Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Is it even possible to make an F2p without selling advatages?

12346

Comments

  • gessekai332gessekai332 New York City, NYPosts: 858Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by UOvet

    Depends what you value as an advantage. I'm sorry, EXP boosters, convenience stuff, these aren't selling an advantage. I mean, why would you care if I reach level 50 before you. Why do you care?

    maybe in this day in age it doesnt matter, since getting to level cap takes less than 2 weeks. my favorite old mmorpgs i did not even reach level cap because it took a ridiculous amount of time to get there.

    Now, if I can buy Sword of Ass-Kicketh that can't be obtained through games and is 10 bucks, then yes, I have an issue with that.

    F2P is fine with things like EXP, cosmetics, really anything AS LONG as it can be obtained through game. The only people who are really complaining about micro-trans I believe are kids who really can't buy anything online due to no card or what have you.

    Not sure how people are in favor of paying 60 bucks, getting boned, and then being stuck 60 bucks out of your wallet. Flip the situation, you try the game for free, can play all you want, spend upwards of 60 bucks if you think the game is worth it. It justifies it because you were likely going to just pay 60 for another game anyway. I dunno, I don't see much of an issue with it if done correctly.

    In my experience its never done correctly. I've seen recently that companies nowadays are allowing you to sell microtransaction items to people in game for a pretty penny, which in the end is equal to trading real money with in game cash.

    We can vote with our wallets, which is what we've been doing anyway, which is why you are now getting COD 55. It took me a little while, but once you learn life isn't fair it's much better ;p.

    yeah thats understandable. which means theres pretty much no hope for a western AAA mmorpg to actually be any good nowadays, because of the sheer amount of COD 55 gamers out there that are "voting with their wallet." 

     

    Most memorable games: AoC(Tryanny PvP), RIFT, GW, GW2, Ragnarok Online, Aion, FFXI, FFXIV, Secret World, League of Legends (Silver II rank)

  • aesperusaesperus Hamshire, NVPosts: 5,131Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Dogblaster
    Originally posted by aesperus

    That is a HUGE stretch of an 'advantage'. That's like saying 'having a cool looking outfit gives you an advantage, because you make friends easier / people follow you around more in pvp'.

    Basically what this boils down to is this:

    A) F2P still need to make money. People can't make a living on nothing. They have mouths to feed and bills to pay, just like everyone else.

    B) As long as your view of 'advantage' is skewed enough to basically include literally EVERYTHING, then yes.. in your distorted world view, every game will have paid advantages or (in the extreme cases) be pay2win.

    However, what is this really saying? At most it comes across as a poor cry to bring back the subscription model (which also can give advantages to select members if you're going to apply equally distorted view points). So maybe we should just stop playing multiplayer games alltogether, because they all offer advantages depending on who plays more / spends money / has cooler stuff. Etc.

    Really.. what's the point?

    point is ... p2p ftw :) not because of advantage, who cares, i spent about 600 euro on GW2 cash shop already, money arent the problem. But p2p mmorpgs are the only one I play and I will ever play (and few B2P)  for me f2p = cheap/crap/cashcow (but thats my view only)

    That's not a point. That's a preference. You like subscriptions, that's great.

    You can't apply such a double standard as to say 'cash shop = advantage, but subscription = who cares if there's an advantage'. Both business models offer advantages to certain players over others. Using your same critisims of the current wave of F2P games, you can infer that subscription games are EQUALLY flawed.

    You've also managed to skew the concept of 'advantage' to the point where we are literally talking about things that have no real impact on the game. To use GW2 as an example again, I've literally spent 10$ USD on GW2's gem store. That's it. And yet I literally have more than the majority of players in the game. Why? Because I was smart with how I used my time and money in the game.

    Yes, technically that guy with a +50% EXP booster will lvl faster than me, but it ultimately doesn't matter. He's not getting more kills than me in PvP, he's not getting better gear than me, he's not winning more fights, he's not killing more bosses, he's not completing more dungeons, he doesn't have more achievement points, he doesn't have more legendaries than i do, etc. etc. etc.

    In short, your definition of 'advantage', while technically accurate, is broad enough to the point where it's meaningless.

  • Slappy1Slappy1 columbus, OHPosts: 458Member

    I think part of the problem is also that so many people want everything ingame right now.So if anyone get's to ride around on a new mount or has new weapon before them,they perceive it as an advantage.The thing is,what if that other person with the mount/weapon played 2x the hour's as the other guy?I guess that's an advantage also?

    To me that's where it's convenience,it's just purely a time saver.

    Some day I'm going to put a sword through your eye and out the back of your skull!

    Arya Stark

  • aesperusaesperus Hamshire, NVPosts: 5,131Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Slappy1

    I think part of the problem is also that so many people want everything ingame right now.So if anyone get's to ride around on a new mount or has new weapon before them,they perceive it as an advantage.The thing is,what if that other person with the mount/weapon played 2x the hour's as the other guy?I guess that's an advantage also?

    To me that's where it's convenience,it's just purely a time saver.

    Pretty much, yep.

    They're all advantages. That's what makes this whole argument pointless. Any competitive game (aka ALL multiplayer games) have advantages. Even games in which you are only playing cooperatively w/ friends, there are still things you could consider advantages. It's pointless to argue about it when talking about business models. It's waay too vague. It's like arguing pay2fun, or whether one offers better game design than another. There are common sense answers, but the topic is so subjective and broad it can be argued however a person wants.

  • gylnnegylnne South Hutchinson, KSPosts: 321Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by gessekai332

    F2p games always seem to degrade iinto one of two things:

     

    1) p2win or p2get ahead (selling gear with good stats or selling exp boosts).

    2) RNG gambling aka pay for a random chance to get some p2win item or advantage (keys for treasure boxes, lockboxes, or crafting success enhancements)

     

    Is it possible to make an F2P where you dont result in ultimately granting a person an advantage?

    Nope, seen it eventually happen in all the ones I have played. It is just to great a temptation for devs, especially if they have stockholders breathing down their neck to make more money.

  • gessekai332gessekai332 New York City, NYPosts: 858Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by UOvet
    Why can't I pay for convenience? If you have 8 hours to play and I have 2, why not? What if they limited your time on the game because it wasn't fair? Becaus they would think that's an advantage, which it is since you have more time to play. Things like EXP just close the gap a little.

     

    Lets make analogy out of this. Lets say we play a game of one on one basketball. I destroy you 24-0. The reason for this is because i played basketball on a team in highschool, college, and nowadays on weekends. You just recently started playing. when people spend more time on getting better at a game than you, they should be better than you at it. mmorpgs are a game just like basketball, so it should be the same thing. F2P cash shops are kinda like steroid use IRL games. you don't want to spend the extra effort to win, so you just cheat and buy enhancements instead.

    Most memorable games: AoC(Tryanny PvP), RIFT, GW, GW2, Ragnarok Online, Aion, FFXI, FFXIV, Secret World, League of Legends (Silver II rank)

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Posts: 5,626Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by gessekai332
    Originally posted by UOvet
    Why can't I pay for convenience? If you have 8 hours to play and I have 2, why not? What if they limited your time on the game because it wasn't fair? Becaus they would think that's an advantage, which it is since you have more time to play. Things like EXP just close the gap a little.

     

    Lets make analogy out of this. Lets say we play a game of one on one basketball. I destroy you 24-0. The reason for this is because i played basketball on a team in highschool, college, and nowadays on weekends. You just recently started playing. when people spend more time on getting better at a game than you, they should be better than you at it. mmorpgs are a game just like basketball, so it should be the same thing. F2P cash shops are kinda like steroid use IRL games. you don't want to spend the extra effort to win, so you just cheat and buy enhancements instead.

    if this was a game where significant skill was involvd I would totally agree with you.

    MMO are typically not games requiring skill other than patience which I admit is a skill, just not the same kind.  :)

    MMO's are typically just about time.  Spending more time in an MMO, doesn't really make you teh player any more skilled, the character is more powerfull, but yourself are not any more skilled really.  (other than knowing mechanics).

    Yes there are some that are, and there are some parts of all MMO's that are, but isn't teh majority of the game.

  • ScotScot UKPosts: 6,070Member Uncommon
    Being able to buy weapons in PS2 is not a fair playing field, but by not having a sub they boxed themsleves into that position.

     25 Agrees

    You received 25 Agrees. You're posting some good content. Great!

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    Now doesn't that make you feel all warm and fuzzy? :P

  • DihoruDihoru ConstantaPosts: 2,731Member
    Originally posted by Scot
    Being able to buy weapons in PS2 is not a fair playing field, but by not having a sub they boxed themsleves into that position.

    Being able to talk about games you haven't played is fair play these days, but shame there are still a few arround that whack a mole the ones that talk without any experience.

    image
  • DogblasterDogblaster PraguePosts: 491Member
    Originally posted by gessekai332
    Originally posted by UOvet
    Why can't I pay for convenience? If you have 8 hours to play and I have 2, why not? What if they limited your time on the game because it wasn't fair? Becaus they would think that's an advantage, which it is since you have more time to play. Things like EXP just close the gap a little.

     

    Lets make analogy out of this. Lets say we play a game of one on one basketball. I destroy you 24-0. The reason for this is because i played basketball on a team in highschool, college, and nowadays on weekends. You just recently started playing. when people spend more time on getting better at a game than you, they should be better than you at it. mmorpgs are a game just like basketball, so it should be the same thing. F2P cash shops are kinda like steroid use IRL games. you don't want to spend the extra effort to win, so you just cheat and buy enhancements instead.

    +1

  • DihoruDihoru ConstantaPosts: 2,731Member
    Originally posted by Dogblaster
    Originally posted by gessekai332
    Originally posted by UOvet
    Why can't I pay for convenience? If you have 8 hours to play and I have 2, why not? What if they limited your time on the game because it wasn't fair? Becaus they would think that's an advantage, which it is since you have more time to play. Things like EXP just close the gap a little.

     

    Lets make analogy out of this. Lets say we play a game of one on one basketball. I destroy you 24-0. The reason for this is because i played basketball on a team in highschool, college, and nowadays on weekends. You just recently started playing. when people spend more time on getting better at a game than you, they should be better than you at it. mmorpgs are a game just like basketball, so it should be the same thing. F2P cash shops are kinda like steroid use IRL games. you don't want to spend the extra effort to win, so you just cheat and buy enhancements instead.

    +1

    the analogy fails because you're talking P2W not F2P there ;)

    image
  • free2playfree2play Toronto, ONPosts: 1,891Member Uncommon

    Free to play is a coffin either way. The only MMO I know of that has developed content after the free play model is LotRO and they sell their expansions to pay for it. You might see games provide small upgrades that were very likely coded and set aside for release but no free platform MMO has ever revamped their engine or added entire new regions to their game worlds.

    Yes, games could make a go of it as free to play without pay to win because they don't cost anything to run. Considering they aren't using the money to polish the games, I don't know why anyone would pay to win.

  • DihoruDihoru ConstantaPosts: 2,731Member
    Originally posted by free2play

    Free to play is a coffin either way. The only MMO I know of that has developed content after the free play model is LotRO and they sell their expansions to pay for it. You might see games provide small upgrades that were very likely coded and set aside for release but no free platform MMO has ever revamped their engine or added entire new regions to their game worlds.

    Yes, games could make a go of it as free to play without pay to win because they don't cost anything to run. Considering they aren't using the money to polish the games, I don't know why anyone would pay to win.

    Bend over:

    http://fw.perfectworld.com/

    http://sto.perfectworld.com/

    http://vindictus.nexon.net/

    http://www.joymax.com/silkroad/

    Need I continue?(there are way more than that, some of which pre-date WoW if I am not mistaken).

    image
  • kikoodutroa8kikoodutroa8 grenoblePosts: 158Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by gessekai332

    F2p games always seem to degrade iinto one of two things:

     

    1) p2win or p2get ahead (selling gear with good stats or selling exp boosts).

    2) RNG gambling aka pay for a random chance to get some p2win item or advantage (keys for treasure boxes, lockboxes, or crafting success enhancements)

     

    Is it possible to make an F2P where you dont result in ultimately granting a person an advantage?

    You mean a f2p like Dota2?

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 25,987Member Rare
    Originally posted by free2play

    Free to play is a coffin either way. The only MMO I know of that has developed content after the free play model is LotRO and they sell their expansions to pay for it. You might see games provide small upgrades that were very likely coded and set aside for release but no free platform MMO has ever revamped their engine or added entire new regions to their game worlds.

    Yes, games could make a go of it as free to play without pay to win because they don't cost anything to run. Considering they aren't using the money to polish the games, I don't know why anyone would pay to win.

    What are you dreaming? Lots of F2P MMOs have added significant content or expansion after going F2P.

    DDO, DCUO, STO (a new expansion is just coming out).

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 25,987Member Rare
    Originally posted by Scot
    Being able to buy weapons in PS2 is not a fair playing field, but by not having a sub they boxed themsleves into that position.

    "boxed themselves"?

    That was designed from the ground up. They can always/easily add a sub if they want to but why doing that when the trend is clear.

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Posts: 5,626Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by free2play

    Free to play is a coffin either way. The only MMO I know of that has developed content after the free play model is LotRO and they sell their expansions to pay for it. You might see games provide small upgrades that were very likely coded and set aside for release but no free platform MMO has ever revamped their engine or added entire new regions to their game worlds.

    Yes, games could make a go of it as free to play without pay to win because they don't cost anything to run. Considering they aren't using the money to polish the games, I don't know why anyone would pay to win.

    What are you dreaming? Lots of F2P MMOs have added significant content or expansion after going F2P.

    DDO, DCUO, STO (a new expansion is just coming out).

    Add EQ, EQ2 to that list.  DCUO had least added teh bases, don't know about a whole expansion though.

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 14,247Member Rare
    Originally posted by free2play

    Free to play is a coffin either way. The only MMO I know of that has developed content after the free play model is LotRO and they sell their expansions to pay for it. You might see games provide small upgrades that were very likely coded and set aside for release but no free platform MMO has ever revamped their engine or added entire new regions to their game worlds.

    The problem with your statement, other than it being completely and undeniably false, is that you have set it up so that anything a person presents you can knock down as 'well, that's not a REAL expansion' but we'll try presenting a few examples anyway and see how it goes. Although you can find major expansions in almost any F2P MMO (they're actually far more actively developed than most subscription MMOs), I looked up a few that specifically include new regions to meet your criteria.

     

     

     

     

     

     

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 25,987Member Rare
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by free2play

    Free to play is a coffin either way. The only MMO I know of that has developed content after the free play model is LotRO and they sell their expansions to pay for it. You might see games provide small upgrades that were very likely coded and set aside for release but no free platform MMO has ever revamped their engine or added entire new regions to their game worlds.

    Yes, games could make a go of it as free to play without pay to win because they don't cost anything to run. Considering they aren't using the money to polish the games, I don't know why anyone would pay to win.

    What are you dreaming? Lots of F2P MMOs have added significant content or expansion after going F2P.

    DDO, DCUO, STO (a new expansion is just coming out).

    Add EQ, EQ2 to that list.  DCUO had least added teh bases, don't know about a whole expansion though.

    And if you include WoT, they are *so* successful that they are adding two completely new tantem games to the mix ... F2P of course.

  • ScotScot UKPosts: 6,070Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Dihoru
    Originally posted by Scot
    Being able to buy weapons in PS2 is not a fair playing field, but by not having a sub they boxed themsleves into that position.

    Being able to talk about games you haven't played is fair play these days, but shame there are still a few arround that whack a mole the ones that talk without any experience.

     

     

    I am not sure what planet you are on Dihoru, but in the PS2 I play you can get buy credits which allow you to buy guns. You need to generate XP to get certs which update features on weapons, but the guns can be paid for in the cash shop. I think you are going to need put some certs into your Mole-Vision. :)

    The fact the weapons can also be paid for by certs is mitigating, but bottom line you can buy a major advantage.

    Trouble is, if they had not done this how would they make any money? The camo skins? In my other post This is what I meant my boxing themselves into having a P2W side to PS2.

     25 Agrees

    You received 25 Agrees. You're posting some good content. Great!

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    Now doesn't that make you feel all warm and fuzzy? :P

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 25,987Member Rare
    Originally posted by Scot
     

     

     

    I am not sure what planet you are on Dihoru, but in the PS2 I play you can get buy credits which allow you to buy guns. You need to generate XP to get certs which update features on weapons, but the guns can be paid for in the cash shop. I think you are going to need put some certs into your Mole-Vision. :)

    The fact the weapons can also be paid for by certs is mitigating, but bottom line you can buy a major advantage.

    Trouble is, if they had not done this how would they make any money? The camo skins? In my other post This is what I meant my boxing themselves into having a P2W side to PS2.

    Scot is correct about how guns can be bought in PS2 (i played that game too).

    However, how is that "boxing themselves into having a P2W side"? P2W was designed from the beginning. They can easily design the game as a sub-game, or any other ways of making money (access to different character types?, access to areas?). The dev CHOSE to sell guns.

    I can't blame them though ..that is how most online F2P shooters are done. Proven business model.

  • ScotScot UKPosts: 6,070Member Uncommon

    If they had had a subscription, they would not have needed to sell guns, its that simple. Given the model they choose it was hard for them to do anything else but sell guns. Camos and helmets would not have made them enough cash. I think PS2 have have done the best job they can of making the game fair within the model they choose. But you cant escape the bottom line, chossing to finance the game via cash shop means you sell guns.

    I never played PS1 but I know they had a subscription, I assume they had no cash shop. On that basis I bet they did not sell guns. That shows you the effect of F2P, a P2W playing field. The certs mitagate that, but do not make the game a fair playing field.

     25 Agrees

    You received 25 Agrees. You're posting some good content. Great!

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    Now doesn't that make you feel all warm and fuzzy? :P

  • LithuanianLithuanian vilniusPosts: 227Member Uncommon

    Depends on what do we call an advantage. And let us agree, that every game has to gain profit. So, any f2p game would have to sell something.

    My point of view is: yes, it can. Take two games as example:

    Istaria: no game shop, no option to buy anything for cash. Members can chose other races, have their plots of lands. No p2w ever.

    Lord of the rings online: while they do sell exp boosts, keys for treasure boxes - player can as well loot them from monsters or gain some of them from a game when he reaches certain level (15 minutes exp advancement).

    So, I think it is possible to keep f2p game while selling only cosmetic outfits, like Cloak of Great Chicken just looks very great and gain no advantage.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 25,987Member Rare
    Originally posted by Scot

    If they had had a subscription, they would not have needed to sell guns, its that simple. Given the model they choose it was hard for them to do anything else but sell guns. Camos and helmets would not have made them enough cash. I think PS2 have have done the best job they can of making the game fair within the model they choose. But you cant escape the bottom line, chossing to finance the game via cash shop means you sell guns.

     

    I think you are confused. They chose NOT to have a subscription in the design stage. Don't tell me they are not able to do so, if they wanted to, when they built the game.

     

  • ScotScot UKPosts: 6,070Member Uncommon

    Indeed it was their choice not to have a sub, and that choice led them to allow guns to be bought in the cash shop. I see this as cause and effect you see it as a a holoistic design decision. Thats where we differ.

    Lotro's cash shop started of well but has got worse. Deja Vu anyone? After a while they allowed you to get the upgrades you need for your legendary weapon in the cash shop. As far as I know all the upgrades you need can be bought online. You may still need to get the basic weapon as standard loot, but they just drop as you quest.  And I still think you can get a better basic weapon by doing raids, but I might be wrong there. But as you can see, selling weapons and XP boosts is here already, what next?

     25 Agrees

    You received 25 Agrees. You're posting some good content. Great!

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    Now doesn't that make you feel all warm and fuzzy? :P

Sign In or Register to comment.