Still no one have explained why the DDO model is so horrible...
I don't argue that the DDO model is "horrible"... I think it's the most "reasonable" in terms of allowing you the option to pay a sub *or* Item mall. It wasn't worth it to me as a sub game before... likely wouldn't be now. So why are people hating on F2P when there is infact exmple of F2P games that are not "pay to win" or whatever you dont like about it? Wether you personally like DDO or not isnt relevant to the discussion, its the buisness model we are talking about here. What would happen if a hyped game like SWTOR or FF14 would use the same model at release? and how it can be good for the players that someone who play 10 hours/ month have to pay the same as someone who play 100 hours/month.
Because how much or how little time an individual has (as in me, you or that guy over there) is not the developers' concern. They develop the game, they provide the same product and service, equally, to everyone, for the same amount. It's not their place to worry about whether Joe has 10 hours to play while Jim has 40 and Bob has 80. That's Joe's, James' and Bob's problem.
The point is, the service is there for you to play as much or as little as you want for the course of that month (maintenance notwithstanding). At some point the individuals have to make the decision for themselves if it's possible for them to enjoy a given game with their allotted time. If they can, then great. If they can't, then perhaps it's time to move on to something else.
The flaw in your question about it "being good for the players with 10 hours versus 100 hours per month" is that it isn't the developers' problem to worry about that.
If people would stop looking for someone to blame for their own poor decisions or poor judgment, and start thinking their decisions through more thoroughly - or at least taking responsibility for them - I think questions like yours would fall away.
But... I guess it's as the saying goes.. "Blame is better to give than receive" I dont understand your argument here... MMO companys give you 2 options, either you pay 15/month or you dont play at all. I think it would be better for the players to have more options and be in control over how much you spend. I know my phone company give me 10 differnt options on how I want to set up my account to suit my phone habits. Im glad that everyone is not forced to pay the same for using a phone... How is giving power to the consumers a bad thing?
If WoW = The Beatles and WAR = Led Zeppelin Then LotrO = Pink Floyd
I really don't understand why people refer to the GW or DDO model as F2P, they may call it that themselves but they are patently not using a cash shop finance model.
They are consistently held up by players who are playing F2P games as an example of good F2P, when they do not actually use that revenue model!
You really believe that? Wow. So what do you think the games and the companies are running on, good intentions?
I suppose there's no one that does it for the love of pc gaming? I would figure they could of entered a better industry that they would of enjoyed more then. Not everyone's views of the world have to be as cynical as yours either
I want to believe there are good and bad sides to everything, I cannot believe something associated with the word "free" can carry entirely bad things for at the very least they provide some form of free content, which is much cheaper than entry for any P2P.
How much does it cost to try out a new P2P MMO? I haven't seen one released with a trial so generally if you cannot wait, you're either stuck hoping to get into an open beta or forking over that initial $50 to get everything started.
In regards to DDO, it might of started as sub and with its move into F2P having more success than in its previous state, you would figure there is some potential in there for a form of the F2P model to exist and be accepted as a more "legitimate" form of revenue than in its current state.
Like a previous poster said, whether or not a user spends their money is at the user's discretion entirely. What separates the good from the bad F2P's are having reasonable ways of playing a good portion of the game for free while still providing a cash shop to convenience people that wish to do so.
Some free content even if its not all of it, is still better than no free content at all, which is the advantage of F2P (over P2P) and its where the Free part comes from. They need cash shops to keep these games going or else they'll all just fall apart due to lack of revenue. Love it or hate it, the business side of MMO's exist and carry some importance in the continuance of any MMORPG.
You actually bellieve that they do it for the love of pc gaming? Wow! (First paragraph)
But then in your last paragraph you talk about revenue and the business side. This is inconsequential. Do you believe that they have cash shops in order to make money or not?
You haven't seen a P2P released with a trial but there are existing games with free trials (Fallen Earth got it already for example) and if you are really interested pre launch I haven't found it difficult to get into beta. There are exceptions to this of course but why play those games then.
The free part in F2P games is there for a reason, it is what makes people start play those games in the first place. Later they realize that the game as a whole is not free and typically this is getting more and more evident the more you progress in game.
It's very similar to 4 people gathering to play a game of Monopoly and on one turn someone lands on Boardwalk and instead of paying $400 monopoly dollars for it, they pay $10 dollars for it. This creates a huge imbalance in the game and makes a game that was fun for everyone on an equal playing field into a game that is fun for the player who pays the most.
I really don't understand why people refer to the GW or DDO model as F2P, they may call it that themselves but they are patently not using a cash shop finance model. They are consistently held up by players who are playing F2P games as an example of good F2P...
clutching at straws
When every single F2P out there are amazing bullcraps grindy as fuck, unbearably boring, bug-ridden, pathetic quality, driven by pure greed malls, they have to repeat that two names over and over and over again, so maybe, just maybe, they will stick.
its not working tho, F2P has a well deserved TERRIBLE fame, and thats not changing.
Most supposed F2P MMO's seem to actually cost more money to play than P2P ones lol. Yeah they are free to download and play, but to even get close to the full experience the game has to offer adds up to ALOT more money than the P2p ones. Plus the overall quality of most f2p games just plain suck IMO.
Not for me. I have played ALLOD, DDO & a few other F2P games and never paid a cent. Majority of the players do not pay.
A MMORPG developer will spend hundreds of thousands of dollars - if not millions - to develop a MMO. Even after launch, they have upkeep in the form of salaries, bandwidth, electric... rent... etc. etc.. They're counting on a model without the steady income of a subscription or box sales, and instead rely on people using an Item Mall to keep the game going...
And you believe they're doing this with the *minority* of their players paying, while the majority spend not a dime?
You really believe that?
Wow.
So what do you think the games and the companies are running on, good intentions?
It is well documented that only a minority of players pay in F2P games. And that is ENOUGH to fund the games. Here is an example:
I really don't understand why people refer to the GW or DDO model as F2P, they may call it that themselves but they are patently not using a cash shop finance model. They are consistently held up by players who are playing F2P games as an example of good F2P...
clutching at straws
When every single F2P out there are amazing bullcraps grindy as fuck, unbearably boring, bug-ridden, pathetic quality, driven by pure greed malls, they have to repeat that two names over and over and over again, so maybe, just maybe, they will stick.
its not working tho, F2P has a well deserved TERRIBLE fame, and thats not changing.
Not working? DDO grew its revenue 500%!!!! after turning F2P. I would say it works out splendidly for them.
Because achievement is purchased instead of earned
Agree. F2P breaks the basic integrity of how achievements are acquired.
So? If i am having fun playing the game, who cares whether others pay for xp or not?
It is like when i play WOW, i don't worry if the next guy buy his gold to pay for his mount.
Myopic much? It isn't about you, or me, or any couple of us. It is more about teh issues that arise from developers making money not off general game enjoyment but their ability to lure people in to spending money in the cash shops. Believe you me, the day games are predominantly, or even largely, they will cease to be much fun at all without following the for purchase carrots if even then.
You are assuming developers need to entice EVERYONE to pay, which is obviously NOT true. Just look it up. Most successful F2P MMOs (DDO, RoM, Maple Story) has a minority supporting the games.
They developers need to make the games fun enough to hook people to play for free for a while. Otherwise, they can't convert free players to paying players.
DDO is fun in the first few levels (i never got to the upper levels and prob never will). Your argument is just based on some guess work about what may or may not happen in the future. My guess is as good as yours.
And there is nothing wrong with being myopic. It is not like I cannot switch to other entertainment if MMO ceases to be fun. There are plenty of SP games, movies, TV shows and novels to occupy time.
So far, F2P is bringing us an explosion of free fun and i don't see how that is a bad thing.
I think the anti-f2p attitude comes from a mix of 'protectionism' and the crazy defense 8-track users had when they were approached by cassettes, and cassette users had when approached by CDs, and CD users had when the IPod came at them.
The f2p model is the future of gaming, if your current p2p doesn't have a cash shop in it currently, it will have one soon. Or it probably has plans unbeknownst to you of not continuing on.
I myself listened to the hype vs f2p, and believed it, but as I became more and more dejected with the current mmo games released and in development, I finally decided to take a chance on one in 2008. That being PWI, and to date I haven't spent a dime on it (well no, I did spend $10 for a stunning outfit! I just had to!)
But I always kept giving chances to my p2p roots, and have yet to find a game p2p that hits the standards that PWI has. That's pretty sad considering the almighty vaunted NA game developer standards (I was a QA tester for many years, so yes mighty sarcasm there). Simple standards, graphic, playability and engine. Many p2p lose sight of simplicity in their quest to be ... well I honestly don't understand what they are trying to be anymore.
Latest f2p I am trying is Final Earth Zero, and it is yet another great example of how the p2p market just misses the mark in fun and what pvp/rvr should actually be. I may give Aika a try (but yeah the daughter thing...cultural difference maybe?) because I hear good things about the pvp system so far.
Main thing I am saying is f2p are truly free. Play them, see the engines, see the ideas behind what interests you. Take from them what you will and go back to your p2p overlords and tell them what you liked about it. Seriously, if you can have the opportunity to see something cool for free in order to make something you love greater, why not take the opportunity, instead of shutting the doors to it?
One more thing in favor of f2p that many leave out, but I love...
f2p games do not have RMT harrassment going on. I have yet to receive 1 email, chat, or spam of any kind while playing many f2p. Whereas if I log onto any of my accounts from the years of p2p games, I have to spend an hour or so clearing old emails from gold spammers, clearing ignore lists in order to re-ignore new spammers, etc.
f2p/cash shops is where the market is headed. 300million < 3 billion. Pretty simple math, and if you want to play the best games around, get used to f2p. Because why would a dev make a game and not want to release it for the world to enjoy and reap the benefits?
Though you can always keep playing that 8-track...that player still working for you?
Come to think on it further, I truly believe we should embrace the f2p model...
f2p devs at least concede the fact they need to appease the player and entice them to stay on longer than the first month in order to retain your business.
Too often the p2p market has been hyping up games for a $70 buy-in price, $15/month fee and the player leaves the game dejected feeling like a sucker, because the devs make no attempt at retention of their customer base.
I'm a long time mmo gamer, into my 2nd decade. I think the anti-f2p attitude comes from a mix of 'protectionism' and the crazy defense 8-track users had when they were approached by cassettes, and cassette users had when approached by CDs, and CD users had when the IPod came at them. The f2p model is the future of gaming, if your current p2p doesn't have a cash shop in it currently, it will have one soon. Or it probably has plans unbeknownst to you of not continuing on. I myself listened to the hype vs f2p, and believed it, but as I became more and more dejected with the current mmo games released and in development, I finally decided to take a chance on one in 2008. That being PWI, and to date I haven't spent a dime on it (well no, I did spend $10 for a stunning outfit! I just had to!) But I always kept giving chances to my p2p roots, and have yet to find a game p2p that hits the standards that PWI has. That's pretty sad considering the almighty vaunted NA game developer standards (I was a QA tester for many years, so yes mighty sarcasm there). Simple standards, graphic, playability and engine. Many p2p lose sight of simplicity in their quest to be ... well I honestly don't understand what they are trying to be anymore. Latest f2p I am trying is Final Earth Zero, and it is yet another great example of how the p2p market just misses the mark in fun and what pvp/rvr should actually be. I may give Aika a try (but yeah the daughter thing...cultural difference maybe?) because I hear good things about the pvp system so far. Main thing I am saying is f2p are truly free. Play them, see the engines, see the ideas behind what interests you. Take from them what you will and go back to your p2p overlords and tell them what you liked about it. Seriously, if you can have the opportunity to see something cool for free in order to make something you love greater, why not take the opportunity, instead of shutting the doors to it? One more thing in favor of f2p that many leave out, but I love... f2p games do not have RMT harrassment going on. I have yet to receive 1 email, chat, or spam of any kind while playing many f2p. Whereas if I log onto any of my accounts from the years of p2p games, I have to spend an hour or so clearing old emails from gold spammers, clearing ignore lists in order to re-ignore new spammers, etc. f2p/cash shops is where the market is headed. 300million < 3 billion. Pretty simple math, and if you want to play the best games around, get used to f2p. Because why would a dev make a game and not want to release it for the world to enjoy and reap the benefits? Though you can always keep playing that 8-track...that player still working for you?
Are you serious? I played PWI. After getting tired of the massive greed so evident by including more and more important cash shop items and lottery for end game gear scams used in that game I quit like most intelligent players. After playing some high quality P2P games I returned just to give away my gear and the game was so ugly and laggy and outdated I couldn't understand I used to actually play that game. I felt embarrassed and couldn't bear to stay online even for ten minutes. That's how great that game is. Have you played Aion? I just give you that example because you have flying elfes and tanks and the traditional MMO classes in that game too. If you would try I suppose you would agree that that game has higher quality than PWI? Still Aion is a terrible grind and there are way better games with no grind and no gold sellers. I now play Fallen Earth and I haven't seen a single gold seller in that game and not a single flying elf with top level gear because they have rich parents either. Just a fun game with a mature community and no scammers.
Your point with the cassettes is totally screwed because PWI is way behind, it's on the cassettes level whereas several other games are very nicely situated in the modern digital world of gaming, using the latest technology and also developing their game in a fair and intelligent way.
You are assuming developers need to entice EVERYONE to pay, which is obviously NOT true. Just look it up. Most successful F2P MMOs (DDO, RoM, Maple Story) has a minority supporting the games. They developers need to make the games fun enough to hook people to play for free for a while. Otherwise, they can't convert free players to paying players.
I an not assuming any such thing, in fact I made the point that only a very few pay in F2P games. This, I cited, is another reason to steer clear of them because you are not the developers audience and not who they are making the game for in the end. Why play a game where you are not the developer's target and not the player they make their living from?
Come to think on it further, I truly believe we should embrace the f2p model... f2p devs at least concede the fact they need to appease the player and entice them to stay on longer than the first month in order to retain your business.
Too often the p2p market has been hyping up games for a $70 buy-in price, $15/month fee and the player leaves the game dejected feeling like a sucker, because the devs make no attempt at retention of their customer base.
something to ponder.
Again, you miss the reality of the F2P model. Developers are incentive's not to make a fun game that attracts players but to make a game that steers people to the cash shop - big difference. If I am paying monthly for full game access then they have to make an appealing enough game to warrant gamers subscribing month to month. If they are only making money of the few who use the cash shop then they only have a monetary interest in what interests those few gamers and in what will entice them to spend more money in the cash shop.
You are assuming developers need to entice EVERYONE to pay, which is obviously NOT true. Just look it up. Most successful F2P MMOs (DDO, RoM, Maple Story) has a minority supporting the games. They developers need to make the games fun enough to hook people to play for free for a while. Otherwise, they can't convert free players to paying players.
I an not assuming any such thing, in fact I made the point that only a very few pay in F2P games. This, I cited, is another reason to steer clear of them because you are not the developers audience and not who they are making the game for in the end. Why play a game where you are not the developer's target and not the player they make their living from?
That is flawed logic. If they don't make us have fun for a while without paying, we won't get hooked and we won't be turning into paying customers. Developers cannot perfectly predict who will and will not pay and so they need to keep a large group just in case.
Furthermore, if I am having fun, do i really care if i am the intended audience? NO .. the only reason not to play a F2P game is that it is not fun. If it is fun (like DDO), I don't see why I shouldn't be getting some free entertainment.
Come to think on it further, I truly believe we should embrace the f2p model... f2p devs at least concede the fact they need to appease the player and entice them to stay on longer than the first month in order to retain your business.
Too often the p2p market has been hyping up games for a $70 buy-in price, $15/month fee and the player leaves the game dejected feeling like a sucker, because the devs make no attempt at retention of their customer base.
something to ponder.
Again, you miss the reality of the F2P model. Developers are incentive's not to make a fun game that attracts players but to make a game that steers people to the cash shop - big difference. If I am paying monthly for full game access then they have to make an appealing enough game to warrant gamers subscribing month to month. If they are only making money of the few who use the cash shop then they only have a monetary interest in what interests those few gamers and in what will entice them to spend more money in the cash shop.
No. You are missing the reality. The realty is that players don't have to care about developers incentives. They may be saints who want to give us free fun. They may be demons who want to suck our wallet dry. Who cares.
All we need to care is that whether the free part of the game is fun. If so, play it. If not, don't. If they make it fun enough because of a by-product of the item shop, heck, that is good enough for some free entertainment.
And from what i have seen, the answer is definitely YES for DDO, and may be even ALLOD (and i will never play enough of this game to pay those horrible item shop price).
You are assuming developers need to entice EVERYONE to pay, which is obviously NOT true. Just look it up. Most successful F2P MMOs (DDO, RoM, Maple Story) has a minority supporting the games. They developers need to make the games fun enough to hook people to play for free for a while. Otherwise, they can't convert free players to paying players.
I an not assuming any such thing, in fact I made the point that only a very few pay in F2P games. This, I cited, is another reason to steer clear of them because you are not the developers audience and not who they are making the game for in the end. Why play a game where you are not the developer's target and not the player they make their living from?
That is flawed logic. If they don't make us have fun for a while without paying, we won't get hooked and we won't be turning into paying customers. Developers cannot perfectly predict who will and will not pay and so they need to keep a large group just in case.
Furthermore, if I am having fun, do i really care if i am the intended audience? NO .. the only reason not to play a F2P game is that it is not fun. If it is fun (like DDO), I don't see why I shouldn't be getting some free entertainment.
Again, it isn't about you it is about why to avoid F2P games. People avoid F2P games because they do not like the model of developers who are incentivized and funded by a tiny fraction of the playing public, it is a model ripe for issues and said issues exist in all F2P games accordingly.
What you are saying is like arguing whether or not dog food tastes good and is something you want to eat. Granted, some dog food may taste good to humans, or at least some humans. However, that aside, I am not willing to even bother trying dog food because I am not a dog and not willing to risk that it tastes horrible since I am not who it was made for. Likewise, I am not interested in F2P MMOs because the design is such that I am not willing to use a cash shop and I am smart enough to realize that the game is designed to get players to use the cash shop.
Come to think on it further, I truly believe we should embrace the f2p model... f2p devs at least concede the fact they need to appease the player and entice them to stay on longer than the first month in order to retain your business.
Too often the p2p market has been hyping up games for a $70 buy-in price, $15/month fee and the player leaves the game dejected feeling like a sucker, because the devs make no attempt at retention of their customer base.
something to ponder.
Again, you miss the reality of the F2P model. Developers are incentive's not to make a fun game that attracts players but to make a game that steers people to the cash shop - big difference. If I am paying monthly for full game access then they have to make an appealing enough game to warrant gamers subscribing month to month. If they are only making money of the few who use the cash shop then they only have a monetary interest in what interests those few gamers and in what will entice them to spend more money in the cash shop.
No. You are missing the reality. The realty is that players don't have to care about developers incentives. They may be saints who want to give us free fun. They may be demons who want to suck our wallet dry. Who cares.
All we need to care is that whether the free part of the game is fun. If so, play it. If not, don't. If they make it fun enough because of a by-product of the item shop, heck, that is good enough for some free entertainment.
And from what i have seen, the answer is definitely YES for DDO, and may be even ALLOD (and i will never play enough of this game to pay those horrible item shop price).
Again, the exceptions aside if you like dog food then by all means go eat dog food. But you cannot argue that as the rule. F2P games are designed for only a small fraction of their player base and despite whether that is a turn off to all it is a solid reason to not like the model and to avoid it. Who wants to invest time in a game, especially in MMOs where time is the ultimate currency of advancement and achievement, when you are not in the group that pays the developers checks and therefore, ultimately, influences their decisions and development choices? Sure, some may not care (I would argue mainly for reasons of being cheap or otherwise unwilling to pay for a sub game - also a valid choice), but that is not relevant to all people and to people who value the integrity of the basic time as currency basis of the genre.
well PWI has flying combat, and it's light years ahead of what you can do in Aion.
Those that pvp on PWI can attest to having real aerial combat in PWI, as opposed to combat until your wing power runs out in Aion, (i.e. may a player lie in wait far above in the skies for unsuspecting prey, and many people fly around hunting those ambushers, etc.. this kind of pvp cannot be done in Aion). PWI's engine can handle the mass amount of people and graphics better than Aions. To say PWI is behind or archaic is a pretty flawed statement. The only engine I would say that is more detailed than PWI is AoC, but AoC is in a league of itself, Aion is definitely not in AoC's league.
But I digress, this isn't about PWI, it's about why folks are afraid and from what I am seeing here make up ridiculous arguements to support p2p and out f2p. I believe it's more 'protectionism' than anything else, and the basic unwillingness to change. In other words, some will evolve, the rest will remain gelatinous cubes.
most p2p models are already bringing cash shops into their games, like DDO, just not yet to DDO's level of f2p.
You spout the greatness of Aion in defense of p2p, yet they are releasing their very own cash shop as you do so, something they said from release they were going to do. Were you unaware of the hypocrisy?
All of SOE is now on a cash shop model, in the future their content is going to be paid by the hour as well. These are the once kings of p2p mmos, and they see the change coming, amazing you do not.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with the f2p model...it's free, if you don't like it, don't play it. Though if you want to stand in the corner stamping your feet on how wrong they are, no one can stop you from doing that either....don't forget to hold you breath too, I hear that is a real deal-maker.
Come to think on it further, I truly believe we should embrace the f2p model... f2p devs at least concede the fact they need to appease the player and entice them to stay on longer than the first month in order to retain your business.
Too often the p2p market has been hyping up games for a $70 buy-in price, $15/month fee and the player leaves the game dejected feeling like a sucker, because the devs make no attempt at retention of their customer base.
something to ponder.
Again, you miss the reality of the F2P model. Developers are incentive's not to make a fun game that attracts players but to make a game that steers people to the cash shop - big difference. If I am paying monthly for full game access then they have to make an appealing enough game to warrant gamers subscribing month to month. If they are only making money of the few who use the cash shop then they only have a monetary interest in what interests those few gamers and in what will entice them to spend more money in the cash shop.
No. You are missing the reality. The realty is that players don't have to care about developers incentives. They may be saints who want to give us free fun. They may be demons who want to suck our wallet dry. Who cares.
All we need to care is that whether the free part of the game is fun. If so, play it. If not, don't. If they make it fun enough because of a by-product of the item shop, heck, that is good enough for some free entertainment.
And from what i have seen, the answer is definitely YES for DDO, and may be even ALLOD (and i will never play enough of this game to pay those horrible item shop price).
Again, the exceptions aside if you like dog food then by all means go eat dog food. But you cannot argue that as the rule. F2P games are designed for only a small fraction of their player base and despite whether that is a turn off to all it is a solid reason to not like the model and to avoid it. Who wants to invest time in a game, especially in MMOs where time is the ultimate currency of advancement and achievement, when you are not in the group that pays the developers checks and therefore, ultimately, influences their decisions and development choices? Sure, some may not care (I would argue mainly for reasons of being cheap or otherwise unwilling to pay for a sub game - also a valid choice), but that is not relevant to all people and to people who value the integrity of the basic time as currency basis of the genre.
You just don't get it do you?
300 million < 3 billion
It's just that simple.
small niche audience? No friend, NA gameplayers are the small niche audience, that's where your logic fails and do not seem to grasp the reality of the internetz. f2p is what the real masses desire as their play model, if NA games want to compete they need to follow suit or find an even more innovative way to bring their product to them.
I'm not saying f2p is better than p2p, All I am saying is that there is clear evidence that p2p is the dinosaur and f2p is the meteor. The question is how does the NA dev react? Do we stay the course, follow suit, or evolve the market even further? Guaranteed the first dev/marketing team that figures it out on a world scale (and with a good game) is going to make billions.
Come to think on it further, I truly believe we should embrace the f2p model... f2p devs at least concede the fact they need to appease the player and entice them to stay on longer than the first month in order to retain your business.
Too often the p2p market has been hyping up games for a $70 buy-in price, $15/month fee and the player leaves the game dejected feeling like a sucker, because the devs make no attempt at retention of their customer base.
something to ponder.
Again, you miss the reality of the F2P model. Developers are incentive's not to make a fun game that attracts players but to make a game that steers people to the cash shop - big difference. If I am paying monthly for full game access then they have to make an appealing enough game to warrant gamers subscribing month to month. If they are only making money of the few who use the cash shop then they only have a monetary interest in what interests those few gamers and in what will entice them to spend more money in the cash shop.
If this is true, then why aren't there more P2P games that have people coming back month- to month to month?
I will never make the argument that F2P games are better than P2P, but as long as neither is holding my interest for very long I may as well go with the free game.
Oh and guess what? No matter what I pay, I am not the target audience for P2P games either. I can buy the game and pay my sub every month and the game will be changed, "balanced", and destroyed to appease the whining of people that troll forums and don't actually play, or plan to play the game.
Lot of hatred towards F2P mmorpgs sprung from the mmorpg community. But I believe this hatred is really linked to fear. Why do you fear F2P mmorpg games? Why,,,,,,
Here is my issue with F2P games: nothing is for free. The makers of the game can't survive without making money in some manner. They have to turn a profit from their product or they can't pay employees, keep servers running, eat food, etc. So, IMO, when they say F2P they are really misleading you to a certain extent. Most of the F2P companies design their games so you have to use a cash shop to actually enjoy the game or be competetive in the game. I prefer a company to just come out and say "you can play this game for $xx.xx a month" period. Nothing under the table, no hidden agenda, just good ole "pay for a service, get a service". To me, saying a game is F2P is akin to the late night infomercials where the seller offers a "free" widget worth $xx.xx with every purchase of a set of highly overpriced Encyclopedia Britannica. It's not an exact comparison but you get my drift. I don't feel like they are being completely honest.
Come to think on it further, I truly believe we should embrace the f2p model... f2p devs at least concede the fact they need to appease the player and entice them to stay on longer than the first month in order to retain your business.
Too often the p2p market has been hyping up games for a $70 buy-in price, $15/month fee and the player leaves the game dejected feeling like a sucker, because the devs make no attempt at retention of their customer base.
something to ponder.
Again, you miss the reality of the F2P model. Developers are incentive's not to make a fun game that attracts players but to make a game that steers people to the cash shop - big difference. If I am paying monthly for full game access then they have to make an appealing enough game to warrant gamers subscribing month to month. If they are only making money of the few who use the cash shop then they only have a monetary interest in what interests those few gamers and in what will entice them to spend more money in the cash shop.
If this is true, then why aren't there more P2P games that have people coming back month- to month to month?
This is a very conditional question that really can't be asked in such general terms.
If we're talking about more recent MMOs that don't have players coming back month to month, etc.. then it's likely because a number of the more recent P2P MMOs are coming up short in delivering an experience a large number of people find worthwhile. Very few P2P launches in recent memory have managed to hold on to a strong population, despite an otherwise strong launch.
However...
Wanna talk about WoW? That game has millions playing it, many since the day it launched. FFXI? Up to relatively recently had ~500k consistently year after year, many of which played since launch (JP or US/EU). EQ1 still has its core crowd. Lineage 2 still has a very large population (especially overseas), many of whom have been playing for years.... And so on.
The difference between those P2P that keep the players playing for years, nevermind months, and those that don't? If you look at them, they fall into two categories... pre-WoW and post-WoW. Pre-WoW, developers sought to make their respective games unique, large and long-term hobbies. To do well, they had to stand out and offer something unique that the others didn't. Post-WoW, many devs are now trying to ride Blizzard's coat-tails and cash in on the whole "casual" thing... many falling far short of expectations in the process. To do well, they just have to "copy the WoW template well enough".
Why are more people playing F2P? Well.. the "free" part might have something to do with it. However, they're also largely considered - by players and industry folk alike - to be largely low quality. I notice many people (though not all, of course) who play a F2P are more the "hopper" type. They stick around and play a F2P 'til it gets to be too much of a grind and they get bored... then they move on to the next one. So, in that context, your question about P2P having people coming back month after month is a bit ironic.
Why is F2P gaining popularity? Well.. look at how much money people spend on a cash shop versus a monthly sub. From a business stand-point, I'm sure it's very attractive. As a gamer, though, I prefer the level playing field of a sub-based game where everyone pays the same fee and has access to the same content.
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
Lot of hatred towards F2P mmorpgs sprung from the mmorpg community. But I believe this hatred is really linked to fear. Why do you fear F2P mmorpg games? Why,,,,,,
Here is my issue with F2P games: nothing is for free. The makers of the game can't survive without making money in some manner. They have to turn a profit from their product or they can't pay employees, keep servers running, eat food, etc. So, IMO, when they say F2P they are really misleading you to a certain extent. Most of the F2P companies design their games so you have to use a cash shop to actually enjoy the game or be competetive in the game. I prefer a company to just come out and say "you can play this game for $xx.xx a month" period. Nothing under the table, no hidden agenda, just good ole "pay for a service, get a service". To me, saying a game is F2P is akin to the late night infomercials where the seller offers a "free" widget worth $xx.xx with every purchase of a set of highly overpriced Encyclopedia Britannica. It's not an exact comparison but you get my drift. I don't feel like they are being completely honest.
The issue with your point of view on it is that YOU want to be competitive, and thats really your (and others who feel the same) problem. You can play the game completely free, and enjoy it for what it is, but choosing to instead insist on being the "best" and trying to compete with others is a personal choice which causes you to spend the money, but it is not forced by the company in any way. I understand your view, cause i like to be competetive too and love pvp, and sure you will usually get owned in a lot of F2Ps (poorly designed ones at least) if you dont spend a lot of money, but i dont go into these games assuming i can be the best without spending the money. Thats like deciding to be a pro boxer, and expecting to just be able to get up off your ass after months of gaming and no exercise, step in the ring and KO everyone without putting in a lot of training. Youve got to invest SOMETHING to be competetive, wether its time or money. P2P requires you invest lots and lots of time, F2P gives you the option of time or money. Some people have time to spare, some people have money to spare instead of time. Does that make it wrong either way? Theyre just offering 2 alternetives to the same goal, rather than forcing you to have no life outside of the game in order to stay on top.
Come to think on it further, I truly believe we should embrace the f2p model... f2p devs at least concede the fact they need to appease the player and entice them to stay on longer than the first month in order to retain your business.
Too often the p2p market has been hyping up games for a $70 buy-in price, $15/month fee and the player leaves the game dejected feeling like a sucker, because the devs make no attempt at retention of their customer base.
something to ponder.
Again, you miss the reality of the F2P model. Developers are incentive's not to make a fun game that attracts players but to make a game that steers people to the cash shop - big difference. If I am paying monthly for full game access then they have to make an appealing enough game to warrant gamers subscribing month to month. If they are only making money of the few who use the cash shop then they only have a monetary interest in what interests those few gamers and in what will entice them to spend more money in the cash shop.
No. You are missing the reality. The realty is that players don't have to care about developers incentives. They may be saints who want to give us free fun. They may be demons who want to suck our wallet dry. Who cares.
All we need to care is that whether the free part of the game is fun. If so, play it. If not, don't. If they make it fun enough because of a by-product of the item shop, heck, that is good enough for some free entertainment.
And from what i have seen, the answer is definitely YES for DDO, and may be even ALLOD (and i will never play enough of this game to pay those horrible item shop price).
Again, the exceptions aside if you like dog food then by all means go eat dog food. But you cannot argue that as the rule. F2P games are designed for only a small fraction of their player base and despite whether that is a turn off to all it is a solid reason to not like the model and to avoid it. Who wants to invest time in a game, especially in MMOs where time is the ultimate currency of advancement and achievement, when you are not in the group that pays the developers checks and therefore, ultimately, influences their decisions and development choices? Sure, some may not care (I would argue mainly for reasons of being cheap or otherwise unwilling to pay for a sub game - also a valid choice), but that is not relevant to all people and to people who value the integrity of the basic time as currency basis of the genre.
You just don't get it do you?
300 million < 3 billion
It's just that simple.
small niche audience? No friend, NA gameplayers are the small niche audience, that's where your logic fails and do not seem to grasp the reality of the internetz. f2p is what the real masses desire as their play model, if NA games want to compete they need to follow suit or find an even more innovative way to bring their product to them.
I'm not saying f2p is better than p2p, All I am saying is that there is clear evidence that p2p is the dinosaur and f2p is the meteor. The question is how does the NA dev react? Do we stay the course, follow suit, or evolve the market even further? Guaranteed the first dev/marketing team that figures it out on a world scale (and with a good game) is going to make billions.
Well...in my opinion, there's something YOU also don't get. And that is this:
While worldwide, NA may be the smaller market for games, it's also the market (at least right now) with the most expendable income. AND...the market that least likes the "free" to play, RMT, MACRO transactions (they've ceased being micro for the most part) form of payment. NA seems to prefer the pay to play subscription model, and my guess as to why that is, in part...it's simply more convenient. Pay for the game, sign up with your credit card and forget about it. I don't think overall North Americans want to have to THINK about it, we'd rather just have you deduct it from our vast incomes (lol...a bit tongue in cheek, a bit truth) and we, for the most part, don't even notice it that way. Yes...it's a bit of a psychological thing with us, I'm thinking.
I think we're kind of lazy. At least myself...I don't personally want to have to think about another bill all the time. If you just take it out of my bank account....I don't notice it was ever there to begin with really. I get used to living without that 15 bucks a month. It's not even noticeable. On the other hand....if you make me LOOK at my expenditures repeatedly....not only do I not appreciate that...I'm less likely to give you my money. And making me THINK about whether a virtual BAG is actually WORTH 20 bucks....a good lot of the time isn't going to fare well for the one trying to sell me that bag.
Nonetheless....free to play has it's "fans" here with social gaming and the RMT that goes hand in hand with FB games and whatnot. However....even though you may say "blah blah 2 - 3 million gamers is a small market" (first of all....that's only the MMO players in NA that are playing WoW....you're leaving out the 500k - 1 million that play EACH of a myriad of other games). That may be a "niche market" on a worldwide scale, but I ASSURE YOU.....it's a market that game developers COVET.
SO...you go on with your "f2p" is uber leet amazing the next best thing to digitally sliced bread....whatever. Because as long as NA gamers prefer the pay to play/forget about it model of pay....we're GOING to keep getting it because developers WANT our money. That's a pretty simply concept, I'd think.
Come to think on it further, I truly believe we should embrace the f2p model... f2p devs at least concede the fact they need to appease the player and entice them to stay on longer than the first month in order to retain your business.
Too often the p2p market has been hyping up games for a $70 buy-in price, $15/month fee and the player leaves the game dejected feeling like a sucker, because the devs make no attempt at retention of their customer base.
something to ponder.
Again, you miss the reality of the F2P model. Developers are incentive's not to make a fun game that attracts players but to make a game that steers people to the cash shop - big difference. If I am paying monthly for full game access then they have to make an appealing enough game to warrant gamers subscribing month to month. If they are only making money of the few who use the cash shop then they only have a monetary interest in what interests those few gamers and in what will entice them to spend more money in the cash shop.
If this is true, then why aren't there more P2P games that have people coming back month- to month to month?
This is a very conditional question that really can't be asked in such general terms.
If we're talking about more recent MMOs that don't have players coming back month to month, etc.. then it's likely because a number of the more recent P2P MMOs are coming up short in delivering an experience a large number of people find worthwhile. Very few P2P launches in recent memory have managed to hold on to a strong population, despite an otherwise strong launch.
This paragraph just helps prove my point. The point I was making was that just because you pay for a game doesn't make you the target audience and it doesn't mean the game will appeal to you anymore just because you're paying for it.
The rest of your post was great, but had little to do with what I said
Comments
If WoW = The Beatles
and WAR = Led Zeppelin
Then LotrO = Pink Floyd
I really don't understand why people refer to the GW or DDO model as F2P, they may call it that themselves but they are patently not using a cash shop finance model.
They are consistently held up by players who are playing F2P games as an example of good F2P, when they do not actually use that revenue model!
I suppose there's no one that does it for the love of pc gaming? I would figure they could of entered a better industry that they would of enjoyed more then. Not everyone's views of the world have to be as cynical as yours either
I want to believe there are good and bad sides to everything, I cannot believe something associated with the word "free" can carry entirely bad things for at the very least they provide some form of free content, which is much cheaper than entry for any P2P.
How much does it cost to try out a new P2P MMO? I haven't seen one released with a trial so generally if you cannot wait, you're either stuck hoping to get into an open beta or forking over that initial $50 to get everything started.
In regards to DDO, it might of started as sub and with its move into F2P having more success than in its previous state, you would figure there is some potential in there for a form of the F2P model to exist and be accepted as a more "legitimate" form of revenue than in its current state.
Like a previous poster said, whether or not a user spends their money is at the user's discretion entirely. What separates the good from the bad F2P's are having reasonable ways of playing a good portion of the game for free while still providing a cash shop to convenience people that wish to do so.
Some free content even if its not all of it, is still better than no free content at all, which is the advantage of F2P (over P2P) and its where the Free part comes from. They need cash shops to keep these games going or else they'll all just fall apart due to lack of revenue. Love it or hate it, the business side of MMO's exist and carry some importance in the continuance of any MMORPG.
You actually bellieve that they do it for the love of pc gaming? Wow! (First paragraph)
But then in your last paragraph you talk about revenue and the business side. This is inconsequential. Do you believe that they have cash shops in order to make money or not?
You haven't seen a P2P released with a trial but there are existing games with free trials (Fallen Earth got it already for example) and if you are really interested pre launch I haven't found it difficult to get into beta. There are exceptions to this of course but why play those games then.
The free part in F2P games is there for a reason, it is what makes people start play those games in the first place. Later they realize that the game as a whole is not free and typically this is getting more and more evident the more you progress in game.
People who like F2P can play them but I won't.
It's very similar to 4 people gathering to play a game of Monopoly and on one turn someone lands on Boardwalk and instead of paying $400 monopoly dollars for it, they pay $10 dollars for it. This creates a huge imbalance in the game and makes a game that was fun for everyone on an equal playing field into a game that is fun for the player who pays the most.
clutching at straws
When every single F2P out there are amazing bullcraps grindy as fuck, unbearably boring, bug-ridden, pathetic quality, driven by pure greed malls, they have to repeat that two names over and over and over again, so maybe, just maybe, they will stick.
its not working tho, F2P has a well deserved TERRIBLE fame, and thats not changing.
Not for me. I have played ALLOD, DDO & a few other F2P games and never paid a cent. Majority of the players do not pay.
A MMORPG developer will spend hundreds of thousands of dollars - if not millions - to develop a MMO. Even after launch, they have upkeep in the form of salaries, bandwidth, electric... rent... etc. etc.. They're counting on a model without the steady income of a subscription or box sales, and instead rely on people using an Item Mall to keep the game going...
And you believe they're doing this with the *minority* of their players paying, while the majority spend not a dime?
You really believe that?
Wow.
So what do you think the games and the companies are running on, good intentions?
It is well documented that only a minority of players pay in F2P games. And that is ENOUGH to fund the games. Here is an example:
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/4046/what_are_the_rewards_of_.php
In this game, only ~10% players ever paid anything.
clutching at straws
When every single F2P out there are amazing bullcraps grindy as fuck, unbearably boring, bug-ridden, pathetic quality, driven by pure greed malls, they have to repeat that two names over and over and over again, so maybe, just maybe, they will stick.
its not working tho, F2P has a well deserved TERRIBLE fame, and thats not changing.
Not working? DDO grew its revenue 500%!!!! after turning F2P. I would say it works out splendidly for them.
Agree. F2P breaks the basic integrity of how achievements are acquired.
So? If i am having fun playing the game, who cares whether others pay for xp or not?
It is like when i play WOW, i don't worry if the next guy buy his gold to pay for his mount.
Myopic much? It isn't about you, or me, or any couple of us. It is more about teh issues that arise from developers making money not off general game enjoyment but their ability to lure people in to spending money in the cash shops. Believe you me, the day games are predominantly, or even largely, they will cease to be much fun at all without following the for purchase carrots if even then.
You are assuming developers need to entice EVERYONE to pay, which is obviously NOT true. Just look it up. Most successful F2P MMOs (DDO, RoM, Maple Story) has a minority supporting the games.
They developers need to make the games fun enough to hook people to play for free for a while. Otherwise, they can't convert free players to paying players.
DDO is fun in the first few levels (i never got to the upper levels and prob never will). Your argument is just based on some guess work about what may or may not happen in the future. My guess is as good as yours.
And there is nothing wrong with being myopic. It is not like I cannot switch to other entertainment if MMO ceases to be fun. There are plenty of SP games, movies, TV shows and novels to occupy time.
So far, F2P is bringing us an explosion of free fun and i don't see how that is a bad thing.
I'm a long time mmo gamer, into my 2nd decade.
I think the anti-f2p attitude comes from a mix of 'protectionism' and the crazy defense 8-track users had when they were approached by cassettes, and cassette users had when approached by CDs, and CD users had when the IPod came at them.
The f2p model is the future of gaming, if your current p2p doesn't have a cash shop in it currently, it will have one soon. Or it probably has plans unbeknownst to you of not continuing on.
I myself listened to the hype vs f2p, and believed it, but as I became more and more dejected with the current mmo games released and in development, I finally decided to take a chance on one in 2008. That being PWI, and to date I haven't spent a dime on it (well no, I did spend $10 for a stunning outfit! I just had to!)
But I always kept giving chances to my p2p roots, and have yet to find a game p2p that hits the standards that PWI has. That's pretty sad considering the almighty vaunted NA game developer standards (I was a QA tester for many years, so yes mighty sarcasm there). Simple standards, graphic, playability and engine. Many p2p lose sight of simplicity in their quest to be ... well I honestly don't understand what they are trying to be anymore.
Latest f2p I am trying is Final Earth Zero, and it is yet another great example of how the p2p market just misses the mark in fun and what pvp/rvr should actually be. I may give Aika a try (but yeah the daughter thing...cultural difference maybe?) because I hear good things about the pvp system so far.
Main thing I am saying is f2p are truly free. Play them, see the engines, see the ideas behind what interests you. Take from them what you will and go back to your p2p overlords and tell them what you liked about it. Seriously, if you can have the opportunity to see something cool for free in order to make something you love greater, why not take the opportunity, instead of shutting the doors to it?
One more thing in favor of f2p that many leave out, but I love...
f2p games do not have RMT harrassment going on. I have yet to receive 1 email, chat, or spam of any kind while playing many f2p. Whereas if I log onto any of my accounts from the years of p2p games, I have to spend an hour or so clearing old emails from gold spammers, clearing ignore lists in order to re-ignore new spammers, etc.
f2p/cash shops is where the market is headed. 300million < 3 billion. Pretty simple math, and if you want to play the best games around, get used to f2p. Because why would a dev make a game and not want to release it for the world to enjoy and reap the benefits?
Though you can always keep playing that 8-track...that player still working for you?
Come to think on it further, I truly believe we should embrace the f2p model...
f2p devs at least concede the fact they need to appease the player and entice them to stay on longer than the first month in order to retain your business.
Too often the p2p market has been hyping up games for a $70 buy-in price, $15/month fee and the player leaves the game dejected feeling like a sucker, because the devs make no attempt at retention of their customer base.
something to ponder.
Are you serious? I played PWI. After getting tired of the massive greed so evident by including more and more important cash shop items and lottery for end game gear scams used in that game I quit like most intelligent players. After playing some high quality P2P games I returned just to give away my gear and the game was so ugly and laggy and outdated I couldn't understand I used to actually play that game. I felt embarrassed and couldn't bear to stay online even for ten minutes. That's how great that game is. Have you played Aion? I just give you that example because you have flying elfes and tanks and the traditional MMO classes in that game too. If you would try I suppose you would agree that that game has higher quality than PWI? Still Aion is a terrible grind and there are way better games with no grind and no gold sellers. I now play Fallen Earth and I haven't seen a single gold seller in that game and not a single flying elf with top level gear because they have rich parents either. Just a fun game with a mature community and no scammers.
Your point with the cassettes is totally screwed because PWI is way behind, it's on the cassettes level whereas several other games are very nicely situated in the modern digital world of gaming, using the latest technology and also developing their game in a fair and intelligent way.
I an not assuming any such thing, in fact I made the point that only a very few pay in F2P games. This, I cited, is another reason to steer clear of them because you are not the developers audience and not who they are making the game for in the end. Why play a game where you are not the developer's target and not the player they make their living from?
--------------------------------
Achiever 60.00%, Socializer 53.00%, Killer 47.00%, Explorer 40.00%
Intel Core i7 Quad, Intel X58 SLi, 6G Corsair XMS DDR3, Intel X-25 SSD, 3 WD Velociraptor SATA SuperTrak SAS EX8650 Array, OCZ 1250W PS, GTX 295, xFi, 32" 1080p LCD
Again, you miss the reality of the F2P model. Developers are incentive's not to make a fun game that attracts players but to make a game that steers people to the cash shop - big difference. If I am paying monthly for full game access then they have to make an appealing enough game to warrant gamers subscribing month to month. If they are only making money of the few who use the cash shop then they only have a monetary interest in what interests those few gamers and in what will entice them to spend more money in the cash shop.
--------------------------------
Achiever 60.00%, Socializer 53.00%, Killer 47.00%, Explorer 40.00%
Intel Core i7 Quad, Intel X58 SLi, 6G Corsair XMS DDR3, Intel X-25 SSD, 3 WD Velociraptor SATA SuperTrak SAS EX8650 Array, OCZ 1250W PS, GTX 295, xFi, 32" 1080p LCD
I an not assuming any such thing, in fact I made the point that only a very few pay in F2P games. This, I cited, is another reason to steer clear of them because you are not the developers audience and not who they are making the game for in the end. Why play a game where you are not the developer's target and not the player they make their living from?
That is flawed logic. If they don't make us have fun for a while without paying, we won't get hooked and we won't be turning into paying customers. Developers cannot perfectly predict who will and will not pay and so they need to keep a large group just in case.
Furthermore, if I am having fun, do i really care if i am the intended audience? NO .. the only reason not to play a F2P game is that it is not fun. If it is fun (like DDO), I don't see why I shouldn't be getting some free entertainment.
Again, you miss the reality of the F2P model. Developers are incentive's not to make a fun game that attracts players but to make a game that steers people to the cash shop - big difference. If I am paying monthly for full game access then they have to make an appealing enough game to warrant gamers subscribing month to month. If they are only making money of the few who use the cash shop then they only have a monetary interest in what interests those few gamers and in what will entice them to spend more money in the cash shop.
No. You are missing the reality. The realty is that players don't have to care about developers incentives. They may be saints who want to give us free fun. They may be demons who want to suck our wallet dry. Who cares.
All we need to care is that whether the free part of the game is fun. If so, play it. If not, don't. If they make it fun enough because of a by-product of the item shop, heck, that is good enough for some free entertainment.
And from what i have seen, the answer is definitely YES for DDO, and may be even ALLOD (and i will never play enough of this game to pay those horrible item shop price).
I an not assuming any such thing, in fact I made the point that only a very few pay in F2P games. This, I cited, is another reason to steer clear of them because you are not the developers audience and not who they are making the game for in the end. Why play a game where you are not the developer's target and not the player they make their living from?
That is flawed logic. If they don't make us have fun for a while without paying, we won't get hooked and we won't be turning into paying customers. Developers cannot perfectly predict who will and will not pay and so they need to keep a large group just in case.
Furthermore, if I am having fun, do i really care if i am the intended audience? NO .. the only reason not to play a F2P game is that it is not fun. If it is fun (like DDO), I don't see why I shouldn't be getting some free entertainment.
Again, it isn't about you it is about why to avoid F2P games. People avoid F2P games because they do not like the model of developers who are incentivized and funded by a tiny fraction of the playing public, it is a model ripe for issues and said issues exist in all F2P games accordingly.
What you are saying is like arguing whether or not dog food tastes good and is something you want to eat. Granted, some dog food may taste good to humans, or at least some humans. However, that aside, I am not willing to even bother trying dog food because I am not a dog and not willing to risk that it tastes horrible since I am not who it was made for. Likewise, I am not interested in F2P MMOs because the design is such that I am not willing to use a cash shop and I am smart enough to realize that the game is designed to get players to use the cash shop.
--------------------------------
Achiever 60.00%, Socializer 53.00%, Killer 47.00%, Explorer 40.00%
Intel Core i7 Quad, Intel X58 SLi, 6G Corsair XMS DDR3, Intel X-25 SSD, 3 WD Velociraptor SATA SuperTrak SAS EX8650 Array, OCZ 1250W PS, GTX 295, xFi, 32" 1080p LCD
Again, you miss the reality of the F2P model. Developers are incentive's not to make a fun game that attracts players but to make a game that steers people to the cash shop - big difference. If I am paying monthly for full game access then they have to make an appealing enough game to warrant gamers subscribing month to month. If they are only making money of the few who use the cash shop then they only have a monetary interest in what interests those few gamers and in what will entice them to spend more money in the cash shop.
No. You are missing the reality. The realty is that players don't have to care about developers incentives. They may be saints who want to give us free fun. They may be demons who want to suck our wallet dry. Who cares.
All we need to care is that whether the free part of the game is fun. If so, play it. If not, don't. If they make it fun enough because of a by-product of the item shop, heck, that is good enough for some free entertainment.
And from what i have seen, the answer is definitely YES for DDO, and may be even ALLOD (and i will never play enough of this game to pay those horrible item shop price).
Again, the exceptions aside if you like dog food then by all means go eat dog food. But you cannot argue that as the rule. F2P games are designed for only a small fraction of their player base and despite whether that is a turn off to all it is a solid reason to not like the model and to avoid it. Who wants to invest time in a game, especially in MMOs where time is the ultimate currency of advancement and achievement, when you are not in the group that pays the developers checks and therefore, ultimately, influences their decisions and development choices? Sure, some may not care (I would argue mainly for reasons of being cheap or otherwise unwilling to pay for a sub game - also a valid choice), but that is not relevant to all people and to people who value the integrity of the basic time as currency basis of the genre.
--------------------------------
Achiever 60.00%, Socializer 53.00%, Killer 47.00%, Explorer 40.00%
Intel Core i7 Quad, Intel X58 SLi, 6G Corsair XMS DDR3, Intel X-25 SSD, 3 WD Velociraptor SATA SuperTrak SAS EX8650 Array, OCZ 1250W PS, GTX 295, xFi, 32" 1080p LCD
To say PWI is behind Aion...hmmm
well PWI has flying combat, and it's light years ahead of what you can do in Aion.
Those that pvp on PWI can attest to having real aerial combat in PWI, as opposed to combat until your wing power runs out in Aion, (i.e. may a player lie in wait far above in the skies for unsuspecting prey, and many people fly around hunting those ambushers, etc.. this kind of pvp cannot be done in Aion). PWI's engine can handle the mass amount of people and graphics better than Aions. To say PWI is behind or archaic is a pretty flawed statement. The only engine I would say that is more detailed than PWI is AoC, but AoC is in a league of itself, Aion is definitely not in AoC's league.
But I digress, this isn't about PWI, it's about why folks are afraid and from what I am seeing here make up ridiculous arguements to support p2p and out f2p. I believe it's more 'protectionism' than anything else, and the basic unwillingness to change. In other words, some will evolve, the rest will remain gelatinous cubes.
most p2p models are already bringing cash shops into their games, like DDO, just not yet to DDO's level of f2p.
You spout the greatness of Aion in defense of p2p, yet they are releasing their very own cash shop as you do so, something they said from release they were going to do. Were you unaware of the hypocrisy?
All of SOE is now on a cash shop model, in the future their content is going to be paid by the hour as well. These are the once kings of p2p mmos, and they see the change coming, amazing you do not.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with the f2p model...it's free, if you don't like it, don't play it. Though if you want to stand in the corner stamping your feet on how wrong they are, no one can stop you from doing that either....don't forget to hold you breath too, I hear that is a real deal-maker.
Again, you miss the reality of the F2P model. Developers are incentive's not to make a fun game that attracts players but to make a game that steers people to the cash shop - big difference. If I am paying monthly for full game access then they have to make an appealing enough game to warrant gamers subscribing month to month. If they are only making money of the few who use the cash shop then they only have a monetary interest in what interests those few gamers and in what will entice them to spend more money in the cash shop.
No. You are missing the reality. The realty is that players don't have to care about developers incentives. They may be saints who want to give us free fun. They may be demons who want to suck our wallet dry. Who cares.
All we need to care is that whether the free part of the game is fun. If so, play it. If not, don't. If they make it fun enough because of a by-product of the item shop, heck, that is good enough for some free entertainment.
And from what i have seen, the answer is definitely YES for DDO, and may be even ALLOD (and i will never play enough of this game to pay those horrible item shop price).
Again, the exceptions aside if you like dog food then by all means go eat dog food. But you cannot argue that as the rule. F2P games are designed for only a small fraction of their player base and despite whether that is a turn off to all it is a solid reason to not like the model and to avoid it. Who wants to invest time in a game, especially in MMOs where time is the ultimate currency of advancement and achievement, when you are not in the group that pays the developers checks and therefore, ultimately, influences their decisions and development choices? Sure, some may not care (I would argue mainly for reasons of being cheap or otherwise unwilling to pay for a sub game - also a valid choice), but that is not relevant to all people and to people who value the integrity of the basic time as currency basis of the genre.
You just don't get it do you?
300 million < 3 billion
It's just that simple.
small niche audience? No friend, NA gameplayers are the small niche audience, that's where your logic fails and do not seem to grasp the reality of the internetz. f2p is what the real masses desire as their play model, if NA games want to compete they need to follow suit or find an even more innovative way to bring their product to them.
I'm not saying f2p is better than p2p, All I am saying is that there is clear evidence that p2p is the dinosaur and f2p is the meteor. The question is how does the NA dev react? Do we stay the course, follow suit, or evolve the market even further? Guaranteed the first dev/marketing team that figures it out on a world scale (and with a good game) is going to make billions.
Again, you miss the reality of the F2P model. Developers are incentive's not to make a fun game that attracts players but to make a game that steers people to the cash shop - big difference. If I am paying monthly for full game access then they have to make an appealing enough game to warrant gamers subscribing month to month. If they are only making money of the few who use the cash shop then they only have a monetary interest in what interests those few gamers and in what will entice them to spend more money in the cash shop.
If this is true, then why aren't there more P2P games that have people coming back month- to month to month?
I will never make the argument that F2P games are better than P2P, but as long as neither is holding my interest for very long I may as well go with the free game.
Oh and guess what? No matter what I pay, I am not the target audience for P2P games either. I can buy the game and pay my sub every month and the game will be changed, "balanced", and destroyed to appease the whining of people that troll forums and don't actually play, or plan to play the game.
Here is my issue with F2P games: nothing is for free. The makers of the game can't survive without making money in some manner. They have to turn a profit from their product or they can't pay employees, keep servers running, eat food, etc. So, IMO, when they say F2P they are really misleading you to a certain extent. Most of the F2P companies design their games so you have to use a cash shop to actually enjoy the game or be competetive in the game. I prefer a company to just come out and say "you can play this game for $xx.xx a month" period. Nothing under the table, no hidden agenda, just good ole "pay for a service, get a service". To me, saying a game is F2P is akin to the late night infomercials where the seller offers a "free" widget worth $xx.xx with every purchase of a set of highly overpriced Encyclopedia Britannica. It's not an exact comparison but you get my drift. I don't feel like they are being completely honest.
Again, you miss the reality of the F2P model. Developers are incentive's not to make a fun game that attracts players but to make a game that steers people to the cash shop - big difference. If I am paying monthly for full game access then they have to make an appealing enough game to warrant gamers subscribing month to month. If they are only making money of the few who use the cash shop then they only have a monetary interest in what interests those few gamers and in what will entice them to spend more money in the cash shop.
If this is true, then why aren't there more P2P games that have people coming back month- to month to month?
This is a very conditional question that really can't be asked in such general terms.
If we're talking about more recent MMOs that don't have players coming back month to month, etc.. then it's likely because a number of the more recent P2P MMOs are coming up short in delivering an experience a large number of people find worthwhile. Very few P2P launches in recent memory have managed to hold on to a strong population, despite an otherwise strong launch.
However...
Wanna talk about WoW? That game has millions playing it, many since the day it launched. FFXI? Up to relatively recently had ~500k consistently year after year, many of which played since launch (JP or US/EU). EQ1 still has its core crowd. Lineage 2 still has a very large population (especially overseas), many of whom have been playing for years.... And so on.
The difference between those P2P that keep the players playing for years, nevermind months, and those that don't? If you look at them, they fall into two categories... pre-WoW and post-WoW. Pre-WoW, developers sought to make their respective games unique, large and long-term hobbies. To do well, they had to stand out and offer something unique that the others didn't. Post-WoW, many devs are now trying to ride Blizzard's coat-tails and cash in on the whole "casual" thing... many falling far short of expectations in the process. To do well, they just have to "copy the WoW template well enough".
Why are more people playing F2P? Well.. the "free" part might have something to do with it. However, they're also largely considered - by players and industry folk alike - to be largely low quality. I notice many people (though not all, of course) who play a F2P are more the "hopper" type. They stick around and play a F2P 'til it gets to be too much of a grind and they get bored... then they move on to the next one. So, in that context, your question about P2P having people coming back month after month is a bit ironic.
Why is F2P gaining popularity? Well.. look at how much money people spend on a cash shop versus a monthly sub. From a business stand-point, I'm sure it's very attractive. As a gamer, though, I prefer the level playing field of a sub-based game where everyone pays the same fee and has access to the same content.
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
Here is my issue with F2P games: nothing is for free. The makers of the game can't survive without making money in some manner. They have to turn a profit from their product or they can't pay employees, keep servers running, eat food, etc. So, IMO, when they say F2P they are really misleading you to a certain extent. Most of the F2P companies design their games so you have to use a cash shop to actually enjoy the game or be competetive in the game. I prefer a company to just come out and say "you can play this game for $xx.xx a month" period. Nothing under the table, no hidden agenda, just good ole "pay for a service, get a service". To me, saying a game is F2P is akin to the late night infomercials where the seller offers a "free" widget worth $xx.xx with every purchase of a set of highly overpriced Encyclopedia Britannica. It's not an exact comparison but you get my drift. I don't feel like they are being completely honest.
The issue with your point of view on it is that YOU want to be competitive, and thats really your (and others who feel the same) problem. You can play the game completely free, and enjoy it for what it is, but choosing to instead insist on being the "best" and trying to compete with others is a personal choice which causes you to spend the money, but it is not forced by the company in any way. I understand your view, cause i like to be competetive too and love pvp, and sure you will usually get owned in a lot of F2Ps (poorly designed ones at least) if you dont spend a lot of money, but i dont go into these games assuming i can be the best without spending the money. Thats like deciding to be a pro boxer, and expecting to just be able to get up off your ass after months of gaming and no exercise, step in the ring and KO everyone without putting in a lot of training. Youve got to invest SOMETHING to be competetive, wether its time or money. P2P requires you invest lots and lots of time, F2P gives you the option of time or money. Some people have time to spare, some people have money to spare instead of time. Does that make it wrong either way? Theyre just offering 2 alternetives to the same goal, rather than forcing you to have no life outside of the game in order to stay on top.
Again, you miss the reality of the F2P model. Developers are incentive's not to make a fun game that attracts players but to make a game that steers people to the cash shop - big difference. If I am paying monthly for full game access then they have to make an appealing enough game to warrant gamers subscribing month to month. If they are only making money of the few who use the cash shop then they only have a monetary interest in what interests those few gamers and in what will entice them to spend more money in the cash shop.
No. You are missing the reality. The realty is that players don't have to care about developers incentives. They may be saints who want to give us free fun. They may be demons who want to suck our wallet dry. Who cares.
All we need to care is that whether the free part of the game is fun. If so, play it. If not, don't. If they make it fun enough because of a by-product of the item shop, heck, that is good enough for some free entertainment.
And from what i have seen, the answer is definitely YES for DDO, and may be even ALLOD (and i will never play enough of this game to pay those horrible item shop price).
Again, the exceptions aside if you like dog food then by all means go eat dog food. But you cannot argue that as the rule. F2P games are designed for only a small fraction of their player base and despite whether that is a turn off to all it is a solid reason to not like the model and to avoid it. Who wants to invest time in a game, especially in MMOs where time is the ultimate currency of advancement and achievement, when you are not in the group that pays the developers checks and therefore, ultimately, influences their decisions and development choices? Sure, some may not care (I would argue mainly for reasons of being cheap or otherwise unwilling to pay for a sub game - also a valid choice), but that is not relevant to all people and to people who value the integrity of the basic time as currency basis of the genre.
You just don't get it do you?
300 million < 3 billion
It's just that simple.
small niche audience? No friend, NA gameplayers are the small niche audience, that's where your logic fails and do not seem to grasp the reality of the internetz. f2p is what the real masses desire as their play model, if NA games want to compete they need to follow suit or find an even more innovative way to bring their product to them.
I'm not saying f2p is better than p2p, All I am saying is that there is clear evidence that p2p is the dinosaur and f2p is the meteor. The question is how does the NA dev react? Do we stay the course, follow suit, or evolve the market even further? Guaranteed the first dev/marketing team that figures it out on a world scale (and with a good game) is going to make billions.
Well...in my opinion, there's something YOU also don't get. And that is this:
While worldwide, NA may be the smaller market for games, it's also the market (at least right now) with the most expendable income. AND...the market that least likes the "free" to play, RMT, MACRO transactions (they've ceased being micro for the most part) form of payment. NA seems to prefer the pay to play subscription model, and my guess as to why that is, in part...it's simply more convenient. Pay for the game, sign up with your credit card and forget about it. I don't think overall North Americans want to have to THINK about it, we'd rather just have you deduct it from our vast incomes (lol...a bit tongue in cheek, a bit truth) and we, for the most part, don't even notice it that way. Yes...it's a bit of a psychological thing with us, I'm thinking.
I think we're kind of lazy. At least myself...I don't personally want to have to think about another bill all the time. If you just take it out of my bank account....I don't notice it was ever there to begin with really. I get used to living without that 15 bucks a month. It's not even noticeable. On the other hand....if you make me LOOK at my expenditures repeatedly....not only do I not appreciate that...I'm less likely to give you my money. And making me THINK about whether a virtual BAG is actually WORTH 20 bucks....a good lot of the time isn't going to fare well for the one trying to sell me that bag.
Nonetheless....free to play has it's "fans" here with social gaming and the RMT that goes hand in hand with FB games and whatnot. However....even though you may say "blah blah 2 - 3 million gamers is a small market" (first of all....that's only the MMO players in NA that are playing WoW....you're leaving out the 500k - 1 million that play EACH of a myriad of other games). That may be a "niche market" on a worldwide scale, but I ASSURE YOU.....it's a market that game developers COVET.
SO...you go on with your "f2p" is uber leet amazing the next best thing to digitally sliced bread....whatever. Because as long as NA gamers prefer the pay to play/forget about it model of pay....we're GOING to keep getting it because developers WANT our money. That's a pretty simply concept, I'd think.
President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club
Again, you miss the reality of the F2P model. Developers are incentive's not to make a fun game that attracts players but to make a game that steers people to the cash shop - big difference. If I am paying monthly for full game access then they have to make an appealing enough game to warrant gamers subscribing month to month. If they are only making money of the few who use the cash shop then they only have a monetary interest in what interests those few gamers and in what will entice them to spend more money in the cash shop.
If this is true, then why aren't there more P2P games that have people coming back month- to month to month?
This is a very conditional question that really can't be asked in such general terms.
If we're talking about more recent MMOs that don't have players coming back month to month, etc.. then it's likely because a number of the more recent P2P MMOs are coming up short in delivering an experience a large number of people find worthwhile. Very few P2P launches in recent memory have managed to hold on to a strong population, despite an otherwise strong launch.
This paragraph just helps prove my point. The point I was making was that just because you pay for a game doesn't make you the target audience and it doesn't mean the game will appeal to you anymore just because you're paying for it.
The rest of your post was great, but had little to do with what I said