Wall after wall of anti-F2P rhetoric spewed by the ignorant masses. These same tired arguments resemble swiss cheese lately, more holes than substance. Oh! The F2P payment system just lifts up the wallet heavy player and exaults him over the poor, hard-working ole grinder of yore! Give it a rest, you lackwit yokels. The F2P movement of five years ago might have been susceptible to some of this drivel, but today's AAA titles bearing the free flag shrug them off like pebbles thrown at a Sherman tank. Take a look at the first wildly successful example of the genre, DDO Unlimited. I've clocked more completely free time in that game than I could stand in most of your precious sub-based flagship failures, and I never felt the pinch of necessity to throw away my hard earned cash for strictly convenience items. Recently I've started subscribing for VIP status at the same standard cost I would spend to sub to any other pay to play game, so I could experience some of the content the development team has come up with lately. I found the game to be worth every penny, and I was able to arrive at that decision because they allowed me the time to become comfortable with the world and it's mechanics before I had to commit. THAT is what the F2P movement embodies, a true look in to the soul of a game before marrying it. Stop wailing over the individuals who spend fortunes to stand out amongst their peers in a small portion of certain games. If you really feel the need to compare yourself tit for tat to every person around you, and find your enjoyment hampered by not being in the top fractional tier, you better prepare for some disappointment both in and out of the virtual space.
Take this F2P trend for the benefits it offers, the ease and relative freedom with which you can jump in to and out of the world, the flexibility of use of your currency, and the ability to influence developement not only by voicing your opinion in a forum setting, but also by virtue of what you DO spend your money on.
It sounds like too many of the above posters are missing the point. If you have compulsion issues that push you to play a game 60 hours a week, you'll have those same issues pushing you to spend ridiculous amounts of money to play a F2P game. After leveling to cap in two F2P games and halfway there in Battle of the Immortals atm I have spent a grand total of ten bucks. And that was last week to buy more backpack slots. You really do not have to spend money if you don't want to. If you end up dropping fifty a month to play a game, that's your fault and has nothing to do with anything but your own problems with control and patience in most of these games.
I think the difference is I have no problems paying money up front and a membership fee to have full access to all the facilities a game may offer. Whilst you prefer to grub around the trashcan out back. Newsflash rubbie- the only reason you have access to those trashcans is because there are gamers willing to put their money where their mouth is and cough up cash to keep the facilities open weather its a full pay or a f2p game.
I think my only real big problem with F2P games is the customer service , its nonexistent well it maybe there for the first month or so then it slowly gets worse , then it vanishes all together.. now with P2P its always there and thats what i like about P2P games.
If they put more effort into the customer service side i might just play more F2P games.
Originally posted by semajin Wall after wall of anti-F2P rhetoric spewed by the ignorant masses. These same tired arguments resemble swiss cheese lately, more holes than substance. Oh! The F2P payment system just lifts up the wallet heavy player and exaults him over the poor, hard-working ole grinder of yore! Give it a rest, you lackwit yokels. The F2P movement of five years ago might have been susceptible to some of this drivel, but today's AAA titles bearing the free flag shrug them off like pebbles thrown at a Sherman tank. Take a look at the first wildly successful example of the genre, DDO Unlimited. I've clocked more completely free time in that game than I could stand in most of your precious sub-based flagship failures, and I never felt the pinch of necessity to throw away my hard earned cash for strictly convenience items. Recently I've started subscribing for VIP status at the same standard cost I would spend to sub to any other pay to play game, so I could experience some of the content the development team has come up with lately. I found the game to be worth every penny, and I was able to arrive at that decision because they allowed me the time to become comfortable with the world and it's mechanics before I had to commit. THAT is what the F2P movement embodies, a true look in to the soul of a game before marrying it. Stop wailing over the individuals who spend fortunes to stand out amongst their peers in a small portion of certain games. If you really feel the need to compare yourself tit for tat to every person around you, and find your enjoyment hampered by not being in the top fractional tier, you better prepare for some disappointment both in and out of the virtual space.
Take this F2P trend for the benefits it offers, the ease and relative freedom with which you can jump in to and out of the world, the flexibility of use of your currency, and the ability to influence developement not only by voicing your opinion in a forum setting, but also by virtue of what you DO spend your money on.
I think what you're saying is absolutely true, don't like the way you said it, the problem being is that the term F2P brings with it all those images of games designed to exploit the F2P model from the ground up, that create a frustrating experience unless you pay through the nose, it doesn't bring to mind games like DDO that started as a sub game that moved in to a hybrid model.
I liked the way DDO have handled the transition, it's good for the game, I wouldn't have tried it if it hadn't changed as would many of the people still enjoying it and paying for it. I'm excited by the news LotRO is to follow and EQII.
Don't think about this in the same way as you think about traditional F2P games and think about it differently. I wouldn't say embrace it, I think there are benefits as proved by DDO but I've seen too many pitfalls in the F2P market and the creeping of cash shops in to subscription games to be welcoming this change wholeheartedly, I'll reserve judgement and applaud or protest depending on each case.
It sounds like too many of the above posters are missing the point. If you have compulsion issues that push you to play a game 60 hours a week, you'll have those same issues pushing you to spend ridiculous amounts of money to play a F2P game. After leveling to cap in two F2P games and halfway there in Battle of the Immortals atm I have spent a grand total of ten bucks. And that was last week to buy more backpack slots. You really do not have to spend money if you don't want to. If you end up dropping fifty a month to play a game, that's your fault and has nothing to do with anything but your own problems with control and patience in most of these games.
I think the difference is I have no problems paying money up front and a membership fee to have full access to all the facilities a game may offer. Whilst you prefer to grub around the trashcan out back. Newsflash rubbie- the only reason you have access to those trashcans is because there are gamers willing to put their money where their mouth is and cough up cash to keep the facilities open weather its a full pay or a f2p game.
News flash "rubbie"! We call people who pay up front with little to no idea of what they're buying "Dupes" in this country. A smart consumer, a saavy individual, knows that being able to extensively test drive a product before they shell out any money whatsoever is a GOOD idea. It's called informed consumption. These antiquated AAA pay to play titles are skyrocketing in cost at the developemental level. Guess what they're "developing" with those dollars? The insane level of hype that the rest of you freedom-haters require so you will fork out your money to buy a product sight-unseen. I hope you're the type to buy a lifetime subscription to a game before you've even played it.
Well im not sure where this f2p s**t storm orginiated at, nm i remember now. But it has gotten some larger media attention. The Wall Street Journal was one of those. Im not going to commont on their article but, what was clear is that F2P make the company more money. You wanna know why there is a push for F2P .. its easy game companies want more than $15 a month from you and in F2P games they get it. Now i have clearly stated that there are some real f2p games out there, very few but a few SB was one, Lol (not an mmo) was one etc.
A few people do not want to admit that F2P is a simple rip off. thats fine but i just want to stress to most of the people out there are are no positives to this system, as most often its FAKE and not F2P at all. Even those pro F2P in this forum addmit that they had to switch to sub to actually play the game (well that not their take but its the truth, once they did that they are now playing a P2P game, ill say that agian. They are not playing a F2P game they are playing a P2P game with a open trial w/ strong limits. This is fine but don't pretend its F2P cause its not, even tho DDO is one of the most free to play). Cash shops w/o subs (P2P options) are the worst type of payment models. In most cases requires $50-$100+ a month just to play.
I do agree with the advantage of testing the game before paying for it. P2P game have these they are called trials. By many standards and statement of what F2P is by a few pro F2P people WAr is more of a F2P game than wizards 101. This is rather odd a F2P game is less F2P and a P2P game. Why? Well easy F2P is rarely F2P. if you want to play Wizards 101 or WAR past a defined earily point (WAR is later ability and game wise than Wizards) then you have to P2P; until then you can play all you like.
There is definatly an effort in parts of the industry to encourgae adaptation to F2P models to make more money. Thats what this is all about. Don't believe me look up the articles.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
I'd write a book here, but allow me to make It brief:
- The term "Free to Play" Is nothing more, nothing less than "Play for Free, Pay to continue playing/win".
All In All, the 4) and 5) points are not true, since most/majority/all(?) of the F2P's rips your wallet off way more than subscription based games. I've seen people that spent like 600$ or even more with xp-increase and refine-success-increase related items. In-a-single-day.
I think what you're saying is absolutely true, don't like the way you said it, the problem being is that the term F2P brings with it all those images of games designed to exploit the F2P model from the ground up, that create a frustrating experience unless you pay through the nose, it doesn't bring to mind games like DDO that started as a sub game that moved in to a hybrid model.
I liked the way DDO have handled the transition, it's good for the game, I wouldn't have tried it if it hadn't changed as would many of the people still enjoying it and paying for it. I'm excited by the news LotRO is to follow and EQII.
Don't think about this in the same way as you think about traditional F2P games and think about it differently. I wouldn't say embrace it, I think there are benefits as proved by DDO but I've seen too many pitfalls in the F2P market and the creeping of cash shops in to subscription games to be welcoming this change wholeheartedly, I'll reserve judgement and applaud or protest depending on each case.
I think that is an intelligent and well thought out strategy, Evil. Of course I'm not saying that every F2P title will be of the same calibre that DDO is at. In fact, it will probably be in the minority of those to be released for quite a while. But being smart about the way you spend your money, for example using the free to play model to really get a feel for whether or not YOU are having fun in a game, is the point here.
I don't think we have to embrace it, but we're going to have to learn to live with it. There is a nice part to it, that you can try before you buy, and in many cases you can try a considerable portion of the game before deciding to spend cash. The negative side is that these companies are purposefully adjusting mechanics of their F2P games in order to give players "incentive" to make purchases, such as XP boost potions and what not.
Turbine has a wonderful F2P system in DDO, but they seem to be more limiting in LotRO, especially since you're going to have to purchase quests per region, or trait slots.
I would be more inclined to embrace the F2P model if so many companies attempt to nickle and dime players into purchasing more content. Actually, it surprises me to an extent that more companies haven't attempted the ArenaNet method of making games that are Buy 2 Play, and produce expansions annually or even bi-annually.
Wrong, F2P is never Cheaper for a person that wants to Compete and Win, I speak with 8 years of experience of leading a guild trough more than a few "Free" to play Games.
I suggest before making columms liek this you actually try some F2P games such as Rohan Online, Archlord Online, Rose Online, Allods Online, where PvP is part of the game and to win he who has the most money to buy best items is who wins.
In Rohan Online and Archlord Online I saw many Members unload over $1,000.00 in less than a year, jsut to get the "Exp pills" "drop rate pills" "extra stats pots" etc.. etc...
not to mention when the Rohan Staff started Selling God like Weapons in the Item Mall for $250 a piece which people gobbled up liek it was nothing, so much for the economic downturn huh?
if your a player that only logs into a game for 30 mins to an hour walk around do a quest and kill 10 monsters and log off then yes, F2P can be cheaper, but if your a hardcore gamer looking to win and be on th top you will spend WAYYY more than a monthly subcription game.
What this article is showing are the benefits of having the choice in how you pay/play. IF you plan on being number one, plan on paying the sub fee, problem solved.
There are bad examples of F2P and there are good examples of F2P, you're only pointing out the bad apples. In older F2P games you really didn't have a whole lot of option in how you were going to pay for your time. You either A played for free and often at a disadvantage or you paid for the advantages that came with your purchases.
With DDO, LOTRO and EQ2 they're offering an alternative to that. If you are going to want it all, they offer you it all with a standard sub. In EQ2's case they even separate those who are not playing the game as intended. I see nothing wrong with this.
The games you're referring to especially Archlord are designed around the pay to win model, most of us loathe. Making them bad counter arguments against the OP, at least IMO.
I understand everyones opinion varies, however, far too often people use weak trumped up counter points only for the purpose of being argumentative, which I'm seeing to much of in this thread.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
You think gaming companies are going f2p because they just feel it in their hearts to give us more free content; or is it the games in this format bring in more revenue? Companies exist to make profits. Not give out free things to make people happy.
Well im not sure where this f2p s**t storm orginiated at, nm i remember now. But it has gotten some larger media attention. The Wall Street Journal was one of those. Im not going to commont on their article but, what was clear is that F2P make the company more money. You wanna know why there is a push for F2P .. its easy game companies want more than $15 a month from you and in F2P games they get it. Now i have clearly stated that there are some real f2p games out there, very few but a few SB was one, Lol (not an mmo) was one etc.
A few people do not want to admit that F2P is a simple rip off. thats fine but i just want to stress to most of the people out there are are no positives to this system, as most often its FAKE and not F2P at all. Even those pro F2P in this forum addmit that they had to switch to sub to actually play the game (well that not their take but its the truth, once they did that they are now playing a P2P game, ill say that agian. They are not playing a F2P game they are playing a P2P game with a open trial w/ strong limits. This is fine but don't pretend its F2P cause its not, even tho DDO is one of the most free to play). Cash shops w/o subs (P2P options) are the worst type of payment models. In most cases requires $50-$100+ a month just to play.
I do agree with the advantage of testing the game before paying for it. P2P game have these they are called trials. By many standards and statement of what F2P is by a few pro F2P people WAr is more of a F2P game than wizards 101. This is rather odd a F2P game is less F2P and a P2P game. Why? Well easy F2P is rarely F2P. if you want to play Wizards 101 or WAR past a defined earily point (WAR is later ability and game wise than Wizards) then you have to P2P; until then you can play all you like.
There is definatly an effort in parts of the industry to encourgae adaptation to F2P models to make more money. Thats what this is all about. Don't believe me look up the articles.
Shennanigans, plain and simple. DDO can be entirely F2P, hence why it is classified under that title. Obviously the company is hoping you spend something on their product eventually, else why in the world would they put out the cost of further developement and upkeep. If I chose to cancel my VIP status tomorrow, I could continue to play DDO completely free of cost for as long as the service existed. THAT quality makes it F2P. We aren't talking about getting everything for nothing here, that would be completely ludicrous. We're talking about being smarter about the way we spend our money. I will make you a promise right now. The way people choose to spend their money in a RMT shop will speak louder than any amount of forum posts a community could ever make. Don't want to see unbalancing gameplay items included in a shop? Don't buy them, and stigmatize anyone who does. Beyond that, you're just spinning your wheels, end of story.
Its a popular misconception that free to play models cost more and really stems from ignorance of the fact their are many different models now available . Games such as DDO offer a hybrid model which allows players to experiance a lot of free content before deciding whether they wish venture further into the game . If they do they have one of three choices
1) grind to gain enough points to spend on advance ment (no expence there at all)
2) micropayment to purchase adventure packs should they only wish to proceed as a casual gamer (cheaper than a monthly fee for someone who only wants to play a little now and then)
3) opt into paying a subscription unlocking the adventure packs( exactly the same as a monthly sub)
not one of these three options come to more than the old monthly fee .
Games like Runes of Magic do only offer the cash shop but they are possible to play for free if you dont wish to use it . Most people do though although most people I know that play it have only spent money on a mount wish comes to roughly about a month and half of a regular subscription fee . So for them if they play for say 6 months the game is much cheaper than a normal subscription mmo .
Of course there are other mmos (mostly of eastern origin) that do milk the cash shop and they can be a lot more costly .
Then you have games such as World of Warcraft that now have a vanity cash shop . While you don't have to use it the same applys to the likes of Runes of Magic and DDO and you also have to remember plenty of people use black market microtransactions to advance themselves in WoW via leveling services and gold sellers .
My view is the Hybrid model is the way to go for nearly all mmos . Allow limited free to play with the option of upgrading to the standard subscription fee . Some will argue that you have to top that up with extra microtransactions all I can say is that these people are talking off the top of thier head without ever experiancing it first hand because that certainly is not my experiance of it .
Also the Guild Wars model of buy to play is extremly attractive .
Things are changing in the mmo market and I can foresee a time when very few mmos simply offer only a subscription model without some sort of free to play content .
I suppose at the end of the day is if you don't like free to play don't play free to play and if you are worried you might overspend simply take the option to subscribe in the same way as you do now .
Perhaps nobody noticed but MMOs that are worth playing don't do F2P... So we have divided up MMO's now into categories: Fast-Food (Hey it's cheap! Not really!) and homemade cooking by a real chef... I'll just call it 'Homemade'.
Sure organic food taste better and is more expensive but at least it doesn't give you diarrhea afterwards.
You think gaming companies are going f2p because they just feel it in their hearts to give us more free content; or is it the games in this format bring in more revenue? Sorry to rain on your sneaky little "gaming promotion" fanboi parade, but companies exist to make profits. Not give out free things to make people happy.
Who said otherwise? They may gain more revenue by catering to more people as well as their indvidual budgets. There's no big secret in what you're attempting to preach.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I'm going to point a finger fairly and squarely at the authors choice of language here as being the prime reason for so many ill thought out posts in this thread, it's about time we started to use our heads and our use of language and start to differentiate. As I stated before F2P to many gamers = nothing more than money grabbing games that are built from the ground up to get as much cash out of you as possible, DDO, LotRO and EQII DO NOT fall in to that bracket. Can we start thinking about using different terms?
I'm no expert with language nor do I expect anyone to come up with a universal easy way to describe all these different payment models but surely we can narrow it down some? Hybrid seems ok to use as a term for games that offer free content, a la carte content and a subscription option. It shouldn't be too difficult for us to learn to use a different term and eventually and objectively acknowledge the difference.
It's painfully obvious that a lot of what this article has to say has been clouded because of the language.
It sounds like too many of the above posters are missing the point. If you have compulsion issues that push you to play a game 60 hours a week, you'll have those same issues pushing you to spend ridiculous amounts of money to play a F2P game. After leveling to cap in two F2P games and halfway there in Battle of the Immortals atm I have spent a grand total of ten bucks. And that was last week to buy more backpack slots. You really do not have to spend money if you don't want to. If you end up dropping fifty a month to play a game, that's your fault and has nothing to do with anything but your own problems with control and patience in most of these games.
I think the difference is I have no problems paying money up front and a membership fee to have full access to all the facilities a game may offer. Whilst you prefer to grub around the trashcan out back. Newsflash rubbie- the only reason you have access to those trashcans is because there are gamers willing to put their money where their mouth is and cough up cash to keep the facilities open weather its a full pay or a f2p game.
News flash "rubbie"! We call people who pay up front with little to no idea of what they're buying "Dupes" in this country. A smart consumer, a saavy individual, knows that being able to extensively test drive a product before they shell out any money whatsoever is a GOOD idea. It's called informed consumption. These antiquated AAA pay to play titles are skyrocketing in cost at the developemental level. Guess what they're "developing" with those dollars? The insane level of hype that the rest of you freedom-haters require so you will fork out your money to buy a product sight-unseen. I hope you're the type to buy a lifetime subscription to a game before you've even played it.
Your definition of informed consumption with extensively test driven product is what everyone else in the world considers at best a cheapskate at worst a bottom feeder. Games are developed for people with cash to spend or are willing to spend to see if they bring anything that just might interest them. No dev is going to spent hard fought for dev money for elbows deep trash can divers. Ooops my bad, elbows deep 'informed consumers'.
As for freedom haters? Well hell ya. Since all this f2p stuff has been breaking on us I have gone out and tried a few f2p's. Guess what so far they suck balls. DDO/wizards thrown in the trash can for you to devour inside of a week. Bon apetitt.
News flash "rubbie"! We call people who pay up front with little to no idea of what they're buying "Dupes" in this country. A smart consumer, a saavy individual, knows that being able to extensively test drive a product before they shell out any money whatsoever is a GOOD idea. It's called informed consumption. These antiquated AAA pay to play titles are skyrocketing in cost at the developemental level. Guess what they're "developing" with those dollars? The insane level of hype that the rest of you freedom-haters require so you will fork out your money to buy a product sight-unseen. I hope you're the type to buy a lifetime subscription to a game before you've even played it.
So in your country you must not, Order anyting on the internet, buy anything from an unopened box, bought any fast food, Bought anything froma STORE. Oddly, enough resturants are ok with your theory. I can research games before buying them, most P2P games have trials are often as good as the F2P "trials" time before you need to pay. So your claims are based on a fallacious agrument that you here make.
All this being said i agree that mmorpgs should not have box sales above $20 (help offset, the spike digital download costs, and dev of larger games) and trials and open betas should be avalbile.
But the thing is they are. most modern online games give beta keys to anyone who preorders $5. Ok Its not free off the bat but thats a few weeks if not a month or two of beta, which is more play than most F2P give in their FREE period. Additionally, trials and buddy keys come with most games now. So its not like there is no opritunity to test. Still this is a rationalization, a logical one, which is rare on these forums, but i will restated that i fully believe in trials, buddy keys, low/no cost for the game itself when subscription is involved.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
I found more fun in playing most of the Aeria free-to-play mmos over the years than I had in most of the pay-to-pay ones I've played.
I think free-to-play+cash shop+subscription hybrid is the best way to go. There's a bunch of good quality mmos out there that are free. I'm talking about good graphics/gameplay/music/ pve/pvp/ animations. There's a bunch with way different ideas and styles than pay-to-play mmos have right now as well. There's just way more to offer me in terms of variation in the current free-to-play market. On top of all of that, you get to PAY FOR WHAT YOU WANT. I don't always feel like every aspect of a pay-to-play game is up to my standards of quality. With free-to-play, I get to buy an experience boost if the grind is too much, a buff if I'm too weak, and the like.
The problem with free-to-play is that sometimes they become pay-to-win. You don't have to win to have fun, though. The best way to remedy this is to allow the free player the ability to acquire the cash shop currency. I think I saw this first with Rohan. LOTRO and DDO are doing as well. I threw down 20 bucks or something after I got high enough to realize I really liked what there was to offer. Then I bought the exchanges system that let you sell in-game items for cash shop currency. I made over 100 bucks worth of cash-shop currency. I never payed real money again. I hear they screwed the game up now, but most developers tend to screw the games up somehow or another.
I also haven't had any customer service problems... content is added a lot of the time. It feels like most of the people that loath the very souls of the free-to-play market are actually sucking up what a few other people might have felt. I get very very very far in an f2p mmo before I spend any money. I'm talking like passed lvl 50 or 60. A few weeks at the least from when I started playing. So yeah... it's both cheaper and you get to pay for what you want.
I love F2P games, right now i play DDO, if i have much time to play i just pay for the vip mode, if i have to study or i won´t have much time i dont loose my character and can keep playing.
With EQII, LOTRO, DDO and DC Universe high quality will reach F2P gamers.
DC Universe has a sub fee and an item shop, it isn't free to play.
Perhaps nobody noticed but MMOs that are worth playing don't do F2P... So we have divided up MMO's now into categories: Fast-Food (Hey it's cheap! Not really!) and homemade cooking by a real chef... I'll just call it 'Homemade'.
Sure organic food taste better and is more expensive but at least it doesn't give you diarrhea afterwards.
Thats totally true . Lord of the Rings Online has a healthy player base . While its proberbly not to your taste it is worth playing for several hundred thousand people and has been for several years . Your really only just speaking for yourself there and not for the mmo community in general . Its not a game that needed to go to the free to play model but after the resounding success of DDO it made sence for Turbine to expand it to LOTRO . For me very few mmos justify a monthly subscription . I can actually only think of three I have felt are worth it . Thats not to say those that don't are bad games but what they offer is worth the standard monthly subscription fee to me .
Perhaps nobody noticed but MMOs that are worth playing don't do F2P... So we have divided up MMO's now into categories: Fast-Food (Hey it's cheap! Not really!) and homemade cooking by a real chef... I'll just call it 'Homemade'.
Sure organic food taste better and is more expensive but at least it doesn't give you diarrhea afterwards.
Thats not* totally true . Lord of the Rings Online has a healthy player base . While its proberbly not to your taste it is worth playing for several hundred thousand people and has been for several years . Your really only just speaking for yourself there and not for the mmo community in general . Its not a game that needed to go to the free to play model but after the resounding success of DDO it made sence for Turbine to expand it to LOTRO . For me very few mmos justify a monthly subscription . I can actually only think of three I have felt are worth it . Thats not to say those that don't are bad games but what they offer is worth the standard monthly subscription fee to me .
Calling BS on this. Less than 50 cents a day? How can that stress anyone's wallet?
3.) Some Real Quality for Cheap
Again, wrong. Just because they are makng tons of money doesn't mean they are putting in some QA time. Just look at DDO. It still has the same old bugs it had 4 years ago. New ones are introduced every patch.
Compare DDO hirelings to EQ's mercenaries, and EQ blows them out of the water. DDO is raking in the cash while EQ is 10 years old, and has been pretty dead for awhile. Look at DDO's recently released content. Its boring, and everyone can tell it was rushed. They are makng the mobs higher level(epic difficulty), then calling it new content. Their newest pirate zombie expansion is very short, and is balanced towards more established players. Almost a year out from their payment model change, and their is still an extreme lack of variety from level 12-20. Judging from their newer adventure packs I'm not optimistic. Their carnival release was an absolute disgrace.
Is DDO better than all the Last Chaos type games? Of course.
2.) Change
I dont't even get this. Obama said they same thing, and it meant nothing. That would apply here.
1.) The Games Can Survive Longer
Can't argue this. Crappy games can sustain itself longer by having a cash shop. I'd rather see a game get better than just get by.
Comments
Wall after wall of anti-F2P rhetoric spewed by the ignorant masses. These same tired arguments resemble swiss cheese lately, more holes than substance. Oh! The F2P payment system just lifts up the wallet heavy player and exaults him over the poor, hard-working ole grinder of yore! Give it a rest, you lackwit yokels. The F2P movement of five years ago might have been susceptible to some of this drivel, but today's AAA titles bearing the free flag shrug them off like pebbles thrown at a Sherman tank. Take a look at the first wildly successful example of the genre, DDO Unlimited. I've clocked more completely free time in that game than I could stand in most of your precious sub-based flagship failures, and I never felt the pinch of necessity to throw away my hard earned cash for strictly convenience items. Recently I've started subscribing for VIP status at the same standard cost I would spend to sub to any other pay to play game, so I could experience some of the content the development team has come up with lately. I found the game to be worth every penny, and I was able to arrive at that decision because they allowed me the time to become comfortable with the world and it's mechanics before I had to commit. THAT is what the F2P movement embodies, a true look in to the soul of a game before marrying it. Stop wailing over the individuals who spend fortunes to stand out amongst their peers in a small portion of certain games. If you really feel the need to compare yourself tit for tat to every person around you, and find your enjoyment hampered by not being in the top fractional tier, you better prepare for some disappointment both in and out of the virtual space.
Take this F2P trend for the benefits it offers, the ease and relative freedom with which you can jump in to and out of the world, the flexibility of use of your currency, and the ability to influence developement not only by voicing your opinion in a forum setting, but also by virtue of what you DO spend your money on.
Doc
I think the difference is I have no problems paying money up front and a membership fee to have full access to all the facilities a game may offer. Whilst you prefer to grub around the trashcan out back. Newsflash rubbie- the only reason you have access to those trashcans is because there are gamers willing to put their money where their mouth is and cough up cash to keep the facilities open weather its a full pay or a f2p game.
I think my only real big problem with F2P games is the customer service , its nonexistent well it maybe there for the first month or so then it slowly gets worse , then it vanishes all together.. now with P2P its always there and thats what i like about P2P games.
If they put more effort into the customer service side i might just play more F2P games.
I think what you're saying is absolutely true, don't like the way you said it, the problem being is that the term F2P brings with it all those images of games designed to exploit the F2P model from the ground up, that create a frustrating experience unless you pay through the nose, it doesn't bring to mind games like DDO that started as a sub game that moved in to a hybrid model.
I liked the way DDO have handled the transition, it's good for the game, I wouldn't have tried it if it hadn't changed as would many of the people still enjoying it and paying for it. I'm excited by the news LotRO is to follow and EQII.
Don't think about this in the same way as you think about traditional F2P games and think about it differently. I wouldn't say embrace it, I think there are benefits as proved by DDO but I've seen too many pitfalls in the F2P market and the creeping of cash shops in to subscription games to be welcoming this change wholeheartedly, I'll reserve judgement and applaud or protest depending on each case.
News flash "rubbie"! We call people who pay up front with little to no idea of what they're buying "Dupes" in this country. A smart consumer, a saavy individual, knows that being able to extensively test drive a product before they shell out any money whatsoever is a GOOD idea. It's called informed consumption. These antiquated AAA pay to play titles are skyrocketing in cost at the developemental level. Guess what they're "developing" with those dollars? The insane level of hype that the rest of you freedom-haters require so you will fork out your money to buy a product sight-unseen. I hope you're the type to buy a lifetime subscription to a game before you've even played it.
Doc
Well im not sure where this f2p s**t storm orginiated at, nm i remember now. But it has gotten some larger media attention. The Wall Street Journal was one of those. Im not going to commont on their article but, what was clear is that F2P make the company more money. You wanna know why there is a push for F2P .. its easy game companies want more than $15 a month from you and in F2P games they get it. Now i have clearly stated that there are some real f2p games out there, very few but a few SB was one, Lol (not an mmo) was one etc.
A few people do not want to admit that F2P is a simple rip off. thats fine but i just want to stress to most of the people out there are are no positives to this system, as most often its FAKE and not F2P at all. Even those pro F2P in this forum addmit that they had to switch to sub to actually play the game (well that not their take but its the truth, once they did that they are now playing a P2P game, ill say that agian. They are not playing a F2P game they are playing a P2P game with a open trial w/ strong limits. This is fine but don't pretend its F2P cause its not, even tho DDO is one of the most free to play). Cash shops w/o subs (P2P options) are the worst type of payment models. In most cases requires $50-$100+ a month just to play.
I do agree with the advantage of testing the game before paying for it. P2P game have these they are called trials. By many standards and statement of what F2P is by a few pro F2P people WAr is more of a F2P game than wizards 101. This is rather odd a F2P game is less F2P and a P2P game. Why? Well easy F2P is rarely F2P. if you want to play Wizards 101 or WAR past a defined earily point (WAR is later ability and game wise than Wizards) then you have to P2P; until then you can play all you like.
There is definatly an effort in parts of the industry to encourgae adaptation to F2P models to make more money. Thats what this is all about. Don't believe me look up the articles.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
- The term "Free to Play" Is nothing more, nothing less than "Play for Free, Pay to continue playing/win".
All In All, the 4) and 5) points are not true, since most/majority/all(?) of the F2P's rips your wallet off way more than subscription based games. I've seen people that spent like 600$ or even more with xp-increase and refine-success-increase related items. In-a-single-day.
I think that is an intelligent and well thought out strategy, Evil. Of course I'm not saying that every F2P title will be of the same calibre that DDO is at. In fact, it will probably be in the minority of those to be released for quite a while. But being smart about the way you spend your money, for example using the free to play model to really get a feel for whether or not YOU are having fun in a game, is the point here.
Doc
Less stres on my walet?? Thats so much bs, I find you pay more for f2p than sub.
I don't think we have to embrace it, but we're going to have to learn to live with it. There is a nice part to it, that you can try before you buy, and in many cases you can try a considerable portion of the game before deciding to spend cash. The negative side is that these companies are purposefully adjusting mechanics of their F2P games in order to give players "incentive" to make purchases, such as XP boost potions and what not.
Turbine has a wonderful F2P system in DDO, but they seem to be more limiting in LotRO, especially since you're going to have to purchase quests per region, or trait slots.
I would be more inclined to embrace the F2P model if so many companies attempt to nickle and dime players into purchasing more content. Actually, it surprises me to an extent that more companies haven't attempted the ArenaNet method of making games that are Buy 2 Play, and produce expansions annually or even bi-annually.
What this article is showing are the benefits of having the choice in how you pay/play. IF you plan on being number one, plan on paying the sub fee, problem solved.
There are bad examples of F2P and there are good examples of F2P, you're only pointing out the bad apples. In older F2P games you really didn't have a whole lot of option in how you were going to pay for your time. You either A played for free and often at a disadvantage or you paid for the advantages that came with your purchases.
With DDO, LOTRO and EQ2 they're offering an alternative to that. If you are going to want it all, they offer you it all with a standard sub. In EQ2's case they even separate those who are not playing the game as intended. I see nothing wrong with this.
The games you're referring to especially Archlord are designed around the pay to win model, most of us loathe. Making them bad counter arguments against the OP, at least IMO.
I understand everyones opinion varies, however, far too often people use weak trumped up counter points only for the purpose of being argumentative, which I'm seeing to much of in this thread.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I have to answer this with a question:
You think gaming companies are going f2p because they just feel it in their hearts to give us more free content; or is it the games in this format bring in more revenue? Companies exist to make profits. Not give out free things to make people happy.
[Mod Edit]
Shennanigans, plain and simple. DDO can be entirely F2P, hence why it is classified under that title. Obviously the company is hoping you spend something on their product eventually, else why in the world would they put out the cost of further developement and upkeep. If I chose to cancel my VIP status tomorrow, I could continue to play DDO completely free of cost for as long as the service existed. THAT quality makes it F2P. We aren't talking about getting everything for nothing here, that would be completely ludicrous. We're talking about being smarter about the way we spend our money. I will make you a promise right now. The way people choose to spend their money in a RMT shop will speak louder than any amount of forum posts a community could ever make. Don't want to see unbalancing gameplay items included in a shop? Don't buy them, and stigmatize anyone who does. Beyond that, you're just spinning your wheels, end of story.
Doc
Its a popular misconception that free to play models cost more and really stems from ignorance of the fact their are many different models now available . Games such as DDO offer a hybrid model which allows players to experiance a lot of free content before deciding whether they wish venture further into the game . If they do they have one of three choices
1) grind to gain enough points to spend on advance ment (no expence there at all)
2) micropayment to purchase adventure packs should they only wish to proceed as a casual gamer (cheaper than a monthly fee for someone who only wants to play a little now and then)
3) opt into paying a subscription unlocking the adventure packs( exactly the same as a monthly sub)
not one of these three options come to more than the old monthly fee .
Games like Runes of Magic do only offer the cash shop but they are possible to play for free if you dont wish to use it . Most people do though although most people I know that play it have only spent money on a mount wish comes to roughly about a month and half of a regular subscription fee . So for them if they play for say 6 months the game is much cheaper than a normal subscription mmo .
Of course there are other mmos (mostly of eastern origin) that do milk the cash shop and they can be a lot more costly .
Then you have games such as World of Warcraft that now have a vanity cash shop . While you don't have to use it the same applys to the likes of Runes of Magic and DDO and you also have to remember plenty of people use black market microtransactions to advance themselves in WoW via leveling services and gold sellers .
My view is the Hybrid model is the way to go for nearly all mmos . Allow limited free to play with the option of upgrading to the standard subscription fee . Some will argue that you have to top that up with extra microtransactions all I can say is that these people are talking off the top of thier head without ever experiancing it first hand because that certainly is not my experiance of it .
Also the Guild Wars model of buy to play is extremly attractive .
Things are changing in the mmo market and I can foresee a time when very few mmos simply offer only a subscription model without some sort of free to play content .
I suppose at the end of the day is if you don't like free to play don't play free to play and if you are worried you might overspend simply take the option to subscribe in the same way as you do now .
Perhaps nobody noticed but MMOs that are worth playing don't do F2P... So we have divided up MMO's now into categories: Fast-Food (Hey it's cheap! Not really!) and homemade cooking by a real chef... I'll just call it 'Homemade'.
Sure organic food taste better and is more expensive but at least it doesn't give you diarrhea afterwards.
Who said otherwise? They may gain more revenue by catering to more people as well as their indvidual budgets. There's no big secret in what you're attempting to preach.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I'm going to point a finger fairly and squarely at the authors choice of language here as being the prime reason for so many ill thought out posts in this thread, it's about time we started to use our heads and our use of language and start to differentiate. As I stated before F2P to many gamers = nothing more than money grabbing games that are built from the ground up to get as much cash out of you as possible, DDO, LotRO and EQII DO NOT fall in to that bracket. Can we start thinking about using different terms?
I'm no expert with language nor do I expect anyone to come up with a universal easy way to describe all these different payment models but surely we can narrow it down some? Hybrid seems ok to use as a term for games that offer free content, a la carte content and a subscription option. It shouldn't be too difficult for us to learn to use a different term and eventually and objectively acknowledge the difference.
It's painfully obvious that a lot of what this article has to say has been clouded because of the language.
F2P
B2P
Sub
Hybrid
Is that too hard?
Your definition of informed consumption with extensively test driven product is what everyone else in the world considers at best a cheapskate at worst a bottom feeder. Games are developed for people with cash to spend or are willing to spend to see if they bring anything that just might interest them. No dev is going to spent hard fought for dev money for elbows deep trash can divers. Ooops my bad, elbows deep 'informed consumers'.
As for freedom haters? Well hell ya. Since all this f2p stuff has been breaking on us I have gone out and tried a few f2p's. Guess what so far they suck balls. DDO/wizards thrown in the trash can for you to devour inside of a week. Bon apetitt.
So in your country you must not, Order anyting on the internet, buy anything from an unopened box, bought any fast food, Bought anything froma STORE. Oddly, enough resturants are ok with your theory. I can research games before buying them, most P2P games have trials are often as good as the F2P "trials" time before you need to pay. So your claims are based on a fallacious agrument that you here make.
All this being said i agree that mmorpgs should not have box sales above $20 (help offset, the spike digital download costs, and dev of larger games) and trials and open betas should be avalbile.
But the thing is they are. most modern online games give beta keys to anyone who preorders $5. Ok Its not free off the bat but thats a few weeks if not a month or two of beta, which is more play than most F2P give in their FREE period. Additionally, trials and buddy keys come with most games now. So its not like there is no opritunity to test. Still this is a rationalization, a logical one, which is rare on these forums, but i will restated that i fully believe in trials, buddy keys, low/no cost for the game itself when subscription is involved.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
No such thing as Free! If you're not paying a sub fee, it means I am paying 3 times to cover you.
How is that fair, or good? Redistribution seems good for the casual player but eventually you run out of other players money to steal.
* I read most of what Jon Wood writes
* He needs more bullet points though
I don't know...
I found more fun in playing most of the Aeria free-to-play mmos over the years than I had in most of the pay-to-pay ones I've played.
I think free-to-play+cash shop+subscription hybrid is the best way to go. There's a bunch of good quality mmos out there that are free. I'm talking about good graphics/gameplay/music/ pve/pvp/ animations. There's a bunch with way different ideas and styles than pay-to-play mmos have right now as well. There's just way more to offer me in terms of variation in the current free-to-play market. On top of all of that, you get to PAY FOR WHAT YOU WANT. I don't always feel like every aspect of a pay-to-play game is up to my standards of quality. With free-to-play, I get to buy an experience boost if the grind is too much, a buff if I'm too weak, and the like.
The problem with free-to-play is that sometimes they become pay-to-win. You don't have to win to have fun, though. The best way to remedy this is to allow the free player the ability to acquire the cash shop currency. I think I saw this first with Rohan. LOTRO and DDO are doing as well. I threw down 20 bucks or something after I got high enough to realize I really liked what there was to offer. Then I bought the exchanges system that let you sell in-game items for cash shop currency. I made over 100 bucks worth of cash-shop currency. I never payed real money again. I hear they screwed the game up now, but most developers tend to screw the games up somehow or another.
I also haven't had any customer service problems... content is added a lot of the time. It feels like most of the people that loath the very souls of the free-to-play market are actually sucking up what a few other people might have felt. I get very very very far in an f2p mmo before I spend any money. I'm talking like passed lvl 50 or 60. A few weeks at the least from when I started playing. So yeah... it's both cheaper and you get to pay for what you want.
DC Universe has a sub fee and an item shop, it isn't free to play.
Thats totally true . Lord of the Rings Online has a healthy player base . While its proberbly not to your taste it is worth playing for several hundred thousand people and has been for several years . Your really only just speaking for yourself there and not for the mmo community in general . Its not a game that needed to go to the free to play model but after the resounding success of DDO it made sence for Turbine to expand it to LOTRO . For me very few mmos justify a monthly subscription . I can actually only think of three I have felt are worth it . Thats not to say those that don't are bad games but what they offer is worth the standard monthly subscription fee to me .
4.) Less Stress on the Wallet
Calling BS on this. Less than 50 cents a day? How can that stress anyone's wallet?
3.) Some Real Quality for Cheap
Again, wrong. Just because they are makng tons of money doesn't mean they are putting in some QA time. Just look at DDO. It still has the same old bugs it had 4 years ago. New ones are introduced every patch.
Compare DDO hirelings to EQ's mercenaries, and EQ blows them out of the water. DDO is raking in the cash while EQ is 10 years old, and has been pretty dead for awhile. Look at DDO's recently released content. Its boring, and everyone can tell it was rushed. They are makng the mobs higher level(epic difficulty), then calling it new content. Their newest pirate zombie expansion is very short, and is balanced towards more established players. Almost a year out from their payment model change, and their is still an extreme lack of variety from level 12-20. Judging from their newer adventure packs I'm not optimistic. Their carnival release was an absolute disgrace.
Is DDO better than all the Last Chaos type games? Of course.
2.) Change
I dont't even get this. Obama said they same thing, and it meant nothing. That would apply here.
1.) The Games Can Survive Longer
Can't argue this. Crappy games can sustain itself longer by having a cash shop. I'd rather see a game get better than just get by.
F2P brings in a crowd I'd rather, and do, avoid.