It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
I believe that such generalization is unfounded. Not all P2P are better than F2P or not all F2P are worse than P2P.
MMORPG: AikaAnime: Naruto
Better quality? Not sure. I think they have a higher quality, but I might be wrong. The important point is however: the whole system of "he who pays wins, he who pays not loses" is something I despise.
Let's play Fallen Earth (blind, 300 episodes)
Let's play Guild Wars 2 (blind, 45 episodes)
Guild Wars had Alliance Battles....which you made a group of four and entered the battlefield on a large map that was as large as UT2004 Onslaught maps. In this battlefield, the game became objective. You were met with two other teams of four and it was a 12vs12 in 6 teams of four roaming the map.
The object of Alliance Battle was really to win enough to acquire territory for Luxon or Kurzich Factions. Players tried to capture 7 shrines. These Shrines gave one point to the team that held them every second. Capturing a Shrine generated NPCs which you could take with you...Killing a Player gave the team 3 points, Killing an NPC gave 1 point. The object was to score 500 points before the other team or hold all 7 shrines for 1 minute.
If you were a new player to Guild Wars (I played since released)
I paid $50 for the base game.
I paid $50 for each expansion (bought during release)
I then bought 4 character slots ($10 each)
I also bought 4 storage panels ($7.50 each on sale))
If you want to be toe to toe with everyone in PvP you will have to buy the skill unlocks for each of the packs...That will cost 40 - 50 for each game....or you can play for months and unlock all skills yourself through just simple PvPing...or just follow a guide below
Today, you can get a deal in some places for $50 - $60 for Guild Wars Trilogy and Eye of the North. Then you can unlock things in PvP. You see to be decent in PvP you have to experiment and learn a lot on how the skills work. Buying the unlock packs do not teach you anything. The best approach is to pretty much unlock 8 skills to a build you are working on, like a nuking or healing build and then work on unlocking Runes and Weapons Mods revolving around those builds....Then take that build all the way and start unlocking skills in that first major profession you are playing.
In defense to ArenaNet. One reason they made the in-Game Store is because many people demanded to be able to buy extra storage space and character slots. They would literally buy new Guild Wars accounts for $50 and then have to unlock things. Also not everyone wanted to pretty much use 2 instances of GW to be able to trade items.
I run with 12 character slots for 10 characters, all PvE, one per class...and 2 PvE characters. My main PvP character just celebrated her 5th birthday
----Primary System----i7-2600K @ 3.4 - 4.8ghz8GB RAM, 980 GTX SC (SLI)--Secondary System----1090T @ 4ghz 8GB RAM, HD 6950 (Xfr)Note: Flashed to 6970 & +20% OC
Originally posted by Rockgod99 F2p games have gotten better. Games like Atlantica, Perfect World, Runes of Magic, Allods, Aika are really good actually. Add I'n the B2p products like Guild wars and new hybrids DDO, lotro, EQ2x it's no longer a huge drop I'n quality when playing f2p.
I'll agree, these games are of high quality however they still have the issue of the gameplay being designed around their cash shops to encourage players to purchase from them which I find most P2P games don't have.
In the worst of them (i.e. ROM) it is most certainly B2W, at least from a PVP perspective.
"Winning" at EVE Online since May, 2007!
In my day MMORPG's were so hard we fought our way through dungeons in the snow, uphill both ways.
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™ "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Originally posted by Kyleran Originally posted by Rockgod99 F2p games have gotten better. Games like Atlantica, Perfect World, Runes of Magic, Allods, Aika are really good actually. Add I'n the B2p products like Guild wars and new hybrids DDO, lotro, EQ2x it's no longer a huge drop I'n quality when playing f2p.
While RoM and Allods are B2W games, they are still as good gameplay wise as most P2Ps and you don't HAVE to pay. You can pay at your own leisure instead of having to do it on a certain day every month. You also get to play the game first to test the game for free to see if you even like it. Most P2Ps don't come with demos till months after release, so the only way to test is to buy the game unless a friend of yours bought the game and they are willing to let you play thier account.
i agree free to play games are a scam. they also seem to be developed for pre teens and maybe teens. ive tried several of them and the only one i was impressed by was allods before they fucked it up with the cash shop and everyone quit. seriously though, like the others said, free to play = huge dependance on cash shop.
i would much much much rather just pay my $15 a month and have a game with NO cash shop what so ever. cash shops are just sketchy to me and too many mmos now a days have them.
and unfortunately, with the success turbine is having i see ALOT of mmos going in this direction. which pretty much for me, means im nearing the end of my mmo career :P
world of tanks and you will have alot of fun lads
and who are we to call out the quality of a game? I for one know that world of warcraft is a high quality game but I dont like it (anymore). I know that Fallen earth is a low budget game that has less quality than world of warcraft but the game is so alot of fun for me.
I7@4ghz, 5970@ 1 ghz/5ghz, water cooled||Former setups Byggblogg||Byggblogg 2|| Msi Wind u100
Originally posted by Thomas2006 With the very small exception that YOU do not have to pay to play the game. You can fully choose to not pay anything and still play the game. You might miss out on things and not have access to some things. But you are still not paying anything to PLAY the game. So in that sense it is indeed Free 2 Play. You are thinking that FREE means you get access to everything. That you are getting a FREE GAME. Nowhere does it state that they are giving you are FREE GAME. It CLEARLY states Free 2 PLAY.
No F2P game makes you pay one shiney dime to play... hence the term 'Free to Play'. You can pay if you choose to give yourself an advantange but this is totally optional and up to the individual's play style. I've played and enjoyed many F2P titles without spending a dime. Whether you pay or not is up to you.
Most F2P games that have come out in the last few years have been of equal quality of most of the P2P games that have come out in that same time. Of course when you look at the totally craptastic P2P games that have been released in the last few years F2P may even have surpassed them in both content and quality.
Most F2P games are capable of keeping up with P2P games. They just dont tend to update as much. Look at Runes Of Magic, Adventure Quest and Runescape (Bad graphics but pretty cool gameplay).
Originally posted by Karesh Originally posted by VirusDancer Originally posted by Elitekill4 Originally posted by Nicirin Hardly... F2P maybe has all the similar content ect... which is fine. You must also understand that with F2P you will not be able to participate in end game without paying money... which is retarded. I would way rather pay monthly for something I know is good than pay at the end of the game to actually have fun playing end game. GW is the only F2P game that was awesome but the frequency of the expansions was kindof sickening but made sense. Game companies have to make money some how guys. P2P will always be the best games IMO. Some are trash but some are real winners
Except that PvP in GW is actually better than most F2P games despite it only being 8v8 sessions (edit; although it's B2P the trilogy doesn't cost that much so it's pretty much nearly F2P if you don't buy the cosmetic items from the Arenanet online game store). I don't understand how 100 against 100 makes good PvP, if it's the button-mashing type PvP then it's still really bad.
8v8... is describing a small map in a FPS game. Not PvP in a MMO.
As for GW, coming along now - near EoL - yes, the costs are less.
GW Trilogy - $39.99
GW Eye of the North - $19.99 to $29.99 (it's on sale right now)
GW Bonus Mission Pack - $9.99
GW PvP Access Kit - $19.99
Two upgrades $4.99 a pop.
Seven unlock packs at $9.99 a pop.
Four costumes at $6.99 a pop.
Several services ranging from $9.99 to $14.99.
So excluding the services, you would be looking at $197.83...
But in comparison to somebody wanting to get into WoW:
WoW BattleChest - $29.99
WoW Lich King - $29.99
WoW Cataclysm - $39.99
So you would be at $99.97 and be able to play for six months in comparison...
Of course, GW would likely add additional items... so you might be able to squeeze out another month or two when all is said and done.
Don't even pull that, you make it sound like it costs $197.83 just to play GW. Not even close. I've played GW for 3 years, only bought the 3 GW games and the expansion nothing more, and I've had no problem. You make it sound like you have to buy all that to get the full game, which isn't true. those unlock packs are meant for people who just don't want to work for stuff. You can easily unlock everything from those packs by playing the game. The costumes aren't needed, and theres only 4 of them anyway. The "services" you mention are character slots and bank space, which you don't need bc you already have plenty. There's no reason to buy the pvp access kit unless that's all you want. If you buy the game, then you have no need to but the kit bc pvp is included.
So let's see, GW trilogy=39.99
GW Xpac: EotN=19.99 (on sale)
total= around $60.
so $60 total, for as long as you like. (If a new game was to come out, it would be optional)
So then $99.97 for WoW (not to mention all the sub fees).
I think GW still kicks the crap out of WoW if your comparing how much you have to spend to get a full experience.
Not to take away from the thread.... Why buy the " The Trilogy" 39.99 when you can get " The Complete Collection" for the same price or cheaper.
P2P games are best suited by offering me content that will challenge my gameplay and keep me entertained. The more I play, the longer I subscribe so it works best when those games continually offer me activites to engage in.
F2P games are best suited by making gameplay lacking in an attempt to encourage me to purchase solutions from a cash shop. The design process revolves around making gameplay suffer in order to make money. It just doens't give the impression of a quality experience to me when obstacles are artificial in this way and force me look outside of gameplay to resolve problems. I prefer obstacles to be in game and not in a cash shop. I don't want developers thinking of ways to inconvience my gameplay further when cash shop sales decline.
I could care less about the condition and polish of f2p vs p2p, because this issue is far more important to me personally.
5 Years ago... the difference was a gulf. 3 Years ago the gap was still very wide. Last year it closed to a small distance. This year I've played several f2p games that are nearly as polished as wow and far more polished than many of the p2p games that have come out recently.
Functionally there isn't much difference at this point in content or quality. Most F2P don't get the large expansions that P2P games get, however they seem to get just about the same amount of content over time.
The early f2p games were nightmarish cash shops and some of the new ones are too... but increasingly there are more and more f2p games that you can skip the cash shop without any real issue or they provide in game ways of getting cash shop items without spending real world money (quest rewards, etc.) which make them much more viable and less "pushed" on you.
If you really consider how much money you spend on the average p2p mmo over a year and you convert that into cash shop money for a f2p you end up setup pretty good ($14.95*12=$179.40). The one nice thing about f2p games is that you aren't STUCK paying a sub... you feel less obligation. If you feel like playing you play, if not there is no "oh god i paid for this I should at least get my money's worth." If you got currency from the cash shop it'll be there when you come back.
For hardcore raiders, I would say p2p is still the better option. For casual players and most everyone else who can control their spending, f2p is increasingly the better option.
Edit: Note-- I'm 33, I've been doing MMOs since LOK (Kesmai on AOL). I'm fully aware of what the point of cash shops are and that people with no impulse control end up spending more money than they can afford or a P2P would cost... (but that never happens outside games right?), however the recent generations of f2p games don't require those expenditures as they once did and the production quality is now generally on par with p2p games. I'm a light buyer for f2p games, some are heavy buyers. It works better for me. YMMV.
Edit2: Also of note, I don't have a complex about people potentially being better than me either. So if someone goes out and spends $8000 and has a character that is better than mine, I really couldn't care. Some people can't handle the thought of that and if thats your game style then f2p definitely won't suit you because they'll never be a completely level playing field (not that p2p is either, it just appears to be on the surface.)
Edit3: Honestly, the people going on about the item shop stuff here... have you honestly played any of the newer f2p games recently? They are not the thing you are talking about... what you're talking about is what I saw 3-5 years ago. It's really not so much that way anymore (well with a few exceptions, allods for example blew their game up... although they're making a push to fix that now. Good example of what happens when greed exceeds game play.)
No offense, but one of the previous posters is far more correct: the point of F2P gameplay is to get you to spend money, or, make you suffer for not spending the money, because that is the only way these companies make money. It is really no more complicated than that.
For P2P, you pay your money, and there it is. The company can then work on adding game content and keeping the players happy, and playing, instead of dreaming up the next load of items for the Cash Shop.
Maybe it is because I am older, or because I don't mind paying the sub fee, but all the F2P games and their money making game mechanics can go suck it.
Originally posted by Clubmaster22 F2P is a scam, period. If you don't use the itemshops you're screwed fast and if you give in, you end up paying more than for any P2P-Game. Scam.
i take it you have no idea what a scam actually is.
We need to start cutting the F2p genre up into sub divisions.
When horrible shops like the ones in Atlantica, Runes of Magic and Allods are lumped up with Guild wars (b2p) & DDO/Lotro (pay as you go) something is fucking wrong!!!!!!
Those piece of crap asian style shops the ones that toss balance on its ass and turn a game into Pay2win need to gtfo of my genre!!!!!
Sorry... Im pro P2p, B2p and Pay as you go but i hate......freaking HATE!!!!!!!!! Pay2win shops!!!!
Playing: Rift, LotROWaiting on: GW2, BP
Originally posted by Elitekill4 I doubt this, sirs. I've found that F2P games can do just as well.
F2P games are clearly for those with lower standards and in some cases those who cannot manage the monthly fee of a P2P game.
Me personally I like the big P2P AAA titles. I want the best out of a game/company. Sure an amazing P2P MMO has not come out for a while, but that does not mean we need to turn to F2P.
I do not find any F2P games fun what so ever. They feel cheap and inferior to the P2P bretheren.
Your title suggest that the P2P games are not of high quality because there has not been a big hit recently. I think that is extremely flawed logic.
Just an opinion though.
There's nothing absolute about your statement (unless of course you have played every free to play game and can attest to this from experience, which would be strange since I played atleast four free to play games in the last year and didn't come across the problems you mention.
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
apologies for not reading every post in this thread and if this has been mentioned before but to be honest it all depends on what you class as quality..
Some see the quality of a game being the PvP element = usually Free to play (joke) or buy to play like GW.
Some see the complexity of crafting being the quality = SWG
the list goes on but you know what i mean just by a couple of examples. i haven't tried many so called free to play games but comparing them to the sub games i've played i have to say that the sub games win for what i class as quality hands down.
Originally posted by Waldoe Originally posted by Elitekill4 I doubt this, sirs. I've found that F2P games can do just as well.
When is someone going to tell the fans of WAR, AOC,FFXIV, and STO that things are as you said they are, these people surely then must be wrong with the laundry list of complaints about the lack of quality and content in these games......
Originally posted by Tazlor Originally posted by Clubmaster22 F2P is a scam, period. If you don't use the itemshops you're screwed fast and if you give in, you end up paying more than for any P2P-Game. Scam.
scam [skæm] Slang
"Strong and bitter words indicate a weak cause" ~Victor Hugo
Originally posted by jaxsundane Originally posted by Waldoe Originally posted by Elitekill4 I doubt this, sirs. I've found that F2P games can do just as well.
i'll agree with the lack on content and quality in STO as i was expecting somethign highly superior to what actually came out, similar with AoC but unlike others i didn't experience any issues in game itself but was dissapointed about the total change in game not long before it's launch, i have gone back to it now though and enjoying it again. So in a sense this all adds to the discussion that everyone sees quality in thier own way as it's a matter of personal taste more than anything.
Originally posted by Loke666 Personally I prefer B2P games.
As do I. I have a sense that I'll get amazing quality and breadth / depth of game-play with GW2, for example, based on GW1 and the fact that ANET must capture a huge audience, as they've done in the past, to be profitable without a subscription; buy to play.
Originally posted by jaxsundane Originally posted by Waldoe Originally posted by Elitekill4 I doubt this, sirs. I've found that F2P games can do just as well.
LOL 4 games how many come out each year?
Originally posted by Waldoe Originally posted by jaxsundane Originally posted by Waldoe Originally posted by Elitekill4 I doubt this, sirs. I've found that F2P games can do just as well.
What do the number of games released every year have to do with the last four major AAA p2p releases being in a list of games that have underwhelmed and underserved their own target audiences? Better yet why don't you just debunk what I say by simply naming us the four or more games that are considered AAA p2p releases that have actually hit the mark?
For the record I'm not "for" or "against" anything if a game is good and accessible to me by price range I'll play it whether it is b2p,p2p, or f2p but other than to state one may have a personal preference all of this talk of "this is better or that is better" is pure foolishness.
Originally posted by jaxsundane Originally posted by Waldoe Originally posted by jaxsundane Originally posted by Waldoe Originally posted by Elitekill4 I doubt this, sirs. I've found that F2P games can do just as well.
Lord of the Rings
Pirates of the Burning Sea