"US free-to-play audience outnumbers pay-to-play 6 to 1"

[Deleted User] · February 2013

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Loktofeit · February 2013

Originally posted by greenreen

LOL, I had to laugh at that always right.

So stop beating around the bush - what reason is it that you aren't paying them the same as a sub game? If you are the rare person that is not like the others, give me the reason that you aren't paying what you would for a sub game - be it more or less. Tell the world why you should pay less. What made you so aware that 15 bucks a month is too much, nay 5 a month is too much to pay a month (runescape). Clue me in because I don't read minds even though I am all powerful in other regards :P Careful - it can't be a complaint about something or that would be dissatisfaction.

Because it's free.

BeansnBread · February 2013

Originally posted by greenreen
LOL, I had to laugh at that always right.

So stop beating around the bush - what reason is it that you aren't paying them the same as a sub game? If you are the rare person that is not like the others, give me the reason that you aren't paying what you would for a sub game - be it more or less. Tell the world why you should pay less. What made you so aware that 15 bucks a month is too much, nay 5 a month is too much to pay a month (runescape). Clue me in because I don't read minds even though I am all powerful in other regards :P Careful - it can't be a complaint about something or that would be dissatisfaction.

I play F2P games because they are fun. It's pretty simple. If I don't see a reason to pay, I don't. If I want something, I do.

I play sub games as well btw.

RefMinor · February 2013

Originally posted by greenreen

Has any product in history ever sold because someone gave 90% of it away.

Razors

Printers

Mobile Phones

They are more like subscriptions, once you stop buying the ink (subscription) you can't use the printer (cheap box) same for Razors and Phones(locked to network).

Personally I am happy paying a sub when I want to play a game and stopping it when I don't. I prefer the ?evel playing field, if you still want to have a gimped access to a game but feel its not worth throwing a few bucks at the cash shop anymore, that seems odd to me, I would rather just not play until I was happy to pay for the full experience again.

[Deleted User] · February 2013

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Dihoru · February 2013

Yeah... I am begining to see why people consider this a forum just for lols and trolls... The amount of pig headed bias on the side of hard line P2Pers is... remarkable... but then again... same people for whom WoW went down the shitter and SWTOR was born as a clone of WoW and not something much better (a revival of the pre-cu SWG system for example).

As is I will state this again: P2P, in its classic form is dying, freemium variants of it may live on but it is dying because the quality and quantity of games has inverted in comparison to the golden age of P2P (lots of games but few good ones in the lot and fewer great ones than before during the initial expansion phase of MMOs) ergo people who've been burned once are far, far less likely to buy a box and sub for your game, they might sub if you have a good trial (EVE) or they might buy the box and play for free (GW1&GW2) but not both. This isn't the slacker/entitled/cheapskate/whatever generation, this is the era where the developers have to earn the right to our money because they are no longer of a select group, there are hundreds of groups of developers around the world with games of differing qualities so to ask someone to pay up front to play your game smacks of arrogance regardless if you're Bioware, Blizzard, whoever, people today demand real tangible proof that your game is "da shizz" it claims to be and that's only possible either in a balanced freemium game or in a true free to play game (where nothing is gated by the cash shop, you either spend cash or time to get everything in-game).

BeansnBread · February 2013

Originally posted by greenreen
Originally posted by colddog04
Originally posted by greenreen
LOL, I had to laugh at that always right.

So stop beating around the bush - what reason is it that you aren't paying them the same as a sub game? If you are the rare person that is not like the others, give me the reason that you aren't paying what you would for a sub game - be it more or less. Tell the world why you should pay less. What made you so aware that 15 bucks a month is too much, nay 5 a month is too much to pay a month (runescape). Clue me in because I don't read minds even though I am all powerful in other regards :P Careful - it can't be a complaint about something or that would be dissatisfaction.

I play F2P games because they are fun. It's pretty simple. If I don't see a reason to pay, I don't. If I want something, I do.

I play sub games as well btw.

Vague. Figures. Convo complete.

I can see how such a simple answer could be difficult for you to deal with after all the effort you put into spinning F2P into an eventual complete and utter failure. But what I said was the truth. I, and many others, don't fit into the little box you created to justify your biased viewpoint.

Your crusade would make a lot more sense if you actually admitted that it is completely based on your opinion. I'm not arguing that people should pay zero to play games. I'm saying that the F2P audience is much larger right now and that it is growing faster than P2P. You are trying to convince people, contrary to all evidence, that F2P is doomed to fail. And you use anecdotal evidence and opinion to back up your claims. What's worse is that you start trying to justify your viewpoint by saying you are making a game and that you are an INTJ personality.

Convo complete? Yeah, I guess so. But most of what you said certainly isn't convincing me.

Onomas · February 2013

Originally posted by nariusseldon
http://www.superdataresearch.com/us-free-to-play-does-it-pay-to-switch/

"If you were to look at the growth of the audience alone, the market for F2P games is substantially larger than that for pay-to-play. Six times larger, in fact."

"Subscription-based MMOs have been on a decline in the US, dropping from 8.5MM in December 2009 to 6.7MM in October 2012."

"So, yes, it would appear that F2P may be a viable revenue model, partly because of the large number of gamers it attracts. But traffic alone is not a definitive measure of success. Overall spending may follow a very different trend depending on a game’s life cycle, player base and genre.

The good news is that in 2012, F2P MMOs made more than their P2P counterparts, capturing the majority of the MMO US market’s revenue. The tricky part lies in how to capture and replicate this success."

And the crap wow clones and cookie cutter mmorpgs outnumber good quality games 20 to 1.......... point?

I would play any game for free, but only the good ones get my money. Doesnt mean subscription is a bad pay model, just means the games arent worth the investment of fund every month.

[Deleted User] · February 2013

The user and all related content has been deleted.

BeansnBread · February 2013

Originally posted by greenreen
Originally posted by colddog04
Originally posted by greenreen
Originally posted by colddog04
Originally posted by greenreen
LOL, I had to laugh at that always right.

So stop beating around the bush - what reason is it that you aren't paying them the same as a sub game? If you are the rare person that is not like the others, give me the reason that you aren't paying what you would for a sub game - be it more or less. Tell the world why you should pay less. What made you so aware that 15 bucks a month is too much, nay 5 a month is too much to pay a month (runescape). Clue me in because I don't read minds even though I am all powerful in other regards :P Careful - it can't be a complaint about something or that would be dissatisfaction.

I play F2P games because they are fun. It's pretty simple. If I don't see a reason to pay, I don't. If I want something, I do.

I play sub games as well btw.

Vague. Figures. Convo complete.

I can see how such a simple answer could be difficult for you to deal with after all the effort you put into spinning F2P into an eventual complete and utter failure. But what I said was the truth. I, and many others, don't fit into the little box you created to justify your biased viewpoint.

Your crusade would make a lot more sense if you actually admitted that it is completely based on your opinion. I'm not arguing that people should pay zero to play games. I'm saying that the F2P audience is much larger right now and that it is growing faster than P2P. You are trying to convince people, contrary to all evidence, that F2P is doomed to fail. And you use anecdotal evidence and opinion to back up your claims. What's worse is that you start trying to justify your viewpoint by saying you are making a game and that you are an INTJ personality.

Convo complete? Yeah, I guess so. But most of what you said certainly isn't convincing me.

My INTJ let's me see right through you as transparent.

Hey fluffikins, what did I type at the top of the post I made, it was opinion. Opinion though based on information from people that have sold games peppered with information from people that talk about why they purchase games. Not unfounded ramblings.

You didn't state a reason because your reason is trying to gain satisfaction which means you are in a state of dissatisfaction without what you buy. This is like debating with kiddiewinks day. Just because someone doesn't gloat it doesn't mean they think they lost anything. It is complete because you aren't interesting enough. You are being too easy to pin down. The worst part is that you don't admit that you do purchase less when you aren't satisfied.

You do exactly what I said, you devalue the developer's time and training and decide that payment wouldn't behoove you and you do it only when it satisfies you, that is everything I stated. I'm not unhappy to inform you, you turned out to be the norm.

You may as well have responded with derrrrrrrrr.

Mhm.

nariusseldon · February 2013

Originally posted by Onomas
Originally posted by nariusseldon
http://www.superdataresearch.com/us-free-to-play-does-it-pay-to-switch/

"If you were to look at the growth of the audience alone, the market for F2P games is substantially larger than that for pay-to-play. Six times larger, in fact."

"Subscription-based MMOs have been on a decline in the US, dropping from 8.5MM in December 2009 to 6.7MM in October 2012."

"So, yes, it would appear that F2P may be a viable revenue model, partly because of the large number of gamers it attracts. But traffic alone is not a definitive measure of success. Overall spending may follow a very different trend depending on a game’s life cycle, player base and genre.

The good news is that in 2012, F2P MMOs made more than their P2P counterparts, capturing the majority of the MMO US market’s revenue. The tricky part lies in how to capture and replicate this success."

And the crap wow clones and cookie cutter mmorpgs outnumber good quality games 20 to 1.......... point?

I would play any game for free, but only the good ones get my money. Doesnt mean subscription is a bad pay model, just means the games arent worth the investment of fund every month.

Point? Given so much "interests" in discussing F2P in this forum (and don't tell me you don't notice the many threads, and the high post count on this one), i figure i will put up some real information.

Weren't you curious of how the market split? I am.

Dihoru · February 2013

Originally posted by greenreen
Originally posted by colddog04
Originally posted by greenreen
Originally posted by colddog04
Originally posted by greenreen
LOL, I had to laugh at that always right.

So stop beating around the bush - what reason is it that you aren't paying them the same as a sub game? If you are the rare person that is not like the others, give me the reason that you aren't paying what you would for a sub game - be it more or less. Tell the world why you should pay less. What made you so aware that 15 bucks a month is too much, nay 5 a month is too much to pay a month (runescape). Clue me in because I don't read minds even though I am all powerful in other regards :P Careful - it can't be a complaint about something or that would be dissatisfaction.

I play F2P games because they are fun. It's pretty simple. If I don't see a reason to pay, I don't. If I want something, I do.

I play sub games as well btw.

Vague. Figures. Convo complete.

I can see how such a simple answer could be difficult for you to deal with after all the effort you put into spinning F2P into an eventual complete and utter failure. But what I said was the truth. I, and many others, don't fit into the little box you created to justify your biased viewpoint.

Your crusade would make a lot more sense if you actually admitted that it is completely based on your opinion. I'm not arguing that people should pay zero to play games. I'm saying that the F2P audience is much larger right now and that it is growing faster than P2P. You are trying to convince people, contrary to all evidence, that F2P is doomed to fail. And you use anecdotal evidence and opinion to back up your claims. What's worse is that you start trying to justify your viewpoint by saying you are making a game and that you are an INTJ personality.

Convo complete? Yeah, I guess so. But most of what you said certainly isn't convincing me.

My INTJ let's me see right through you as transparent.

Hey fluffikins, what did I type at the top of the post I made, it was opinion. Opinion though based on information from people that have sold games peppered with information from people that talk about why they purchase games. Not unfounded ramblings. Chide my expertise yet yours is in your lap under the napkin. I made logical arguments and made them real easy to understand with simple words.

You didn't state a reason because your reason is trying to gain satisfaction which means you are in a state of dissatisfaction without what you buy. This is like debating with kiddiewinks day. Just because someone doesn't gloat it doesn't mean they think they lost anything. It is complete because you aren't interesting enough. You are being too easy to pin down. The worst part is that you don't admit that you do purchase less when you aren't satisfied. Being unable to analyze yourself makes you a bad candidate for debate with me. I lay it all out on the table.

You do exactly what I said, you devalue the developer's time and training and decide that payment wouldn't behoove you and you do it only when it satisfies you, that is everything I stated. I'm not unhappy to inform you, you turned out to be the norm.

You may as well have responded with derrrrrrrrr.

I truly hope your mentality dies out amongst developers because it shows nothing more than a narrow minded approach to a very broad and multicoloured subject. As I have stated many times in the past a good developer (not even a great one) will know how to weave a F2P model into their gameplay such that it does not cheapen the overall game merely that it offers ways to speed along progress or to augment the player's individuality within the community.

That said I will state this much: The only person on this entire forum who has ever devalued developers in any way shape or form is you, by stating such opinions as fact and denigrating people whom very shortly will be your main consumer base and then having the audacity to claim it is somehow a view held by a majority of developers. Perhaps the lazy ones, or the ones to stuck in their ways but I doubt a real developer would shrink at the possibility of making a good game people could enjoy for free that does not mean he does not get paid.

Onomas · February 2013

Originally posted by nariusseldon
Originally posted by Onomas
Originally posted by nariusseldon
http://www.superdataresearch.com/us-free-to-play-does-it-pay-to-switch/

"If you were to look at the growth of the audience alone, the market for F2P games is substantially larger than that for pay-to-play. Six times larger, in fact."

"Subscription-based MMOs have been on a decline in the US, dropping from 8.5MM in December 2009 to 6.7MM in October 2012."

"So, yes, it would appear that F2P may be a viable revenue model, partly because of the large number of gamers it attracts. But traffic alone is not a definitive measure of success. Overall spending may follow a very different trend depending on a game’s life cycle, player base and genre.

The good news is that in 2012, F2P MMOs made more than their P2P counterparts, capturing the majority of the MMO US market’s revenue. The tricky part lies in how to capture and replicate this success."

And the crap wow clones and cookie cutter mmorpgs outnumber good quality games 20 to 1.......... point?

I would play any game for free, but only the good ones get my money. Doesnt mean subscription is a bad pay model, just means the games arent worth the investment of fund every month.

Point? Given so much "interests" in discussing F2P in this forum (and don't tell me you don't notice the many threads, and the high post count on this one), i figure i will put up some real information.

Weren't you curious of how the market split? I am.

Games started to suck and people didnt want to pay for single player console games online anymore. But was ok for them to play if it was free

But many F2P games fail and went under also, and many more are losing players as well. Its not about the pay scale, its all about the quality of the mmorpg's being released. It has changed over the years and not for the better.

nariusseldon · February 2013

Originally posted by Dihoru

As is I will state this again: P2P, in its classic form is dying, freemium variants of it may live on but it is dying because the quality and quantity of games has inverted in comparison to the golden age of P2P (lots of games but few good ones in the lot and fewer great ones than before during the initial expansion phase of MMOs) ergo people who've been burned once are far, far less likely to buy a box and sub for your game, they might sub if you have a good trial (EVE) or they might buy the box and play for free (GW1&GW2) but not both. This isn't the slacker/entitled/cheapskate/whatever generation, this is the era where the developers have to earn the right to our money because they are no longer of a select group, there are hundreds of groups of developers around the world with games of differing qualities so to ask someone to pay up front to play your game smacks of arrogance regardless if you're Bioware, Blizzard, whoever, people today demand real tangible proof that your game is "da shizz" it claims to be and that's only possible either in a balanced freemium game or in a true free to play game (where nothing is gated by the cash shop, you either spend cash or time to get everything in-game).

There is one more reason. People don't want commitments of a sub game. They want to play many games with no string attached.

nariusseldon · February 2013

Originally posted by Onomas

Games started to suck and people didnt want to pay for single player console games online anymore. But was ok for them to play if it was free

You miss this part? "The good news is that in 2012, F2P MMOs made more than their P2P counterparts, capturing the majority of the MMO US market’s revenue."

Some (the whales) are paying.

And of course it is ok to play if it was free ... as long as the game is fun. Who does not love cheap entertainment?

jtcgs · February 2013

Originally posted by Rossboss
If you believe Blizzard, EA, and smaller developers aren't sharing your data, let me welcome you to the era of Facebook where you can freely share your own data to others and tell them how many cows you e-milked today.

The study is not specifically stand-alone MMORPGs either, make note of that.

I'd imagine it includes smart phone applications and Facebook games alike.

I didn't generate this study nor do I claim to see this as the holy grail of all writing.

ROFLMAO!

Wait, you actually believe that a publically held company can hide data on their products? Even EA, trying to hide the issues with SWTOR have no choice but eventually bring it up in conferrence calls...hell, their last one where they lumped SWTOR in with 2 other games had to release it on paper afterwards.

When there are public shareholders, they cant hide anything...its the smaller companies that have no public option that CAN withold information.

Just like you mouthbreathers can deny F2P is making massive money all you want but when a company like Nexon is dropping over 400 million to buyout other companies....reality laughs at you.

craftseeker · February 2013

Originally posted by jtcgs
Originally posted by Rossboss
If you believe Blizzard, EA, and smaller developers aren't sharing your data, let me welcome you to the era of Facebook where you can freely share your own data to others and tell them how many cows you e-milked today.

The study is not specifically stand-alone MMORPGs either, make note of that.

I'd imagine it includes smart phone applications and Facebook games alike.

I didn't generate this study nor do I claim to see this as the holy grail of all writing.

ROFLMAO!

Wait, you actually believe that a publically held company can hide data on their products? Even EA, trying to hide the issues with SWTOR have no choice but eventually bring it up in conferrence calls...hell, their last one where they lumped SWTOR in with 2 other games had to release it on paper afterwards.

When there are public shareholders, they cant hide anything...its the smaller companies that have no public option that CAN withold information.

Just like you mouthbreathers can deny F2P is making massive money all you want but when a company like Nexon is dropping over 400 million to buyout other companies....reality laughs at you.

Thus demonstrating that F2P is anything but free to play. To be making massive money, money has to be being paid by players. Of course there is another model, one SOE has a patent for, interupting the game with paid advertisments. Fortunately we have not seen that one introduced into the wild yet.

Personally I am happy to see a variety of pricing models. While I prefer the consistency of a subscription fee and no cash shop other models are equally valid. Despite the history of bad F2P games and bad P2P games going F2P there is nothing in either model that dictates bad (or good) design and implementation.

BeansnBread · February 2013

Originally posted by craftseeker
Thus demonstrating that F2P is anything but free to play. To be making massive money, money has to be being paid by players. Of course there is another model, one SOE has a patent for, interupting the game with paid advertisments. Fortunately we have not seen that one introduced into the wild yet.

Personally I am happy to see a variety of pricing models. While I prefer the consistency of a subscription fee and no cash shop other models are equally valid. Despite the history of bad F2P games and bad P2P games going F2P there is nothing in either model that dictates bad (or good) design and implementation.

Anarchy Online actually had in game advertising on billboards and things for a little while. I never really got into that game back then, as I was still in school and was busy all the time, but I remember the advertising not feeling very intrusive in the sci-fi setting. It actually felt like it made a lot of sense in that universe much like the Coka-Cola advertisements in Bladerunner.

But in a fantasy game? I think it would bother the hell out of a lot of people - including me.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I might be accepting of a well made sci-fi MMORPG that does in game advertising in a tasteful way if it meant the game would be free to play without a cash shop. It's probably not viable, at least at this point, but it seems like a possibility at some point.

nariusseldon · February 2013

Originally posted by craftseeker
Originally posted by jtcgs
Originally posted by Rossboss
If you believe Blizzard, EA, and smaller developers aren't sharing your data, let me welcome you to the era of Facebook where you can freely share your own data to others and tell them how many cows you e-milked today.

The study is not specifically stand-alone MMORPGs either, make note of that.

I'd imagine it includes smart phone applications and Facebook games alike.

I didn't generate this study nor do I claim to see this as the holy grail of all writing.

ROFLMAO!

Wait, you actually believe that a publically held company can hide data on their products? Even EA, trying to hide the issues with SWTOR have no choice but eventually bring it up in conferrence calls...hell, their last one where they lumped SWTOR in with 2 other games had to release it on paper afterwards.

When there are public shareholders, they cant hide anything...its the smaller companies that have no public option that CAN withold information.

Just like you mouthbreathers can deny F2P is making massive money all you want but when a company like Nexon is dropping over 400 million to buyout other companies....reality laughs at you.

Thus demonstrating that F2P is anything but free to play. To be making massive money, money has to be being paid by players. Of course there is another model, one SOE has a patent for, interupting the game with paid advertisments. Fortunately we have not seen that one introduced into the wild yet.

Personally I am happy to see a variety of pricing models. While I prefer the consistency of a subscription fee and no cash shop other models are equally valid. Despite the history of bad F2P games and bad P2P games going F2P there is nothing in either model that dictates bad (or good) design and implementation.

This ONLY demonstrating that F2P is not free for SOME. It still can be free to play for many, and even a majority. In fact, evidence supporting exactly that ... a SMALL minority of whales pay through the roof while most are playing for free.

So F2P is correct for many.

Annwyn · February 2013

Originally posted by craftseeker
Originally posted by jtcgs

ROFLMAO!

Wait, you actually believe that a publically held company can hide data on their products? Even EA, trying to hide the issues with SWTOR have no choice but eventually bring it up in conferrence calls...hell, their last one where they lumped SWTOR in with 2 other games had to release it on paper afterwards.

When there are public shareholders, they cant hide anything...its the smaller companies that have no public option that CAN withold information.

Just like you mouthbreathers can deny F2P is making massive money all you want but when a company like Nexon is dropping over 400 million to buyout other companies....reality laughs at you.

Thus demonstrating that F2P is anything but free to play. To be making massive money, money has to be being paid by players.

Speaking strictly of F2P as a whole and not just MMOs (because it's easier to play with the line in MMOs), DOTA 2 and LoL have wonderful cash shops that offers purely cosmetic and convenience items (DOTA has Hero Skins and Spectator Access to Tournaments, LoL has champions, champion skins, rewards buffs, etc). They're both very succesful F2P titles that can be played without ever spending a single buck and yet they are still making money. Why is that? Because they offer services or items that players find interesting even though they have no bearing on the overall experience.

Will buying a Hero Skin in DOTA 2 means that the game is no longer free to play? No. You could play without ever spending a single buck and get the same experience as those paying for Hero Skins. The only thing you won't get as a F2P player, is Spectator Access to Tournament Matches within the DOTA TV client (but you may still watch streams online from other distributors), you can however spectate normal matches entirely for free. But again, this does not affect in any way the F2P model, in that players can continue to play for free without ever having to spend a dime. The players who purchase Hero Skins do so because they want to and feel that they get their money out of it, and different people value money differently.

craftseeker · February 2013

Originally posted by colddog04
Originally posted by craftseeker
Thus demonstrating that F2P is anything but free to play. To be making massive money, money has to be being paid by players. Of course there is another model, one SOE has a patent for, interupting the game with paid advertisments. Fortunately we have not seen that one introduced into the wild yet.

Personally I am happy to see a variety of pricing models. While I prefer the consistency of a subscription fee and no cash shop other models are equally valid. Despite the history of bad F2P games and bad P2P games going F2P there is nothing in either model that dictates bad (or good) design and implementation.

Anarchy Online actually had in game advertising on billboards and things for a little while. I never really got into that game back then, as I was still in school and was busy all the time, but I remember the advertising not feeling very intrusive in the sci-fi setting. It actually felt like it made a lot of sense in that universe much like the Coka-Cola advertisements in Bladerunner.

But in a fantasy game? I think it would bother the hell out of a lot of people - including me.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I might be accepting of a well made sci-fi MMORPG that does in game advertising in a tasteful way if it meant the game would be free to play without a cash shop. It's probably not viable, at least at this point, but it seems like a possibility at some point.

from http://www.gizmag.com/sony-in-game-advertising/22743/ May last year.

"Sony Computer Entertainment America has filed a patent that could see video games interrupted by compulsory advertising. The patent's abstract describes the suspension of "interactive content" in order to display an advertisement, after which interaction resumes."

Does not seem to have hit the PC market yet, but this site reported its intended use in at least one PS game.

http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/71/view/news/page/2/read/3318/PlanetSide-SOE-Jumps-On-InGame-Ads.html

Brabbit1987 · February 2013

Originally posted by greenreen
Originally posted by colddog04
Originally posted by greenreen
Originally posted by colddog04
Originally posted by greenreen
LOL, I had to laugh at that always right.

So stop beating around the bush - what reason is it that you aren't paying them the same as a sub game? If you are the rare person that is not like the others, give me the reason that you aren't paying what you would for a sub game - be it more or less. Tell the world why you should pay less. What made you so aware that 15 bucks a month is too much, nay 5 a month is too much to pay a month (runescape). Clue me in because I don't read minds even though I am all powerful in other regards :P Careful - it can't be a complaint about something or that would be dissatisfaction.

I play F2P games because they are fun. It's pretty simple. If I don't see a reason to pay, I don't. If I want something, I do.

I play sub games as well btw.

Vague. Figures. Convo complete.

I can see how such a simple answer could be difficult for you to deal with after all the effort you put into spinning F2P into an eventual complete and utter failure. But what I said was the truth. I, and many others, don't fit into the little box you created to justify your biased viewpoint.

Your crusade would make a lot more sense if you actually admitted that it is completely based on your opinion. I'm not arguing that people should pay zero to play games. I'm saying that the F2P audience is much larger right now and that it is growing faster than P2P. You are trying to convince people, contrary to all evidence, that F2P is doomed to fail. And you use anecdotal evidence and opinion to back up your claims. What's worse is that you start trying to justify your viewpoint by saying you are making a game and that you are an INTJ personality.

Convo complete? Yeah, I guess so. But most of what you said certainly isn't convincing me.

My INTJ lets me see right through you as transparent.

Hey fluffikins, what did I type at the top of the post I made, it was opinion. Opinion though based on information from people that have sold games peppered with information from people that talk about why they purchase games. Not unfounded ramblings. Chide my expertise yet yours is in your lap under the napkin. I made logical arguments and made them real easy to understand with simple words.

You didn't state a reason because your reason is trying to gain satisfaction which means you are in a state of dissatisfaction without what you buy. This is like debating with kiddiewinks day. Just because someone doesn't gloat it doesn't mean they think they lost anything. It is complete because you aren't interesting enough. You are being too easy to pin down. The worst part is that you don't admit that you do purchase less when you aren't satisfied. Being unable to analyze yourself makes you a bad candidate for debate with me. I lay it all out on the table.

You do exactly what I said, you devalue the developer's time and training and decide that payment wouldn't behoove you and you do it only when it satisfies you, that is everything I stated. I'm not unhappy to inform you, you turned out to be the norm.

You may as well have responded with derrrrrrrrr.

Wow this is just too funny. Trollololol

First of all INTJ doesn't make anyone in this world special. INTJ is just the rarest personality types one can be. Even if you are one of these personality types doesn't make you smart. Personality does not give you a better understanding or a better IQ.

Now on to another note, You don't even match a INTJ personality type.

I – Introversion preferred to extraversion: INTJs tend to be quiet and reserved. They generally prefer interacting with a few close friends rather than a wide circle of acquaintances, and they expend energy in social situations (whereas extraverts gain energy).
N – Intuition preferred to sensing: INTJs tend to be more abstract than concrete. They focus their attention on the big picture rather than the details and on future possibilities rather than immediate realities.
T – Thinking preferred to feeling: INTJs tend to value objective criteria above personal preference. When making decisions they generally give more weight to logic than to social considerations.
J – Judgment preferred to perception: INTJs tend to plan their activities and make decisions early. They derive a sense of control through predictability, which to perceptive types may seem limiting.

It's very unlikely a INTJ would be on forums socializing with many other people let alone speaking up to such a simple a matter. So you already lose the "I" in INTJ.

You are also not following the "N". Rather then seeing the big picture in free to play, you are focusing on small details that really have very little to do with it. You reasoning is because some are paying more then others? You know it kinda works that way in a store as well, someone can go in .. and leave without buying a thing. Some can go in and buy $100 worth of things. Free to Play mmo's is pretty much a giant store getting you to buy things. Think of the game as the actual store with a bunch of murchindise shining to get your attention and buy it.

"T", Thinking, you are also not following at all. You are suppose to be using logic, but you clearly are not.

The "J" really doesn't have much to do with this situation. I can say though your Judgement sucks XD.

So, again, tell me. What makes you so special? ...

OHHH! That's right you are "special"

.

[Deleted User] · February 2013

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Bochner · February 2013

Your entire post has nothing to stand on. Just because some website is calculating the amount of suscriptions does not mean that they left for a F2P model, they leave for a number of reasons.

Brabbit1987 · February 2013

Originally posted by greenreen
Originally posted by Brabbit1987
Originally posted by greenreen
Originally posted by colddog04
Originally posted by greenreen
Originally posted by colddog04
Originally posted by greenreen
LOL, I had to laugh at that always right.

So stop beating around the bush - what reason is it that you aren't paying them the same as a sub game? If you are the rare person that is not like the others, give me the reason that you aren't paying what you would for a sub game - be it more or less. Tell the world why you should pay less. What made you so aware that 15 bucks a month is too much, nay 5 a month is too much to pay a month (runescape). Clue me in because I don't read minds even though I am all powerful in other regards :P Careful - it can't be a complaint about something or that would be dissatisfaction.

I play F2P games because they are fun. It's pretty simple. If I don't see a reason to pay, I don't. If I want something, I do.

I play sub games as well btw.

Vague. Figures. Convo complete.

I can see how such a simple answer could be difficult for you to deal with after all the effort you put into spinning F2P into an eventual complete and utter failure. But what I said was the truth. I, and many others, don't fit into the little box you created to justify your biased viewpoint.

Your crusade would make a lot more sense if you actually admitted that it is completely based on your opinion. I'm not arguing that people should pay zero to play games. I'm saying that the F2P audience is much larger right now and that it is growing faster than P2P. You are trying to convince people, contrary to all evidence, that F2P is doomed to fail. And you use anecdotal evidence and opinion to back up your claims. What's worse is that you start trying to justify your viewpoint by saying you are making a game and that you are an INTJ personality.

Convo complete? Yeah, I guess so. But most of what you said certainly isn't convincing me.

My INTJ lets me see right through you as transparent.

Hey fluffikins, what did I type at the top of the post I made, it was opinion. Opinion though based on information from people that have sold games peppered with information from people that talk about why they purchase games. Not unfounded ramblings. Chide my expertise yet yours is in your lap under the napkin. I made logical arguments and made them real easy to understand with simple words.

You didn't state a reason because your reason is trying to gain satisfaction which means you are in a state of dissatisfaction without what you buy. This is like debating with kiddiewinks day. Just because someone doesn't gloat it doesn't mean they think they lost anything. It is complete because you aren't interesting enough. You are being too easy to pin down. The worst part is that you don't admit that you do purchase less when you aren't satisfied. Being unable to analyze yourself makes you a bad candidate for debate with me. I lay it all out on the table.

You do exactly what I said, you devalue the developer's time and training and decide that payment wouldn't behoove you and you do it only when it satisfies you, that is everything I stated. I'm not unhappy to inform you, you turned out to be the norm.

You may as well have responded with derrrrrrrrr.

Wow this is just too funny. Trollololol

First of all INTJ doesn't make anyone in this world special. INTJ is just the rarest personality types one can be. Even if you are one of these personality types doesn't make you smart. Personality does not give you a better understanding or a better IQ.

Now on to another note, You don't even match a INTJ personality type.

I – Introversion preferred to extraversion: INTJs tend to be quiet and reserved. They generally prefer interacting with a few close friends rather than a wide circle of acquaintances, and they expend energy in social situations (whereas extraverts gain energy).

N – Intuition preferred to sensing: INTJs tend to be more abstract than concrete. They focus their attention on the big picture rather than the details and on future possibilities rather than immediate realities.

T – Thinking preferred to feeling: INTJs tend to value objective criteria above personal preference. When making decisions they generally give more weight to logic than to social considerations.

J – Judgment preferred to perception: INTJs tend to plan their activities and make decisions early. They derive a sense of control through predictability, which to perceptive types may seem limiting.

It's very unlikely a INTJ would be on forums socializing with many other people let alone speaking up to such a simple a matter. So you already lose the "I" in INTJ.

You are also not following the "N". Rather then seeing the big picture in free to play, you are focusing on small details that really have very little to do with it. You reasoning is because some are paying more then others? You know it kinda works that way in a store as well, someone can go in .. and leave without buying a thing. Some can go in and buy $100 worth of things. Free to Play mmo's is pretty much a giant store getting you to buy things. Think of the game as the actual store with a bunch of murchindise shining to get your attention and buy it.

"T", Thinking, you are also not following at all. You are suppose to be using logic, but you clearly are not.

The "J" really doesn't have much to do with this situation. I can say though your Judgement sucks XD.

So, again, tell me. What makes you so special? ...

OHHH! That's right you are "special" .

Yeah, tell me more about myself. I'm not an INTJ because I'm on a forum. This just gets more entertaining. So INTJs never talk right, wrong. We just don't talk to people after they stop being entertaining, learn to predict me. Don't be jealous because my personality type is rare - the rarity only threatens you. I'm not threatened by it. I don't need to be considered "special" but different I am from the majority of the other people around me - nothing new. What were your discussions on the topic again?

Yeah... not a one because you came for a personal attack.

Good news for you, I can put people on block, bad news for me - their dumb comments still show unless I block them in every new thread. Ah well, first world problems. Still not going to make me play free games. Keep talking about it though. I think I might get off on your overwhelming attention to detail, on me. When you hit that nerve and you speak truth it just radiates. Tell me more things about myself that aren't true, I can take it. Give it to me, tell me how mad you are lol

Not mad, only proving a point. I also never said INTJ's never talk, I said they usually don't bother getting involved in such situations.

Also, hate to point this out. Rarity doesn't threaten me, considering I am a pretty rare specimen myself XD. However unlike you, im not going to use it and act like I know everything, because I do not. Just like you, I know a lot of game industry professionals and have even been part of a few development teams. Now this of course doesn't mean I know for a fact that free to play will stick. However, I do know free to play is not a bad model. Nexon, while not the best support company in the world, has made just about all their profits using a free to play model. They are also one of the largest free to play gaming companies and very sucessful at that.

If there is something wrong with free to play, how did Nexon become so big?

Edit: I also can't forget to mention that many companies are moving to the free to play model. Kinda funny how it's sucha bad model yet companies are using it.

Howdy, Stranger!

"US free-to-play audience outnumbers pay-to-play 6 to 1"

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

"US free-to-play audience outnumbers pay-to-play 6 to 1"

Comments