Unless the company is non profit you will always get what you pay for. If you are enjoying a game that is truly free to play then great, games ate meant for fun.
Saying that all MMOs should become or be F2P is hopefully not going to happen. The quality will go down. There's no denying that. With no or unreliable income companies will do what they need to in order to stay in business.
Yes f2p is so grand,i love seeing chat spammed with kina sales every 5 seconds and stalls setup to sell game currency.How about go try Eve and enter the noob chat,the ISk selling posam is so bad,you won't have a god's prayer of seeing anything in the chat window,except scrolling spam.
F2p -=piss poor sup[port and GM,might as well say Gm's don't exist.Players can bot and setup rmt stalls right in the open for everyone to see,it is because nobody cares.
NCSOFT always has been a huge reason why f2p is a complete joke.They are a bad influence for all developers.When i see a level 10 item in Aion selling for millions of Kina,i just shake my head in disbelief at how careless a developer can get.If a developer does not care one bit about their games environment,why shoud lanyone care about their game?
That is why i quit supporting the COD franchise,when cheating got so bad and there was not one avenue to reprt cheating,i knew they did not care.This is happening far too often now and it is because without a monthly sub fee,these devs have nothing to lose at all,if you bought the game,they already have that.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Yes f2p is so grand,i love seeing chat spammed with kina sales every 5 seconds and stalls setup to sell game currency.How about go try Eve and enter the noob chat,the ISk selling posam is so bad,you won't have a god's prayer of seeing anything in the chat window,except scrolling spam.
F2p -=piss poor sup[port and GM,might as well say Gm's don't exist.Players can bot and setup rmt stalls right in the open for everyone to see,it is because nobody cares.
NCSOFT always has been a huge reason why f2p is a complete joke.They are a bad influence for all developers.When i see a level 10 item in Aion selling for millions of Kina,i just shake my head in disbelief at how careless a developer can get.If a developer does not care one bit about their games environment,why shoud lanyone care about their game?
That is why i quit supporting the COD franchise,when cheating got so bad and there was not one avenue to reprt cheating,i knew they did not care.This is happening far too often now and it is because without a monthly sub fee,these devs have nothing to lose at all,if you bought the game,they already have that.
Or WoW where there is a tell/shout for gold every 5 mintues, or EQ2 where someone advertises selling a gamecard every 10 minutes. Oh wait, those are p2p and freemium.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
For terrible games that couldn't justify the sub price...well because they were terrible, yes F2P is the future for such games. But is F2P the future of the MMO genre?... I doubt it. All its gonna take is one game to really put up a nice feature list (not Quest, Dungeon/Raid.. BG..Rinse/repeat with next expansion/content update) and be sub based and it will pick back up again.
"In the immediate future, we have this one, and then weve got another one that is actually going to be so were going to have, what we want to do, is in January, what were targeting to do, this may or may not happen, so you cant hold me to it. But what were targeting to do, is have a fun anniversary to the Ilum shenanigans that happened. An alien race might invade, and they might crash into Ilum and there might be some new activities that happen on the planet." ~Gabe Amatangelo
I don't get this whole F2P is the future either. It is the present, we don't need prophets to tell us what is going on now. I'm not saying this is a good thing or a bad thing. Even worse we have the games where you have b2p with cash shops, and the worst of all milking methods: box + sub + cash shop. F2P isn't even the worst of the monetizing methods in MMOs, and that is sad.
I think microtransactions are evil! Unless they are for silly things like customizing your characters looks. But when they impede my enjoyment of a game I just feel ripped off and quit. I don't like feeling like I am being nickel and dimed. F2P in it's current form across the majority of games is just not acceptable to me. And sub games with cash shops that give you a one up on others its just disgusting.
Also, I wish people wouldn't compare LoL to all these F2P games. LoL does not restrict you. By the time you can even do ranked games, or should I say by the time you can actually compete in ranked games you have already earned enough free IP to purchase a couple rune pages, multiple characters, and all the runes you need. The only thing you really would want to pay for if you are hooked are the skins! I've never felt ripped off by LoL because they don't sell anything I NEED to enjoy the game. Just things I WANT. IE; in some mmo's to keep up they want you to pay for enhanced experience bonuses, or they want you to pay so something is completed quicker. In LoL you can get experience faster, but whoopee dooooo. If anything that only hurts you as now you are at a higher level, and have LESS than those at the same level as you. Therefore, the XP bonus hurts you.
Now to Wayshuba, I see no reason why you wouldn't share the speakers name from a conference. It makes no sense and only leads me to believe that you are making a story up. For one, he held a conference to educate and get a message out. You really believe he wants his message spread but does not want his name associated with it? What is this some sort of underground neo-nazi leader who is actually a politician and needs to hide his relation? Sorry, I have seen too many movies. Regardless, I call BS on your "conference". No one holds a public or private conference that hundreds of people can attend on such a typical topic only to want their names held back. For those wondering, in his thread he refused to share the name.
LOl .. i agree with madazz for once. Conferences are public events. Many are advertised. I don't see a scenario where even teh conference name should be hidden.
Some people just arent happy unless they have to pay alot of money right of the bat for their MMO.......If they dont have to pay a box+sub+cash shop+lifetime then they feel they have been cheated and the game sucks......
I see lots of complaints about the "free" games here.
It's not good change - that's the problem. My 2 cents. I don't want to beat a dead horse and remind the other grownups as to why F2P games are just horribly represented. I'll stick with companies that have faith in their product. Granted - to argue against myself, I will admit that the DDO model isn't bad - but I hate most others.
In what way do people want to pay more money? It might depend on what type of player I am. If I want to stick to one game then yes, I want to play a quality game and pay money for it.
On the other hand if I'm juggling five MMOs, which there is nothing wrong with, then I probably don't want to pay for them as that would get expensive. Either way it's up to the player to decide what's right for their time and money.
Saying people want to pay money in order to feel like it's quality may be true in some cases but that has to do with the psyche of said individual. Bottom line is that a quality MMO needs money to continue to be a quality MMO. Aion is a good example. If it wasn't doing so well in Korea do you think they would settle for complete F2P for the West? I think not.
In what way do people want to pay more money? It might depend on what type of player I am. If I want to stick to one game then yes, I want to play a quality game and pay money for it.
On the other hand if I'm juggling five MMOs, which there is nothing wrong with, then I probably don't want to pay for them as that would get expensive. Either way it's up to the player to decide what's right for their time and money.
Saying people want to pay money in order to feel like it's quality may be true in some cases but that has to do with the psyche of said individual. Bottom line is that a quality MMO needs money to continue to be a quality MMO. Aion is a good example. If it wasn't doing so well in Korea do you think they would settle for complete F2P for the West? I think not.
And it is not very useful dismissing f2p games as low quality. It is about fun .. and often you don't need the most fun game, just one that is fun enough.
Sure i like the Avenger more than an average episode of Arrow. But since watching Arrow is free, and that it is fun ENOUGH, i will watch it too.
I don't think a F2P needs to be the most fun thing on earth to be successful, and given their popularity, many are fun "enough".
And it is not very useful dismissing f2p games as low quality. It is about fun .. and often you don't need the most fun game, just one that is fun enough.
Sure i like the Avenger more than an average episode of Arrow. But since watching Arrow is free, and that it is fun ENOUGH, i will watch it too.
I don't think a F2P needs to be the most fun thing on earth to be successful, and given their popularity, many are fun "enough".
Ahhhh, ok. Now I'm starting to understand you a bit more. Fun "enough", huh? See that's another of way saying you're just settling. Personally, I can understand killing some time with a good "enough" game on some shitty phone or tablet while waiting for the wife to finish up shopping, but to settle for good "enough" at my age with a full time job at home with my PC with thousands of dollars of equipment. Aint gonna happen.
I am by no means in search of some non-existent perfect game, but no way am I settling for "ahhhh, it's good enough". Too many consumers pull that nonsense and we all end up with terrible products.
Your post was very telling, Mr. Seldon.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
As I said before, if you're having fun, or "fun enough", then that's great as games are supposed to be fun. The argument here is whether F2P is the future of MMOs. I'm in the camp that hopes this is not the case because quality is important to me. You can tell the difference really easily.
The ironic thing is that although I have little time to play MMOs I have been playing PS2 for free and having a blast. I die a lot, more due to my lack of FPS experience than Cert gain, but it doesn't matter that I don't get things a quickly as subs do. So you are correct, the fun factor is king, but in my case it's with a freemium game that has certain price gates and because of them PS2 is a high quality game.
I see lots of complaints about the "free" games here.
The future? What? F2P is the here and now while sub only games have dried up to just a handful of titles. Of course everyone is complaining. It's an internet forum. What's wrong with you dude?
This is how payment model is, since people asked about spending and some people will say "why can't I spend how I want".
P2P:
$15
F2P at launch:
$0 (player A through F)----> $ 30 (player G, H, I)------> $ 100 (player J, K)-----> $1000 (player L)
Now who do you think the developer cares about most, player A through F or player L who spends $1000 on their game a month (and make no mistake about it, these people exist, what is $1000 to you is $10 to a millionaires kid).
Player A through F is just there for one reason, to play with player L, but after player L has made his clique and found his guild, usually with other rich people, the developers realise they don't need player A through F anymore, and they keep increasing the power of cash shop items to get all the money they can from player L.
That's how F2P work and it's disgusting frankly, I don't like F2P anymore.
What really irritates me about the whole "F2P sucks" argument: the examples of "F2P" games are games that converted to a F2P model. In other words, the publisher is trying to squeeze every last dime out of the game before it dies and think they can trick more people into playing (and spending money) on a crappy game with the F2P model. The exapmles of F2P cited every time: SWToR, LOtR, etc. Those are not F2P games! They are crappy games that failed with their original business model.
Then there are the people who wax poetic about how they love grinding for stuff in WoW, but diss any F2P game because it's a "grindfest". Wait, wut? It matters not if you're grinding for rare item x or for levels, it's still a grind.
Yes, there are plenty of F2P games that are poorly designed, ill concieved, and badly implemented. But the same is just as true of P2P too. Just because there are examples of bad games does not mean that the business model is a bust.
"F2P is a ripoff desigend to squeeze the maximum cash from gamers"; lol. This argument always amuses me especially when coming from a WoW fanboy. Lets use the WoW model, shall we? Go to retailer, buy box for $40-80, install game, go to web site to create account, pay $15 per month for sub with the understanding that the sub is how new content will be paid for, when new content is released pay $20-50 for access to content that was supposedly already paid for with the sub, repeat ad nauseum. (insert cash register sfx here) Sure plenty of F2P games can squeeze more out of a player per month than P2P games using the WoW model. But long term, companies make more money out of more players (thus achieving greater profits) than do companies using F2P. Just because the grip isn't tight, doesn't mean you aren't getting squeezed.
This is how payment model is, since people asked about spending and some people will say "why can't I spend how I want".
P2P:
$15
F2P at launch:
$0 (player A through F)----> $ 30 (player G, H, I)------> $ 100 (player J, K)-----> $1000 (player L)
Now who do you think the developer cares about most, player A through F or player L who spends $1000 on their game a month (and make no mistake about it, these people exist, what is $1000 to you is $10 to a millionaires kid).
Player A through F is just there for one reason, to play with player L, but after player L has made his clique and found his guild, usually with other rich people, the developers realise they don't need player A through F anymore, and they keep increasing the power of cash shop items to get all the money they can from player L.
That's how F2P work and it's disgusting frankly, I don't like F2P anymore.
No. Players A through K usually don't give a rats behind about player L. None of them are there to play with player L, all of them are there for a variety of reasons some of which are playing with a few other people.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
And the future is so bright I have to wear shades...
No, but really, F2P can suck it. Give me my monthly sub and let have everything the game has to offer.
I am not impressed by these models that allow me to sub yet I have to get whatever kind of "bucks" the company uses to nickle and dime the customers with in their shops.
That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!
This is how payment model is, since people asked about spending and some people will say "why can't I spend how I want".
P2P:
$15
F2P at launch:
$0 (player A through F)----> $ 30 (player G, H, I)------> $ 100 (player J, K)-----> $1000 (player L)
Now who do you think the developer cares about most, player A through F or player L who spends $1000 on their game a month (and make no mistake about it, these people exist, what is $1000 to you is $10 to a millionaires kid).
Player A through F is just there for one reason, to play with player L, but after player L has made his clique and found his guild, usually with other rich people, the developers realise they don't need player A through F anymore, and they keep increasing the power of cash shop items to get all the money they can from player L.
That's how F2P work and it's disgusting frankly, I don't like F2P anymore.
No. Players A through K usually don't give a rats behind about player L. None of them are there to play with player L, all of them are there for a variety of reasons some of which are playing with a few other people.
Yes they are ,that's the exact reason a vindictus developer said they keep the non-paying players in-game, to play with the paying gamer, they even mentioned this in the chinese MMO ducumentary someone linked.
Give me one good reason why they would keep players in game who don't pay anything outside of making the world feel alive and entertaining the players who pay.
You will come up without a good reason, that is the reason they are there, and once the paying players are hooked into the game, there is no reason to keep supporting the non-paying players which is why the cash shop items always increase in power, usually under constant dicontent of the playerbase.
I know you're a fan of F2P, but you have to admit how bad this model is.
The only reason the non-paying players in F2P games are there is to entertain the paying customers in the beginning of the game. They serve no other function, they tend to leave the game rather quickly when developer start to unbalance the game and add more cash shop items, and the increase in cash shop items and power of those items is to get more and more money from the paying player.
In a P2P game without cash shop, every player is of equal importance, which is the reason these games last much longer than F2P games, even though F2P games tend to make more money.
I think it's hilarious people believe this model will last, F2P is doomed to fail in MMO because more and more players realise how bad, unbalanced, unfair, and expensive this model is. While F2P have many players in the beginning, they die in a matter of weeks.
This is how payment model is, since people asked about spending and some people will say "why can't I spend how I want".
P2P:
$15
F2P at launch:
$0 (player A through F)----> $ 30 (player G, H, I)------> $ 100 (player J, K)-----> $1000 (player L)
Now who do you think the developer cares about most, player A through F or player L who spends $1000 on their game a month (and make no mistake about it, these people exist, what is $1000 to you is $10 to a millionaires kid).
Player A through F is just there for one reason, to play with player L, but after player L has made his clique and found his guild, usually with other rich people, the developers realise they don't need player A through F anymore, and they keep increasing the power of cash shop items to get all the money they can from player L.
That's how F2P work and it's disgusting frankly, I don't like F2P anymore.
No. Players A through K usually don't give a rats behind about player L. None of them are there to play with player L, all of them are there for a variety of reasons some of which are playing with a few other people.
Yes they are ,that's the exact reason a vindictus developer said they keep the non-paying players in-game, to play with the paying gamer.
Give me one good reason why they would keep players in game who don't pay anything outside of making the world feel alive and entertaining the players who pay.
You will come up without a good reason, that is the reason they are there, and once the paying players are hooked into the game, there is no reason to keep supporting the non-paying players which is why the cash shop items always increase in power, usually under constant dicontent of the playerbase.
I know you're a fan of F2P, but you have to admit how bad this model is.
Doesn't matter what the dev said, the fact is that people are playing for a whole bunch of reasons, and I would bet very few of those guys are actually playing with L. I would bet very few of the actual population even care about L.
I don't think the model is bad, I think it's very good. It allows me to choose how much I want to spend regardless of how I choose to play. You have to admit that choosing what you wish to spend is good.
The devs want them because the worst possible thing to happen to an MMO is low population. Once the population is low it sinks into and remains in obscurity. Just look at VG.
F2P has been around since before UO, it's lasted longer than p2p, it's not going anywhere.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Doesn't matter what the dev said, the fact is that people are playing for a whole bunch of reason.
Why does a developer keep a non-paying F2P player in the game outside of entertaining the paying customers in the beginning of the game.
I really doubt you can come up with a reasonable reason.
allready answered.
Nope, you twisted around my argument and argumented from the player point of view.
I'm asking why the developer keeps the non-paying customer in a F2P game.
Nope I didn't thats the reason. When the population is low, the game sinks into obscurity, it's a vicious cycle. Low pop, no word of mouth, little money, no money for advertising, lower population. Having people in game generates word of mouth. Having it free means no barrier, more population, more word of mouth and more paying customers.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Doesn't matter what the dev said, the fact is that people are playing for a whole bunch of reason.
Why does a developer keep a non-paying F2P player in the game outside of entertaining the paying customers in the beginning of the game.
I really doubt you can come up with a reasonable reason.
allready answered.
Nope, you twisted around my argument and argumented from the player point of view.
I'm asking why the developer keeps the non-paying customer in a F2P game.
Nope I didn't thats the reason. When the population is low, the game sinks into obscurity, it's a vicious cycle. Low pop, no word of mouth, little money, no money for advertising, lower population. Having people in game generates word of mouth. Having it free means no barrier, more population, more word of mouth and more paying customers.
So you can't come up with a reasonable reason except for populating the world for the paying customer.
-your money argument is wrong, since I specifically said "non-paying" player
-your word of mouth argument is ridiculous, those F2P players cost more in network costs and customer service than they will ever advertise the game
So you admit, the F2P player is there for 1 reason and 1 reason only in F2P games, that is to entertain the paying player.
This single fact undermines the whole F2P model since the non-paying customer will always come second and once the paying player is hooked, there is no reason to support people who spend nothing or low amounts, and each time the power of items increases, and even the people paying $10 don't matter anymore when some are paying $1000.
This whole F2P model is plain ridiculous and it's starting to show cracks, every F2P forum I read is non-stop complaints about the cash shop being overpowered.
Comments
Saying that all MMOs should become or be F2P is hopefully not going to happen. The quality will go down. There's no denying that. With no or unreliable income companies will do what they need to in order to stay in business.
Yes f2p is so grand,i love seeing chat spammed with kina sales every 5 seconds and stalls setup to sell game currency.How about go try Eve and enter the noob chat,the ISk selling posam is so bad,you won't have a god's prayer of seeing anything in the chat window,except scrolling spam.
F2p -=piss poor sup[port and GM,might as well say Gm's don't exist.Players can bot and setup rmt stalls right in the open for everyone to see,it is because nobody cares.
NCSOFT always has been a huge reason why f2p is a complete joke.They are a bad influence for all developers.When i see a level 10 item in Aion selling for millions of Kina,i just shake my head in disbelief at how careless a developer can get.If a developer does not care one bit about their games environment,why shoud lanyone care about their game?
That is why i quit supporting the COD franchise,when cheating got so bad and there was not one avenue to reprt cheating,i knew they did not care.This is happening far too often now and it is because without a monthly sub fee,these devs have nothing to lose at all,if you bought the game,they already have that.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Or WoW where there is a tell/shout for gold every 5 mintues, or EQ2 where someone advertises selling a gamecard every 10 minutes. Oh wait, those are p2p and freemium.
"In the immediate future, we have this one, and then weve got another one that is actually going to be so were going to have, what we want to do, is in January, what were targeting to do, this may or may not happen, so you cant hold me to it. But what were targeting to do, is have a fun anniversary to the Ilum shenanigans that happened. An alien race might invade, and they might crash into Ilum and there might be some new activities that happen on the planet." ~Gabe Amatangelo
LOl .. i agree with madazz for once. Conferences are public events. Many are advertised. I don't see a scenario where even teh conference name should be hidden.
It's not good change - that's the problem. My 2 cents. I don't want to beat a dead horse and remind the other grownups as to why F2P games are just horribly represented. I'll stick with companies that have faith in their product. Granted - to argue against myself, I will admit that the DDO model isn't bad - but I hate most others.
In what way do people want to pay more money? It might depend on what type of player I am. If I want to stick to one game then yes, I want to play a quality game and pay money for it.
On the other hand if I'm juggling five MMOs, which there is nothing wrong with, then I probably don't want to pay for them as that would get expensive. Either way it's up to the player to decide what's right for their time and money.
Saying people want to pay money in order to feel like it's quality may be true in some cases but that has to do with the psyche of said individual. Bottom line is that a quality MMO needs money to continue to be a quality MMO. Aion is a good example. If it wasn't doing so well in Korea do you think they would settle for complete F2P for the West? I think not.
And it is not very useful dismissing f2p games as low quality. It is about fun .. and often you don't need the most fun game, just one that is fun enough.
Sure i like the Avenger more than an average episode of Arrow. But since watching Arrow is free, and that it is fun ENOUGH, i will watch it too.
I don't think a F2P needs to be the most fun thing on earth to be successful, and given their popularity, many are fun "enough".
Ahhhh, ok. Now I'm starting to understand you a bit more. Fun "enough", huh? See that's another of way saying you're just settling. Personally, I can understand killing some time with a good "enough" game on some shitty phone or tablet while waiting for the wife to finish up shopping, but to settle for good "enough" at my age with a full time job at home with my PC with thousands of dollars of equipment. Aint gonna happen.
I am by no means in search of some non-existent perfect game, but no way am I settling for "ahhhh, it's good enough". Too many consumers pull that nonsense and we all end up with terrible products.
Your post was very telling, Mr. Seldon.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
The ironic thing is that although I have little time to play MMOs I have been playing PS2 for free and having a blast. I die a lot, more due to my lack of FPS experience than Cert gain, but it doesn't matter that I don't get things a quickly as subs do. So you are correct, the fun factor is king, but in my case it's with a freemium game that has certain price gates and because of them PS2 is a high quality game.
SInce we are talking quality.
F2P games are not the games that started off with the budget of a sub game and went freemiun.
Have a look at the perfect world games. There is a reason why none of them are voted in the top 10.
The future? What? F2P is the here and now while sub only games have dried up to just a handful of titles. Of course everyone is complaining. It's an internet forum. What's wrong with you dude?
This is how payment model is, since people asked about spending and some people will say "why can't I spend how I want".
P2P:
$15
F2P at launch:
$0 (player A through F)----> $ 30 (player G, H, I)------> $ 100 (player J, K)-----> $1000 (player L)
Now who do you think the developer cares about most, player A through F or player L who spends $1000 on their game a month (and make no mistake about it, these people exist, what is $1000 to you is $10 to a millionaires kid).
Player A through F is just there for one reason, to play with player L, but after player L has made his clique and found his guild, usually with other rich people, the developers realise they don't need player A through F anymore, and they keep increasing the power of cash shop items to get all the money they can from player L.
That's how F2P work and it's disgusting frankly, I don't like F2P anymore.
What really irritates me about the whole "F2P sucks" argument: the examples of "F2P" games are games that converted to a F2P model. In other words, the publisher is trying to squeeze every last dime out of the game before it dies and think they can trick more people into playing (and spending money) on a crappy game with the F2P model. The exapmles of F2P cited every time: SWToR, LOtR, etc. Those are not F2P games! They are crappy games that failed with their original business model.
Then there are the people who wax poetic about how they love grinding for stuff in WoW, but diss any F2P game because it's a "grindfest". Wait, wut? It matters not if you're grinding for rare item x or for levels, it's still a grind.
Yes, there are plenty of F2P games that are poorly designed, ill concieved, and badly implemented. But the same is just as true of P2P too. Just because there are examples of bad games does not mean that the business model is a bust.
"F2P is a ripoff desigend to squeeze the maximum cash from gamers"; lol. This argument always amuses me especially when coming from a WoW fanboy. Lets use the WoW model, shall we? Go to retailer, buy box for $40-80, install game, go to web site to create account, pay $15 per month for sub with the understanding that the sub is how new content will be paid for, when new content is released pay $20-50 for access to content that was supposedly already paid for with the sub, repeat ad nauseum. (insert cash register sfx here) Sure plenty of F2P games can squeeze more out of a player per month than P2P games using the WoW model. But long term, companies make more money out of more players (thus achieving greater profits) than do companies using F2P. Just because the grip isn't tight, doesn't mean you aren't getting squeezed.
No. Players A through K usually don't give a rats behind about player L. None of them are there to play with player L, all of them are there for a variety of reasons some of which are playing with a few other people.
And the future is so bright I have to wear shades...
No, but really, F2P can suck it. Give me my monthly sub and let have everything the game has to offer.
I am not impressed by these models that allow me to sub yet I have to get whatever kind of "bucks" the company uses to nickle and dime the customers with in their shops.
That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!
Yes they are ,that's the exact reason a vindictus developer said they keep the non-paying players in-game, to play with the paying gamer, they even mentioned this in the chinese MMO ducumentary someone linked.
Give me one good reason why they would keep players in game who don't pay anything outside of making the world feel alive and entertaining the players who pay.
You will come up without a good reason, that is the reason they are there, and once the paying players are hooked into the game, there is no reason to keep supporting the non-paying players which is why the cash shop items always increase in power, usually under constant dicontent of the playerbase.
I know you're a fan of F2P, but you have to admit how bad this model is.
The only reason the non-paying players in F2P games are there is to entertain the paying customers in the beginning of the game. They serve no other function, they tend to leave the game rather quickly when developer start to unbalance the game and add more cash shop items, and the increase in cash shop items and power of those items is to get more and more money from the paying player.
In a P2P game without cash shop, every player is of equal importance, which is the reason these games last much longer than F2P games, even though F2P games tend to make more money.
I think it's hilarious people believe this model will last, F2P is doomed to fail in MMO because more and more players realise how bad, unbalanced, unfair, and expensive this model is. While F2P have many players in the beginning, they die in a matter of weeks.
Doesn't matter what the dev said, the fact is that people are playing for a whole bunch of reasons, and I would bet very few of those guys are actually playing with L. I would bet very few of the actual population even care about L.
I don't think the model is bad, I think it's very good. It allows me to choose how much I want to spend regardless of how I choose to play. You have to admit that choosing what you wish to spend is good.
The devs want them because the worst possible thing to happen to an MMO is low population. Once the population is low it sinks into and remains in obscurity. Just look at VG.
F2P has been around since before UO, it's lasted longer than p2p, it's not going anywhere.
Why does a developer keep a non-paying F2P player in the game outside of entertaining the paying customers in the beginning of the game.
I really doubt you can come up with a reasonable reason.
allready answered.
Nope, you twisted around my argument and argumented from the player point of view.
I'm asking why the developer keeps the non-paying customer in a F2P game.
Nope I didn't thats the reason. When the population is low, the game sinks into obscurity, it's a vicious cycle. Low pop, no word of mouth, little money, no money for advertising, lower population. Having people in game generates word of mouth. Having it free means no barrier, more population, more word of mouth and more paying customers.
So you can't come up with a reasonable reason except for populating the world for the paying customer.
-your money argument is wrong, since I specifically said "non-paying" player
-your word of mouth argument is ridiculous, those F2P players cost more in network costs and customer service than they will ever advertise the game
So you admit, the F2P player is there for 1 reason and 1 reason only in F2P games, that is to entertain the paying player.
This single fact undermines the whole F2P model since the non-paying customer will always come second and once the paying player is hooked, there is no reason to support people who spend nothing or low amounts, and each time the power of items increases, and even the people paying $10 don't matter anymore when some are paying $1000.
This whole F2P model is plain ridiculous and it's starting to show cracks, every F2P forum I read is non-stop complaints about the cash shop being overpowered.