Howdy, Stranger!

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

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Mark Jacobs is not a fan of F2P right now.

IsturiIsturi Phoenix, AZPosts: 1,509Member

Mark Jacobs States that F2P "consequences in a few years will be a bit of an apocalypse." I could not agree more. Actualy I think he is spot on.image

Jacobs goes on to say "all of the players cannot be playing free-to-play games all of the time and not all of them “buy in.” Worse, MMO games require a much larger amount of infrastructure and maintenance than the casual solo games that appear on sites such as PopCap or arrive for Android and iPhone mobile gaming. The cost can be staggering and as interest shifts so shall go the tide of money.

“I don’t think that model is going to work out all that well for anybody,” he continued, “not in the long term. Short term – absolutely. Just like every model that seems interesting works out in the short term." I could not agree with you more Mr. Jacobs.

He also states:

“You’re going to see a lot of developers shutting down, and you’re going to see a lot of publishers going, ‘Oh yeah maybe spending $20 million on a free-to-play game wasn’t the best idea ever.’ That’s part of the reason, but the other reason is equally as important, that if you go free-to-play, you really have to compete with every other free-to-play game out there.”

"The nature of disruptive model changes on industry tends to play out the same"

Wow you mean that DEVs are starting to see the error of F2P well TYVM it is about time.

It is safe to say CU will prob not be F2P.

Sorry did not realize that there was anouther thread on this.image

image

«134

Comments

  • TaldierTaldier Camp Hill, PAPosts: 235Member

    CU will certainly be a subscription model.  Though this topic has already played its course on these forums I think.

     

    To be clear, he did not say F2P was inherently a bad model for everything, simply that too many developers are jumping on that F2P boat.  Its a bubble, and bubbles burst.

     

    He's stated that he wants to focus on making a fun game.  F2P developers have to make a fun game while also worrying about building a working monetization model on top of it.

     

    Cue incoming wave of F2P players who want to pretend he said all F2P games were bad so they have an excuse to get angry.

  • naezgulnaezgul Homer Glen, ILPosts: 374Member
    Originally posted by Taldier

    CU will certainly be a subscription model.  Though this topic has already played its course on these forums I think.

     

    To be clear, he did not say F2P was inherently a bad model for everything, simply that too many developers are jumping on that F2P boat.  Its a bubble, and bubbles burst.

     

    He's stated that he wants to focus on making a fun game.  F2P developers have to make a fun game while also worrying about building a working monetization model on top of it.

     

    Cue incoming wave of F2P players who want to pretend he said all F2P games were bad so they have an excuse to get angry.

    Subject already done to death. Please lock

  • eye_meye_m Notta Chance, ABPosts: 3,133Member Uncommon

    I think that if MJ is really serious about providing this quality niche game, then the players need to be willing to step up and stand behind the concept beyond just kickstarter. I think that all the players should rally together and let Jacobs know that the players will pay a higher monthly premium, just to insure that this game becomes available and STAYS available!! Lets show the world how important CU is to us!

     

    All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.

    I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.

    I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.

  • mklinicmklinic Pottstown, PAPosts: 1,435Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Taldier
     this topic has already played its course on these forums I think.

    At least one thread on it: http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/382251/F2P-Model-heading-for-disaster-an-apocalypse-in-35-years.html

    -mklinic

    "There's a point I think we're missing.
    It's in the air we raise our fists in."
    -from Behind Closed Doors by Rise Against

  • ice-vortexice-vortex Xenia, OHPosts: 951Member

    It really isn't surpising to see a developer who has not been in the industry for something like 10 years to have a general negative attitude towards f2p. The online gaming industry has changed since Mark Jacobs was actively working within the market. It is heading towards f2p because it is more profitable, but it is still very much only at the beginning stages and the model itself is still being refined to what works and what doesn't. This includes industry veterans like SOE who are moving away from the freemium model towards a fully f2p model with their current games and  Crytek which are just now dipping their toes into the model with Warface.

    The market is also heading towards f2p because this is what the market is demanding right now. This is simply a fact that cannot be ignored by anyone hoping to release a new game in the modern market.

    The f2p model is especially appealing for MMOs because for an MMO to be successful, it needs a large populace and the ability to constantly bring in a flow of new players to replace ones that leave. If the population of an MMO starts trending downard, it is a cascading effect because people don't want to play in a game that is empty. The price of a box and a monthly fee is a very large barrier for new players.

  • Plastic-MetalPlastic-Metal Highland Heights, KYPosts: 405Member
    Originally posted by ice-vortex

    The market is also heading towards f2p because this is what the market is demanding right now. This is simply a fact that cannot be ignored by anyone hoping to release a new game in the modern market.

     

    The market is "demanding" it right now because a lot of gamers have an obscene sense of entitlement.. that and there's a lot of people in the past five or so years that sight economic issues as a reason f2p is viable.

    My name is Plastic-Metal and my name is an oxymoron.

    image

  • MkilbrideMkilbride Hooksett, NHPosts: 637Member Uncommon

    For like 10 years, what are you talking about?

     

    MJ has been making games...he's not been "Out of the industry" for 10 years.

     

    Christ, three weeks ago, I didn't know who the man was. Now, all I see is him being crucified for, what when I look up, were things out of his control, that regardless, he took responsibility for. It's a shame.

    Help get Camelot Unchained made, a old-school MMORPG, with no hand holding!

    http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/13861848/camelot-unchained

  • TaldierTaldier Camp Hill, PAPosts: 235Member
    Originally posted by ice-vortex

    It really isn't surpising to see a developer who has not been in the industry for something like 10 years to have a general negative attitude and even fear towards f2p. The online gaming industry has changed since Mark Jacobs was actively working within the market. It is heading towards f2p because it is more profitable, but it is still very much only at the beginning stages and the model itself is still being refined to what works and what doesn't. This includes industry veterans like SOE who are moving away from the freemium model towards a fully f2p model with their current games and  Crytek which are just now dipping their toes into the model with Warframe.

    The market is also heading towards f2p because this is what the market is demanding right now. This is simply a fact that cannot be ignored by anyone hoping to release a new game in the modern market.

    The f2p model is especially appealing for MMOs because for an MMO to be successful, it needs a large populace and the ability to constantly bring in a flow of new players to replace ones that leave. If the population of an MMO starts trending downard, it is a cascading effect because people don't want to play in a game that is empty. The price of a box and a monthly fee is a very large barrier for new players.

    F2P has been around for years, and so has MJ, actively working in the gaming industry.

     

    Just because F2P is one of many functioning business models does not mean its the only one.  Its a business model, not a religion.  Theres no need to be so blindly fanatical about it.

     

    The F2P model relies on a high rate of player intake to make up for a high rate of player attrition.  This can work fine for MMO's that are targetting the mainstream audience.  But it wont work for CU.

    CU is a niche game, it is not fishing from that same pool of players, only a specific segment of the market.  It cant afford to rely on the [ customers in -> spend $$$ -> customers out ] model.

     

    P.S.  I find it hard to respond seriously to any post trying to put SOE in a postitive light.  I've been down that road before playing SOE games, they're completely untrustworthy, and dont care in the slightest about their customers.  I'd never want to play one of their MMO's again.  At least EA is pretty much just openly evil by now.  SOE smile at you before they twist the knife in your back.

  • ice-vortexice-vortex Xenia, OHPosts: 951Member
    Originally posted by Plastic-Metal
    Originally posted by ice-vortex

    The market is also heading towards f2p because this is what the market is demanding right now. This is simply a fact that cannot be ignored by anyone hoping to release a new game in the modern market.

     

    The market is "demanding" it right now because a lot of gamers have an obscene sense of entitlement.. that and there's a lot of people in the past five or so years that sight economic issues as a reason f2p is viable.

    Using an 'entitlement' argument is laughable. People have only ever paid for what they want since people started trading goods in early history.

    F2P is viable because the cost in  server space and bandwidth to maintain an individual player on a game is an extremely small amount and the benefit of letting a person who doesn't pay anything play far outweighs that cost.

  • ToxiaToxia Lake Charles, LAPosts: 1,319Member Uncommon

    Of course he says F2P is going to implode. Why would he say" Hey i wanna make a Sub game, but yeah, F2P is a viable option"? That'd be shooting himself in the foot.

    From what we have heard from slightly less biased sources, F2P has been very very successful, and has even revived some games that weren't doing so well. For those games, certainly, the company is making more money with microtransactions than they did with the Sub model.

    Personally, i'm waiting for Arenanets quarterly to see how well the B2P with cosmetic cash shop model is faring.

    The Deep Web is sca-ry.

  • IsturiIsturi Phoenix, AZPosts: 1,509Member
    Originally posted by mklinic
    Originally posted by Taldier
     this topic has already played its course on these forums I think.

    At least one thread on it: http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/382251/F2P-Model-heading-for-disaster-an-apocalypse-in-35-years.html

    Sorry did not see this thread. Other wise I would of never of made this thread.image

    image

  • MikeJezZMikeJezZ HillerødPosts: 1,197Member

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Jacobs_(video_game_designer) a sum up for what MJ has done.

     

    But of course he is known for WAR Online and Dark Age of Camelot - in my opinion two great PvP MMO's.

     

    I never really arrived to DAoC before it was "too late", but Warhammer Online had a very nice PvP which I still miss.

     

    No matter how many other MMO's I try, they just never feel as awesome as Warhammer Online.

     

    But I'm now a fan of F2P neither.

     

    I'm a fan of the b2p model with expansions.

     

    I'm not really a fan of subscription neither, but there's no good b2p PvP games out there.

    Playing ATM: Elder Scrolls Online, Diablo 3
    MMO's shelted: Check my mmorpg profile
    KICKSTARTED: Camelot Unchained. (250 USD)

  • MortifyMortify None of your BusinessPosts: 95Member
    Originally posted by ice-vortex

    Using an 'entitlement' argument is laughable. People have only ever paid for what they want since people started trading goods in early history.

    F2P is viable because the cost in  server space and bandwidth to maintain an individual player on a game is an extremely small amount and the benefit of letting a person who doesn't pay anything play far outweighs that cost.

    You seem to have forgotten development costs. Suddenly things change once you put that in.

    DAoC: P2P, up since 2001 and still running. (~12 years)

    WoW: P2P, up since 2004 and still running (~9 years)

    Which F2P games have that longevity?

     

    I'm getting tired of this F2P argument anyway... hopefully the backer forums will have the quality threads we had here on MMORPG before the Kickstarter started.

     

     

    Methos, Armsman, EU Excalibur
    Jager, Infiltrator, EU Excalibur
    Phos, Cleric, EU Excalibur
    Mortify, Sorcerer, EU Excalibur

  • KoroshiyaKoroshiya Pacific, WAPosts: 250Member Uncommon

    if he is against F2p then he is ignorant.

    How much money I spent on DAoC?  5 years @ 15 a month = 900 bucks.

    I spent about 1/3rd of that in 3 months of GW2, Tera.  I also subbed to Tera AFTER it went f2p because I wouldn't try it until it did.  Lots of people today are moving away from sub based games because NO developer has ever delivered on their full list of promises, yet we still get buggy content, shitty patches and bad balancing all while paying 15 a month.

    I think the reality is, he doesn't like F2P because he is scared.  He is scared his game won't hold up to the hype of what DAoC used to be, it won't hold up and he won't make "any" money.  The reality is, people like to be micro-spent to death, I am guilty of this too.  Look at the xbox, ps3 BS that happened at launch.  People cried over how expensive the PS3 was because of its initial price tag, yet when the 360 was bought with all the same compenents it was 100 more... the difference?  PS3 users didn't get to pick and choose what they wanted on their plate, Xbox did.

    How does that work in mmo's?  The same way.  If I am spending 15 bucks a month, I won't be spending money on anything else in the game because I feel like you are already getting money, in games like Guild Wars 2, where in reality you can't buy a "win" button I still spent money WEEKLY for other things.  It's sad because the subscription is exactly why I won't play Camelot Unchained.  I think the non sub model is better for players, better for developers (and yes, I worked at SCE for 10 years, Playstation Underground forum handle was Faetyl for anyone who doesn't believe me, I dealt with the online cheating systems and cheat devices with SCERT) so until developers stop trying to earn their paycheck by forcing payment of me monthly, I would rather reward them for allowing me to pick and choose when I want to spend my money.

    If they make a game worth my time, ill invest a hundred every 3-4 months in f2p games.  Its sad that just like ToA he is going to miss the boat on the community, and the genre and end up being a game that loses face when it has to switch to f2p 3 months down the road.

    “The people that are trying to make the world worse never take a day off , why should I. Light up the darkness” – Bob Marley

  • JeroKaneJeroKane OsloPosts: 5,353Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Toxia

    Of course he says F2P is going to implode. Why would he say" Hey i wanna make a Sub game, but yeah, F2P is a viable option"? That'd be shooting himself in the foot.

    From what we have heard from slightly less biased sources, F2P has been very very successful, and has even revived some games that weren't doing so well. For those games, certainly, the company is making more money with microtransactions than they did with the Sub model.

    Personally, i'm waiting for Arenanets quarterly to see how well the B2P with cosmetic cash shop model is faring.

     I absolutely loath the F2P model and more and more people are getting turned off by it!

    ArenaNet is currently one of the few who has a decent and fair B2P model.

    All the other games, including the latest DEFIANCE game, have turned into money grabbing crap games, where all loot is stuffed into lock boxes!

    They are really milking heavily on the F2P/B2P model right now, until it blows up straight in their faces! And we will come back to the subscription model.

    Can't wait for that to happen. And if not.... well, then it's time to leave the MMO genre for good.

    I don't mind paying for a game, but I hate being nickle and dimed all over like what is happening now! Absolutely disgusting practices!

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    I'm highly sceptical of f2p / b2p setups in mmos, they usually end up pay to win, or have a lesser problem like gw2s heavily gold dependant economy.

    But it can work, I have no problem with ps2 f2p / optional sub model (which in effect makes it gw2 style pay to get there faster), that works pretty good. I guess with ps2 being a shooter mmo though, "gear" and "level" aren't as important and a skilled newb can kill a whale or vet. That said subscribing makes you gain certs faster and they are I guess equivelent of renown tanks.
  • DihoruDihoru ConstantaPosts: 2,731Member
    Originally posted by Mortify
    Originally posted by ice-vortex

    Using an 'entitlement' argument is laughable. People have only ever paid for what they want since people started trading goods in early history.

    F2P is viable because the cost in  server space and bandwidth to maintain an individual player on a game is an extremely small amount and the benefit of letting a person who doesn't pay anything play far outweighs that cost.

    You seem to have forgotten development costs. Suddenly things change once you put that in.

    DAoC: P2P, up since 2001 and still running. (~12 years)

    WoW: P2P, up since 2004 and still running (~9 years)

    Which F2P games have that longevity?

     

    I'm getting tired of this F2P argument anyway... hopefully the backer forums will have the quality threads we had here on MMORPG before the Kickstarter started.

    Runescape is the most known example and with over 200 million accounts registered to date it's holding it's own quite comfortably :P.

    image
  • MortifyMortify None of your BusinessPosts: 95Member
    Originally posted by Dihoru

    Runescape is the most known example and with over 200 million accounts registered to date it's holding it's own quite comfortably :P.

    Did they start out F2P or did they change from P2P to F2P at a later date? ;)

    I should have mentioned that in my posting i presume.

    Methos, Armsman, EU Excalibur
    Jager, Infiltrator, EU Excalibur
    Phos, Cleric, EU Excalibur
    Mortify, Sorcerer, EU Excalibur

  • ComafComaf Chicago, ILPosts: 1,154Member Common
    Originally posted by Isturi

    Mark Jacobs States that F2P "consequences in a few years will be a bit of an apocalypse." I could not agree more. Actualy I think he is spot on.image

    Jacobs goes on to say "all of the players cannot be playing free-to-play games all of the time and not all of them “buy in.” Worse, MMO games require a much larger amount of infrastructure and maintenance than the casual solo games that appear on sites such as PopCap or arrive for Android and iPhone mobile gaming. The cost can be staggering and as interest shifts so shall go the tide of money.

    “I don’t think that model is going to work out all that well for anybody,” he continued, “not in the long term. Short term – absolutely. Just like every model that seems interesting works out in the short term." I could not agree with you more Mr. Jacobs.

    He also states:

    “You’re going to see a lot of developers shutting down, and you’re going to see a lot of publishers going, ‘Oh yeah maybe spending $20 million on a free-to-play game wasn’t the best idea ever.’ That’s part of the reason, but the other reason is equally as important, that if you go free-to-play, you really have to compete with every other free-to-play game out there.”

    "The nature of disruptive model changes on industry tends to play out the same"

    Wow you mean that DEVs are starting to see the error of F2P well TYVM it is about time.

    It is safe to say CU will prob not be F2P.

    Sorry did not realize that there was anouther thread on this.image

    Thanks be to Odin.

    image
  • MightyPitMightyPit StuttgartPosts: 89Member
    Originally posted by Koroshiya

    if he is against F2p then he is ignorant.

    How much money I spent on DAoC?  5 years @ 15 a month = 900 bucks.

    I spent about 1/3rd of that in 3 months of GW2, Tera.  I also subbed to Tera AFTER it went f2p because I wouldn't try it until it did.  Lots of people today are moving away from sub based games because NO developer has ever delivered on their full list of promises, yet we still get buggy content, shitty patches and bad balancing all while paying 15 a month.

    I think the reality is, he doesn't like F2P because he is scared.  He is scared his game won't hold up to the hype of what DAoC used to be, it won't hold up and he won't make "any" money.  The reality is, people like to be micro-spent to death, I am guilty of this too.  Look at the xbox, ps3 BS that happened at launch.  People cried over how expensive the PS3 was because of its initial price tag, yet when the 360 was bought with all the same compenents it was 100 more... the difference?  PS3 users didn't get to pick and choose what they wanted on their plate, Xbox did.

    How does that work in mmo's?  The same way.  If I am spending 15 bucks a month, I won't be spending money on anything else in the game because I feel like you are already getting money, in games like Guild Wars 2, where in reality you can't buy a "win" button I still spent money WEEKLY for other things.  It's sad because the subscription is exactly why I won't play Camelot Unchained.  I think the non sub model is better for players, better for developers (and yes, I worked at SCE for 10 years, Playstation Underground forum handle was Faetyl for anyone who doesn't believe me, I dealt with the online cheating systems and cheat devices with SCERT) so until developers stop trying to earn their paycheck by forcing payment of me monthly, I would rather reward them for allowing me to pick and choose when I want to spend my money.

    If they make a game worth my time, ill invest a hundred every 3-4 months in f2p games.  Its sad that just like ToA he is going to miss the boat on the community, and the genre and end up being a game that loses face when it has to switch to f2p 3 months down the road.

    While I think that F2P is a accepted business-model and with a big gaming audiance you can make a lot of money with it, I am glad that MJ decided to make a sub-based game.

    This are the reasons:

    - I played some F2P games. I tend to buy some stuff quite early in the game, even if I stop playinig after a short while. I always regret that I spend the money before. ( I had this feeling never in a subbased game )

    - I don't want to have the feeling that the game tries to lure me into the cashshop.

    - I want to know that no one in the game has any advantage because he/she is paying more than I.

    - A monthly fee of 10 to 15 euro's is easy affordable, and I know that I have the full game experience.

    - I assume (just my personal opinion) that f2p games bring gamehopper into the game, which contradicts the vision of a tight social community. However, to hold the players it needs more than a subscription fee. It needs more than in daoc-times, since the possible alternative mmos are vast nowadays.

    MMO's played so far:
    UO,EQ,DAOC,EQ2,GW,ROM,WOW,WAR,AOC,LOTRO,RIFT,TSW,GW2,POE
    Looking forward to: Camelot Unchained, Star Citizen

  • DMKanoDMKano Gamercentral, AKPosts: 8,498Member Uncommon

    I think that both F2P and sub models can work based on the design of the game.

    Obviously Mark believes that for CU sub model is the best fit, and that's fine.

    I disagree with him about F2P not being a viable model, because it is for some games.

  • Ice-QueenIce-Queen USA, GAPosts: 2,451Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by eyelolled

    I think that if MJ is really serious about providing this quality niche game, then the players need to be willing to step up and stand behind the concept beyond just kickstarter. I think that all the players should rally together and let Jacobs know that the players will pay a higher monthly premium, just to insure that this game becomes available and STAYS available!! Lets show the world how important CU is to us!

     

    @ Your poll

    I'd definately pay up to $50 subscription, especially if there were a heavily enforced name guild restriction roleplay server.

    image

    What happens when you log off your characters????.....
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFQhfhnjYMk
    Dark Age of Camelot

  • Ice-QueenIce-Queen USA, GAPosts: 2,451Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DMKano

    I think that both F2P and sub models can work based on the design of the game.

    Obviously Mark believes that for CU sub model is the best fit, and that's fine.

    I disagree with him about F2P not being a viable model, because it is for some games.

    If you plan on having a cash/item shop sure, but he doesn't plan on it, so no a F2P model is not viable for CU.

    image

    What happens when you log off your characters????.....
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFQhfhnjYMk
    Dark Age of Camelot

  • ZiftylrhavicZiftylrhavic GrenoblePosts: 222Member
    Originally posted by Koroshiya

    if he is against F2p then he is ignorant.

    He is not against FTP, he only said than a lot of the people going that way will go bankrupt, because everybody is going that way and so chasing the same customers.

    If you don't understand that, i can think up of a few examples.

    How much money I spent on DAoC?  5 years @ 15 a month = 900 bucks.

    I spent about 1/3rd of that in 3 months of GW2, Tera.  I also subbed to Tera AFTER it went f2p because I wouldn't try it until it did.  Lots of people today are moving away from sub based games because NO developer has ever delivered on their full list of promises, yet we still get buggy content, shitty patches and bad balancing all while paying 15 a month.

    About the buggy content, with all the testers that there'll be in the alpha and beta i doubt there'll be any important bug at release, they will rather push back the release date than launch it bugged. Same about bad balancing, they are focusing on RvR and have many testers, there is no way it would come out with major unbalance.

    And as a FYI, the sub will be less than the current market average, meaning it will be between $5 and $10.

    I think the reality is, he doesn't like F2P because he is scared.  He is scared his game won't hold up to the hype of what DAoC used to be, it won't hold up and he won't make "any" money.  The reality is, people like to be micro-spent to death, I am guilty of this too.  Look at the xbox, ps3 BS that happened at launch.  People cried over how expensive the PS3 was because of its initial price tag, yet when the 360 was bought with all the same compenents it was 100 more... the difference?  PS3 users didn't get to pick and choose what they wanted on their plate, Xbox did.

    He is not scared, he is realist. How many of the customers do you think spend as much as you in a free game? I for sure did not buy anything in a free to play MMORPG, ever.

    CU is already a niche game, and he should go and make it FTP so that only 10% of the customers spend money on it? that would make what, 3 000, 2 000 people? Maybe less?

    10% of 2M is still 200 000, that's why the FTP model is usable by large audiance MMO. But MJ is aiming for 20 to 30k people, maybe a little more, and there is no way the FTP model would get him enough money to sustain the game.

    Besides, what would he sell? It is a RvR MMO, you can't make it PTW, or you'll end up with only the 10% people paying on your server, that'll leave because they are alone.

    How does that work in mmo's?  The same way.  If I am spending 15 bucks a month, I won't be spending money on anything else in the game because I feel like you are already getting money, in games like Guild Wars 2, where in reality you can't buy a "win" button I still spent money WEEKLY for other things.  It's sad because the subscription is exactly why I won't play Camelot Unchained.  I think the non sub model is better for players, better for developers (and yes, I worked at SCE for 10 years, Playstation Underground forum handle was Faetyl for anyone who doesn't believe me, I dealt with the online cheating systems and cheat devices with SCERT) so until developers stop trying to earn their paycheck by forcing payment of me monthly, I would rather reward them for allowing me to pick and choose when I want to spend my money.

    If they make a game worth my time, ill invest a hundred every 3-4 months in f2p games.  Its sad that just like ToA he is going to miss the boat on the community, and the genre and end up being a game that loses face when it has to switch to f2p 3 months down the road.

    You may be spending that much on FTP, but you are part of a minority. I'm not the only one thinking than buying something in a FTP game is worthless. Either it won't help you and there is no reason to buy it. Either it'll help you, and it become a PTW piece of garbage. And for me, PTW is like Cheat To Win. No fun in it : "Yay i was able to kill that guy with that skill i bought and than he doesn't have!" is pretty much the same as "Yay i was able to kill that guy with that hack i did and than he doesn't have!". I may as well challenge a 10 years old kid to play chess, i'll have the same odds of finding someone skilled enough to take me on.

  • ZiftylrhavicZiftylrhavic GrenoblePosts: 222Member
    Originally posted by DMKano

    I think that both F2P and sub models can work based on the design of the game.

    Obviously Mark believes that for CU sub model is the best fit, and that's fine.

    I disagree with him about F2P not being a viable model, because it is for some games.

    He never said that.

    http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/post/5670311#5670311

    Post #218.

«134
Sign In or Register to comment.