Originally posted by Theocritus There is alot of prejudice on this site towards f2p games and their players.....Its almsot as if people who pay to play MMOs have an elitist attitude and feel they are entitled while players who don't pay are crap and unworthy of being human beings.....It is just a reflection of society where people who think that those who have money are great and admired while those who don't are scum.
You're right on the money...no pun intended.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Yes they have the right to complain but developers and other palyers have te right not to listen.However if the complaints are about things that are preventing segments of free palyers from becoming paying players then isn't that soemthing the developers would like to know?
On the other hand if they arte just whining about nto getting everything in the game for free then they can be safely ignored.
I view it in terms of "a satisfied free player is a lot more likely to spend money on the game than an unsatisfied one". So, yes, they should have the right to voice their complaints, and those complaints should be taken into account by the devs, as they most likely do want to increase the amount of paying players in their game.
In Asia upwards of 10% may pay for a game. In the western markets, it is more like 5%. F2P developers/publisers realize that the vast majority of players are NEVER going to pay anything for the game. Because they except that, they cater to the 5-10% that are going to pay, and provide them with the goods and services that will cover the cost of the game.
There is value in constructive criticism, whether it is from a paying customer or not.
If you open your game to free players, there is a reason for it. Some games wouldn't have the population needed to attract paying customers, were it not for the free players.
They are simply the cattle on which the rest of us feed.
Lol no. You are the cattle on which the developers feed in order to develop their game to attract more free to play people.
Ironically, since they have your money, they don't care about you. All the changes that you hate? It's because they are trying to attract more free players and coax them into become paying players.
Once those free players become like you, they are just random pieces of meat. Pieces of meat should just say it, "Moooo" and be silent.
It's simple. Make a thread that is easy to agree or disagree with and there will always be someone in there to say or argue about something. Annoying isn't it? Its why more thought provoking topics get burried and the "masses" are here to keep bumping ones like these.
It's simple. Make a thread that is easy to agree or disagree with and there will always be someone in there to say or argue about something. Annoying isn't it? Its why more thought provoking topics get burried and the "masses" are here to keep bumping ones like these.
My take is that most people are not on forums for thought provoking discussions. They are there to merely pass the time (may be a slow work day?) and flame wars are fun, and easy to multitask.
Anyone has the right to complain about anything anytime anywhere. (at least as long as they aren't violating any rules they had agreed to before hand, such as the rules of a message board that prohibit straight trolling disguised as complaining). And even if in violation of some rules the person agreed to, complaining still might be completely within one's right sometimes. Even if that person doesn't have the right for some reason, there still could be a lot of truth to what they had to say, so restricting their speech on the basis of having no right could be seen as restrictive of honest and open discourse.
Don't like someone's complaints? Tough cookies. Everyone else has the right to completely ignore that person/respond in kind/and or listen with a reasonable mind. This takes me to a similar point...
Truth is truth regardless of the source. Oh sure people will argue all day long about what is the truth, what are the facts. Whatever the outcome, the source is generally not very relevant. The main exception of course are situations where credibility is important, like if one person is giving testimony at a trial...but that's not at all what we're talking about here.
Has anyone ever heard the expression, "don't look a gift horse in the mouth"? Or do parents even teach that anymore?
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own. -- Herman Melville
Has anyone ever heard the expression, "don't look a gift horse in the mouth"? Or do parents even teach that anymore?
That is before the age of plentiful, and the most precious commodity is human attention span.
I'll take that as a "no".
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own. -- Herman Melville
Has anyone ever heard the expression, "don't look a gift horse in the mouth"? Or do parents even teach that anymore?
No, apparently parents now teach their kids the expression "when you are given a horse, complain that it's not fast enough and demand a free sports car".
I don't complain. If I don't like something, and it's important enough to discourage my game play...then I just stop playing.
It's the developer's game. It's their vision. They have the metrics to determine what they need to do or change. Why players think their little "ideas" are helpfull is a mystery to me. What qualifications to they have in game design? Are they thinking about the game long-term or just because some Rogue killed them in PvP? And with hundreds of thousand of "ideas"...is it even realistic that a developer can really "listen" to the community?
Voted yes mostly because once the game decides to go FTP, it is welcoming all players.
Meaning now the game is FTP so every single player has a right to respond to the game they are playing. The only players don't dont deserve the right to complain are trial players, you are just testing the game so don't complain about it. While free players are commiting to the game.
Originally posted by ignore_me Do F2P game makers want people to play?
No they want them to pay so anything that makes a person who is playing entirely free complain is a great thing, provided said complaint goes away if the complainer coughs up some dough.
If you dont do stupid things while youre young, youll have nothing to smile about when youre old.
Originally posted by ignore_me Do F2P game makers want people to play?
No they want them to pay so anything that makes a person who is playing entirely free complain is a great thing, provided said complaint goes away if the complainer coughs up some dough.
I see what youre saying Moronie, but I just think that you make the first move when you put something out there. To expect no input after that seems a bit ridiculous. Especially if it's a business.
So sick of this "I payed money so i am more entitled then you are" bullshit mentality.
If a game is being touted as a F2P game, they the free players have just as much right to an enjoyable experience as the ones who wanted that cool looking hat.
And from a business standpoint, its the free players the games WANTS to listen to, as they obviously won over the other players who bought something, but its the free players they need to entice into actually becoming a paying player. Ignoring your free players, and more importantly letting your community of self-righteous, self-entitled players that dropped money antagonize and belittle your free players is the fastest way to build a wall to potential new paying costumers.
Simple question inspired by the "Free players get what they deserve" thread.
I'll weigh in on this one. No they do not.
My question is:
are f2p players those without subs and not paying a dime?
or f2p players who spend some money in the cash shop but not as much as a sub?
or f2p players that spend as much in cash shop as subs?
how about f2p players that spend more money in the cash shop than a sub player?
So, before I can answer the question, which of the f2p players are you referring to?
Even not knowing that information, I can say, if I were a developer, I would take f2p criticism seriously, because I am trying to entice them to spend some money; the more enjoyable my game is to that player, i.e. the less complaints they have, the more money they may be willing to spend in the cash shop.
I can also say, if I were a developer, I would be most interested in minimizing the number of people who aren't spending money, by creating a game that makes people feel good about purchasing items in the cash shop.
I'll turn the question around on you:
does a f2p player who spends more in the cash shop than you do on your sub have more rights to complain than you?
Comments
You're right on the money...no pun intended.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Yes they have the right to complain but developers and other palyers have te right not to listen.However if the complaints are about things that are preventing segments of free palyers from becoming paying players then isn't that soemthing the developers would like to know?
On the other hand if they arte just whining about nto getting everything in the game for free then they can be safely ignored.
I make spreadsheets at work - I don't want to make them for the games I play.
I view it in terms of "a satisfied free player is a lot more likely to spend money on the game than an unsatisfied one". So, yes, they should have the right to voice their complaints, and those complaints should be taken into account by the devs, as they most likely do want to increase the amount of paying players in their game.
But maybe I'm being a bit too idealistic.
and where did you get these numbers from ?
Define "Complain".
There is value in constructive criticism, whether it is from a paying customer or not.
If you open your game to free players, there is a reason for it. Some games wouldn't have the population needed to attract paying customers, were it not for the free players.
Ignore them at your peril.
Lol no. You are the cattle on which the developers feed in order to develop their game to attract more free to play people.
Ironically, since they have your money, they don't care about you. All the changes that you hate? It's because they are trying to attract more free players and coax them into become paying players.
Once those free players become like you, they are just random pieces of meat. Pieces of meat should just say it, "Moooo" and be silent.
Let's play Fallen Earth (blind, 300 episodes)
Let's play Guild Wars 2 (blind, 45 episodes)
wow .. people are still on this moot question?
It's simple. Make a thread that is easy to agree or disagree with and there will always be someone in there to say or argue about something. Annoying isn't it? Its why more thought provoking topics get burried and the "masses" are here to keep bumping ones like these.
My take is that most people are not on forums for thought provoking discussions. They are there to merely pass the time (may be a slow work day?) and flame wars are fun, and easy to multitask.
Anyone has the right to complain about anything anytime anywhere. (at least as long as they aren't violating any rules they had agreed to before hand, such as the rules of a message board that prohibit straight trolling disguised as complaining). And even if in violation of some rules the person agreed to, complaining still might be completely within one's right sometimes. Even if that person doesn't have the right for some reason, there still could be a lot of truth to what they had to say, so restricting their speech on the basis of having no right could be seen as restrictive of honest and open discourse.
Don't like someone's complaints? Tough cookies. Everyone else has the right to completely ignore that person/respond in kind/and or listen with a reasonable mind. This takes me to a similar point...
Truth is truth regardless of the source. Oh sure people will argue all day long about what is the truth, what are the facts. Whatever the outcome, the source is generally not very relevant. The main exception of course are situations where credibility is important, like if one person is giving testimony at a trial...but that's not at all what we're talking about here.
It reminds me of this:
http://i.imgur.com/ZMjvs.jpg (picture and quote of Neil deGrasse Tyson)
If it's not broken, you are not innovating.
Has anyone ever heard the expression, "don't look a gift horse in the mouth"? Or do parents even teach that anymore?
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own.
-- Herman Melville
That is before the age of plentiful, and the most precious commodity is human attention span.
I'll take that as a "no".
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own.
-- Herman Melville
No, apparently parents now teach their kids the expression "when you are given a horse, complain that it's not fast enough and demand a free sports car".
Survivor of the great MMORPG Famine of 2011
I don't complain. If I don't like something, and it's important enough to discourage my game play...then I just stop playing.
It's the developer's game. It's their vision. They have the metrics to determine what they need to do or change. Why players think their little "ideas" are helpfull is a mystery to me. What qualifications to they have in game design? Are they thinking about the game long-term or just because some Rogue killed them in PvP? And with hundreds of thousand of "ideas"...is it even realistic that a developer can really "listen" to the community?
Voted yes mostly because once the game decides to go FTP, it is welcoming all players.
Meaning now the game is FTP so every single player has a right to respond to the game they are playing. The only players don't dont deserve the right to complain are trial players, you are just testing the game so don't complain about it. While free players are commiting to the game.
No they want them to pay so anything that makes a person who is playing entirely free complain is a great thing, provided said complaint goes away if the complainer coughs up some dough.
If you dont do stupid things while youre young, youll have nothing to smile about when youre old.
I see what youre saying Moronie, but I just think that you make the first move when you put something out there. To expect no input after that seems a bit ridiculous. Especially if it's a business.
Survivor of the great MMORPG Famine of 2011
So sick of this "I payed money so i am more entitled then you are" bullshit mentality.
If a game is being touted as a F2P game, they the free players have just as much right to an enjoyable experience as the ones who wanted that cool looking hat.
And from a business standpoint, its the free players the games WANTS to listen to, as they obviously won over the other players who bought something, but its the free players they need to entice into actually becoming a paying player. Ignoring your free players, and more importantly letting your community of self-righteous, self-entitled players that dropped money antagonize and belittle your free players is the fastest way to build a wall to potential new paying costumers.
My question is:
are f2p players those without subs and not paying a dime?
or f2p players who spend some money in the cash shop but not as much as a sub?
or f2p players that spend as much in cash shop as subs?
how about f2p players that spend more money in the cash shop than a sub player?
So, before I can answer the question, which of the f2p players are you referring to?
Even not knowing that information, I can say, if I were a developer, I would take f2p criticism seriously, because I am trying to entice them to spend some money; the more enjoyable my game is to that player, i.e. the less complaints they have, the more money they may be willing to spend in the cash shop.
I can also say, if I were a developer, I would be most interested in minimizing the number of people who aren't spending money, by creating a game that makes people feel good about purchasing items in the cash shop.
I'll turn the question around on you:
does a f2p player who spends more in the cash shop than you do on your sub have more rights to complain than you?