Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Why I'm not excited about Vanguard free to play, but will still pay monthly
Trolldefender99
Member UncommonPosts: 416
One word (well maybe two depending on how you look at it)...Everquest 2
2nd worst free to play conversion from a pay to play MMO. The 1st being Age of Conan
Take the best free to play conversions
Ryzom, truly free (to a point)...with a few restrictions, but you get almost the whole game for free
Aion, the true free to play conversion...get TONS of stuff for free and don't even have to pay a dime
Then runner ups...
LOTRO and DDO. You can pay money to unlock things...however...you can earn in-game coins or whatever its called and pay in-game to unlock items. Sure it takes a while, but you can truly play for FREE. LOTRO has the same problem as EQ2 though, very limited bag space.
Then take Everquest 2. Very very limited bag space (kind of like LOTRO, but way worse, because EQ2 has a lot more items)...the most boring classes are only available for free. Which is the same problem AoC has. And you can't actually earn anything in game to play for free, like you can for LOTRO and DDO.
EQ2 isn't even free, nor is AoC. They are a scam. Its like saying "free icecream!" but you have to pay for the cone...
LOTRO, DDO, Ryzom and Aion are truly free games...and still have things to offer if you pay.
However, I like Vanguard enough that I'll ignore the cash shop and pay monthly like I used to do. Only reason I stopped playing was December came...SWTOR and Skyrim were released...and the game was so dead that even the trial isle was a deserted island. So hopefully enough people come back, that its worth the 15 dollars a month.
And if there is no monthly fee, guess I just won't play. Which would be sad, as VG is my favorite MMO. But no way am I going to be nickle and dimed for a bunch of cash shop items...I would rather just pay the monthly fee.
Comments
Judging from both EQ2 and EQ FTP transformation im making a pretty safe bet that they will leave the sub option.
I would totally just take the icecream without the cone.
But you are right, SoE F2P models are embarrasingly bad. I hope they copy Aion's model, but I know they won't as they are just too greedy.
Vanguard with EQ2 style F2P restrictions wouldnt be worth playing.
I'm with you OP, F2P sucks. And yet it's SOE's F2P, so it would really suck.
Have fun trying to find groups with all the gimped Free-to-play players everyone !...........Yaaa... another good mmo is getting its final nail in there coffin.
Be careful OP if your to pay a monthly fee. Are you sure you would like to play along side all the gimped ?... How would you know who has what ?....That guy over there, that your just about to ask to do Kreggers End....well, he did not pay a dime, and has nothing !
you must really not know how well FTP did for EQ2 or EQ do you. I mean sure there are limitations but it brought in thousands of people that just dropped for a sub and got everything anyway.
Besides i pay the 20$ for the pass and i get em all and 500 SC every month , hell i havent paid for an xpack in over a year.
Those who make this argument with regard to SOE's specific implementation are missing the point of f2p. While I agree with many of the specific criticisms of the model, the idea is not to offer any particular amount of the game for free. It's to get more players in. Lots of those players will be casual and fine with the f2p restrictions. Some of those will spend a few bucks here and there — most will spend less than they would subbing, and a few will spend more, but it's money that the developer wasn't getting otherwise. Meanwhile, the game is stronger simply because there are more people playing it. In the case of Vanguard in particular, whose biggest problem is simply the low population, and where even semi-serious players have years of stuff to do ahead of them, the effect should be pretty pronounced even with a modest uptick in population.
Those trying to make this case also need to be wary of their argument coming off as "I am not getting enough for free, therefore this model sucks." Which is how this one reads. As I said, I think there are major issues with SOE's model, but the idea that the game is unplayable for free is complete hogwash. There is some point on the casual-hardcore spectrum where the f2p restrictions become onerous, and certainly serious players will want to subscribe rather than trying to pay à la carte (and SOE's model is bad at that anyway,) but that's up to each player to decide, and it's no less true than in the idealized models of LotRO and DDO.
I wouldn't be surprised if the Vanguard f2p model differs from previous SOE f2p conversions in ways that turn out to be significant — SOE has a lot less to lose with Vanguard, and they can (to my mind) afford to be fairly generous. I am probably wrong about this, but we'll see. In any event, though, I would be very surprised if there was no subscription option.
And for the record, EQ2 bag slots are very cheap —like $1.50 — to unlock. And while there is indeed a lot to keep in inventory, bags can also be very large, are easily craftable, and the worst of the inventory bloat doesn't happen until level 50+, so it's probably not much of an issue for casual free/silver players.
Aso for the record, while you can earn cash shop points in LotRO and DDO, it's a monstrous pain in the rear to get more than you need for the first couple of unlocks.
Ardwulf's Lair | Ardwulf's YouTube Channel | Ardwulf on Twitter
You can mark my words and say whatever you want if I am wrong, but I guarantee there is no way SOE is going to drop a subscription option for players willing to pay for it.
In the end, I really do not understand why so many people expect to play a full MMORPG without paying. After all, they are offering Free to Play, not Free to Play everything. You can log in, build a character and play. SOE even lets you play to max level. Do you have the same options and access to everything in game as the subscriber? No. You can purchase those options in small increments as you go, or pay the subscription. If you do not want to pay, then you dont have the same options. If you cant afford to pay, be happy you have free content at all.
I do believe in having options to unlock content and/or options for free as the DDO and LOTRO models offer, but for someone to come in and expect the entire game to be completely free makes no sense for the company. Its a a massively multiplayer online game, not a community service.
I am confident that the type of player that this game will attract for more than a test run will have no issue with a subscription. This is really just a great way to get people to look at it again after all the bad press over the years. And I agree with the prior poster, SOE has a little room to be generous with VG. We will see how they handle that one though. It would be silly to treat VG as if it was EQ2 for a host of reasons, but then again they handled EQ nearly the same and that game is about 14 years old.
The approach to F2P that SoE has taken is very much based around the concept of letting you try the game out & then subbing, they really really want you to sub & subbing is by far the best way to play their games so get a sub now & sub for the real game.
Anything less than a sub in an SoE game is there just to let you take a look & see if you'd like to sub, it's "lowering the barrier to entry" not a free pass to do what you want.
Then they should call it an Extended Trial. Not free to play.
Because you're not playing during a trial? For free...?
Having played both EQ2 and LOTRO I can't say I have a problem with either of them, but I will say that with SOE's options you can definitely save over paying a $15/mo sub by doing just a tiny bit of research. If you start playing when there's a double or triple station cash deal going on and picking up cards (particularly at Wal-Mart if you're in the states as you get even more of a bonus) then rather than just paying a sub you can get those classes/races and convenience items like extra bagspace on the cheap. I couldn't find any reason to even think about a subscription until the level cap when it's actually worth it and the gear and spells you have access to just leveling are completely useable. The game is ridiculously easy to level in in the first place and any groups that would ignore you just for spell and gear restrictions are elitist a-holes anyway.
It's sad how little adversity and inconvenience today's gamers can handle.
Its just continues to boggle the mind, how some people think they can play a free to play regularly without paying. Why would you ever think that is possible?(I know stricly speaking it is possible) The company needs to make money you guys do realize that? And if you want to play a game regularly, why would you mind paying? Ofc there are restrictions, nothing is ever 100% free. I just don't understand how some of you guys think. How are they going to make money if the game is truely free to play? The playerbase is not big enuff to live on selling fluff, besides not all games can take the same approach.
Then they should call it an Extended Trial. Not free to play.
You can play for free though. That doesn't end which is what an extended trial would be.
I mostly like SoE's model for EQ2 because when I sub all my stuff is unlocked. I don't really like playing it while silver though because as you point out it is very restrictive. "F2P" isn't qualified by restrictions. It is qualified by requiring payment to log onto the server. The "fun" part is qualified by restrictions which is why silver isn't very fun to me.
What I like about EQ2 and F2P is that when I feel like resubbing to the game I can log in while silver and get my stuff in order and become reacquainted with the controls and mechanics.
What I don't like is that the store is expensive and now when you buy an xpac it seems they don't include the previous versions. If I want to get up to speed I need to buy Destiny of Velious and Age of Discovery which at a minimum is about $60. That seems like a lot to ask in addition to a subscription fee.
Turbine's model with LotRO and earning cash is way overrated. The game is expensive and you'll never practically earn enough cash just to unlock the game, even if you sub and get your 500TP stipend. Subscribing doesn't unlock the whole game and the store is expensive.
So far I really like NCSoft's payment model with Aion. It's the best of the lot. I only wish the game had a pve only server, but I'll put up with a little pvp. I'm hoping Blade and Soul and Wildstar have similar payment models or are subscription where you get the whole game without extra costs (like they offered with Lineage).
Actually, the only thing that subscribing to DDO did not unlock was the artificer. That cost 900 TP. However, they gave all subscribers dounble TP when they released it, which in the end would equate to a free unlock if you chose to do so. They did not publicly state that was the reason for the double TP for paying members, and that caused a bit of an uproar. In the end, they gave subscribers the option for either a free unlock, or the ability to spend it elsewhere if they were not interested.Sorry, back to the original post. Just wanted to clarify that.
Aion lets everyone play for free, it has a cash shop but it isn't needed. They even gave TONS of free stuff when they changed systems (only NA side did this), to not just subscribers but everyone.
Fallen Earth is really free as well, and subscribing gives bonuses like extra exp and what not and more crafting time.
Ryzom is very free too. But a bit more limited than the above.
And as for the no limit of playing for free...then call it a demo. Maybe using "Extended trial" doesn't work...but "Demo" does.
I can download a demo for a singleplayer/multiplayer game and keep playing for free, but would have to pay to do anything on. Many demos have skirmish maps you can keep doing. They don't call the free demo "free to play". But like some free to play conversions, that is what they are, just demos.
In any case, I'll still play monthly...whatever the cash shop is. But SOE's free to play, is more like a demo, than what Aion/Fallen Earth and sort of Ryzom, have.
This isn't necessarily adding or helping the topic, but personally I'm looking forward to F2P simply for an influx of players.
If the F2P platform is agreeable, then I'll stay as a f2p member...If not, I wouldn't mind paying a sub if there were more players in the game. I've never leveled very far, always wanted to, but always found the lack of population to be a bummer quite frankly.
For me...they are offering a free product of some sort, I'll take what they give me. I'm finding far too many people are feeling entitled to a completely free game these days. Similarly to this new trend that everyone feels entitled to play a beta.
It wasn't so long ago when a major title going F2P was mind blowing...as a fan base all I can think about "give an inch and we'll take a mile".
Yeah, I'll be subbing just for that. VG always felt empty, especially over the two major releases last year.
However, people (not all, but some, like I) expect a FREE to play game.
What started free to play MMOs? Asian MMOs. You could play them for free, all the way to raiding and still play for free. Granted, many (not all did) had overpowered items, but you could still play totally for free.
Then certain pay to play MMOs were made and turned to free to play games. Unlike the asian free to play design, the pay to free conversions weren't nearly as free.
That may be why some people don't like how some companies do free to play. Its like comparing something based off of something and comparing it to the original.
I would argue the current standard for "F2P" is that...there are almost always catches. It's not the norm games are completely free, in fact very few F2P games don't have stipulations, or at least mechanics that lure you to pay some money.
I agree that ALL (not simply Vanguard) games should not advertise the game as "free", but in the end...they are all in it for the money. If there is 0 dollars coming in, money going out for staff (albeit, very few) and maintenance, it simply can't sustain itself.
The reason I tied it along with the entitlement opinion, and betas, is because companies realize people are attracted to a title that has no subscription. They are simply trying to make money off of something that failed in another fashion. It's not honest, but it's there for everyone to see, the same as paying to play a beta.
Then they should call it an Extended Trial. Not free to play.
You can play for free though. That doesn't end which is what an extended trial would be.
I mostly like SoE's model for EQ2 because when I sub all my stuff is unlocked. I don't really like playing it while silver though because as you point out it is very restrictive. "F2P" isn't qualified by restrictions. It is qualified by requiring payment to log onto the server. The "fun" part is qualified by restrictions which is why silver isn't very fun to me.
What I like about EQ2 and F2P is that when I feel like resubbing to the game I can log in while silver and get my stuff in order and become reacquainted with the controls and mechanics.
What I don't like is that the store is expensive and now when you buy an xpac it seems they don't include the previous versions. If I want to get up to speed I need to buy Destiny of Velious and Age of Discovery which at a minimum is about $60. That seems like a lot to ask in addition to a subscription fee.
Turbine's model with LotRO and earning cash is way overrated. The game is expensive and you'll never practically earn enough cash just to unlock the game, even if you sub and get your 500TP stipend. Subscribing doesn't unlock the whole game and the store is expensive.
So far I really like NCSoft's payment model with Aion. It's the best of the lot. I only wish the game had a pve only server, but I'll put up with a little pvp. I'm hoping Blade and Soul and Wildstar have similar payment models or are subscription where you get the whole game without extra costs (like they offered with Lineage).
Actually, the only thing that subscribing to DDO did not unlock was the artificer. That cost 900 TP. However, they gave all subscribers dounble TP when they released it, which in the end would equate to a free unlock if you chose to do so. They did not publicly state that was the reason for the double TP for paying members, and that caused a bit of an uproar. In the end, they gave subscribers the option for either a free unlock, or the ability to spend it elsewhere if they were not interested. Sorry, back to the original post. Just wanted to clarify that.
I never mentioned DDO, but even there the cash shop offers items that are exclusive to the store or are so rare they are effectively exclusive, not to mention if you don't buy a quest zone you can't enter it. The model fits DDO better than LotRO, but Turbine still focuses heavily on the store. DDO is lobby instanced like Guild Wars so it doesn't really have the immersive world of an MMO.
Accidental double post. Please delete me.Then they should call it an Extended Trial. Not free to play.
You can play for free though. That doesn't end which is what an extended trial would be.
I mostly like SoE's model for EQ2 because when I sub all my stuff is unlocked. I don't really like playing it while silver though because as you point out it is very restrictive. "F2P" isn't qualified by restrictions. It is qualified by requiring payment to log onto the server. The "fun" part is qualified by restrictions which is why silver isn't very fun to me.
What I like about EQ2 and F2P is that when I feel like resubbing to the game I can log in while silver and get my stuff in order and become reacquainted with the controls and mechanics.
What I don't like is that the store is expensive and now when you buy an xpac it seems they don't include the previous versions. If I want to get up to speed I need to buy Destiny of Velious and Age of Discovery which at a minimum is about $60. That seems like a lot to ask in addition to a subscription fee.
Turbine's model with LotRO and earning cash is way overrated. The game is expensive and you'll never practically earn enough cash just to unlock the game, even if you sub and get your 500TP stipend. Subscribing doesn't unlock the whole game and the store is expensive.
So far I really like NCSoft's payment model with Aion. It's the best of the lot. I only wish the game had a pve only server, but I'll put up with a little pvp. I'm hoping Blade and Soul and Wildstar have similar payment models or are subscription where you get the whole game without extra costs (like they offered with Lineage).
Actually, the only thing that subscribing to DDO did not unlock was the artificer. That cost 900 TP. However, they gave all subscribers dounble TP when they released it, which in the end would equate to a free unlock if you chose to do so. They did not publicly state that was the reason for the double TP for paying members, and that caused a bit of an uproar. In the end, they gave subscribers the option for either a free unlock, or the ability to spend it elsewhere if they were not interested. Sorry, back to the original post. Just wanted to clarify that.
I never mentioned DDO, but even there the cash shop offers items that are exclusive to the store or are so rare they are effectively exclusive, not to mention if you don't buy a quest zone you can't enter it. The model fits DDO better than LotRO, but Turbine still focuses heavily on the store. DDO is lobby instanced like Guild Wars so it doesn't really have the immersive world of an MMO.
Whoops...you are absolutely right. LOTRO spelled DDO to me when I read it, not sure why. Apologies. I have not played LOTRO for very long and never used the store in game, only with DDO. Yes, it is the lobby of lobbies, but the best dungeon crawl of any game I had seen. In the end the lack of open world does make it difficult over extended periods of time.LotRO has the WORST FTP system I've ever seen. They cut so much of the content if you want to actually go anywhere or do anything interesting it costs money. Even if you opt to pay monthly, you still get LESS content than you used to get when the game was subscription based. They bleed money out of you and lock you out of zones and quest lines.
Meanwhile, you can go anywhere and do anything in Vanguard FOR FREE. The only thing about it that's grating is the item restriction.
I felt the need to chime in here concerning the gear restriction associated with the F2P model being instated in Vanguard. I've played the game off and on multiple times now and tend to make a new character each time. One thing that I've always noticed is the complete lack of need for a full group WHEN you're equipped with a few good Heroic/Legendary items. I almost exclusively ran with 2 - 3 good players and myself and had little problem with any content up to level 40. Post 40, getting into the Xennumet dungeon area, our four man group was no longer viable (the Greystone area mid 40's was a bit easier and doable with the aforementioned four man group).
What I'm getting it at is that I could see groups of reasonably geared players (not using Heroic/Legendary loot) completing most if not all the content up to the 40's range, which is a considerable amount of content, possibly beyond. Vanguard does a good job of rewarding skillful play.
As someone who got burned by the game's state at launch, I would probably have played if it went f2p. I would never touch this game with this f2p model. I have no reason to. I'd rather pay my $60 for GW2 and play without a monthly fee or just play Aion or Lineage 2 which are completely f2p.