Had no problem with TERA before it went F2P, paid my sub and everything was smooth (at least for me) but now I have hard times to connect, lag kills my characters (when it takes 2 seconds for my warrior to evade attacks it makes the dynamic combat impossible, died many times because of this) but the worst: since F2P I always get launcher errors (right now "Error: 02112:0000 JSON parse error;") and when I finally manage to get into the game, chat is full of racism, porn etc. no moderators whatsoever...Sad really because it's a great game but F2P is hurting the experience...
I can see they take money from the cash shop and barely pay any game moderators, or get more stable servers...if it wasn't for TERA's universe (I'm a big fan) I'd have moved on, long time ago...it's worst in Europe (Gameforge should disappear from the face of the Earth)
But don't get me wrong. I love F2P's, huge Vindictus fan, enjoy C9, loved the Neverwinter beta and looking forward to it, but in the end if I had the option to choose, I'd prefer a sub that provides a more stable / complete experience. Just like I paid 1 year of Rift and never get any problems with it.
But when you really look at it - is it really F2P or is it the way En Masse implemented it.
Lag can be fixed by increasing network throughput or server infrastructure.
Launcher errors can be fixed by quality control
Chat can be fixed by active moderation
It sounds like TERA didnt understand the best way to go F2P and went all in feet first and became overwhelmed.
F2P will always in my book come down to implementation. Those who get the model/balance right are the ones that will succeed. And to be fair these are tough questions to answer. Its still new.
But notice how GW2 model works more holistically than a game that was built as P2P and *goes* F2P.
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?
No I do not see B2P + item shop as more viable than pure F2P, at least not from a player perspective. I can play Aion for free, but GW2 is still $60 up front. That doesn't give GW2 any advantage.
On the other hand, pure B2P (which is now all but extinct) had advantages due to not having to balance item shop purchases into combat and economic mechanisms. This died out completely when MMO development budgets went through the roof. At best a few Indies are still B2P.
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.
This. Plus nothing in life is free. Rather than charging a fair price, F2P games use deception and trickery to prod you to keep reaching for your wallet. All F2P games that I know of offer character advancement for a fee (xp potions). Meaning all F2P games are P2W. I will not ever download a F2P game.
Ok lets remove this from the discussion. I doubt any of us here ACTUALLY believe F2P means absolutely FREE.
F2P is a limited trial that essentially allows you to try out the game. Some allow longer 'try outs' than others. But the end of the day they want you to sub. I'm not against that, but dont want to sub until I know I will be enjoying all aspects of it.
Interesting to point out are F2P only games. I have played a few, mostly from Aria Games (Eden Eternal, Grand Fantasia, and a few others). They are of cheaper quality and have heard that 'end game' is all cash shop, but I have to be honest. I enjoyed the time I played them especially Eden Eternal. I didnt pay a dime.
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
What TV provider do you have?
Here in NYC you dont get none of that. For one, you get the provider in your area. Period. You dont get a choice. You cant pick and choose (well you can if you consider FiOS an option - but its not for me).
I cant JUST buy HBO without getting the entire HBO package which has channels I dont watch. But my favorite is I cant get the FEAR network (one new channel) without buying the entire Encore suite.
Cable TV has to be the most monopolistic business out there.
back on topic ... I do believe there may be a separate between PvE'ers and PvP'ers. I can see F2P affecting the latter over the former since competition is introduced.
I doubt any of us here ACTUALLY believe F2P means absolutely FREE.
yet about 90% of players MAKE IT so for them it's that way.
what they believe doesn't really matter. it's only what they do.
It can mean absoluely free for me if I want it to be. You (metaphorically, I'm talking about developers) can't stop me.
and on such a shaky business model...things can go unstable quickly. And now I'm really not investing in something that's so unstable.
see the issue ?
League of Legends, World of Tanks, DDO, Age of Conan, stop me when your argument sinks completely. Good F2P games will never be shakey because people will love them and want to support them, that's why most of the crap F2Ps slowly die off while the decent to good ones live on (christ World of Tanks isn't even a MMO in the real sense of the word and its shakey as a game can get but it shot through the roof and turned Wargamming into an international player in the games world).
I doubt any of us here ACTUALLY believe F2P means absolutely FREE.
yet about 90% of players MAKE IT so for them it's that way.
what they believe doesn't really matter. it's only what they do.
It can mean absoluely free for me if I want it to be. You (metaphorically, I'm talking about developers) can't stop me.
and on such a shaky business model...things can go unstable quickly. And now I'm really not investing in something that's so unstable.
see the issue ?
No. :-)
As I dont understand how someone could do something they dont believe, but wouldnt put it past people....
It can only be free if you are content to live within whatever limitations are placed by the F2P model. But again I personally don't believe thats an issue for the model. If the game that is using the F2P model is 'crap' (not fun too the masses, etc) no amount of making it free or paying for it could save the game.
Stability to me comes from quality, or at least the selling of that perception which could be B2P or F2P. Paying money does not always equal better. SWTOR proved that pretty well.
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.
What about speed bumps, locks, and time constraints in sub-locked games? How is that not imposing artificial limits, not technical limits, in order to squeeze more cash out of subscribers?
Perhpas - most liely - it is. However...it affects everyone equally.
not the rich one way an the peasants another. That's why it's more tolerable knowing every player is on equal ground in this sense.
If enjoyment is subjective how do we quantify? Is limited bag space really a big/major issue to playing a game? Its not for me (in the sense if I want more bag space I buy it without a second thought). but that transaction in and of itself says that I enjoy the game. As opposed to giving me (say) unlimited bag space but I dont like the game.
When we talk equal ground are you speaking in the context of PvP? Because as a PvE'er I dont care what a rich person does. It doesnt affect my game (hasn't yet) nor has it ruined my enjoyment.
Sub only model, every item in the game can be had in a reasonable amount of time for 15 bucks a month.
F2P cash shop model. Every item in the game CANNOT be achieved in a resonable amount of time even spending 15 a month as if it was a sub game, unless you open your wallet WIDE. And the entire game is developed to drive you to the cash shop to spend more and more money. So instead of creating items and content to be consumed for your 15 a month in a sub only game, items and content are created soley to part you with as much cash as possible.
Sub only model, every item in the game can be had in a reasonable amount of time for 15 bucks a month.
F2P cash shop model. Every item in the game CANNOT be achieved in a resonable amount of time even spending 15 a month as if it was a sub game, unless you open your wallet WIDE. And the entire game is developed to drive you to the cash shop to spend more and more money. So instead of creating items and content to be consumed for your 15 a month in a sub only game, items and content are created soley to part you with as much cash as possible.
Sub only model, every item in the game can be had in a reasonable amount of time for 15 bucks a month.
F2P cash shop model. Every item in the game CANNOT be achieved in a resonable amount of time even spending 15 a month as if it was a sub game, unless you open your wallet WIDE. And the entire game is developed to drive you to the cash shop to spend more and more money. So instead of creating items and content to be consumed for your 15 a month in a sub only game, items and content are created soley to part you with as much cash as possible.
Simpl as that.
Over generalized. Can you provide concrete examples?
You also make some wide assumptions. Such as all players wanting every achievement in the game. The entire game developed to drive you to the cash shop.
You just simply prefer to pay for something you may not fully utilize... which is fine. But that doesnt make the opposite using F2P model bad.
which part of this imbecilical post should i adress first?
"deal with it". what was the point of this? Did this have a point at all ?
"fixed that for you". You couldn't state your argument in a civilised manner, had to choose the hostile one, didn't you? Oh wait you posted the word "because". followed by nothing that'd justify it. soooo.
"Because". see above.
"the MMO world is waking up". Citation needed.
"bandwidth bla bla bla". what about the other costs ?surely hosting 1999 graphics today is cheaper, but developing 2009 era graphics is more expensive. where do they get the extra money from ?
"A ton of profit". profit is not measured by weight.
"the lie is dieing". your lack of proper grammar aside, lies aren't alive therefore can't die.
"as is the pay model". speculation. citation needed.
And which part of your imbecilical post should I address first?
"what was the point of this? Did this have a point at all ?" Having so little to refute so im going to quote something and then mention how little it matters.
"You couldn't state your argument in a civilised manner, had to choose the hostile one" inventing a redherring to cover up the fact your original post was puerile nonesense worthy only of satire.
"Citation needed." Go read Sony's, Funcoms, Turbines and EAs comments about how Subscriptions are becoming a thing of the past, only people who have their heads up their backsides dont know about it, everyone else is trying to fool themselves into thinking it isnt happening.
"but developing 2009 era graphics is more expensive. where do they get the extra money from ?" Go ask NCsoft how they are doing, go ask Nexon Co how they are able to make 500 MILLION dollars worth of take-overs in 1 1/2 years off of F2P profits how they did it.
"profit is not measured by weight" No but profit IS a measure of a SUCCESSFUL BUSINESS...derp.
"lies aren't alive therefore can't die" Yep but you have proved that hurr can durr.
"speculation. citation needed." See above, the industry is leaving you behind and I am really HOPING you stick to your morals and stop playing when the last of the sub games go F2P.
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
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.
which part of this imbecilical post should i adress first?
"deal with it". what was the point of this? Did this have a point at all ?
"fixed that for you". You couldn't state your argument in a civilised manner, had to choose the hostile one, didn't you? Oh wait you posted the word "because". followed by nothing that'd justify it. soooo.
"Because". see above.
"the MMO world is waking up". Citation needed.
"bandwidth bla bla bla". what about the other costs ?surely hosting 1999 graphics today is cheaper, but developing 2009 era graphics is more expensive. where do they get the extra money from ?
"A ton of profit". profit is not measured by weight.
"the lie is dieing". your lack of proper grammar aside, lies aren't alive therefore can't die.
"as is the pay model". speculation. citation needed.
You forgot when this """lie""" started he was 10 years old.
Also from his profile "mmo experience limited to WoW and EVE", both subscription games btw.
Sub only model, every item in the game can be had in a reasonable amount of time for 15 bucks a month.
F2P cash shop model. Every item in the game CANNOT be achieved in a resonable amount of time even spending 15 a month as if it was a sub game, unless you open your wallet WIDE. And the entire game is developed to drive you to the cash shop to spend more and more money. So instead of creating items and content to be consumed for your 15 a month in a sub only game, items and content are created soley to part you with as much cash as possible.
Simpl as that.
That's what it all boils down to; if you want to enjoy a video game in it's entirety, and not just bits and pieces, then "F2P" is going to be significantly more expensive.
When I purchased my first MMO at EB games, I was shocked when the guy at the desk asked me if I also wanted to buy a 60 day time card. I couldn't believe this $60 game also required a subscription to keep playing. However, it quickly became clear why this was a part of the deal with games in this genre, and it's such a small amount of money for such a large amount of entertainment. "F2P", on the other hand, simply cannot match the bang for buck of a P2P game (assuming of course, you are not fully satisfied with bits and pieces of an entertainment product).
"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
Sub only model, every item in the game can be had in a reasonable amount of time for 15 bucks a month.
F2P cash shop model. Every item in the game CANNOT be achieved in a resonable amount of time even spending 15 a month as if it was a sub game, unless you open your wallet WIDE. And the entire game is developed to drive you to the cash shop to spend more and more money. So instead of creating items and content to be consumed for your 15 a month in a sub only game, items and content are created soley to part you with as much cash as possible.
Simpl as that.
That's what it all boils down to; if you want to enjoy a video game in it's entirety, and not just bits and pieces, then "F2P" is going to be significantly more expensive.
When I purchased my first MMO at EB games, I was shocked when the guy at the desk asked me if I also wanted to buy a 60 day time card. I couldn't believe this $60 game also required a subscription to keep playing. However, it quickly became clear why this was a part of the deal with games in this genre, and it's such a small amount of money for such a large amount of entertainment. "F2P", on the other hand, simply cannot match the bang for buck of a P2P game (assuming of course, you are not fully satisfied with bits and pieces of an entertainment product).
Possibly.
I however have never played a game in it's entirety, any video game, ever. F2p games give me exactly what I'm paying WoW or EQ or EQ2 (when they were p2p) or Istaria or FF... I"m playing them the exact same way.
And since no game out so far is giving me exactly what I want I don't see the down side.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Sub only model, every item in the game can be had in a reasonable amount of time for 15 bucks a month.
F2P cash shop model. Every item in the game CANNOT be achieved in a resonable amount of time even spending 15 a month as if it was a sub game, unless you open your wallet WIDE. And the entire game is developed to drive you to the cash shop to spend more and more money. So instead of creating items and content to be consumed for your 15 a month in a sub only game, items and content are created soley to part you with as much cash as possible.
Simpl as that.
That's what it all boils down to; if you want to enjoy a video game in it's entirety, and not just bits and pieces, then "F2P" is going to be significantly more expensive.
When I purchased my first MMO at EB games, I was shocked when the guy at the desk asked me if I also wanted to buy a 60 day time card. I couldn't believe this $60 game also required a subscription to keep playing. However, it quickly became clear why this was a part of the deal with games in this genre, and it's such a small amount of money for such a large amount of entertainment. "F2P", on the other hand, simply cannot match the bang for buck of a P2P game (assuming of course, you are not fully satisfied with bits and pieces of an entertainment product).
Possibly.
I however have never played a game in it's entirety, any video game, ever. F2p games give me exactly what I'm paying WoW or EQ or EQ2 (when they were p2p) or Istaria or FF... I"m playing them the exact same way.
And since no game out so far is giving me exactly what I want I don't see the down side.
Well, for a gamer of your playstyle, I can totally understand why this model works for you. It makes sense. But, for someone such as myself, it just gets ridiculous as I tend to want to experience everything that a game has to offer.
"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
Nothing. Its simply a different business model. There have been horrible P2P and B2P games as well. Unless Dear Leader issues some dictate or another, anything you purchase from a cash shop is done by your own *choice*.
The hysterics who rant and rave about F2P games seem to forget that.
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.
Are you being *forced* to purchase those bags? Or can you simply find another game that is more to your taste?
If enjoyment is subjective how do we quantify? Is limited bag space really a big/major issue to playing a game?
Why do we care what other gamers do/buy?
it's ideologic.
why do we care what poachers in asia do to their elephants ?
and ... why does it matter why do we care ?
Well Im more pragmatic. My question was rhetorical.
And if I dont care its not an issue nor cause to impact F2P. Hence it comes down to choice/opinion (as opposed to it being a bad model or bad for the genre).
I doubt any of us here ACTUALLY believe F2P means absolutely FREE.
yet about 90% of players MAKE IT so for them it's that way.
what they believe doesn't really matter. it's only what they do.
It can mean absoluely free for me if I want it to be. You (metaphorically, I'm talking about developers) can't stop me.
and on such a shaky business model...things can go unstable quickly. And now I'm really not investing in something that's so unstable.
see the issue ?
League of Legends, World of Tanks, DDO, Age of Conan, stop me when your argument sinks completely. Good F2P games will never be shakey because people will love them and want to support them, that's why most of the crap F2Ps slowly die off while the decent to good ones live on (christ World of Tanks isn't even a MMO in the real sense of the word and its shakey as a game can get but it shot through the roof and turned Wargamming into an international player in the games world).
I agree.
problem is...are we talking "f2p" or "ideal f2p". because quoting 4 f2p's with a good model doesnt cover up the other 1,000.
ideal f2p is an entirely different topic. and it comes down to "if it's so good I'd play it under f2p, b2p or p2p...because it's that good". I have no problem with a great and cheap f2p. the average f2p is not that way, though.
The difference between 'f2p' and 'ideal f2p' is implementation.
F2P as model is neither good nor bad, its the perception of the game it covers. If the game is bad F2P wont change that.
I agree most older F2p games are cheaply made (though I have had some limited fun with them) - but overall I see the model evolving especially as AAA publishers begin to look and invest in the model.
I dont really see anything wrong with it....The option to try games for free is very appealing....IMO its a much better business model than b2p or p2p....Theres jsut too many games out now to justify paying for each one......
personally I have a very difficult time with the simple concept of ME giving things to MY CHARACTER. Shouldn't we be one and the same from a RP standpoint ? It's not my main issue, it's a very minor one in fact but ... can you relate to your character when at its core the game presents "it" as different than 'you' ?
buying expansions and access is no problem in this sense since I'm not giving 'it' an expansion. i'm just opening the gates. but items, bags, stats, potions...that's the issue.
You have a problem distinguishing between yourself and your level 85 paladin? That sounds like a psychological problem if true. From a RP (role play) point of view your in game persona is supposed to be entirely seperate from your real life persona. If you play multiple characters (in one or more than one game) each is supposed to be seperate and distinct from each other and your real life persona from a RP point of view. I can relate to a variety of people and personas, not being able to relate to other personas is considered to be a little disturbed, not saying you are, just that it is something that would be concerning if it was true.
BTW its interesting that you supported your F2P credentials by pointing out WoW is free to level 20 when you play a level 85 paladin. Also you do not actually say you manage to pay your Eve subscription through actual in game activity, just that it is possible. Nor do you claim to actually play any free to pay game. Makes your arguments kind of straw men really.
Instead of the dev team being focused on making the entire game engaging enough to keep people subbed, their focus becomes on how to engineer gameplay to drive people to the store.
personally I have a very difficult time with the simple concept of ME giving things to MY CHARACTER. Shouldn't we be one and the same from a RP standpoint ? It's not my main issue, it's a very minor one in fact but ... can you relate to your character when at its core the game presents "it" as different than 'you' ?
buying expansions and access is no problem in this sense since I'm not giving 'it' an expansion. i'm just opening the gates. but items, bags, stats, potions...that's the issue.
This argument makes no sense to me. What does buying a bag, health potion, or plush backpack have to do with relating to your character? What it sounds like you meant to say was simply 'it breaks my immersion'. Which, i dunno, seems like kind of a weak argument, tbh. It's not unlike acusing a game of being 'immersion breaking', because it has a UI you need to go through in order to log in.
I can't think of ANY game in which my character is defined by how much bag space, potions he has; or whether or not his backpack is a collectable. As far back as I can remember, what made your character unique was the class, actions, skills, and story you partook in, as well as your ability to relate to the story / environment that character was placed within.
That's not to say that F2p can't be done wrong (and often is), but I just don't get the argument being presented here.
Now the 'free to play" games I played/play are/were: urban rivals, Travian and presently Halosphere2. I'm currently level 45 in halosphere2 and have access to everything without paying. So the cash shop doesn't bother me.
Now we can see why you have so many misconceptions about the F2P market as a whole. Limited experience. The market is vast and varied in concept, design and operation that is not restricted to what you know or think you know.
Example: Atlantica Online is more a gamblers cash shop, nothing like what is in most F2P games. Yet amazingly enough the game was making a larger profit than all of Funcoms games combined during its peak years of 2008-2009, enough so that 6 years after its release the company was still worth enough to warrent a 175 million dollar buyout...and that wasnt a very good game.
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
But when you really look at it - is it really F2P or is it the way En Masse implemented it.
Lag can be fixed by increasing network throughput or server infrastructure.
Launcher errors can be fixed by quality control
Chat can be fixed by active moderation
It sounds like TERA didnt understand the best way to go F2P and went all in feet first and became overwhelmed.
F2P will always in my book come down to implementation. Those who get the model/balance right are the ones that will succeed. And to be fair these are tough questions to answer. Its still new.
But notice how GW2 model works more holistically than a game that was built as P2P and *goes* F2P.
Design has a lot to do with it.
No I do not see B2P + item shop as more viable than pure F2P, at least not from a player perspective. I can play Aion for free, but GW2 is still $60 up front. That doesn't give GW2 any advantage.
On the other hand, pure B2P (which is now all but extinct) had advantages due to not having to balance item shop purchases into combat and economic mechanisms. This died out completely when MMO development budgets went through the roof. At best a few Indies are still B2P.
Ok lets remove this from the discussion. I doubt any of us here ACTUALLY believe F2P means absolutely FREE.
F2P is a limited trial that essentially allows you to try out the game. Some allow longer 'try outs' than others. But the end of the day they want you to sub. I'm not against that, but dont want to sub until I know I will be enjoying all aspects of it.
Interesting to point out are F2P only games. I have played a few, mostly from Aria Games (Eden Eternal, Grand Fantasia, and a few others). They are of cheaper quality and have heard that 'end game' is all cash shop, but I have to be honest. I enjoyed the time I played them especially Eden Eternal. I didnt pay a dime.
Isnt that the point?
good point and I dont know :-)
I'm more interested in why someone would care if you paid for a mount or not? And how that purchase affects their game.
I've paid for mounts before but it was because I was damn tired of walking. Thats how I roll ;-)
What TV provider do you have?
Here in NYC you dont get none of that. For one, you get the provider in your area. Period. You dont get a choice. You cant pick and choose (well you can if you consider FiOS an option - but its not for me).
I cant JUST buy HBO without getting the entire HBO package which has channels I dont watch. But my favorite is I cant get the FEAR network (one new channel) without buying the entire Encore suite.
Cable TV has to be the most monopolistic business out there.
back on topic ... I do believe there may be a separate between PvE'ers and PvP'ers. I can see F2P affecting the latter over the former since competition is introduced.
League of Legends, World of Tanks, DDO, Age of Conan, stop me when your argument sinks completely. Good F2P games will never be shakey because people will love them and want to support them, that's why most of the crap F2Ps slowly die off while the decent to good ones live on (christ World of Tanks isn't even a MMO in the real sense of the word and its shakey as a game can get but it shot through the roof and turned Wargamming into an international player in the games world).
No. :-)
As I dont understand how someone could do something they dont believe, but wouldnt put it past people....
It can only be free if you are content to live within whatever limitations are placed by the F2P model. But again I personally don't believe thats an issue for the model. If the game that is using the F2P model is 'crap' (not fun too the masses, etc) no amount of making it free or paying for it could save the game.
Stability to me comes from quality, or at least the selling of that perception which could be B2P or F2P. Paying money does not always equal better. SWTOR proved that pretty well.
If enjoyment is subjective how do we quantify? Is limited bag space really a big/major issue to playing a game? Its not for me (in the sense if I want more bag space I buy it without a second thought). but that transaction in and of itself says that I enjoy the game. As opposed to giving me (say) unlimited bag space but I dont like the game.
When we talk equal ground are you speaking in the context of PvP? Because as a PvE'er I dont care what a rich person does. It doesnt affect my game (hasn't yet) nor has it ruined my enjoyment.
Why do we care what other gamers do/buy?
Simple
Sub only model, every item in the game can be had in a reasonable amount of time for 15 bucks a month.
F2P cash shop model. Every item in the game CANNOT be achieved in a resonable amount of time even spending 15 a month as if it was a sub game, unless you open your wallet WIDE. And the entire game is developed to drive you to the cash shop to spend more and more money. So instead of creating items and content to be consumed for your 15 a month in a sub only game, items and content are created soley to part you with as much cash as possible.
Simpl as that.
If you lived in Asia....a decade ago....maybe.
Over generalized. Can you provide concrete examples?
You also make some wide assumptions. Such as all players wanting every achievement in the game. The entire game developed to drive you to the cash shop.
You just simply prefer to pay for something you may not fully utilize... which is fine. But that doesnt make the opposite using F2P model bad.
And which part of your imbecilical post should I address first?
"what was the point of this? Did this have a point at all ?" Having so little to refute so im going to quote something and then mention how little it matters.
"You couldn't state your argument in a civilised manner, had to choose the hostile one" inventing a redherring to cover up the fact your original post was puerile nonesense worthy only of satire.
"Citation needed." Go read Sony's, Funcoms, Turbines and EAs comments about how Subscriptions are becoming a thing of the past, only people who have their heads up their backsides dont know about it, everyone else is trying to fool themselves into thinking it isnt happening.
"but developing 2009 era graphics is more expensive. where do they get the extra money from ?" Go ask NCsoft how they are doing, go ask Nexon Co how they are able to make 500 MILLION dollars worth of take-overs in 1 1/2 years off of F2P profits how they did it.
"profit is not measured by weight" No but profit IS a measure of a SUCCESSFUL BUSINESS...derp.
"lies aren't alive therefore can't die" Yep but you have proved that hurr can durr.
"speculation. citation needed." See above, the industry is leaving you behind and I am really HOPING you stick to your morals and stop playing when the last of the sub games go F2P.
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
You forgot when this """lie""" started he was 10 years old.
Also from his profile "mmo experience limited to WoW and EVE", both subscription games btw.
That's what it all boils down to; if you want to enjoy a video game in it's entirety, and not just bits and pieces, then "F2P" is going to be significantly more expensive.
When I purchased my first MMO at EB games, I was shocked when the guy at the desk asked me if I also wanted to buy a 60 day time card. I couldn't believe this $60 game also required a subscription to keep playing. However, it quickly became clear why this was a part of the deal with games in this genre, and it's such a small amount of money for such a large amount of entertainment. "F2P", on the other hand, simply cannot match the bang for buck of a P2P game (assuming of course, you are not fully satisfied with bits and pieces of an entertainment product).
"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
Possibly.
I however have never played a game in it's entirety, any video game, ever. F2p games give me exactly what I'm paying WoW or EQ or EQ2 (when they were p2p) or Istaria or FF... I"m playing them the exact same way.
And since no game out so far is giving me exactly what I want I don't see the down side.
Well, for a gamer of your playstyle, I can totally understand why this model works for you. It makes sense. But, for someone such as myself, it just gets ridiculous as I tend to want to experience everything that a game has to offer.
"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
Nothing. Its simply a different business model. There have been horrible P2P and B2P games as well. Unless Dear Leader issues some dictate or another, anything you purchase from a cash shop is done by your own *choice*.
The hysterics who rant and rave about F2P games seem to forget that.
Are you being *forced* to purchase those bags? Or can you simply find another game that is more to your taste?
Well Im more pragmatic. My question was rhetorical.
And if I dont care its not an issue nor cause to impact F2P. Hence it comes down to choice/opinion (as opposed to it being a bad model or bad for the genre).
The difference between 'f2p' and 'ideal f2p' is implementation.
F2P as model is neither good nor bad, its the perception of the game it covers. If the game is bad F2P wont change that.
I agree most older F2p games are cheaply made (though I have had some limited fun with them) - but overall I see the model evolving especially as AAA publishers begin to look and invest in the model.
You have a problem distinguishing between yourself and your level 85 paladin? That sounds like a psychological problem if true. From a RP (role play) point of view your in game persona is supposed to be entirely seperate from your real life persona. If you play multiple characters (in one or more than one game) each is supposed to be seperate and distinct from each other and your real life persona from a RP point of view.
I can relate to a variety of people and personas, not being able to relate to other personas is considered to be a little disturbed, not saying you are, just that it is something that would be concerning if it was true.
BTW its interesting that you supported your F2P credentials by pointing out WoW is free to level 20 when you play a level 85 paladin. Also you do not actually say you manage to pay your Eve subscription through actual in game activity, just that it is possible. Nor do you claim to actually play any free to pay game. Makes your arguments kind of straw men really.
This argument makes no sense to me. What does buying a bag, health potion, or plush backpack have to do with relating to your character? What it sounds like you meant to say was simply 'it breaks my immersion'. Which, i dunno, seems like kind of a weak argument, tbh. It's not unlike acusing a game of being 'immersion breaking', because it has a UI you need to go through in order to log in.
I can't think of ANY game in which my character is defined by how much bag space, potions he has; or whether or not his backpack is a collectable. As far back as I can remember, what made your character unique was the class, actions, skills, and story you partook in, as well as your ability to relate to the story / environment that character was placed within.
That's not to say that F2p can't be done wrong (and often is), but I just don't get the argument being presented here.
Now we can see why you have so many misconceptions about the F2P market as a whole. Limited experience. The market is vast and varied in concept, design and operation that is not restricted to what you know or think you know.
Example: Atlantica Online is more a gamblers cash shop, nothing like what is in most F2P games. Yet amazingly enough the game was making a larger profit than all of Funcoms games combined during its peak years of 2008-2009, enough so that 6 years after its release the company was still worth enough to warrent a 175 million dollar buyout...and that wasnt a very good game.
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