^ Thank you qombi, that's exactly what I'm saying. Beau, you say that F2P and P2P games are no different in the end, but that's far from the truth. You show me a F2P game that gives me all the benefits and conveniences of a P2P game, at only 15 dollars a month, and maybe I'll agree with you. The truth is, cash shop games are made on the basis of "get as much money out of people as possible with no limit". People that can afford it will spend tons every month to always have the edge, whilst the rest of us (who only spend 15 dollars a month), will be left in the dust, in more ways than one. I'll agree that there might be some F2P games that don't offer such significant differences from using the cash shop, but from what I've seen, they're few and far between. As for buying the collectors edition of a P2P game in order to get the special items (something I've never done, to be honest), that's hardly a fair comparison. First of all, I can't even think of anything that's ever been offered in a collectors edition that was anything other than a fluff item - the biggest thing I can think of is maybe a special mount or something of that sort, or some special potions. The difference is, those are typically limited time use items. The cash shop, on the other hand, opens up an "unlimited collectors edition" in a sense, and that just seems wrong - especially if you want to be somewhat competitive in the game. The bottom line is, if you want to have a fair playing field in most F2P games, or have a tolerable playing experience, you've got to shell out the cash for it, and in most cases, it will be far more than 15 dollars a month. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt when it comes to Mabinogi's cash shop, since I haven't played the game much, but many of the others I've played have items in their cash shop that are so damning, (here's one example) that crafters in the game actually stopped making items because it was less time consuming to buy them from the shop. I don't care how you spin it - when a game gets to the point that the developers are so focused on squeezing money out of people that they start to ruin the integrity of the game mechanics by pingeonholing people into buying their crap, versus actually playing the game, it's just wrong. That's far different from using a bank alt for nothing but storage (I don't have a problem with that kind of thing), or using a few limited use items.
Once again you are placing YOUR value (all items in collectors editions are "fluff") on items that many people place their own value on. You mean to tell me that the guy that paid 400 dollars for a limited edition, just to get the fluff pet, holds no value for that fluff pet? There is no definition of value that says "the item in question must have some use in combat." to some players, a fluff item can be just as valuable as a sword. The cloak I got in Mines of Moria has definite stats and usefulness, but many liked it for the look alone. One player might see it as an "advantage" while others laugh at the idea.
You are not even seeing this, though.
You keep using words like "tolerable" and saying such things as "..those are typically limited use items.." as though YOU set the standard for what someone else should value.
You are proving my point, hardcore.
One player cannot say that a health potion is more valuable than a horse, or a sword, or time saved. It is up the individual. You see no irony in the fact that you have no issues with a BANK ALT (a blatant form of cash-shoppery if ever there was one) but yet have an issue with an item that, according to you, provides an unfair advantage?
So, according to you, I can buy a second account and it's ok, yet if I buy the "extra bank slots" cash shop item (that does exist) ...I am cheating?
Whose advantage are you talking about here? That cash shop player over yourself? Are you two in some kind of competition?
Also, you see NO IRONY in the "limited cash shop" of the limited edition, because it is such a smalllllll sin, as compared to the huge evil sin of the "unlimited limited edition" of the cash shop?
In other words, it's ok to use a cash shop just a bit, but not a lot?
These are the kind of points that always prove my point: most players have no issues with "cheating", as long as they think they have been cheated.
Beau
You seem to be misunderstanding my point here. My definition of "fluff" item is something that doesn't offer an advantage to the gameplay. I have no problem with "fluff" items, and I'd assume (yes I said "assume") that no one else would either. I don't care if you use the cash shop to buy extra bank slots (I say this is a fluff item because it doesn't give your character extra stats, speed, or any other kind of real advantage to your actual character aside from a little extra space), not at all, or to get a special mount, just as long as that mount doesn't give the player some huge speed advantage that can't be earned in the game through actually playing the game.
I understand that I'm using my own opinions on what I think would be considered fluff items and what wouldn't, but then again, it all comes down to the same thing that I believe is pretty much universal to all players that dislike the cash shop games, and that is - people shouldn't be able to gain some huge advantage in a game by merely buying items, while those of us who don't wish to use the cash shop don't have the option to earn the same items by playing the game. If I'm able to obtain all the same stuff that the cash shop offers, by merely playing the game for instance, or buy the xp potions using in-game currency that I earned in the game (for example), then I don't really care that the cash shop sells it. The point I'm tryng to make is that that's rarely the case in these types of games. Typically (and I say this from my own experience with cash shop games), the F2P games don't offer that kind of alternative to players, like myself, who would rather earn everything on our own (at least not at an acceptable level - what I mean is, they might offer the same items in-game BUT the time and effort involved to get them might be unrealistic), in-game. Instead, they offer these "cash shop exclusive" items that make such a huge difference, whether it be stats to the characters, increased xp gain, stat potions that can't be obtained in-game, health potions that are far superior to anything you get in-game (stuff like that makes pvp much more difficult for those who don't use the shop), etc, etc.
As for the "little sin" remark, honestly, I don't like anything that offers an unfair advantage to players, but I can accept the lesser of two evils. I'd rather deal with one-time, limited use items versus a cash shop that offers the items eternally - at least the limited items will go away eventually. But If it were up to me, collectors editions wouldn't offer anything in-game related that gave an advantage to players (notice earlier, I said "special mounts as long as the speed isn't substantially faster"). But I digress - my definition of what's fluff and what's not is pretty simple and self-explanatory. Sure, I know not everyone is going to agree with me, but I think a majority of gamers like myself have a universal understanding of what kind of items are fair and what isn't. And no, I'm not a "hardcore" gamer either, I just think that items in a game should at least have the possibility of being earned by playing the game (I mean, it's one of the reasons many of us play the game afterall - to advance our characters), not by whipping out our pocket books for instant gratification that can only be obtained by the cash shop alone.
I think the main difference between players like you and players like me is that you don't really care if things are kept fair, while gamers like myself do. Maybe it's because I started with P2P games that always offered a fair playing field to all players for the same price, I don't know.
Overall, as much as I prefer games with static subscription fees that offer the same experience to everyone, I can accept a compromise with F2P games if they allow me to earn everything on my own (without some ridiculously, in-human grind) in the game, without ever having to use the cash shop, but since I can't think of a single game like that, I'll have to stick with my belief that F2P games are nothing more than a cheap marketing ploy with a mediocre game attached.
I think we'll just have to agree to disagree here.
The problem is, Alacres, that there is no competition to keep "fair." If we lived in a magical world with no death and endless amounts of gold, there would be no competition.
Beau
Clearly, your definition of competition is much different than my own.
ly spend 15 dollars a month), will be left in the dust, in more ways than one. I'll agree that there might be some F2P games that don't offer such significant differences from using the cash shop, but from what I've seen, they're few and far between. As for buying the collectors edition of a P2P game in order to get the special items (something I've never done, to be honest), that's hardly a fair comparison. First of all, I can't even think of anything that's ever been offered in a collectors edition that was anything other than a fluff item - the biggest thing I can think of is maybe a special mount or something of that sort, or some special potions. The difference is, those are typically limited time use items. The cash shop, on the other hand, opens up an "unlimited collectors edition" in a sense, and that just seems wrong - especially if you want to be somewhat competitive in the game. The bottom line is, if you want to have a fair playing field in most F2P games, or have a tolerable playing experience, you've got to shell out the cash for it, and in most cases, it will be far more than 15 dollars a month. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt when it comes to Mabinogi's cash shop, since I haven't played the game much, but many of the others I've played have items in their cash shop that are so damning, (here's one example) that crafters in the game actually stopped making items because it was less time consuming to buy them from the shop. I don't care how you spin it - when a game gets to the point that the developers are so focused on squeezing money out of people that they start to ruin the integrity of the game mechanics by pingeonholing people into buying their crap, versus actually playing the game, it's just wrong. That's far different from using a bank alt for nothing but storage (I don't have a problem with that kind of thing), or using a few limited use items.
Once again you are placing YOUR value (all items in collectors editions are "fluff") on items that many people place their own value on. You mean to tell me that the guy that paid 400 dollars for a limited edition, just to get the fluff pet, holds no value for that fluff pet? There is no definition of value that says "the item in question must have some use in combat." to some players, a fluff item can be just as valuable as a sword. The cloak I got in Mines of Moria has definite stats and usefulness, but many liked it for the look alone. One player might see it as an "advantage" while others laugh at the idea.
You are not even seeing this, though.
You keep using words like "tolerable" and saying such things as "..those are typically limited use items.." as though YOU set the standard for what someone else should value.
You are proving my point, hardcore.
One player cannot say that a health potion is more valuable than a horse, or a sword, or time saved. It is up the individual. You see no irony in the fact that you have no issues with a BANK ALT (a blatant form of cash-shoppery if ever there was one) but yet have an issue with an item that, according to you, provides an unfair advantage?
So, according to you, I can buy a second account and it's ok, yet if I buy the "extra bank slots" cash shop item (that does exist) ...I am cheating?
Whose advantage are you talking about here? That cash shop player over yourself? Are you two in some kind of competition?
Also, you see NO IRONY in the "limited cash shop" of the limited edition, because it is such a smalllllll sin, as compared to the huge evil sin of the "unlimited limited edition" of the cash shop?
In other words, it's ok to use a cash shop just a bit, but not a lot?
These are the kind of points that always prove my point: most players have no issues with "cheating", as long as they think they have been cheated.
Beau
You didn't quote me, but I always have found the limited edition fad disgusting and a start to RMT in games. I haven't and will never purchase a limited edition box for some digital item. I have tolerated some games in the past doing this because it was a one time shot. Believe me, when it has started happening on a frequent basis (WoW for instance) that has accumulated for one of the reasons I left the game.
Below is my original post, that describes my views better:
In Mabinogi, can you get every single item out of the cash shop for 15/month and continue to do so? Some of those items are consumables as well. Say I use aproximately 25 potions a month in my 15/month game, can you still get all items plus multiple consumables for 15/month? Curious, please someone do the math.
It will come down to how you view it. I view buying an item with a credit card without any gameplay to obtain the item wrong. I play games for the gameplay experience. My view on a video game does not have things outside of the gameworld affect a character. To answer a previous question in this thread: I have never purchased a collectors edition box for some digital item, I have always viewd collector edition ploys a scam and retarded. I also never have purchased a second account in a video game to hold items or box, that takes away from the game experience for me and I see it as a waste of money. That is your view on games. I see them differently. Once you purchase a second character to box then you are no longer just concerned with having fun and adventuring the way the game was intended, you are looking for ways to cheat the system.
If I felt the need to ever purchase another account and this goes for the same as RMT in a game, I will quit. Apparently if there is a need for either of those for me, I am playing a badly designed unfun game.
Before people start to pick on each other too much, there's a general question to be solved first and foremost...
What do you want to do in a game? Do you want to have fun only (i.e. just playing for some hours) or do you want to be competitive and achieve something?
P2P is a leveled playground for MMOs with deeply implemented PvP, where there needs to be balance.
Take a game like EvE Online for example. If this game would be F2P with a cash-shop, then all those, who are lucky to have some bucks to spare for the cash-shop will have a huge advantage, which will unbalance the whole story about territorial warfare etc.
F2P MMOs are a nice thing, if you don't want to PvP at all, but only play some 2 hours in the evening. It doesn't matter if you have the fanciest stuff available, when you're beating up NPCs for the fun and the nice graphics.
So from my perception, both of the systems are equally good, depending on what you want to do in the game. If you want to PvP then search for a P2P MMO, and if it's all about the cheap relief after a hard day at work, then F2P is just the right thing for you.
For the record, here is the definition of the word "competition":
1: the act or process of competing :rivalry : as a: the effort of two or more parties acting independently to secure the business of a third party by offering the most favorable terms b: active demand by two or more organisms or kinds of organisms for some environmental resource in short supply 2: a contest between rivals ; also: one's competitors <faced tough competition>
We'll break it down.
First part: 1: the act or process of competing :rivalry : as a: the effort of two or more parties acting independently to secure the business of a third party by offering the most favorable terms. Alright, this part could have something to do with crafting in the latter half, but the first part about having a "rivalry" still does not apply to a game that has no contests.
There are no contests in MMO's, or at least in 99.9 percent of them. There might be a racing live event, or something similar, but those are not the norm.
The second part: (this is the important one)
b: active demand by two or more organisms or kinds of organisms for some environmental resource in short supply.
The two "organisms" we are talking here are two players. There are no resources that are in short supply, unless the players come up with them themselves (for example, the first to reach a level, the last one to die.) All resources in MMO's are infinite, there is an endless supply. If you had two people sitting at a table, and both had an endless supply of Kool Aid, there would be no competition for Kool Aid.
The last part:
2: a contest between rivals ; also: one's competitors <faced tough competition>
Again, there are no official "contests" in 99.9 percent of MMO's. Even in a pvp based MMO, or a pvp heavy MMO, there are still choices. After all, the goal is not to NOT die, but might be seen as the goal to some. Death has no meaning, so "dying" is simply a pause.
Titles are, again, endless. TRhey can be gained by anyone.
The best gear is, again, in endless supply. No competition.
I can go on and on with examples of how MMO's, 99.9 percent of them, are not set up for any true competition. They allow for players to place VALUE in certain areas of the game, and in certain accomplishments, but no game forces that one area on the rest of the game. No forced play, no contest/rules to go by to prove a "winner."
You may feel as though we are competing in these games, but what do you "win?" Nothing that I cannot gain, as well. Gold medals for everyone.
Beau
Listen to the Spouse Aggro podcast at spouseaggro.com. Twitter: spouseaggro
For the record, here is the definition of the word "competition": 1: the act or process of competing :rivalry : as a: the effort of two or more parties acting independently to secure the business of a third party by offering the most favorable terms b: active demand by two or more organisms or kinds of organisms for some environmental resource in short supply 2: a contest between rivals ; also: one's competitors <faced tough competition> We'll break it down. First part: 1: the act or process of competing :rivalry : as a: the effort of two or more parties acting independently to secure the business of a third party by offering the most favorable terms. Alright, this part could have something to do with crafting in the latter half, but the first part about having a "rivalry" still does not apply to a game that has no contests. There are no contests in MMO's, or at least in 99.9 percent of them. There might be a racing live event, or something similar, but those are not the norm. The second part: (this is the important one) b: active demand by two or more organisms or kinds of organisms for some environmental resource in short supply. The two "organisms" we are talking here are two players. There are no resources that are in short supply, unless the players come up with them themselves (for example, the first to reach a level, the last one to die.) All resources in MMO's are infinite, there is an endless supply. If you had two people sitting at a table, and both had an endless supply of Kool Aid, there would be no competition for Kool Aid. The last part: 2: a contest between rivals ; also: one's competitors <faced tough competition> Again, there are no official "contests" in 99.9 percent of MMO's. Even in a pvp based MMO, or a pvp heavy MMO, there are still choices. After all, the goal is not to NOT die, but might be seen as the goal to some. Death has no meaning, so "dying" is simply a pause. Titles are, again, endless. TRhey can be gained by anyone. The best gear is, again, in endless supply. No competition. I can go on and on with examples of how MMO's, 99.9 percent of them, are not set up for any true competition. They allow for players to place VALUE in certain areas of the game, and in certain accomplishments, but no game forces that one area on the rest of the game. No forced play, no contest/rules to go by to prove a "winner." You may feel as though we are competing in these games, but what do you "win?" Nothing that I cannot gain, as well. Gold medals for everyone.
Beau
You can quote and try to explain your interpretation of the true definition of competition all day long but it wont change the fact that many people, including myself, view the term much differently. Competition isn't always about obtaining a physical prize; it's about the feeling of accomplishment through work and dedication, and when other people are able to buy everything that you worked hard to achieve, it trivializes that rewarding feeling that many of us get from those said accomplishments.
For the sake of clarity, I'll admit that competition may not be the best term to use when talking generally about acomplishing goals in the game, but to say that competition barely exists for pvp players is just ludicrous. It doesn't matter that death isn't permanent, or that anyone can eventually obtain everything that someone else obtained. That person still has to work for it just like everyone else, and still has to compete to get those things, whether they be medals, loot, or even just recognition from other pvpers on the game. It's obvious that that sort of thing isn't significant for a player like yourself, but to many, it's a very real concept, and believing that it doesn't exist is just ignorant.
Like I said, you obviously don't care if things are on a fair playing field, while people like myself do. If significant items are offered in a cash shop, that aren't also offered in the game itself, then I will continue to think very poorly of the F2P philosophy.
And with that, I'm done with this thread. It's pretty clear that neither of us is going to convince each other of anything, so I think it's time to put this argument to rest.
It is a problem today with the "I want it now" crowd. Why work for anything when you can whip out a credit card and pay for it.
The concept of earning something is a foreign concept. Hard to try to explain to someone, when they can't grasp the idea behind what you are trying to discuss.
Comments
Once again you are placing YOUR value (all items in collectors editions are "fluff") on items that many people place their own value on. You mean to tell me that the guy that paid 400 dollars for a limited edition, just to get the fluff pet, holds no value for that fluff pet? There is no definition of value that says "the item in question must have some use in combat." to some players, a fluff item can be just as valuable as a sword. The cloak I got in Mines of Moria has definite stats and usefulness, but many liked it for the look alone. One player might see it as an "advantage" while others laugh at the idea.
You are not even seeing this, though.
You keep using words like "tolerable" and saying such things as "..those are typically limited use items.." as though YOU set the standard for what someone else should value.
You are proving my point, hardcore.
One player cannot say that a health potion is more valuable than a horse, or a sword, or time saved. It is up the individual. You see no irony in the fact that you have no issues with a BANK ALT (a blatant form of cash-shoppery if ever there was one) but yet have an issue with an item that, according to you, provides an unfair advantage?
So, according to you, I can buy a second account and it's ok, yet if I buy the "extra bank slots" cash shop item (that does exist) ...I am cheating?
Whose advantage are you talking about here? That cash shop player over yourself? Are you two in some kind of competition?
Also, you see NO IRONY in the "limited cash shop" of the limited edition, because it is such a smalllllll sin, as compared to the huge evil sin of the "unlimited limited edition" of the cash shop?
In other words, it's ok to use a cash shop just a bit, but not a lot?
These are the kind of points that always prove my point: most players have no issues with "cheating", as long as they think they have been cheated.
Beau
You seem to be misunderstanding my point here. My definition of "fluff" item is something that doesn't offer an advantage to the gameplay. I have no problem with "fluff" items, and I'd assume (yes I said "assume") that no one else would either. I don't care if you use the cash shop to buy extra bank slots (I say this is a fluff item because it doesn't give your character extra stats, speed, or any other kind of real advantage to your actual character aside from a little extra space), not at all, or to get a special mount, just as long as that mount doesn't give the player some huge speed advantage that can't be earned in the game through actually playing the game.
I understand that I'm using my own opinions on what I think would be considered fluff items and what wouldn't, but then again, it all comes down to the same thing that I believe is pretty much universal to all players that dislike the cash shop games, and that is - people shouldn't be able to gain some huge advantage in a game by merely buying items, while those of us who don't wish to use the cash shop don't have the option to earn the same items by playing the game. If I'm able to obtain all the same stuff that the cash shop offers, by merely playing the game for instance, or buy the xp potions using in-game currency that I earned in the game (for example), then I don't really care that the cash shop sells it. The point I'm tryng to make is that that's rarely the case in these types of games. Typically (and I say this from my own experience with cash shop games), the F2P games don't offer that kind of alternative to players, like myself, who would rather earn everything on our own (at least not at an acceptable level - what I mean is, they might offer the same items in-game BUT the time and effort involved to get them might be unrealistic), in-game. Instead, they offer these "cash shop exclusive" items that make such a huge difference, whether it be stats to the characters, increased xp gain, stat potions that can't be obtained in-game, health potions that are far superior to anything you get in-game (stuff like that makes pvp much more difficult for those who don't use the shop), etc, etc.
As for the "little sin" remark, honestly, I don't like anything that offers an unfair advantage to players, but I can accept the lesser of two evils. I'd rather deal with one-time, limited use items versus a cash shop that offers the items eternally - at least the limited items will go away eventually. But If it were up to me, collectors editions wouldn't offer anything in-game related that gave an advantage to players (notice earlier, I said "special mounts as long as the speed isn't substantially faster"). But I digress - my definition of what's fluff and what's not is pretty simple and self-explanatory. Sure, I know not everyone is going to agree with me, but I think a majority of gamers like myself have a universal understanding of what kind of items are fair and what isn't. And no, I'm not a "hardcore" gamer either, I just think that items in a game should at least have the possibility of being earned by playing the game (I mean, it's one of the reasons many of us play the game afterall - to advance our characters), not by whipping out our pocket books for instant gratification that can only be obtained by the cash shop alone.
I think the main difference between players like you and players like me is that you don't really care if things are kept fair, while gamers like myself do. Maybe it's because I started with P2P games that always offered a fair playing field to all players for the same price, I don't know.
Overall, as much as I prefer games with static subscription fees that offer the same experience to everyone, I can accept a compromise with F2P games if they allow me to earn everything on my own (without some ridiculously, in-human grind) in the game, without ever having to use the cash shop, but since I can't think of a single game like that, I'll have to stick with my belief that F2P games are nothing more than a cheap marketing ploy with a mediocre game attached.
I think we'll just have to agree to disagree here.
The problem is, Alacres, that there is no competition to keep "fair."
If we lived in a magical world with no death and endless amounts of gold, there would be no competition.
Beau
Listen to the Spouse Aggro podcast at spouseaggro.com. Twitter: spouseaggro
Clearly, your definition of competition is much different than my own.
Once again you are placing YOUR value (all items in collectors editions are "fluff") on items that many people place their own value on. You mean to tell me that the guy that paid 400 dollars for a limited edition, just to get the fluff pet, holds no value for that fluff pet? There is no definition of value that says "the item in question must have some use in combat." to some players, a fluff item can be just as valuable as a sword. The cloak I got in Mines of Moria has definite stats and usefulness, but many liked it for the look alone. One player might see it as an "advantage" while others laugh at the idea.
You are not even seeing this, though.
You keep using words like "tolerable" and saying such things as "..those are typically limited use items.." as though YOU set the standard for what someone else should value.
You are proving my point, hardcore.
One player cannot say that a health potion is more valuable than a horse, or a sword, or time saved. It is up the individual. You see no irony in the fact that you have no issues with a BANK ALT (a blatant form of cash-shoppery if ever there was one) but yet have an issue with an item that, according to you, provides an unfair advantage?
So, according to you, I can buy a second account and it's ok, yet if I buy the "extra bank slots" cash shop item (that does exist) ...I am cheating?
Whose advantage are you talking about here? That cash shop player over yourself? Are you two in some kind of competition?
Also, you see NO IRONY in the "limited cash shop" of the limited edition, because it is such a smalllllll sin, as compared to the huge evil sin of the "unlimited limited edition" of the cash shop?
In other words, it's ok to use a cash shop just a bit, but not a lot?
These are the kind of points that always prove my point: most players have no issues with "cheating", as long as they think they have been cheated.
Beau
You didn't quote me, but I always have found the limited edition fad disgusting and a start to RMT in games. I haven't and will never purchase a limited edition box for some digital item. I have tolerated some games in the past doing this because it was a one time shot. Believe me, when it has started happening on a frequent basis (WoW for instance) that has accumulated for one of the reasons I left the game.
Below is my original post, that describes my views better:
In Mabinogi, can you get every single item out of the cash shop for 15/month and continue to do so? Some of those items are consumables as well. Say I use aproximately 25 potions a month in my 15/month game, can you still get all items plus multiple consumables for 15/month? Curious, please someone do the math.
It will come down to how you view it. I view buying an item with a credit card without any gameplay to obtain the item wrong. I play games for the gameplay experience. My view on a video game does not have things outside of the gameworld affect a character. To answer a previous question in this thread: I have never purchased a collectors edition box for some digital item, I have always viewd collector edition ploys a scam and retarded. I also never have purchased a second account in a video game to hold items or box, that takes away from the game experience for me and I see it as a waste of money. That is your view on games. I see them differently. Once you purchase a second character to box then you are no longer just concerned with having fun and adventuring the way the game was intended, you are looking for ways to cheat the system.
If I felt the need to ever purchase another account and this goes for the same as RMT in a game, I will quit. Apparently if there is a need for either of those for me, I am playing a badly designed unfun game.
Before people start to pick on each other too much, there's a general question to be solved first and foremost...
What do you want to do in a game? Do you want to have fun only (i.e. just playing for some hours) or do you want to be competitive and achieve something?
P2P is a leveled playground for MMOs with deeply implemented PvP, where there needs to be balance.
Take a game like EvE Online for example. If this game would be F2P with a cash-shop, then all those, who are lucky to have some bucks to spare for the cash-shop will have a huge advantage, which will unbalance the whole story about territorial warfare etc.
F2P MMOs are a nice thing, if you don't want to PvP at all, but only play some 2 hours in the evening. It doesn't matter if you have the fanciest stuff available, when you're beating up NPCs for the fun and the nice graphics.
So from my perception, both of the systems are equally good, depending on what you want to do in the game. If you want to PvP then search for a P2P MMO, and if it's all about the cheap relief after a hard day at work, then F2P is just the right thing for you.
For the record, here is the definition of the word "competition":
1: the act or process of competing : rivalry : as a: the effort of two or more parties acting independently to secure the business of a third party by offering the most favorable terms b: active demand by two or more organisms or kinds of organisms for some environmental resource in short supply 2: a contest between rivals ; also : one's competitors <faced tough competition>
We'll break it down.
First part: 1: the act or process of competing : rivalry : as a: the effort of two or more parties acting independently to secure the business of a third party by offering the most favorable terms. Alright, this part could have something to do with crafting in the latter half, but the first part about having a "rivalry" still does not apply to a game that has no contests.
There are no contests in MMO's, or at least in 99.9 percent of them. There might be a racing live event, or something similar, but those are not the norm.
The second part: (this is the important one)
b: active demand by two or more organisms or kinds of organisms for some environmental resource in short supply.
The two "organisms" we are talking here are two players. There are no resources that are in short supply, unless the players come up with them themselves (for example, the first to reach a level, the last one to die.) All resources in MMO's are infinite, there is an endless supply. If you had two people sitting at a table, and both had an endless supply of Kool Aid, there would be no competition for Kool Aid.
The last part:
2: a contest between rivals ; also : one's competitors <faced tough competition>
Again, there are no official "contests" in 99.9 percent of MMO's. Even in a pvp based MMO, or a pvp heavy MMO, there are still choices. After all, the goal is not to NOT die, but might be seen as the goal to some. Death has no meaning, so "dying" is simply a pause.
Titles are, again, endless. TRhey can be gained by anyone.
The best gear is, again, in endless supply. No competition.
I can go on and on with examples of how MMO's, 99.9 percent of them, are not set up for any true competition. They allow for players to place VALUE in certain areas of the game, and in certain accomplishments, but no game forces that one area on the rest of the game. No forced play, no contest/rules to go by to prove a "winner."
You may feel as though we are competing in these games, but what do you "win?" Nothing that I cannot gain, as well. Gold medals for everyone.
Beau
Listen to the Spouse Aggro podcast at spouseaggro.com. Twitter: spouseaggro
You can quote and try to explain your interpretation of the true definition of competition all day long but it wont change the fact that many people, including myself, view the term much differently. Competition isn't always about obtaining a physical prize; it's about the feeling of accomplishment through work and dedication, and when other people are able to buy everything that you worked hard to achieve, it trivializes that rewarding feeling that many of us get from those said accomplishments.
For the sake of clarity, I'll admit that competition may not be the best term to use when talking generally about acomplishing goals in the game, but to say that competition barely exists for pvp players is just ludicrous. It doesn't matter that death isn't permanent, or that anyone can eventually obtain everything that someone else obtained. That person still has to work for it just like everyone else, and still has to compete to get those things, whether they be medals, loot, or even just recognition from other pvpers on the game. It's obvious that that sort of thing isn't significant for a player like yourself, but to many, it's a very real concept, and believing that it doesn't exist is just ignorant.
Like I said, you obviously don't care if things are on a fair playing field, while people like myself do. If significant items are offered in a cash shop, that aren't also offered in the game itself, then I will continue to think very poorly of the F2P philosophy.
And with that, I'm done with this thread. It's pretty clear that neither of us is going to convince each other of anything, so I think it's time to put this argument to rest.
It is a problem today with the "I want it now" crowd. Why work for anything when you can whip out a credit card and pay for it.
The concept of earning something is a foreign concept. Hard to try to explain to someone, when they can't grasp the idea behind what you are trying to discuss.