Free 2 Play blurs the distinction between achievers and purchasers.
I have a cool mount in Runes of Magic.
Did I do some long quest chain? No.
Did my character slay some mega-boss? No.
Did I grind reputation for hours? No.
How did I get it? Credit card.
See the blur? Am I an achiever for having my mount?
World of Warcraft cash shop mounts. Are you an achiever for having a mount? Probably not, mounts are pretty common in any game with them and easy to get to boot.
Free 2 Play blurs the distinction between achievers and purchasers.
I have a cool mount in Runes of Magic.
Did I do some long quest chain? No.
Did my character slay some mega-boss? No.
Did I grind reputation for hours? No.
How did I get it? Credit card.
See the blur? Am I an achiever for having my mount?
Ehm sure but you can buy mounts in WoW too and Rift and most other p2p mmos have a cash shop these days and they sell you that on top of the sub, the boxes for the game and the xpacs.
I don't like being nickled and dimed in the games I play period. Specially when it comes to slowing my progression or halting it to entice me to buy things to keep everything at a normal pace. I have yet to see a F2P title that truly only let me pay for the features I want.
For instance I could care less about raids so I feel it should be an optional payment option. I want F2P titles work the same way my TV Provider does. I can pick and choose between the programs I want and only pay for those period. Not having a multitude of channels part of a package I will never use.
I like PvP so that should be one of the features you could add as well. And avoid paying for if you have no interest.
These are just examples but I feel it should extend far beyond that instead of just adding roadblocks to a game to get you to buy things
Exactly ^^ bottom line is how much you pay on average on month, and if you can pay more to get in unfair advantage, or worse to avoid a disadvantage. I would suggest $60 a year over and above box prices seems like good value.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Free 2 Play blurs the distinction between achievers and purchasers.
I have a cool mount in Runes of Magic.
Did I do some long quest chain? No.
Did my character slay some mega-boss? No.
Did I grind reputation for hours? No.
How did I get it? Credit card.
See the blur? Am I an achiever for having my mount?
Can you get that same mount from doing anything in game ? It's not really blurred if the only way to get it is from the cash shop or in game AH from someone selling it.
Most real achiements can't be paid for. In a well desinged game this isn't an issue. The problem of course that isn't just limited to f2p is...well desinged games are rare.
I don't like being nickled and dimed in the games I play period. Specially when it comes to slowing my progression or halting it to entice me to buy things to keep everything at a normal pace. I have yet to see a F2P title that truly only let me pay for the features I want.
For instance I could care less about raids so I feel it should be an optional payment option. I want F2P titles work the same way my TV Provider does. I can pick and choose between the programs I want and only pay for those period. Not having a multitude of channels part of a package I will never use.
Donno about modularity but you could try Neverwinter when it's out or one of the other Cryptic games as they allow you to earn microtransaction points via in-game currency transactions (dilithum to cryptic points in STO for example).
Originally posted by Bladestrom Exactly ^^ bottom line is how much you pay on average on month, and if you can pay more to get in unfair advantage, or worse to avoid a disadvantage. I would suggest $60 a year over and above box prices seems like good value.
I don't like being nickled and dimed in the games I play period. Specially when it comes to slowing my progression or halting it to entice me to buy things to keep everything at a normal pace. I have yet to see a F2P title that truly only let me pay for the features I want.
For instance I could care less about raids so I feel it should be an optional payment option. I want F2P titles work the same way my TV Provider does. I can pick and choose between the programs I want and only pay for those period. Not having a multitude of channels part of a package I will never use.
Donno about modularity but you could try Neverwinter when it's out or one of the other Cryptic games as they allow you to earn microtransaction points via in-game currency transactions (dilithum to cryptic points in STO for example).
Thanks for the offer but I highly doubt Cryptic will ever produce anything I will be even remotely interested in. Pick another developer for me. Preferably one with a better track record
Yup and I think good value in this day and age is 60 over and above box. ( based on proof provided by Anet that you can produce an aaa mmorg on lower costs)
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Originally posted by Bladestrom Yup and I think good value in this day and age is €60 over and above box. ( based on proof provided by Anet that you can produce an aaa mmorg on lower costs)
Is it though?
No doubt it is good value to you as the consumer, thats not what I mean.
Would GW2 be able to offer that value if they didn't receive income from the CS?
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
There's only something wrong with the models listed below:
Freemium - a DLC system that so limits the play of the player that one could argue the player can't experience the full range of content that the game has to offer. Such systems restrict inventory, trait progression, virtual location, loot, character roles, mail, chat, sales in auctions all in the pursuit to prevent the player from experience any part of the game for free. These games are designed solely around greed and are never a good practice as it harms the playerbase and you tend to lose players this way not gain them. They are often built around the idea that you can force people to pay a monthly fee, which sets this model separate from what people normally call F2P.
F2P - is a system that allows players to enjoy a limited gameplay only in a minor way. There are methods in game in this model that allow for the player to collect in game via normal gameplay a convertable currency that can be used in their store. The only DLC that is required to play are expansions. This model has enhancements to gameplay much like the others but includes low level starter packs and starter gear. Only some games restrict character classes/roles most do not. No subscription exists for this type of monetization model.
B2P - is a system that allows the full range of the gameplay with almost no restriction. The only DLCs are 1 yr anniversary expansions. the only ui restrictions are bank/bag slots and character slots. Few enhancements are in the store, only for the purposes of improving the leveling process. Nothing gamechanging is in the store. This model includes the ability to purchase currency that can be converted into currency used in game directly from the developer. This is rarely abused by developers but sometimes becomes an issue when the developers limit in game currency gathering to almost nothing (GW2). There is no subscription for this type monetization model.
Subshop (trial) - is a system that allows the play of the game only through a subscription model but also has a shop where players can gain advantages from gear, mounts, and enhancements via a store. This game usually has a trial that allows the players to play the game only to a miniscule portion and stops it there. (WoW/Rift) This type of model is the least common as most games are now leaving the subscription model behind for the freemium model as very few games can keep this model going for very long unless there are unusual circumstances involved (WoW).
I personally like the F2P model. LOTRO had a sortof cross between F2P and Freemium for a while. It was the happiest I've been with a game for a while until STO's purchase by PW. PW really turned STO around and included a fantastic feature for currency that allows a player to purchase Zen (their currency) to be withdrawn from the game and stored on one's account. When you do this you can use that currency on any of their other game title's stores. It's a nice system. I think PW's F2P is the best system out there honestly.
I was a strong advocate for GW2 until Nov 15th when they decided it was more important to herd people to the gem store for gold then it was to fix their game. It was the biggest disappointment I've ever dealt with in the gaming world. People need to know that end game is where you'll have difficulties just getting enough gold to travel much less gearing your toon if you are a new player. They royally screwed the pooch on that one.
I don't like being nickled and dimed in the games I play period. Specially when it comes to slowing my progression or halting it to entice me to buy things to keep everything at a normal pace. I have yet to see a F2P title that truly only let me pay for the features I want.
For instance I could care less about raids so I feel it should be an optional payment option. I want F2P titles work the same way my TV Provider does. I can pick and choose between the programs I want and only pay for those period. Not having a multitude of channels part of a package I will never use.
Donno about modularity but you could try Neverwinter when it's out or one of the other Cryptic games as they allow you to earn microtransaction points via in-game currency transactions (dilithum to cryptic points in STO for example).
Thanks for the offer but I highly doubt Cryptic will ever produce anything I will be even remotely interested in. Pick another developer for me. Preferably one with a better track record
Preferably one with a better track record? You do know there aren't any objectively or even subjectively out there with a better track record than Cryptic no matter what people say they are still better then a majority of the established devs out there (STO might not be a shining beacon of innovation but... it is still a decent game, same can be said of their other titles, decent games which have seen a more than adequate level of support). The only devs who haven't stunk up their reputation that badly is CCP but they've kinda fucked themselves over with Dust 514 everyone else and I mean everyone else has allot of shit they've pulled and crappy games released which needed stiching back together (Cryptic had this as well but their F2P games are really free to play, you can play completely free, get everything available in the game and even contribute to the developers indirectly by consuming the microtransaction points others bought thus feeding the demand and thus firing up those who want to trade for in-game currency with real cash to do it more often thus giving the devs more to work with).
developers are focusing on "how can we force inconvenience that can be circumvented by the cash shop" vs "how can we cause enjoyment for people who already pay and who we want to keep paying".
simple. there's no other reason they'd limit bag space for example. ther's no technical limitation. They do it to inconvenience you on purpose.
I'm not going to pay someone who deicates his career to inconveniencing me.
I agree with you but I'll be devil's advocate with my reply.
Games with subs also create grinds, which is a form of inconvenience I guess, that forces to you pay using addictive methods (carrot on a stick) to stick around.
But then...F2P games have grinds too, so might as well get everything all at once...
Most real achiements can't be paid for. In a well desinged game this isn't an issue. The problem of course that isn't just limited to f2p is...well desinged games are rare.
I agree. When achievements can be purchased, that drives the blurring. Frankly this holds just as true for P2P with item shop as for F2P with item shop.
Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now working in Network Security. I don't Forum PVP. If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident. When I don't understand, I ask. Such is not intended as criticism.
Nothing is wrong with F2P, in every sense of the term you are getting what you pay for. It depends more on the player that the model. Are you okay not having everything others do? Are you willing to work around roadblocks and still enjoy the game? If so you will be kept very happy with the amount of F2P titles out there.
If speaking about big name F2P games it mearly casts a bigger net but with bigger holes. It's the hope that a bigger volume of players will bring in enough money to keep the lights on. If there seems to be slower content updates and more put into the cash shop what does that tell you? There are more minnows than whales and the company needs to pay the bills. It shouldn't be surprising and that doesn't make the company greedy.
developers are focusing on "how can we force inconvenience that can be circumvented by the cash shop" vs "how can we cause enjoyment for people who already pay and who we want to keep paying".
simple. there's no other reason they'd limit bag space for example. ther's no technical limitation. They do it to inconvenience you on purpose.
I'm not going to pay someone who deicates his career to inconveniencing me.
I agree with you but I'll be devil's advocate with my reply.
Games with subs also create grinds, which is a form of inconvenience I guess, that forces to you pay using addictive methods (carrot on a stick) to stick around.
But then...F2P games have grinds too, so might as well get everything all at once...
Yeah, I'm not good at being devil's advocate.
well, grinding is the game most of the time.
if an mmo is a virtual world then you won't be in combat against epic foes 24/7. that's not anywhere near 'a believable virtual world'.
Let's pick EVE. A game where - even without RP - players 'live' in the gameworld. What do you do 90% of your time ? you go on with your daily life. trade, farm, rat, mine, craft, socialize... and only 10% is "epic call to arms to save our assets that those animals with human faces dared reinforce again".
"LIFE" in a virtual world will be...much like any real life...grindy. you develop a routine, goals, and you start working towards them. I mean that's the game. Otherwise what would you do ? if you pvp 24/7 then pvp becomes a grind. if you pve 24/7 then pve is a grind.
I think 'grind' itself is not a factor as MMOs are mostly about it. eliminating grind makes you stand in town waiting for queue to pop. Not a lot better.
Problem is once you get closer to real life the more the grind itself goes away and the exploration/invention/self-determination aspect kicks in. I've been following Project Universe for a few weeks now and if that thing isn't a scam and manages to do even a 1/10th of the things it wants to do... christ almighty that would be the one game where grind never comes into it (as you spend half the time scratching your ass trying to invent something by examining things and seeing how they fit together in a useful way, imagine basically you could build a sling but from the same assets you could, by getting a solid piece of wood, craft a rudimentary flail).
Originally posted by 123443211234 Because f2p games tend to revolve around ways the devs can extract more money out of you rather than just focusing on creating a good game.
It's interesting reading a lot of the responses here, as there is no logic whatsoever to the comparisons.
The assumption above (presented as fact, as usual) is applied to F2P, as if no other developers in this massive market of chasing the next ding is designing their game, raids or gear to do the same but in the form of a monthly fee. It's as if F2P devs are businessmen using science and psychology to guide their work, while subscription devs are fellow gamers guided by passion, art and muses.
The other interesting thing is this if you asked many in the anti-F2P crowd if they stop playing a game once it's no longer enjoyable, they'd say yes, but every one of their talking points on the topic hinges on the fictional F2P gamer reaching something they don't like/enjoy and paying to bypass it or progress beyond it. The stance is either irrational or arrogant, being poorly thought through in the former, or a sense of being above or smarter than F2P gamers in the latter. This is the most interesting of the two, as it is a shared cognitive bias that feeds off of constant reaffirmation from the group. It's both crazy and beautiful at the same time.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Didnt WoW get hacked when Stormwind was full of all dead NPCs? My point is hacking is independent of F2P. Same goes for the 'community' argument that F2P has a worse community than P2P. I have met my fair share of bad apples and paid full price.
I can see this having perhaps a higher probability than say an AAA title, but I attribute that more to funding. As F2P matures this should be reduced (my thought).
Great replies all! Dont know where to respond first :-) But wanted to add another wrinkle.
Do we see B2P (ala GW2) more viable than strict F2P?
I see B2P a highly probable model going forward and one I would support. I had no issue paying a console price for GW2 and getting my 2-3 months fun out of it. Especially since I can return back to the game whenever I want.
I dont know, subs to me were psychological to me as well. When I pay 15/months I feel *obligated* to log on if for no other reason than to get my 'value' from the month. Why waste the 53 cents/day? I mean if I can (easily) afford that - shouldnt I put it towards something I play more often? This 'obligation' (again a construct of my own mind) takes away the fun of why I'm playing.
Take SWTOR for instance. It was a fun game but got bored mid-game. Quit my sub. Game goes F2P and now I have a level 12 Bounty Hunter. Those are the facts. Now granted SWTOR implementation of F2P is annoying restrictive, but I feel if I play a game for free and Im enjoying it then I might as well pay for it. But in this case I can pay for what *I* want to play. I will probably never do an Operation ... so I simply wont play for it. I want to try a flashpoint? I can pay for one month. Even with its convoluted structure the fact that I get to pick and choose what I play when allows me to enjoy the game my way.
TERA is another one I plan to give another chance, simply because its F2P. If the game is not enjoyable (to me) the F2P conversion wont save it, but I believe I would probably enjoy it more the first time if there was no sub.
TSW too, but you get my point. F2P not only allows you to 'test' a game out longer than a specified time frame, but as you explore what you actually enjoy you get to pay piecemeal.
I agree with others, F2P as a model is good but it will come down to each IP's implementation. Where I see the best as B2P. Pay once and get everything (except expansions) for free.
Hard to see how a sub could beat that flexibility.
When looking at a business model, just be careful to think carefully about what it is you are actually paying the developers to develop. Are you buying a game or is the game just the bait?
Because, the developers deliberately build a road filled with potholes and then sell you bags of rubble to fill in the holes.
I would rather the developers would develop the best game they can in terms of gameplay and then charge me a set fee to play it. That way if they want to succeed they are concentrating on improving the gameplay experience rather than producing a gimped version they can monetize.
I agree but thats not F2P as a model, thats F2P as a (bad) implementation - and they ARE out there. This is where I see market forces taking over (i.e. - if the game is trying to cheat you to pay in a CS or whatever, we simply wont play/support the game).
developers are focusing on "how can we cause enjoyment that can be enhanced by the cash shop" vs "how can we force people to continue to be suckered out of money every month over a 14 year old lie".
I'm not going to pay someone who dedicates his career to deceiving me.
Fixed that for you because the MMO world is waking up to the fact that bandwidth and server costs arent as high as it was 14 years ago and companies can make a ton of profits from cash shops. The lie is dieing as is the pay model. Deal with it.
I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson
Comments
World of Warcraft cash shop mounts. Are you an achiever for having a mount? Probably not, mounts are pretty common in any game with them and easy to get to boot.
Ehm sure but you can buy mounts in WoW too and Rift and most other p2p mmos have a cash shop these days and they sell you that on top of the sub, the boxes for the game and the xpacs.
I don't like being nickled and dimed in the games I play period. Specially when it comes to slowing my progression or halting it to entice me to buy things to keep everything at a normal pace. I have yet to see a F2P title that truly only let me pay for the features I want.
For instance I could care less about raids so I feel it should be an optional payment option. I want F2P titles work the same way my TV Provider does. I can pick and choose between the programs I want and only pay for those period. Not having a multitude of channels part of a package I will never use.
I like PvP so that should be one of the features you could add as well. And avoid paying for if you have no interest.
These are just examples but I feel it should extend far beyond that instead of just adding roadblocks to a game to get you to buy things
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
Can you get that same mount from doing anything in game ? It's not really blurred if the only way to get it is from the cash shop or in game AH from someone selling it.
Most real achiements can't be paid for. In a well desinged game this isn't an issue. The problem of course that isn't just limited to f2p is...well desinged games are rare.
Donno about modularity but you could try Neverwinter when it's out or one of the other Cryptic games as they allow you to earn microtransaction points via in-game currency transactions (dilithum to cryptic points in STO for example).
the first year of a sub game is $215
Thanks for the offer but I highly doubt Cryptic will ever produce anything I will be even remotely interested in. Pick another developer for me. Preferably one with a better track record
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
Is it though?
No doubt it is good value to you as the consumer, thats not what I mean.
Would GW2 be able to offer that value if they didn't receive income from the CS?
There's only something wrong with the models listed below:
Freemium - a DLC system that so limits the play of the player that one could argue the player can't experience the full range of content that the game has to offer. Such systems restrict inventory, trait progression, virtual location, loot, character roles, mail, chat, sales in auctions all in the pursuit to prevent the player from experience any part of the game for free. These games are designed solely around greed and are never a good practice as it harms the playerbase and you tend to lose players this way not gain them. They are often built around the idea that you can force people to pay a monthly fee, which sets this model separate from what people normally call F2P.
F2P - is a system that allows players to enjoy a limited gameplay only in a minor way. There are methods in game in this model that allow for the player to collect in game via normal gameplay a convertable currency that can be used in their store. The only DLC that is required to play are expansions. This model has enhancements to gameplay much like the others but includes low level starter packs and starter gear. Only some games restrict character classes/roles most do not. No subscription exists for this type of monetization model.
B2P - is a system that allows the full range of the gameplay with almost no restriction. The only DLCs are 1 yr anniversary expansions. the only ui restrictions are bank/bag slots and character slots. Few enhancements are in the store, only for the purposes of improving the leveling process. Nothing gamechanging is in the store. This model includes the ability to purchase currency that can be converted into currency used in game directly from the developer. This is rarely abused by developers but sometimes becomes an issue when the developers limit in game currency gathering to almost nothing (GW2). There is no subscription for this type monetization model.
Subshop (trial) - is a system that allows the play of the game only through a subscription model but also has a shop where players can gain advantages from gear, mounts, and enhancements via a store. This game usually has a trial that allows the players to play the game only to a miniscule portion and stops it there. (WoW/Rift) This type of model is the least common as most games are now leaving the subscription model behind for the freemium model as very few games can keep this model going for very long unless there are unusual circumstances involved (WoW).
I personally like the F2P model. LOTRO had a sortof cross between F2P and Freemium for a while. It was the happiest I've been with a game for a while until STO's purchase by PW. PW really turned STO around and included a fantastic feature for currency that allows a player to purchase Zen (their currency) to be withdrawn from the game and stored on one's account. When you do this you can use that currency on any of their other game title's stores. It's a nice system. I think PW's F2P is the best system out there honestly.
I was a strong advocate for GW2 until Nov 15th when they decided it was more important to herd people to the gem store for gold then it was to fix their game. It was the biggest disappointment I've ever dealt with in the gaming world. People need to know that end game is where you'll have difficulties just getting enough gold to travel much less gearing your toon if you are a new player. They royally screwed the pooch on that one.
Preferably one with a better track record? You do know there aren't any objectively or even subjectively out there with a better track record than Cryptic no matter what people say they are still better then a majority of the established devs out there (STO might not be a shining beacon of innovation but... it is still a decent game, same can be said of their other titles, decent games which have seen a more than adequate level of support). The only devs who haven't stunk up their reputation that badly is CCP but they've kinda fucked themselves over with Dust 514 everyone else and I mean everyone else has allot of shit they've pulled and crappy games released which needed stiching back together (Cryptic had this as well but their F2P games are really free to play, you can play completely free, get everything available in the game and even contribute to the developers indirectly by consuming the microtransaction points others bought thus feeding the demand and thus firing up those who want to trade for in-game currency with real cash to do it more often thus giving the devs more to work with).
I agree with you but I'll be devil's advocate with my reply.
Games with subs also create grinds, which is a form of inconvenience I guess, that forces to you pay using addictive methods (carrot on a stick) to stick around.
But then...F2P games have grinds too, so might as well get everything all at once...
Yeah, I'm not good at being devil's advocate.
I agree. When achievements can be purchased, that drives the blurring. Frankly this holds just as true for P2P with item shop as for F2P with item shop.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
If speaking about big name F2P games it mearly casts a bigger net but with bigger holes. It's the hope that a bigger volume of players will bring in enough money to keep the lights on. If there seems to be slower content updates and more put into the cash shop what does that tell you? There are more minnows than whales and the company needs to pay the bills. It shouldn't be surprising and that doesn't make the company greedy.
Problem is once you get closer to real life the more the grind itself goes away and the exploration/invention/self-determination aspect kicks in. I've been following Project Universe for a few weeks now and if that thing isn't a scam and manages to do even a 1/10th of the things it wants to do... christ almighty that would be the one game where grind never comes into it (as you spend half the time scratching your ass trying to invent something by examining things and seeing how they fit together in a useful way, imagine basically you could build a sling but from the same assets you could, by getting a solid piece of wood, craft a rudimentary flail).
It's interesting reading a lot of the responses here, as there is no logic whatsoever to the comparisons.
The assumption above (presented as fact, as usual) is applied to F2P, as if no other developers in this massive market of chasing the next ding is designing their game, raids or gear to do the same but in the form of a monthly fee. It's as if F2P devs are businessmen using science and psychology to guide their work, while subscription devs are fellow gamers guided by passion, art and muses.
The other interesting thing is this if you asked many in the anti-F2P crowd if they stop playing a game once it's no longer enjoyable, they'd say yes, but every one of their talking points on the topic hinges on the fictional F2P gamer reaching something they don't like/enjoy and paying to bypass it or progress beyond it. The stance is either irrational or arrogant, being poorly thought through in the former, or a sense of being above or smarter than F2P gamers in the latter. This is the most interesting of the two, as it is a shared cognitive bias that feeds off of constant reaffirmation from the group. It's both crazy and beautiful at the same time.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Didnt WoW get hacked when Stormwind was full of all dead NPCs? My point is hacking is independent of F2P. Same goes for the 'community' argument that F2P has a worse community than P2P. I have met my fair share of bad apples and paid full price.
I can see this having perhaps a higher probability than say an AAA title, but I attribute that more to funding. As F2P matures this should be reduced (my thought).
Great replies all! Dont know where to respond first :-) But wanted to add another wrinkle.
Do we see B2P (ala GW2) more viable than strict F2P?
I see B2P a highly probable model going forward and one I would support. I had no issue paying a console price for GW2 and getting my 2-3 months fun out of it. Especially since I can return back to the game whenever I want.
I dont know, subs to me were psychological to me as well. When I pay 15/months I feel *obligated* to log on if for no other reason than to get my 'value' from the month. Why waste the 53 cents/day? I mean if I can (easily) afford that - shouldnt I put it towards something I play more often? This 'obligation' (again a construct of my own mind) takes away the fun of why I'm playing.
Take SWTOR for instance. It was a fun game but got bored mid-game. Quit my sub. Game goes F2P and now I have a level 12 Bounty Hunter. Those are the facts. Now granted SWTOR implementation of F2P is annoying restrictive, but I feel if I play a game for free and Im enjoying it then I might as well pay for it. But in this case I can pay for what *I* want to play. I will probably never do an Operation ... so I simply wont play for it. I want to try a flashpoint? I can pay for one month. Even with its convoluted structure the fact that I get to pick and choose what I play when allows me to enjoy the game my way.
TERA is another one I plan to give another chance, simply because its F2P. If the game is not enjoyable (to me) the F2P conversion wont save it, but I believe I would probably enjoy it more the first time if there was no sub.
TSW too, but you get my point. F2P not only allows you to 'test' a game out longer than a specified time frame, but as you explore what you actually enjoy you get to pay piecemeal.
I agree with others, F2P as a model is good but it will come down to each IP's implementation. Where I see the best as B2P. Pay once and get everything (except expansions) for free.
Hard to see how a sub could beat that flexibility.
Interesting argument. Bait for what though?
I agree but thats not F2P as a model, thats F2P as a (bad) implementation - and they ARE out there. This is where I see market forces taking over (i.e. - if the game is trying to cheat you to pay in a CS or whatever, we simply wont play/support the game).
We can't eliminate choice from the equation.
Fixed that for you because the MMO world is waking up to the fact that bandwidth and server costs arent as high as it was 14 years ago and companies can make a ton of profits from cash shops. The lie is dieing as is the pay model. Deal with it.
I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson