Free Players Should Not Have The Same Access To The Game As Paying Players

SoMuchMass · May 2013

Why should they?

At one point I was completely against the SWTOR model. But now that I think about it, it isn't that bad. Why should players that pay nothing have access to everything in game?

Reklaw · May 2013

Free Players Should Not Have The Same Access To The Game As Paying Players

To me that's just logical.

The "I want it all and want it now crowd" is the biggest plague this genre knows.

Whitebeards · May 2013

Originally posted by SoMuchMass
Why should they?

At one point I was completely against the SWTOR model. But now that I think about it, it isn't that bad. Why should players that pay nothing have access to everything in game?

And who says they do? that is the whole point.

That is why i like F2P model of games like AION. Entire game is available for free and you can spend your money on cosmetic items. And honestly i have spent more money in AIon than i ever did in SWTOR because i like honest F2P models and i don't mind supporting the devs.

Dihoru · May 2013

So you want to segregate paying players from non-paying players thus slicing apart the community and potentially losing a good portion of your playerbase (both paying and non-paying) and a big chunk of your potential playerbase just to force payment on everyone? Tell me in what parallel universe is that a good idea for any business let alone a F2P MMO that lives and dies at the whims of its community?

Lumm · May 2013

The SWTOR model is pretty terrible if you ask me. Its like one of those old school f2p games you had where you get a tiny taste of everything out there but if you want the good stuff you better bust out the wallet. Full access to content with cosmetic options is the right way.

DamonVile · May 2013

Originally posted by Dihoru
So you want to segregate paying players from non-paying players thus slicing apart the community and potentially losing a good portion of your playerbase (both paying and non-paying) and a big chunk of your potential playerbase just to force payment on everyone? Tell me in what parallel universe is that a good idea for any business let alone a F2P MMO that lives and dies at the whims of its community?

No he wants to bait ppl into yet another f2p vrs p2p argument like the last 5 or 6 threads he's started.

Dihoru · May 2013

Originally posted by DamonVile
Originally posted by Dihoru
So you want to segregate paying players from non-paying players thus slicing apart the community and potentially losing a good portion of your playerbase (both paying and non-paying) and a big chunk of your potential playerbase just to force payment on everyone? Tell me in what parallel universe is that a good idea for any business let alone a F2P MMO that lives and dies at the whims of its community?

No he wants to bait ppl into yet another f2p vrs p2p argument like the last 5 or 6 threads he's started.

I missed 3 of those flame wars? o..o

Scalpless · May 2013

It's not morally wrong to ask people to pay for action bars. EA can do whatever they want to do and I can skip their games. Not because I don't want to pay, but because I don't want to be annoyed by their cash shop.

ShakyMo · May 2013

Depends on the game.

I absolutely want free players to have access to the same content as me in ps2, as other players are the content.

Loke666 · May 2013

Originally posted by SoMuchMass
Why should they?

At one point I was completely against the SWTOR model. But now that I think about it, it isn't that bad. Why should players that pay nothing have access to everything in game?

While that sounds logical at first there is problems with that.

MMOs already separates players based on levels and gear making things really hard for anyone trying to get a group and dividing the game up in monthly subscribers, people who bought a lot of things and people who payed little or nothing makes things a lot harder.

Selling races, skins, bags, bank space and faster mounts is really no problem. XP pots work as well even though I find them annoying myself.

Selling access to zones, classes and the ability to equip certain gear on the other hand is bad.

Selling gear with endgame stats is incredible stupid since that is what most players try to get and if you easily can buy it then people will and soon tire of the game.

I agree that some stuff really should be for paying customers only but not anything that divide the playerbase more than it already is in P2P games They need to think out ways to increase the social interaction, not dividing it.

In TORs case they should more look on games like Tera instead of games like EQ2.

xmenty · May 2013

Originally posted by Whitebeards
Originally posted by SoMuchMass
Why should they?

At one point I was completely against the SWTOR model. But now that I think about it, it isn't that bad. Why should players that pay nothing have access to everything in game?

And who says they do? that is the whole point.

That is why i like F2P model of games like AION. Entire game is available for free and you can spend your money on cosmetic items. And honestly i have spent more money in AIon than i ever did in SWTOR because i like honest F2P models and i don't mind supporting the devs.

/agreed.

My personal opnion only, F2P players are not pariah or leecher or scumbag or whatever these subs elitist catogorize them with.

I believe they are more advance than those subs players.

They are willing to pay if the game are really worth their money and time.

They do not have these fanboy stockholm syndromes.

Nitth · May 2013

Originally posted by Dihoru
So you want to segregate paying players from non-paying players thus slicing apart the community and potentially losing a good portion of your playerbase (both paying and non-paying) and a big chunk of your potential playerbase just to force payment on everyone? Tell me in what parallel universe is that a good idea for any business let alone a F2P MMO that lives and dies at the whims of its community?

I'm actually all for equality but the boat already sailed when they offered freemium and premium 'plans' in the same game.

Dihoru · May 2013

Originally posted by Nitth

Originally posted by Dihoru
So you want to segregate paying players from non-paying players thus slicing apart the community and potentially losing a good portion of your playerbase (both paying and non-paying) and a big chunk of your potential playerbase just to force payment on everyone? Tell me in what parallel universe is that a good idea for any business let alone a F2P MMO that lives and dies at the whims of its community?

I'm actually all for equality but the boat already sailed when they offered freemium and premium 'plans' in the same game.

I don't play games that segregate their community via freemium plans (DDO, LoTRO, etc). I play only games where the free player has access to the same content as the player that opts to invest in the game (via fair premium sub plans, such as the one World of Tanks has for its premium players, or items) so the boat hasn't sailed, it's been split up between the HMS Titanic (freemium/p2w games) and the Star of India ( true f2p games ).

Aldous.Huxley · May 2013

Originally posted by xmenty
Originally posted by Whitebeards
Originally posted by SoMuchMass
Why should they?

At one point I was completely against the SWTOR model. But now that I think about it, it isn't that bad. Why should players that pay nothing have access to everything in game?

And who says they do? that is the whole point.

That is why i like F2P model of games like AION. Entire game is available for free and you can spend your money on cosmetic items. And honestly i have spent more money in AIon than i ever did in SWTOR because i like honest F2P models and i don't mind supporting the devs.

/agreed.

My personal opnion only, F2P players are not pariah or leecher or scumbag or whatever these subs elitist catogorize them with.

I believe they are more advance than those subs players.

They are willing to pay if the game are really worth their money and time.

They do not have these fanboy stockholm syndromes.

The only problem with your theory is that F2P games are not worth paying for to those of us with discerning taste. That is what the real problem is. Some of us that have grown accustom to quality do not want to pay for a substandard game. On top of that, the F2p community demand more F2P games. This means that my options as a paying customer & subscription model advocate are being limited just because you want to play for free.

The only reason you are there is to make the population seem artificially large so the paying players don't quit. That's it. You're pretty much just furniture in a room. When NPC's are designed to be more realistic in their interaction, you'll be replaced. Sorry, but this is true.

This is why i am a subscription advocate. It's the only way to have a true level playing field for every player. Personally, I don't want to have an advantage, nor do I want another player having an advantage over me.

Zalmon · May 2013

Originally posted by Kleptobrainiac
Originally posted by xmenty
Originally posted by Whitebeards
Originally posted by SoMuchMass
Why should they?

At one point I was completely against the SWTOR model. But now that I think about it, it isn't that bad. Why should players that pay nothing have access to everything in game?

And who says they do? that is the whole point.

That is why i like F2P model of games like AION. Entire game is available for free and you can spend your money on cosmetic items. And honestly i have spent more money in AIon than i ever did in SWTOR because i like honest F2P models and i don't mind supporting the devs.

/agreed.

My personal opnion only, F2P players are not pariah or leecher or scumbag or whatever these subs elitist catogorize them with.

I believe they are more advance than those subs players.

They are willing to pay if the game are really worth their money and time.

They do not have these fanboy stockholm syndromes.

The only problem with your theory is that F2P games are not worth paying for to those of us with discerning taste. That is what the real problem is. Some of us that have grown accustom to quality do not want to pay for a substandard game. On top of that, the F2p community demand more F2P games. This means that my options as a paying customer & subscription model advocate are being limited just because you want to play for free.

The only reason you are there is to make the population seem artificially large so the paying players don't quit. That's it. You're pretty much just furniture in a room. When NPC's are designed to be more realistic in their interaction, you'll be replaced. Sorry, but this is true.

This is why i am a subscription advocate. It's the only way to have a true level playing field for every player. Personally, I don't want to have an advantage, nor do I want another player having an advantage over me.

No the actual real problem is that there are not enough of players to support P2P model.. simple.

Now you can go and tell me how you if a company makes a "quality' MMO people won't mind supporting it but where are these quality MMOS? have there been not one quality MMO for all these years?

That is the problem. it is supply and demand and now demand is for F2P MMOS. Also i find it absurd that somehow paying 15 bucks a month makes for a quality MMO even though the reality is quite ironic given that majority of F2P MMOS these days were once P2P.

Dihoru · May 2013

Originally posted by Zalmon
Originally posted by Kleptobrainiac
Originally posted by xmenty
Originally posted by Whitebeards
Originally posted by SoMuchMass
Why should they?

At one point I was completely against the SWTOR model. But now that I think about it, it isn't that bad. Why should players that pay nothing have access to everything in game?

And who says they do? that is the whole point.

That is why i like F2P model of games like AION. Entire game is available for free and you can spend your money on cosmetic items. And honestly i have spent more money in AIon than i ever did in SWTOR because i like honest F2P models and i don't mind supporting the devs.

/agreed.

My personal opnion only, F2P players are not pariah or leecher or scumbag or whatever these subs elitist catogorize them with.

I believe they are more advance than those subs players.

They are willing to pay if the game are really worth their money and time.

They do not have these fanboy stockholm syndromes.

The only problem with your theory is that F2P games are not worth paying for to those of us with discerning taste. That is what the real problem is. Some of us that have grown accustom to quality do not want to pay for a substandard game. On top of that, the F2p community demand more F2P games. This means that my options as a paying customer & subscription model advocate are being limited just because you want to play for free.

The only reason you are there is to make the population seem artificially large so the paying players don't quit. That's it. You're pretty much just furniture in a room. When NPC's are designed to be more realistic in their interaction, you'll be replaced. Sorry, but this is true.

This is why i am a subscription advocate. It's the only way to have a true level playing field for every player. Personally, I don't want to have an advantage, nor do I want another player having an advantage over me.

No the actual real problem is that there are not enough of players to support P2P model.. simple.

Now you can go and tell me how you if a company makes a "quality' MMO people won't mind supporting it but where are these quality MMOS? have there been not one quality MMO for all these years?

That is the problem. it is supply and demand and now demand is for F2P MMOS. Also i find it absurd that somehow paying 15 bucks a month makes for a quality MMO even though the reality is quite ironic given that majority of F2P MMOS these days were once P2P.

I wouldn't waste time replying to commi-jesus XD the sheer amount of trolling he's doing in each of his posts is just mind boggling and shows the touch of a master troll... either that or he truly believes what he's saying but that's just not really possible to be honest...

Also a fun fact: If NPCs become a good surrogate for actual players in all possible ways within an MMO then you'll have a slight issue once they decide they don't need humans:

rawfox · May 2013

F2P = suxx arse

It has always some kind of stupid "gimme moar moonyy"-epeen-shop, ofcause for everyone.

Subscribers get some of the shop currency, but i only saw a fair amount of these in Anarchy Online.

Every other game had either too expensive shop-currencies or gave subscribers just not enuff, because subscribers should really get everything the game offers for their subscribtion.

But /shrug .. a lot of you people out there want these models ... since they made sexey in yer heads, by greedy badass moneymilkers ... the world is full of victims ...

Aldous.Huxley · May 2013

Originally posted by Zalmon
No the actual real problem is that there are not enough of players to support P2P model.. simple.

Now you can go and tell me how you if a company makes a "quality' MMO people won't mind supporting it but where are these quality MMOS? have there been not one quality MMO for all these years?

That is the problem. it is supply and demand and now demand is for F2P MMOS. Also i find it absurd that somehow paying 15 bucks a month makes for a quality MMO even though the reality is quite ironic given that majority of F2P MMOS these days were once P2P.

I'm sorry but your premise is false. There are more than enough players willing to pay for subscription based games. WoW has already proved that tenfold. It's still proving it for that matter...

If you cannot at least meet me there, than we have nothing further to discuss & your posts will be rendered invalid by those who deal in fact.

Axehilt · May 2013

Originally posted by SoMuchMass
Why should they?

At one point I was completely against the SWTOR model. But now that I think about it, it isn't that bad. Why should players that pay nothing have access to everything in game?

If the model allows for it, like League of Legends, they can certainly have access to everything.

asrlohz · May 2013

Originally posted by SoMuchMass
Why should they?

At one point I was completely against the SWTOR model. But now that I think about it, it isn't that bad. Why should players that pay nothing have access to everything in game?

Thing is, for a healthy community they should. But for a healthy game they shouldn't. Having more slots on the actionbar and unlimited PvP isn't exactly good for the community since it splits it in such a severe way.

I prefer the cosmetic cash shop idea but it doesn't quite work in MMO's and destroys the point of getting better looking gear. Personally, I think that when you were against the SWTOR model you were a F2P player, but when you started to pay for it you changed your mind completely.

But I agree. Supporting the game should give you ATLEAST bragging rights. I'd say that Defiance is doing the whole Expansion thing right. Everyone gets more content, but those who pay gets more of it. So you end up being able to decide which parts of it you want in the game, kind of like a DLC of sorts. (Although I haven't played Defiance in a long while so I might be wrong)

Dihoru · May 2013

Originally posted by asrlohz
Originally posted by SoMuchMass
Why should they?

At one point I was completely against the SWTOR model. But now that I think about it, it isn't that bad. Why should players that pay nothing have access to everything in game?

Thing is, for a healthy community they should. But for a healthy game they shouldn't. Having more slots on the actionbar and unlimited PvP isn't exactly good for the community since it splits it in such a severe way.

I prefer the cosmetic cash shop idea but it doesn't quite work in MMO's and destroys the point of getting better looking gear. Personally, I think that when you were against the SWTOR model you were a F2P player, but when you started to pay for it you changed your mind completely.

But I agree. Supporting the game should give you ATLEAST bragging rights. I'd say that Defiance is doing the whole Expansion thing right. Everyone gets more content, but those who pay gets more of it. So you end up being able to decide which parts of it you want in the game, kind of like a DLC of sorts. (Although I haven't played Defiance in a long while so I might be wrong)

And you can either allow cash shop items to be traded or have the possibility for players to modify the visuals of their items (like Neverwinter's ability to take one item's appearance and the stats of another for the cost of a little AD, this is a good idea as you can have your own look regardless of tier of items you use and can even make for some interesting PvP in games where there's actually pvp and no inspect button :P).

Zalmon · May 2013

Originally posted by Kleptobrainiac
Originally posted by Zalmon
No the actual real problem is that there are not enough of players to support P2P model.. simple.

Now you can go and tell me how you if a company makes a "quality' MMO people won't mind supporting it but where are these quality MMOS? have there been not one quality MMO for all these years?

That is the problem. it is supply and demand and now demand is for F2P MMOS. Also i find it absurd that somehow paying 15 bucks a month makes for a quality MMO even though the reality is quite ironic given that majority of F2P MMOS these days were once P2P.

I'm sorry but your premise is false. There are more than enough players willing to pay for subscription based games. WoW has already proved that tenfold. It's still proving it for that matter...

If you cannot at least meet me there, than we have nothing further to discuss & your posts will be rendered invalid by those who deal in fact.

WOW is 9 years old now. Even UO is sub based but that doesn't say much about the current time does it? We are talking about now not what was viable 10 years ago.

You give me example of one MMO that came out in 2004 and the try to pass your opinion as a fact? do you know that majority of players to WOW come from Asia and they don't play a monthly sub? how about that for a fact?

If you were really stating a fact we wouldn't see all the P2P MMOS turning belly up and go F2P. I am pretty sure given how you know for a 'fact' that there are a lot of players like you who can easily support a P2P model.....the real question is where are they?

Let me see..they are waiting for this 'quality' MMO to show up.

Ozmodan · May 2013

Originally posted by smokedogg311
The SWTOR model is pretty terrible if you ask me. Its like one of those old school f2p games you had where you get a tiny taste of everything out there but if you want the good stuff you better bust out the wallet. Full access to content with cosmetic options is the right way.

I disagree, SWTOR is still a subscription game, it just has a f2p option. If you enjoy the game, then subscribe. If you don't support games you like they go away.

Really irks me when posters think everything should be free, that is a ridiculous supposition.

Dihoru · May 2013

Originally posted by Ozmodan
Originally posted by smokedogg311
The SWTOR model is pretty terrible if you ask me. Its like one of those old school f2p games you had where you get a tiny taste of everything out there but if you want the good stuff you better bust out the wallet. Full access to content with cosmetic options is the right way.

I disagree, SWTOR is still a subscription game, it just has a f2p option. If you enjoy the game, then subscribe. If you don't support games you like they go away.

Really irks me when posters think everything should be free, that is a ridiculous supposition.

It really irks me when people who can't even fathom the choice between pay by money or pay by time when it is offered to them in a game and then start spouting that the failhard F2P games like SWTOR are in any way a good example of a F2P system... if it were they'd have gone as big as League of Legends or World of Tanks (around 10-20 mil active players and over 20 mil active respectively of which in both games a good portion put in cash from time to time for skins and whatnot).

Classicstar · May 2013

Originally posted by SoMuchMass
Why should they?At one point I was completely against the SWTOR model. But now that I think about it, it isn't that bad. Why should players that pay nothing have access to everything in game?

Stop paying then problem solved:)

Why would you keep paying for game while others get it free?

It's so simple sometimes.

Aldous.Huxley · May 2013

Originally posted by Zalmon
WOW is 9 years old now. Even UO is sub based but that doesn't say much about the current time does it? We are talking about now not what was viable 10 years ago.

You give me example of one MMO that came out in 2004 and the try to pass your opinion as a fact? do you know that majority of players to WOW come from Asia and they don't play a monthly sub? how about that for a fact?

If you were really stating a fact we wouldn't see all the P2P MMOS turning belly up and go F2P. I am pretty sure given how you know for a 'fact' that there are a lot of players like you who can easily support a P2P model.....the real question is where are they?

Let me see..they are waiting for this 'quality' MMO to show up.

Do those games still have paying subs today? If they do, then the information is current as well as relevant. By your assessment they don't even exist. These are gamers paying right now in real time today for games & you say they do not exist? Okay...?

Look, you can eat out of a dumpster for free if you like. I could pay a fee & take a seat next to the dumpster & watch you eat, while I dine on a slightly higher quality food. However, I prefer to eat my dinner in a nice restaurant with good ambiance far away from the dumpster. Just my preference.

Howdy, Stranger!

Free Players Should Not Have The Same Access To The Game As Paying Players

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Free Players Should Not Have The Same Access To The Game As Paying Players

Comments