Mr. Aihoshi, you sound like an actor who's blaming the audience. The audience is never wrong.
As said 1000 times before - Be specific. Give us things like "this [game example here] has that, which is new / "inovative" / cool / fun". Repeatedly avoiding this approach makes me think you cannot come with examples, i hope that's not the case.
Yes i saw the D&D Online logo, located where you were talking about the "kill 100 rats" quests. If that is designed to work as a "suggestion", yes D&D is f2p now and it does have some "better" quests than "kill 100 rats" but let's not forget that it was p2p before.
While disguised "kill 100 rats" quests "exist" in all business models, there is a HUGE difference between them being 90% of the available quests or only around 30% of them. Play Age of Conan to see quest development (that game semi-failed due to other issues, but not quest development). Then play a f2p, focusing on quests. See how it feels.
Also, all asian, maybe "this game follows the history of China" does not appeal to all of us. How about the lack of endgame content for most of the f2p's? The close-to-zero-asian-male/female-face character customisation? The insane grinding? The big "bonus" that multiboxing players get, practically forcing everyone who wants to be semi-competitive to run 3 alts and leave the PC on overnight? The "ingame gods" who spend thousands, becoming untouchable/unbeatable? The "if you spend 20 bucks, you have 20% chances of upgrading this armor" model? The Atlantica-like Cash Shop boxes -> games where you cannot buy your item from the Item Mall, but only like 1/25 chances to get the item you want? Hopefully i'll find these in part2.
Come with examples. I am sure that for every praised f2p game, there will be 10 experienced players which will post real ingame things and not theories about how the game "really is". This way people can truly make an idea about this lame "f2p" trend which is forced down our throats by "the industry". I'm sick of f2p fanboys which just go on about "this is the new trend, everyone embraces it, you dont have to pay to play yada yada" with zero examples. Giving examples would open the doors for people to post really how crappy the game is - don't believe me? Check the gamespace for all f2p's on this site, see what people post there.
most of the MMOs out there are almost the same, what F2P games lack is storyline, which is the backbone of the game, and just walking around, killing mobs is no fun, if a F2P HAPPENED, to have an amazing storyline, where its like a movie - you just have all the world's patience to wait long enough and see what happens, if a game has no story, you have no motivation to grind it out, but if it HAD, then, thats a different story
No offense Richard, but if you took 1/10 of the effort you spend towards talking about F2P's criticisms, and devoted that towards actually showcasing the good F2P's in-depth, explaining how those specific games buck the trend, and why they deserve to be placed on a pedistal... well, you'd probably accomplish more, to be frank.
Just to address the points:
"All F2P games require spending a lot of money to reach high levels"
I trust the second part of this article will address the REAL complaint that people have? Namely "All F2P games require spending a lot of money of reach high power levels"? Few people (even the detractors) deny that you can reach the high levels with enough time and effort. Where the real problem arises is the inability to compete with similarly-leveled players who have purchased CS items that give them extra power. And this IS a rampant problem. Are there exceptions to the rule? No doubt. See my opening paragraph.
"F2P games make no money, or make very little"
Do people really believe this? The proliferation of the F2P genre should speak for itself - somebody is clearly making money from it.
"The quests in F2P games consist mainly of "kill 10 rats" quests, except it's more like "kill 100 rats"
Valid, actually. Definitely not a F2P-specific issue, although the rewards for killing the 10 rats have a distinct tendency to be proportionately smaller without the aid of CS items. And there is still a definite shortage of games offering items/options to simply reduce overall grind for a moderate fee (i.e. items acting as monthly subscriptions), and too many offering the grind-reductions in increments measured in minutes and hours.
"Most F2P games are rushed into America, resulting in broken English translations"
Whether "most" applies or not these days, it's still a problem. And it's not a difficult one to correct in many cases - just have a English-fluent (well-fluent, I mean) person sit down and read every sentence in the game, and have him judge it. In lieu of the acres of gaming code already needing to be handled, it's not actually that difficult. And there are still far too many games that fail this test.
"Cash shops encourage developers to work only on cash shop content"
A developer doesn't NEED to work excessively on CS content - once they've created an initial need for power and time, the items sell themselves. XP pots/bags/ items don't need to be constantly re-engineered once you have them designed. Things like mounts and costumes require more effort, but they' And there's a flipside to your offered counter-argument - since the majority of F2P's allow for CS items to be resold for in-game currency, any work spent on CS items doesn't apply "only" to the paying customers.
Cute article, I'm sure the second half will be similar, but I think the time would be better served by highlighting the gems of the industry and bringin them to the forefront (and criticising the trash!), rather than this engaging in generic apologetics.
Edit: And while I'm sure the second half of your article is already written, I would be interested to see the complaint "F2P Cash Shops sell items that differ from online casinos only in semantics" addressed.
I totally agree with Mehve. Also I think it's funny how you (mmorpg.com) keeps trying to give the negativity around F2P a spin to change the concept into something that it's not.
Why don't you stop discussing the concept and the alleged misconceptions and go into detail for a change. Take 10 recently launched F2P's, play them all for 10 levels and analyze the data to form a conclusion. Or launch some poll's on the site, don't be surprised if you find out that F2P players are only waiting for the real P2P releases that are coming up, I know I am ;p
Runes of Magic. The current best example of a AAA f2p mmo is rampant with cash shop goodness that is absolutely needed to reach endgame content. Sure, you can cap out your levels without paying, but once you get there you need to pay, heavily, to do anything other than rehash old, weak content.
I like f2p games. I jump from one to the other and play about 2/3 of the levels and jump again before the cash shop items become necessary. It's how I cope with not wanting to pay to play anything.
The majority of arguments against F2P games I've read do not claim that they ALL require LARGE expenditures of real money to advance to high levels, but that you CAN advance just by spending real money without doing anything else in MANY of them.
I want to see the facts; I want to see the actual numbers, how much someone spends per month in a F2P game as opposed to a monthly subscription game. I want you to name the games that require you to advance through questing and accomplishment and don't allow you to buy items that improve your stats with real cash (something you didn't earn in-game) or level up in any way that uses real money and not some kind of effort.
Whatever; I'll continue to say that the kind of player that wants to pay for advancement is different than the kind of player that wants to earn it, and the games should be made for different players. I'll also continue to object to the "F2P" name; these games are NOT free to play, they are not intended to be free to play, they are intended to make a profit just like the subscription games, but are less honest about it. I'm all for profit, but I hate being flim-flammed.
Have played: Everquest, Asheron's Call, Horizons, Everquest2, World of Warcraft, Lord of the Rings Online, Warhammer, Age of Conan, Darkfall
An interesting article, though i agree you need more specifics, not because i think you can't back them up, but rather because i know you can.
DDO offers a prime example of a high end F2P model that basically offers gamers everything they want and has managed to not only keep a game around, but improve it.
All F2P games require spending a lot of money to reach high levels
In DDO you can reach around level 12 entirely with free quests, if your willing to grind points you can unlock enough to hit the cap, and pretty much everything else if your willing to spend the time. This is time consuming, but you are not required to pay.
F2P games make no money, or make very little
I've heard this in the DDO community when the move to f2p was first announced, it came mostly from people unfamiliar with f2p who feared it would kill any future development. More common is the idea that f2p is a quick cash in that will result in cheap, broken content being pushed out for a fast buck.
The quests in F2P games consist mainly of "kill 10 rats" quests, except it's more like "kill 100 rats"
As true for WoW as it is for any F2P, this is a common complaint of mine for MMO's in general.
Most F2P games are rushed into America, resulting in broken English translations
Not as true as it was, this is less common now. It is possible this continues to carry on with the mass of open betas that happen for a us release, these are always filled with poor translations before the final release.
Cash shops encourage developers to work only on cash shop content
Using DDO again, the developers released a free content pack between a couple of paid content packs. The longer a player stays playing after all the more likely they are to use the cash shop, in this way giving them fresh content entices them to stick around, and gives them an idea of what they could expect from the paid content. Ideally for the developer this then encourages the player to buy the other paid content if they played and were satisfied with the free release.
Ultimately in the end i support the f2p model offered by Turbine, if you subscribe it is the exact same experience as any other sub title. Otherwise you can play for free or pay for content.
Asian f2p games tend to be very focused on a pay to win mentality, especially when pvp is involved, and i've seen enough to cement this perception of foreign f2p in my mind. Turbines method is created with people like me in mind, suspicious of these pay to win games but willing to pay for quality content.
Now if only SOE would adopt it instead of their own weird attempt, i liked eq2 and f2p would draw me back, but not with the way they currently have explained it. (I want my old character on my old server, not segregated into some f2p colony lest we dare mingle with the paying customers.)
Nice article I liked it rings very true in my opinion. While I'm not versed on the technical aspects as you two are I think it goes without saying that the biggest point is if a f2p game is designed in such a way as it was not fun without spending money on it then it wouldn't last anyway so why debate the issue. If LOTRO when f2p makes Turbine less money than they were making then they can easily switch the model back. I as a player of that game will continue to pay my sub fee and earn the turbine points spend them or not but if I find that I need to use them beyond my sub fee paid I'll leave and tell them why.
In regards to other games that have already been free to play I've played a few and had no problem with them got some levels and never felt compelled to spend any money but if I liked the game what's spending a few dollars when we typically spend fifteen bucks a month for our games anyway. Free to play to me is about business options and a way for mmo's on a large scale to compete with all the other highly advertised and touted products they have to compete with. I think more companies should be bold with how they offer the product to consumers maybe make a box purchase or download necessary but a free to play server with cash shop whatever the case to open more games to options where we can add to the community and make an informed decision which is needed with mmo's as they are now.
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
"At the end of 2010, the three highest-quality F2P games on the market will be D&D Online, Lord of the Rings Online, and EverQuest II"
Does anyone deny this?
Fact is, there has never been a game developed with the intention of a F2P release that has matched the quality of the mainstream subscription titles. So the best F2P games out there are the ones that were launched as subscription titles, ran as subscription titles for a number of years, and then were switched to F2P/hybrid models when they were in decline.
Give me a call when someone actually produces a game that is AAA in both scope and quality, with the intention of launching it as a F2P + cash shop title.
Many straw men gave their lives to make this article possible. Take a proposition that is generally true, make it into an absolute by adding the word "all," and watch right become wrong - just add water.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
F2P games for the most part have just not been that good. Look at the advertising on this site almost all of it is try this new asian made f2p game. Frankly the f2p market has been so flooded by so bad many titles(see all the Asian factory churned out f2p games that dominate the banner ad's on this site) that even if a good one exist the majority of them are really terrible and after many people have tried more than a few f2p games and they all have sucked what do you expect the majority of players to think.
100's of terrible games to try to find one that may be decent and not require a large time sink to level and a large cash investment for end game along with decent/good game play I will pass on that. I do not have the time to invest in finding one of the mythical free to play games that you right about that may be good. The dieing MMO's switching to a hybraid f2p model are the exception to this.
"At the end of 2010, the three highest-quality F2P games on the market will be D&D Online, Lord of the Rings Online, and EverQuest II"
Does anyone deny this?
Fact is, there has never been a game developed with the intention of a F2P release that has matched the quality of the mainstream subscription titles. So the best F2P games out there are the ones that were launched as subscription titles, ran as subscription titles for a number of years, and then were switched to F2P/hybrid models when they were in decline.
Give me a call when someone actually produces a game that is AAA in both scope and quality, with the intention of launching it as a F2P + cash shop title.
I appreciate a title that I enjoy has to maintain a level of profitability in order for the powers that be to be willing to continue the line. If F2P is the model that allows the game to survive, so be it. I have yet to have felt forced to buy anything in a F2P. IMO, of course, my experience has been somewhat limited.
"At the end of 2010, the three highest-quality F2P games on the market will be D&D Online, Lord of the Rings Online, and EverQuest II"
Does anyone deny this?
Fact is, there has never been a game developed with the intention of a F2P release that has matched the quality of the mainstream subscription titles. So the best F2P games out there are the ones that were launched as subscription titles, ran as subscription titles for a number of years, and then were switched to F2P/hybrid models when they were in decline.
Give me a call when someone actually produces a game that is AAA in both scope and quality, with the intention of launching it as a F2P + cash shop title.
^^ This
And funny that it would be true
I agree. The sad part is the games making the change could have continued to be successful if they had taken care of business instead of adopting the latest model of milking machine in hopes of making more from less.
WOW isnt great because it has 12 million players. WOW has 12 million players because its great.
Everytime I read one of these pro-F2P articles I instantly think of "follow the money". The whole F2P market is about money and not about what the experienced playerbase is looking or asking for. It is being shoved down our throats.
WHOO no offense but please read jamie skelton, she likes to look at the heart of the issue not just writing down cool stuff.
All F2P games require spending a lot of money to reach high levels
Lets look at the F2P threads on this site. A LOT of f2p game require a great amount of money to get a higher level and have equip form anywhere remote to that level. ITs true. But in all of those thread you see people saying but some F2P models don't. just look through them. The larger argument is that you have to P2A ot P2P in F2P games (or spend 1 years doing something that takes 1 month if paying which is crazy, one person basiclly exampled this about altlantica, while attempting to say it costs no money). Ok but it is true for many f2p games like wiz 101.
The F2P games make no money, or make very little. Has not been the conversation on mmorpg AT ALL. Infact the community has done its homework and linked articles from the WSJ showign the F2P make MORE money per person and thus COST MORE TO PLAY. So i think this point at least fly a bit in the face of your first point.
The quests in F2P games consist mainly of "kill 10 rats" quests, except it's more like "kill 100 rats"
This maybe true or not. I mean you would have to take some time to collect that data. But anyway your point is basiclly, i don't know ... no one knows. Great so it maybe or might not be the case.
Most F2P games are rushed into America, resulting in broken English translations
This was true but not so much anymore, so cheer. But i don't think this was most peoples primary or secondardy concern with f2p mmos, I mean in all the treads on this site it may have been mentioned once or twice.
Cash shops encourage developers to work only on cash shop content
Maybe, what can be side is new content will encourge cash shop use, becuase thats how they make money.
And no your wrong trickign people into stuff works, thast why we have the word trick. And that is why we used it like so , " they tricked me". The goal is it trick them without them realizing they have been tricked, which also happens a lot.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
How long are they going to write this column before they realize that 90% of the readers on this site hate these articles? And hate FTP? And hate microtransactions? Despite this constant snarky column telling us how wrong we are?
You can keep telling us a turd is a rose,and explain why all you want, but I will not be swayed by your shoddy mind tricks. A turd is still a turd.
How long are they going to write this column before they realize that 90% of the readers on this site hate these articles? And hate FTP? And hate microtransactions? Despite this constant snarky column telling us how wrong we are?
You can keep telling us a turd is a rose,and explain why all you want, but I will not be swayed by your shoddy mind tricks. A turd is still a turd.
No junk right i mean this is like the 4-5th one. And the only write that understood and even knew how to approch this was jamie skelton. Where she just looked a a few real aspects of F2P and why its done. It was balanced and did not jump to massive assumptions.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
This column is the same thing every time - a defense of the free-to-play model against some imagined attack. Maybe if it focused on the games themselves, people would be convinced to give them a try. I wouldn't mind playing a good f2p, but all I see here is another installment of "I think f2p MMOs are teh bestest thing evar and anyone with a different opinion is a big fat doodyhead."
Richard, you have beat this topic to death. Not everyone is going to agree with you, especially when you rarely talk about the GAMES you are supposed to be covering and almost exclusively focus on talking about why people who disagree with you are wrong.
Pure crap again.
/sign
/signed
Was nice to see Beau again. That's about the only positive to this whole "article".
I personally don't think anyonewill cry if Aihoshi never wrote anything here again, though. In fact, I'm betting most would /cheer.
-Letting Derek Smart work on your game is like letting Osama bin Laden work in the White House. Something will burn.- -And on the 8th day, man created God.-
I haven't played a single F2P game which I liked, and I tried out a lot. Basically often out of boredom. Not a single one met the same standards as those with a monthly fee even by far! I don't have general prejudices against F2P games, but I have yet to see a good one. All F2P games have boring quests, and I was bored by all of them after a few days.
GW stands out in this, that I wasn't able to play it long, since the playerbase was the most HORRIBLE I ever had the dubious honor to meet. At least the German servers were full of porn, sex and immature trash talk. Terrible. Absolutely terrible.
I value the monthly fee game, because it is the equivalent of a flatrate. One price which covers all. Usually it is cheaper unless you really play only with the bare minimum of stuff. Way easier to control how much you pay and one fee = access to ALL content. What more can one want.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Comments
Mr. Aihoshi, you sound like an actor who's blaming the audience. The audience is never wrong.
As said 1000 times before - Be specific. Give us things like "this [game example here] has that, which is new / "inovative" / cool / fun". Repeatedly avoiding this approach makes me think you cannot come with examples, i hope that's not the case.
Yes i saw the D&D Online logo, located where you were talking about the "kill 100 rats" quests. If that is designed to work as a "suggestion", yes D&D is f2p now and it does have some "better" quests than "kill 100 rats" but let's not forget that it was p2p before.
While disguised "kill 100 rats" quests "exist" in all business models, there is a HUGE difference between them being 90% of the available quests or only around 30% of them. Play Age of Conan to see quest development (that game semi-failed due to other issues, but not quest development). Then play a f2p, focusing on quests. See how it feels.
Also, all asian, maybe "this game follows the history of China" does not appeal to all of us. How about the lack of endgame content for most of the f2p's? The close-to-zero-asian-male/female-face character customisation? The insane grinding? The big "bonus" that multiboxing players get, practically forcing everyone who wants to be semi-competitive to run 3 alts and leave the PC on overnight? The "ingame gods" who spend thousands, becoming untouchable/unbeatable? The "if you spend 20 bucks, you have 20% chances of upgrading this armor" model? The Atlantica-like Cash Shop boxes -> games where you cannot buy your item from the Item Mall, but only like 1/25 chances to get the item you want? Hopefully i'll find these in part2.
Come with examples. I am sure that for every praised f2p game, there will be 10 experienced players which will post real ingame things and not theories about how the game "really is". This way people can truly make an idea about this lame "f2p" trend which is forced down our throats by "the industry". I'm sick of f2p fanboys which just go on about "this is the new trend, everyone embraces it, you dont have to pay to play yada yada" with zero examples. Giving examples would open the doors for people to post really how crappy the game is - don't believe me? Check the gamespace for all f2p's on this site, see what people post there.
most of the MMOs out there are almost the same, what F2P games lack is storyline, which is the backbone of the game, and just walking around, killing mobs is no fun, if a F2P HAPPENED, to have an amazing storyline, where its like a movie - you just have all the world's patience to wait long enough and see what happens, if a game has no story, you have no motivation to grind it out, but if it HAD, then, thats a different story
^^
Everything this guy writes is not worth reading.
I totally agree with Mehve. Also I think it's funny how you (mmorpg.com) keeps trying to give the negativity around F2P a spin to change the concept into something that it's not.
Why don't you stop discussing the concept and the alleged misconceptions and go into detail for a change. Take 10 recently launched F2P's, play them all for 10 levels and analyze the data to form a conclusion. Or launch some poll's on the site, don't be surprised if you find out that F2P players are only waiting for the real P2P releases that are coming up, I know I am ;p
And that is why mmorpg.com is not my main site for mmo news now days.
I7@4ghz, 5970@ 1 ghz/5ghz, water cooled||Former setups Byggblogg||Byggblogg 2|| Msi Wind u100
Runes of Magic. The current best example of a AAA f2p mmo is rampant with cash shop goodness that is absolutely needed to reach endgame content. Sure, you can cap out your levels without paying, but once you get there you need to pay, heavily, to do anything other than rehash old, weak content.
I like f2p games. I jump from one to the other and play about 2/3 of the levels and jump again before the cash shop items become necessary. It's how I cope with not wanting to pay to play anything.
The majority of arguments against F2P games I've read do not claim that they ALL require LARGE expenditures of real money to advance to high levels, but that you CAN advance just by spending real money without doing anything else in MANY of them.
I want to see the facts; I want to see the actual numbers, how much someone spends per month in a F2P game as opposed to a monthly subscription game. I want you to name the games that require you to advance through questing and accomplishment and don't allow you to buy items that improve your stats with real cash (something you didn't earn in-game) or level up in any way that uses real money and not some kind of effort.
Whatever; I'll continue to say that the kind of player that wants to pay for advancement is different than the kind of player that wants to earn it, and the games should be made for different players. I'll also continue to object to the "F2P" name; these games are NOT free to play, they are not intended to be free to play, they are intended to make a profit just like the subscription games, but are less honest about it. I'm all for profit, but I hate being flim-flammed.
Have played: Everquest, Asheron's Call, Horizons, Everquest2, World of Warcraft, Lord of the Rings Online, Warhammer, Age of Conan, Darkfall
An interesting article, though i agree you need more specifics, not because i think you can't back them up, but rather because i know you can.
DDO offers a prime example of a high end F2P model that basically offers gamers everything they want and has managed to not only keep a game around, but improve it.
All F2P games require spending a lot of money to reach high levels
In DDO you can reach around level 12 entirely with free quests, if your willing to grind points you can unlock enough to hit the cap, and pretty much everything else if your willing to spend the time. This is time consuming, but you are not required to pay.
F2P games make no money, or make very little
I've heard this in the DDO community when the move to f2p was first announced, it came mostly from people unfamiliar with f2p who feared it would kill any future development. More common is the idea that f2p is a quick cash in that will result in cheap, broken content being pushed out for a fast buck.
The quests in F2P games consist mainly of "kill 10 rats" quests, except it's more like "kill 100 rats"
As true for WoW as it is for any F2P, this is a common complaint of mine for MMO's in general.
Most F2P games are rushed into America, resulting in broken English translations
Not as true as it was, this is less common now. It is possible this continues to carry on with the mass of open betas that happen for a us release, these are always filled with poor translations before the final release.
Cash shops encourage developers to work only on cash shop content
Using DDO again, the developers released a free content pack between a couple of paid content packs. The longer a player stays playing after all the more likely they are to use the cash shop, in this way giving them fresh content entices them to stick around, and gives them an idea of what they could expect from the paid content. Ideally for the developer this then encourages the player to buy the other paid content if they played and were satisfied with the free release.
Ultimately in the end i support the f2p model offered by Turbine, if you subscribe it is the exact same experience as any other sub title. Otherwise you can play for free or pay for content.
Asian f2p games tend to be very focused on a pay to win mentality, especially when pvp is involved, and i've seen enough to cement this perception of foreign f2p in my mind. Turbines method is created with people like me in mind, suspicious of these pay to win games but willing to pay for quality content.
Now if only SOE would adopt it instead of their own weird attempt, i liked eq2 and f2p would draw me back, but not with the way they currently have explained it. (I want my old character on my old server, not segregated into some f2p colony lest we dare mingle with the paying customers.)
Nice article I liked it rings very true in my opinion. While I'm not versed on the technical aspects as you two are I think it goes without saying that the biggest point is if a f2p game is designed in such a way as it was not fun without spending money on it then it wouldn't last anyway so why debate the issue. If LOTRO when f2p makes Turbine less money than they were making then they can easily switch the model back. I as a player of that game will continue to pay my sub fee and earn the turbine points spend them or not but if I find that I need to use them beyond my sub fee paid I'll leave and tell them why.
In regards to other games that have already been free to play I've played a few and had no problem with them got some levels and never felt compelled to spend any money but if I liked the game what's spending a few dollars when we typically spend fifteen bucks a month for our games anyway. Free to play to me is about business options and a way for mmo's on a large scale to compete with all the other highly advertised and touted products they have to compete with. I think more companies should be bold with how they offer the product to consumers maybe make a box purchase or download necessary but a free to play server with cash shop whatever the case to open more games to options where we can add to the community and make an informed decision which is needed with mmo's as they are now.
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
Well, It was nice to see Beau back on the boards anyway:)
The most damning indictment of F2P games is this:
"At the end of 2010, the three highest-quality F2P games on the market will be D&D Online, Lord of the Rings Online, and EverQuest II"
Does anyone deny this?
Fact is, there has never been a game developed with the intention of a F2P release that has matched the quality of the mainstream subscription titles. So the best F2P games out there are the ones that were launched as subscription titles, ran as subscription titles for a number of years, and then were switched to F2P/hybrid models when they were in decline.
Give me a call when someone actually produces a game that is AAA in both scope and quality, with the intention of launching it as a F2P + cash shop title.
Many straw men gave their lives to make this article possible. Take a proposition that is generally true, make it into an absolute by adding the word "all," and watch right become wrong - just add water.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
F2P games for the most part have just not been that good. Look at the advertising on this site almost all of it is try this new asian made f2p game. Frankly the f2p market has been so flooded by so bad many titles(see all the Asian factory churned out f2p games that dominate the banner ad's on this site) that even if a good one exist the majority of them are really terrible and after many people have tried more than a few f2p games and they all have sucked what do you expect the majority of players to think.
100's of terrible games to try to find one that may be decent and not require a large time sink to level and a large cash investment for end game along with decent/good game play I will pass on that. I do not have the time to invest in finding one of the mythical free to play games that you right about that may be good. The dieing MMO's switching to a hybraid f2p model are the exception to this.
^^ This
And funny that it would be true
Gaming since Avalon Hill was making board games.
Played SWG, EVE, Fallen Earth, LOTRO, Rift, Vanguard, WoW, SWTOR, TSW, Tera
Tried Aoc, Aion, EQII, RoM, Vindictus, Darkfail, DDO, GW, PotBS
I appreciate a title that I enjoy has to maintain a level of profitability in order for the powers that be to be willing to continue the line. If F2P is the model that allows the game to survive, so be it. I have yet to have felt forced to buy anything in a F2P. IMO, of course, my experience has been somewhat limited.
I agree. The sad part is the games making the change could have continued to be successful if they had taken care of business instead of adopting the latest model of milking machine in hopes of making more from less.
WOW isnt great because it has 12 million players. WOW has 12 million players because its great.
Everytime I read one of these pro-F2P articles I instantly think of "follow the money". The whole F2P market is about money and not about what the experienced playerbase is looking or asking for. It is being shoved down our throats.
WHOO no offense but please read jamie skelton, she likes to look at the heart of the issue not just writing down cool stuff.
All F2P games require spending a lot of money to reach high levels
Lets look at the F2P threads on this site. A LOT of f2p game require a great amount of money to get a higher level and have equip form anywhere remote to that level. ITs true. But in all of those thread you see people saying but some F2P models don't. just look through them. The larger argument is that you have to P2A ot P2P in F2P games (or spend 1 years doing something that takes 1 month if paying which is crazy, one person basiclly exampled this about altlantica, while attempting to say it costs no money). Ok but it is true for many f2p games like wiz 101.
The F2P games make no money, or make very little. Has not been the conversation on mmorpg AT ALL. Infact the community has done its homework and linked articles from the WSJ showign the F2P make MORE money per person and thus COST MORE TO PLAY. So i think this point at least fly a bit in the face of your first point.
The quests in F2P games consist mainly of "kill 10 rats" quests, except it's more like "kill 100 rats"
This maybe true or not. I mean you would have to take some time to collect that data. But anyway your point is basiclly, i don't know ... no one knows. Great so it maybe or might not be the case.
Most F2P games are rushed into America, resulting in broken English translations
This was true but not so much anymore, so cheer. But i don't think this was most peoples primary or secondardy concern with f2p mmos, I mean in all the treads on this site it may have been mentioned once or twice.
Cash shops encourage developers to work only on cash shop content
Maybe, what can be side is new content will encourge cash shop use, becuase thats how they make money.
And no your wrong trickign people into stuff works, thast why we have the word trick. And that is why we used it like so , " they tricked me". The goal is it trick them without them realizing they have been tricked, which also happens a lot.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
How long are they going to write this column before they realize that 90% of the readers on this site hate these articles? And hate FTP? And hate microtransactions? Despite this constant snarky column telling us how wrong we are?
You can keep telling us a turd is a rose,and explain why all you want, but I will not be swayed by your shoddy mind tricks. A turd is still a turd.
No junk right i mean this is like the 4-5th one. And the only write that understood and even knew how to approch this was jamie skelton. Where she just looked a a few real aspects of F2P and why its done. It was balanced and did not jump to massive assumptions.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
This column is the same thing every time - a defense of the free-to-play model against some imagined attack. Maybe if it focused on the games themselves, people would be convinced to give them a try. I wouldn't mind playing a good f2p, but all I see here is another installment of "I think f2p MMOs are teh bestest thing evar and anyone with a different opinion is a big fat doodyhead."
/signed
Was nice to see Beau again. That's about the only positive to this whole "article".
I personally don't think anyonewill cry if Aihoshi never wrote anything here again, though. In fact, I'm betting most would /cheer.
-Letting Derek Smart work on your game is like letting Osama bin Laden work in the White House. Something will burn.-
-And on the 8th day, man created God.-
I haven't played a single F2P game which I liked, and I tried out a lot. Basically often out of boredom. Not a single one met the same standards as those with a monthly fee even by far! I don't have general prejudices against F2P games, but I have yet to see a good one. All F2P games have boring quests, and I was bored by all of them after a few days.
GW stands out in this, that I wasn't able to play it long, since the playerbase was the most HORRIBLE I ever had the dubious honor to meet. At least the German servers were full of porn, sex and immature trash talk. Terrible. Absolutely terrible.
I value the monthly fee game, because it is the equivalent of a flatrate. One price which covers all. Usually it is cheaper unless you really play only with the bare minimum of stuff. Way easier to control how much you pay and one fee = access to ALL content. What more can one want.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert