Is it only me, or has the F2P actually made the content more expensive?
Yes, you can grind, and usually in a very lab rat, monotonous way (which actually ISNT my idea of fun after 10 hours of real life work), or you can end up paying MORE than what you did with the subscription model.
Dungeon and Dragons Online: You can buy a single race for about 900 ingame tokens. 1200 tokens cost about 15 dollars. To get a nice race + class combo, you have to pay around 1800 tokens. See what they did there? In less than 5 minutes you spent twice the amount you would have paid to subscribe a whole game universe.
Now who's the god damn punk that asked for this? X(
Is it only me, or has the F2P actually made the content more expensive?
Yes, you can grind, and usually in a very lab rat, monotonous way (which actually ISNT my idea of fun after 10 hours of real life work), or you can end up paying MORE than what you did with the subscription model.
Dungeon and Dragons Online: You can buy a single race for about 900 ingame tokens. 1200 tokens cost about 15 dollars. To get a nice race + class combo, you have to pay around 1800 tokens. See what they did there? In less than 5 minutes you spent twice the amount you would have paid to subscribe a whole game universe.
Now who's the god damn punk that asked for this? X(
In DDO you can still sub which not only give you access to all but also 500 tp /month... problem solved
And the differnce is between renting content (sub) or owning the content (buying it) + In DDO you can TP for playing the game.
So don't see how that post is relevant at all. DDO give you choice, how is that bad?
Edit: And btw, how many races/claess do you get without paying ANYTHING?
If WoW = The Beatles and WAR = Led Zeppelin Then LotrO = Pink Floyd
Depending on how the F2P game is handled, there are some decent F2P titles (LOTRO & Champions Online) but others are basically Pay2Win like Need For Seed World. F2P is decent if you play the game once or twice a month, rather than spending $14/mo if you don't spend much time playing, I'm on the road alot so it's not like I can come home every night and sit down to play it.
In my opinion, F2P is the only way to go if the developers are not confident that their game is any good, which is most of them these days. Good games are either B2P or P2P. That could change in the future, because it's looking like F2P is the only way the bad games can make money, and that's all anyone in the business is really after, right?
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
F2P games are way too expensive to actually ENJOY, imo. What I prefer is either P2P or Guild Wars style B2P. I really really sincerely loathe the F2P models I have seen....all of them. Just one opinion.
Is it only me, or has the F2P actually made the content more expensive?
Yes, you can grind, and usually in a very lab rat, monotonous way (which actually ISNT my idea of fun after 10 hours of real life work), or you can end up paying MORE than what you did with the subscription model.
Dungeon and Dragons Online: You can buy a single race for about 900 ingame tokens. 1200 tokens cost about 15 dollars. To get a nice race + class combo, you have to pay around 1800 tokens. See what they did there? In less than 5 minutes you spent twice the amount you would have paid to subscribe a whole game universe.
Now who's the god damn punk that asked for this? X(
In DDO you can still sub which not only give you access to all but also 500 tp /month... problem solved
And the differnce is between renting content (sub) or owning the content (buying it) + In DDO you can TP for playing the game.
So don't see how that post is relevant at all. DDO give you choice, how is that bad?
Edit: And btw, how many races/claess do you get without paying ANYTHING?
Yes thats all very lovely, but most of the F2P titles DONT have an optional sub. If these particular game publishers actually implemented a subscription model, they have already seen too much of all the goodies inside the F2P model. You would just have a sub with a cash shop on top.
Its GREED. Plain and simple. Shit in colorful wrappings. Oh and im sure DDO just have all the purchaseable races and classes in their cash shop just for shits and giggles. Of course nobody would spend their money and buy any class or race combo that is worth up to four times the worth of a monthly sub. So of course your right.
Oh and everybody mentions lotro in regards to teardrippingly successful F2P transitions. So, they make more money now. Hurray for them, and too bad for you, because its YOU that end up paying more for the same thing you had before. There will be people here telling you its because the amount of people playing and using the CS in lotro has just sky rocketed.
On the other hand, it is much more plausible that they DONT have as many people playing as they did a while back, but the people playing are actually paying more.
And the thing that strikes me as increadibly ironic is that this development stems from the lovely term
B2P + Microtransactions is the future! Thats what I want!
Well you can have it for your self, and dont get me in on it... >.< Sounds just like forsaken world or any such nonsense, only they get to grab you for 29.95 on steam first, before going for the juggular.
Free to play is a term a psychologist with mastery in economics would conjure up. The real term would be "The sky is the limit (for what you can pay)"
A few years ago F2P was viewed as a foul word. Now with so many western companies adopting some form of F2P the player base has made an about face on the topic !!
So what has changed sense then, NOTHING besides where the game is made. Interesting don't you think of the western mindset.
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
Oh and everybody mentions lotro in regards to teardrippingly successful F2P transitions. So, they make more money now. Hurray for them, and too bad for you, because its YOU that end up paying more for the same thing you had before. There will be people here telling you its because the amount of people playing and using the CS in lotro has just sky rocketed.
On the other hand, it is much more plausible that they DONT have as many people playing as they did a while back, but the people playing are actually paying more.
And the thing that strikes me as increadibly ironic is that this development stems from the lovely term
FREE TO PLAY
HA!
Well since I do not feel like typing out the same response to idiotic statements like this again, I will just quote myself.
Originally posted by AKASlaphappy
I am not going to go into all of this again, but I have already given evidence multiply times on this board, that this statement is completely idiotic.
Here is the short version:
Freemium in LOTRO would cost me $150 and I would own everything in game with 5665 points left over.
If I went P2P in LOTRO I would pay 119.88 a year if you pay for a year at a time, if you pay monthly it is $179.88. So if you only play for a short time the subscription is cheaper at least for the yearly, but if you want to keep an active account for an extended period of time then the picture starts to change drastically.
After two years without purchasing any new expansion, subscription paying yearly is at $239.76/paying monthly is at $359.76 and freemium is at $150.
After 3 years subscription paying yearly is at $359.64/paying monthly is at $539.64, and freemium is at $150.
Then to make things even more interesting if a paid for expansion comes out you have to add that to the total of your subscription cost, while with the Freemiuim and my 5665 points I can just add it without another penny spent.
So how is LOTRO freemium more of a rip of then P2P? So is paying $150 compared to $359 considered somehow bad now? There is a big difference between some F2P game and the freemium model some companies are using! But stop repeating stupid crap that has not evidence to back it up!
If you want to see what I said in full check out the following links:
Well there you go math and basic common sense doesn’t agree with your assessment! After all who would have thought it would be cheaper to buy content from a developer then renting it through a pay to play system? Oh wait everyone that knows buying a house is cheaper than renting one could have told you that. But please do not let facts stop you on your crusade against the freemium model that games like LOTRO uses, after all who cares if it is really cheaper in the long run? The point is to make up facts about it so it looks bad because you do not like it.
P2P for me is the only way to go.I have been arround MMORPG's since the early days.The biggest thing I notice in F2P games is the glitches, bugs, and it seems almost natural for the publishers and devs to ignore the issues, much more than P2P.The norm is that there is significantly less money invested in the developement of a F2P game than a P2P game.95% of all F2P games will cost you much more a month than a Subscription based game.And From my experience they are so sub par as far as game mechanics working smoothely , glitches and bugs and customer service.There are a hand full of games that are F2P where u can get a good bang for free.Initially that is.But eventually you will feel the pressure of needing to buy something.Until its almost a neccesity .
So in my conclusion , P2P is far cheaper than F2P with usually the time and money put into the right places to make a solid piece.F2P seems to be the (lets see how little we spend to make this and how much we can profit , type of deal).
The genre is evolving , and I have tried about every F2P that has peaked my interest.And I can honestly say that I am purely only doing Subs anymore.Can't even stomache the thought of doing any type of F2P ever again.
Oh and everybody mentions lotro in regards to teardrippingly successful F2P transitions. So, they make more money now. Hurray for them, and too bad for you, because its YOU that end up paying more for the same thing you had before. There will be people here telling you its because the amount of people playing and using the CS in lotro has just sky rocketed.
On the other hand, it is much more plausible that they DONT have as many people playing as they did a while back, but the people playing are actually paying more.
And the thing that strikes me as increadibly ironic is that this development stems from the lovely term
FREE TO PLAY
HA!
Well since I do not feel like typing out the same response to idiotic statements like this again, I will just quote myself.
Originally posted by AKASlaphappy
I am not going to go into all of this again, but I have already given evidence multiply times on this board, that this statement is completely idiotic.
Here is the short version:
Freemium in LOTRO would cost me $150 and I would own everything in game with 5665 points left over.
If I went P2P in LOTRO I would pay 119.88 a year if you pay for a year at a time, if you pay monthly it is $179.88. So if you only play for a short time the subscription is cheaper at least for the yearly, but if you want to keep an active account for an extended period of time then the picture starts to change drastically.
After two years without purchasing any new expansion, subscription paying yearly is at $239.76/paying monthly is at $359.76 and freemium is at $150.
After 3 years subscription paying yearly is at $359.64/paying monthly is at $539.64, and freemium is at $150.
Then to make things even more interesting if a paid for expansion comes out you have to add that to the total of your subscription cost, while with the Freemiuim and my 5665 points I can just add it without another penny spent.
So how is LOTRO freemium more of a rip of then P2P? So is paying $150 compared to $359 considered somehow bad now? There is a big difference between some F2P game and the freemium model some companies are using! But stop repeating stupid crap that has not evidence to back it up!
If you want to see what I said in full check out the following links:
Well there you go math and basic common sense doesn’t agree with your assessment! After all who would have thought it would be cheaper to buy content from a developer then renting it through a pay to play system? Oh wait everyone that knows buying a house is cheaper than renting one could have told you that. But please do not let facts stop you on your crusade against the freemium model that games like LOTRO uses, after all who cares if it is really cheaper in the long run? The point is to make up facts about it so it looks bad because you do not like it.
Well, let me just say this, before I hopefully will find this thread again and make a nice, backed up reply to your fancy sway over reality post:
If, in reality, players are paying 150$ instead of 500$+, then godness - they would be loosing alot of money wouldnt they? But they arent. They have made more money now than ever before. Is that because somehow their game has finally learned how to attract all the players it couldnt before? Im sure you would argue yes.
However, many people, myself included, dont tend to play the same game for a long period of time. When I do play, I want quality gameplay. For people like me, such game play would cost me more because I usually got all the bells and whistles for 15 bucks a month x 2 or 3 months. Now I see more and more games that simply rely on cash shops for their income (forget about lotro - it was built for p2p and is one of the more serious players on the market). Before you had a roof on how much people could end up paying for their gameplay. With F2P you DONT have that roof, and dont go around telling people it's coincidental and nobody will end up paying MORE. Because you are simply lying or being increadibly naive.
With F2P there are no conincidents. There are only roads leading to the cash shop. Cash shops is a serious threat towards actual creative and imaginative GAMEPLAY. Too many companys view you simply as a walking wallet.
Oh and everybody mentions lotro in regards to teardrippingly successful F2P transitions. So, they make more money now. Hurray for them, and too bad for you, because its YOU that end up paying more for the same thing you had before. There will be people here telling you its because the amount of people playing and using the CS in lotro has just sky rocketed.
On the other hand, it is much more plausible that they DONT have as many people playing as they did a while back, but the people playing are actually paying more.
And the thing that strikes me as increadibly ironic is that this development stems from the lovely term
FREE TO PLAY
HA!
Well since I do not feel like typing out the same response to idiotic statements like this again, I will just quote myself.
Originally posted by AKASlaphappy
I am not going to go into all of this again, but I have already given evidence multiply times on this board, that this statement is completely idiotic.
Here is the short version:
Freemium in LOTRO would cost me $150 and I would own everything in game with 5665 points left over.
If I went P2P in LOTRO I would pay 119.88 a year if you pay for a year at a time, if you pay monthly it is $179.88. So if you only play for a short time the subscription is cheaper at least for the yearly, but if you want to keep an active account for an extended period of time then the picture starts to change drastically.
After two years without purchasing any new expansion, subscription paying yearly is at $239.76/paying monthly is at $359.76 and freemium is at $150.
After 3 years subscription paying yearly is at $359.64/paying monthly is at $539.64, and freemium is at $150.
Then to make things even more interesting if a paid for expansion comes out you have to add that to the total of your subscription cost, while with the Freemiuim and my 5665 points I can just add it without another penny spent.
So how is LOTRO freemium more of a rip of then P2P? So is paying $150 compared to $359 considered somehow bad now? There is a big difference between some F2P game and the freemium model some companies are using! But stop repeating stupid crap that has not evidence to back it up!
If you want to see what I said in full check out the following links:
Well there you go math and basic common sense doesn’t agree with your assessment! After all who would have thought it would be cheaper to buy content from a developer then renting it through a pay to play system? Oh wait everyone that knows buying a house is cheaper than renting one could have told you that. But please do not let facts stop you on your crusade against the freemium model that games like LOTRO uses, after all who cares if it is really cheaper in the long run? The point is to make up facts about it so it looks bad because you do not like it.
Well, let me just say this, before I hopefully will find this thread again and make a nice, backed up reply to your fancy sway over reality post:
If, in reality, players are paying 150$ instead of 500$+, then godness - they would be loosing alot of money wouldnt they? But they arent. They have made more money now than ever before. Is that because somehow their game has finally learned how to attract all the players it couldnt before? Im sure you would argue yes.
However, many people, myself included, dont tend to play the same game for a long period of time. When I do play, I want quality gameplay. For people like me, such game play would cost me more because I usually got all the bells and whistles for 15 bucks a month x 2 or 3 months. Now I see more and more games that simply rely on cash shops for their income (forget about lotro - it was built for p2p and is one of the more serious players on the market). Before you had a roof on how much people could end up paying for their gameplay. With F2P you DONT have that roof, and dont go around telling people it's coincidental and nobody will end up paying MORE. Because you are simply lying or being increadibly naive.
With F2P there are no conincidents. There are only roads leading to the cash shop. Cash shops is a serious threat towards actual creative and imaginative GAMEPLAY. Too many companys view you simply as a walking wallet.
Yea and DDO, LotrO, Champions AoC etc all give you the OPTION that fits your personal playstyle. So whats the problem?
Isnt it better to give more options that fit more players that just give one sub fits all?
And btw, most P2P MMOs have cash shops...
If WoW = The Beatles and WAR = Led Zeppelin Then LotrO = Pink Floyd
Are we talking TRUE f2p? or Fake f2p with cash shop?
I could dig a true F2P without a cash shop, but unfortunately that just isn't how it works.
It is almost deceptive marketing, which I am not a fan of, but sadly is what our country seems to be built around (our country as in the united states.)
The thing about F2P and cash shops is that the game provider is counting on the impulse buying that is human behaviour.
Playing a game...hey you know, 5 bucks will get me 500 points and I can buy 2 experience scrolls...it's just 5 bucks and if I only do it today then it is no problem...
2 days later...ah I really liked that increased exp gain...what is another 5 bucks?
By the end of the month you probably have spent 50$ on these cash shop items barely even realizing you had done it until you look at your credit card bill.
Also, when cash shop items give unfair advantages over other players, it is absolutely rediculous. It becomes a battle of spending real money to see who is better with small amounts of actual skill involved.
I am entitled to my opinions, misspellings, and grammatical errors.
If Guild Wars 2 is solid and keeps its cash shop pure fluff (maybe with some xp potions and some other convenience items, but only if the game isn't grindy and annoying without them), then hopefully the buy to play model will take off.
But I'm not holding my breath. These comanies aren't stupid. People get hyped over the newest game on the shelf and buy it for around $50 because we all like being first ones in. Most of the time we cancel by the end of the month, but if we linger on in sucky games, that's $15 a month more these companies get. Why turn down another $15? Plus, if we do like the game enough to play longer, that's more money for them, and if they've got Blizzard/Activision's brass, we'll buy their expansionsn on top of it for another $40-$50! Some of us also quit the first month, then resub to check out changes (and bug fixes that should have been implemented before beta ended, too), and that's another $15 in their pockets, even if we only play for a day and then quit again.
I doubt GW2 could sustain a much higher price tag for the box than what people already paid to be first in on games like Rift and Earthrise, and if they release shoddy expansions at a too rapid pace, players simply won't purchase them, plus their reputation will be shot, so they'll have to do it right. I have great respect for a company willing to do it right, rather than go for more profit but less satisfied customers, but the reason pay to play works so well is that we, the customers, keep coming back for more. I'm as guilty as anyone, especially lately. Free trials have saved me some money, but lately I'm eager to be one of the first in crowd and it has cost me.
Meanwhile, free to play games have gotten very little out of me over the years. In fact, Entropia was the only one that got anything. And because I liked to play more hours per month than $15-$20 could possibly sustain, I soon gave up on it. It's a neat game, it's just not in my budget. I don't think it's in the budgets of very many people, to be honest. It's not pay to win, though. It's just pay to do the fun things, and pay a lot.
Ramble ramble. What was my point?
Oh yeah. Some free to play companies have shady reputations, some have better reputations. Deserved or not. But the same is true for pay to play game companies. Guild Wars is a game with a solid reputation overall, judging by everything I've read (wasn't my cup o tea, as with DAoC, something about the UI and graphics made me sad). If Guild Wars 2 is done right, customers might use the power of their wallets to force other game companies to reconsider their current business practices. If not, we're probably stuck with more of the same for a long, long time to come.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
I still think runescape had the best format of all. It was completely free to play except with less gameplay and ads and a premium option that quadrupled the amount of stuff available and removed ads. and on top of that, if u played on a free world, none of the premiums had an advantage over you since it was turned off on free worlds. And the free game was enouh of a game in itself.
If games followed runescapes model, i would love it. But, your game has to have enough content to support that, which most games don't.
and also, b2p+ packs is a very good model imo.
I really dislike the cash shop item f2p's tho. Thats the only thing I can't stand. F2p that sells content is perfectly fine, but not items. But thats not worse than p2p's that sell each expansion seperately+sub+cash shop items.
1. Well, let me just say this, before I hopefully will find this thread again and make a nice, backed up reply to your fancy sway over reality post:
If, in reality, players are paying 150$ instead of 500$+, then godness - they would be loosing alot of money wouldnt they? But they arent. They have made more money now than ever before. Is that because somehow their game has finally learned how to attract all the players it couldnt before? Im sure you would argue yes.
2. However, many people, myself included, dont tend to play the same game for a long period of time. When I do play, I want quality gameplay. For people like me, such game play would cost me more because I usually got all the bells and whistles for 15 bucks a month x 2 or 3 months. Now I see more and more games that simply rely on cash shops for their income (forget about lotro - it was built for p2p and is one of the more serious players on the market). Before you had a roof on how much people could end up paying for their gameplay. With F2P you DONT have that roof, and dont go around telling people it's coincidental and nobody will end up paying MORE. Because you are simply lying or being increadibly naive.
3.With F2P there are no conincidents. There are only roads leading to the cash shop. Cash shops is a serious threat towards actual creative and imaginative GAMEPLAY. Too many companys view you simply as a walking wallet.
1. Fancy sway over reality? HAHA! Well then how about you make a F2P account on LOTRO and see if it would cost you more than the $150 I posted to get all the content in the game right now! That is exactly what I did to get the numbers I used, it was not theory it is called a fact that anyone can look up for themselves! Let’s see your facts to back up what you are saying here, since I can backup mine with facts where are yours?
2. And as I stated for people that like playing short term the pay 2 play models is better, but for anyone that wants to play the game over years it is not. How hard is that to understand, is basic math too much for you here? Let’s see with the purchase of the game at $60 and then another 1 to 3 months at $15 that still comes out to be $75 to $105. So yes it is cheaper than the $150 freemium you would pay on LOTRO for that short of play time, but see here is the catch if you ever want to return to the game you will have to pay them more money. So your cost keeps going up but mine on the freemium side will not, it does not increase from the $150 unless I want to buy vanity items or some other stupid item. But that is where self control comes in, I can stop myself from buying things like that so my cost will never rise above $150 while your pay 2 play will keep going up. Interesting who would of thought that a month to month payment would cost more than buying something out right, oh wait anyone that understands math!
3. That is awesome you call me naïve and then you go on to make a statement that only F2P sees people as wallets. Well let’s see World of Warcraft makes $67,500,000 a month off of just the North American and Europe subscription fees, plus they also charge for expansions. They also have a vanity item cash shop to get even more money out of their customer base! Yep sounds to me like it is only F2P companies see clients as wallets oh wait! Also what happened to your roof on your Pay to play games seems like with the cash shop (in games like WoW) it died a horrible death.
Dude just admit that you do not like any type of MMO besides pay 2 play and be done with this topic. Nothing anyone is going to say is going to change your mind that F2P and feemium are the devil and pay 2 play is god’s gift to gamers.
If Guild Wars 2 is solid and keeps its cash shop pure fluff (maybe with some xp potions and some other convenience items, but only if the game isn't grindy and annoying without them), then hopefully the buy to play model will take off.
But I'm not holding my breath. These comanies aren't stupid. People get hyped over the newest game on the shelf and buy it for around $50 because we all like being first ones in. Most of the time we cancel by the end of the month, but if we linger on in sucky games, that's $15 a month more these companies get. Why turn down another $15? Plus, if we do like the game enough to play longer, that's more money for them, and if they've got Blizzard/Activision's brass, we'll buy their expansionsn on top of it for another $40-$50! Some of us also quit the first month, then resub to check out changes (and bug fixes that should have been implemented before beta ended, too), and that's another $15 in their pockets, even if we only play for a day and then quit again.
I doubt GW2 could sustain a much higher price tag for the box than what people already paid to be first in on games like Rift and Earthrise, and if they release shoddy expansions at a too rapid pace, players simply won't purchase them, plus their reputation will be shot, so they'll have to do it right. I have great respect for a company willing to do it right, rather than go for more profit but less satisfied customers, but the reason pay to play works so well is that we, the customers, keep coming back for more. I'm as guilty as anyone, especially lately. Free trials have saved me some money, but lately I'm eager to be one of the first in crowd and it has cost me.
Meanwhile, free to play games have gotten very little out of me over the years. In fact, Entropia was the only one that got anything. And because I liked to play more hours per month than $15-$20 could possibly sustain, I soon gave up on it. It's a neat game, it's just not in my budget. I don't think it's in the budgets of very many people, to be honest. It's not pay to win, though. It's just pay to do the fun things, and pay a lot.
Ramble ramble. What was my point?
Oh yeah. Some free to play companies have shady reputations, some have better reputations. Deserved or not. But the same is true for pay to play game companies. Guild Wars is a game with a solid reputation overall, judging by everything I've read (wasn't my cup o tea, as with DAoC, something about the UI and graphics made me sad). If Guild Wars 2 is done right, customers might use the power of their wallets to force other game companies to reconsider their current business practices. If not, we're probably stuck with more of the same for a long, long time to come.
It was a ramble, a long rambe, but a very nice ramble. We hope to hear more of your rambling in the future. : )
No it is not what we want, it is what the industry wants us to want so they can make more money.
It's not what YOU want, but apparantly it's what the consumer wants, as more people play f2p than p2p.
But do more people spend more money on F2P than they do on P2P? I think not.
Obviously if you get something for free more people will try it, but that does not mean that the sub-genre is more successful.
That is where F2P is failing. They got more people, but not more money.
So I assume you know how much money these f2p games are bringing in? Oh, right, you don't, you're just making things up.
LOTRO devs have said they're making more money now that it's f2p... but what do they know about it, right?
F2P is only failing for those who hate it. It's working for everyone else.
I said I think not. Learn to read...
LOTRO devs making more money as F2P does not mean F2P MMORPGs are more successful. I cant imagine a F2P game making more than WoW, Aion or Rift. But if you know something that I dont, please post it.
1. Fancy sway over reality? HAHA! Well then how about you make a F2P account on LOTRO and see if it would cost you more than the $150 I posted to get all the content in the game right now! That is exactly what I did to get the numbers I used, it was not theory it is called a fact that anyone can look up for themselves! Let’s see your facts to back up what you are saying here, since I can backup mine with facts where are yours?
2. And as I stated for people that like playing short term the pay 2 play models is better, but for anyone that wants to play the game over years it is not. How hard is that to understand, is basic math too much for you here? Let’s see with the purchase of the game at $60 and then another 3 months at $15 that still comes out to be $75. So yes it is cheaper than the $150 freemium you would pay on LOTRO for that short of play time, but see here is the catch if you ever want to return to the game you will have to pay them more money. So your cost keeps going up but mine on the freemium side will not, it does not increase from the $150 unless I want to buy vanity items or some other stupid item. But that is where self control comes in, I can stop myself from buying things like that so my cost will never rise above $150 while your pay 2 play will keep going up. Interesting who would of thought that a month to month payment would cost more than buying something out right, oh wait anyone that understands math!
3. That is awesome you call me naïve and then you go on to make a statement that only F2P sees people as wallets. Well let’s see World of Warcraft makes $67,500,000 a month off of just the North American and Europe subscription fees, plus they also charge for expansions. They also have a vanity item cash shop to get even more money out of their customer base! Yep sounds to me like it is only F2P companies see clients as wallets oh wait! Also what happened to your roof on your Pay to play games seems like with the cash shop (in games like WoW) it died a horrible death.
Dude just admit that you do not like any type of MMO besides pay 2 play and be done with this topic. Nothing anyone is going to say is going to change your mind that F2P and feemium are the devil and pay 2 play is god’s gift to gamers.
Looking at the google docs of the cash shop your $150 price tag doesn't really represent the cost of the P2W model. You should really compare the full cost of P2W vs the monthly cost of P2P.
P2P would be the equivalent of obtaining every expansion possible and using every item at all times in the item mall.
Take in the game, change it a little and release it under a different name. Update it constantly instead of never.
But that ain't gonna happen and if F2P is what takes to get steady updates so be it. No, I don't play now because the game have no updates at all .
That is a good point. There are very few P2P game with frequent expansions, most don't even have more than one even though they've been out for a few years. Some none at all.
At the very least the Issues which City of Heroes brought out every year should be a baseline for how much content to bring out on P2P games.
I know of some F2P games which have brought out more content in 3 or so years than P2P's have in 8.
Comments
Yes
Is it only me, or has the F2P actually made the content more expensive?
Yes, you can grind, and usually in a very lab rat, monotonous way (which actually ISNT my idea of fun after 10 hours of real life work), or you can end up paying MORE than what you did with the subscription model.
Dungeon and Dragons Online: You can buy a single race for about 900 ingame tokens. 1200 tokens cost about 15 dollars. To get a nice race + class combo, you have to pay around 1800 tokens. See what they did there? In less than 5 minutes you spent twice the amount you would have paid to subscribe a whole game universe.
Now who's the god damn punk that asked for this? X(
In DDO you can still sub which not only give you access to all but also 500 tp /month... problem solved
And the differnce is between renting content (sub) or owning the content (buying it) + In DDO you can TP for playing the game.
So don't see how that post is relevant at all. DDO give you choice, how is that bad?
Edit: And btw, how many races/claess do you get without paying ANYTHING?
If WoW = The Beatles
and WAR = Led Zeppelin
Then LotrO = Pink Floyd
Depending on how the F2P game is handled, there are some decent F2P titles (LOTRO & Champions Online) but others are basically Pay2Win like Need For Seed World. F2P is decent if you play the game once or twice a month, rather than spending $14/mo if you don't spend much time playing, I'm on the road alot so it's not like I can come home every night and sit down to play it.
In my opinion, F2P is the only way to go if the developers are not confident that their game is any good, which is most of them these days. Good games are either B2P or P2P. That could change in the future, because it's looking like F2P is the only way the bad games can make money, and that's all anyone in the business is really after, right?
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
F2P games are way too expensive to actually ENJOY, imo. What I prefer is either P2P or Guild Wars style B2P. I really really sincerely loathe the F2P models I have seen....all of them. Just one opinion.
President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club
Yes thats all very lovely, but most of the F2P titles DONT have an optional sub. If these particular game publishers actually implemented a subscription model, they have already seen too much of all the goodies inside the F2P model. You would just have a sub with a cash shop on top.
Its GREED. Plain and simple. Shit in colorful wrappings. Oh and im sure DDO just have all the purchaseable races and classes in their cash shop just for shits and giggles. Of course nobody would spend their money and buy any class or race combo that is worth up to four times the worth of a monthly sub. So of course your right.
Oh and everybody mentions lotro in regards to teardrippingly successful F2P transitions. So, they make more money now. Hurray for them, and too bad for you, because its YOU that end up paying more for the same thing you had before. There will be people here telling you its because the amount of people playing and using the CS in lotro has just sky rocketed.
On the other hand, it is much more plausible that they DONT have as many people playing as they did a while back, but the people playing are actually paying more.
And the thing that strikes me as increadibly ironic is that this development stems from the lovely term
FREE TO PLAY
HA!
B2P + Microtransactions is the future! Thats what I want!
Guild Wars 2 Youtube Croatian Maniacs
My Guild Wars titles
Well you can have it for your self, and dont get me in on it... >.< Sounds just like forsaken world or any such nonsense, only they get to grab you for 29.95 on steam first, before going for the juggular.
Free to play is a term a psychologist with mastery in economics would conjure up. The real term would be "The sky is the limit (for what you can pay)"
A few years ago F2P was viewed as a foul word. Now with so many western companies adopting some form of F2P the player base has made an about face on the topic !!
So what has changed sense then, NOTHING besides where the game is made. Interesting don't you think of the western mindset.
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
Well since I do not feel like typing out the same response to idiotic statements like this again, I will just quote myself.
Well there you go math and basic common sense doesn’t agree with your assessment! After all who would have thought it would be cheaper to buy content from a developer then renting it through a pay to play system? Oh wait everyone that knows buying a house is cheaper than renting one could have told you that. But please do not let facts stop you on your crusade against the freemium model that games like LOTRO uses, after all who cares if it is really cheaper in the long run? The point is to make up facts about it so it looks bad because you do not like it.
Didn't you check out the most recent poll?
F2P only got ~20% while Subscription-based was over 50%... Even if it is a skewed audience, it sorta answers your question with a resounding no =/
Though, it does sound like you just had a bad experience and felt the need to rant, which comprises most of the posts on this site these days.
P2P for me is the only way to go.I have been arround MMORPG's since the early days.The biggest thing I notice in F2P games is the glitches, bugs, and it seems almost natural for the publishers and devs to ignore the issues, much more than P2P.The norm is that there is significantly less money invested in the developement of a F2P game than a P2P game.95% of all F2P games will cost you much more a month than a Subscription based game.And From my experience they are so sub par as far as game mechanics working smoothely , glitches and bugs and customer service.There are a hand full of games that are F2P where u can get a good bang for free.Initially that is.But eventually you will feel the pressure of needing to buy something.Until its almost a neccesity .
So in my conclusion , P2P is far cheaper than F2P with usually the time and money put into the right places to make a solid piece.F2P seems to be the (lets see how little we spend to make this and how much we can profit , type of deal).
The genre is evolving , and I have tried about every F2P that has peaked my interest.And I can honestly say that I am purely only doing Subs anymore.Can't even stomache the thought of doing any type of F2P ever again.
Well, let me just say this, before I hopefully will find this thread again and make a nice, backed up reply to your fancy sway over reality post:
If, in reality, players are paying 150$ instead of 500$+, then godness - they would be loosing alot of money wouldnt they? But they arent. They have made more money now than ever before. Is that because somehow their game has finally learned how to attract all the players it couldnt before? Im sure you would argue yes.
However, many people, myself included, dont tend to play the same game for a long period of time. When I do play, I want quality gameplay. For people like me, such game play would cost me more because I usually got all the bells and whistles for 15 bucks a month x 2 or 3 months. Now I see more and more games that simply rely on cash shops for their income (forget about lotro - it was built for p2p and is one of the more serious players on the market). Before you had a roof on how much people could end up paying for their gameplay. With F2P you DONT have that roof, and dont go around telling people it's coincidental and nobody will end up paying MORE. Because you are simply lying or being increadibly naive.
With F2P there are no conincidents. There are only roads leading to the cash shop. Cash shops is a serious threat towards actual creative and imaginative GAMEPLAY. Too many companys view you simply as a walking wallet.
Yea and DDO, LotrO, Champions AoC etc all give you the OPTION that fits your personal playstyle. So whats the problem?
Isnt it better to give more options that fit more players that just give one sub fits all?
And btw, most P2P MMOs have cash shops...
If WoW = The Beatles
and WAR = Led Zeppelin
Then LotrO = Pink Floyd
Are we talking TRUE f2p? or Fake f2p with cash shop?
I could dig a true F2P without a cash shop, but unfortunately that just isn't how it works.
It is almost deceptive marketing, which I am not a fan of, but sadly is what our country seems to be built around (our country as in the united states.)
The thing about F2P and cash shops is that the game provider is counting on the impulse buying that is human behaviour.
Playing a game...hey you know, 5 bucks will get me 500 points and I can buy 2 experience scrolls...it's just 5 bucks and if I only do it today then it is no problem...
2 days later...ah I really liked that increased exp gain...what is another 5 bucks?
By the end of the month you probably have spent 50$ on these cash shop items barely even realizing you had done it until you look at your credit card bill.
Also, when cash shop items give unfair advantages over other players, it is absolutely rediculous. It becomes a battle of spending real money to see who is better with small amounts of actual skill involved.
I am entitled to my opinions, misspellings, and grammatical errors.
If Guild Wars 2 is solid and keeps its cash shop pure fluff (maybe with some xp potions and some other convenience items, but only if the game isn't grindy and annoying without them), then hopefully the buy to play model will take off.
But I'm not holding my breath. These comanies aren't stupid. People get hyped over the newest game on the shelf and buy it for around $50 because we all like being first ones in. Most of the time we cancel by the end of the month, but if we linger on in sucky games, that's $15 a month more these companies get. Why turn down another $15? Plus, if we do like the game enough to play longer, that's more money for them, and if they've got Blizzard/Activision's brass, we'll buy their expansionsn on top of it for another $40-$50! Some of us also quit the first month, then resub to check out changes (and bug fixes that should have been implemented before beta ended, too), and that's another $15 in their pockets, even if we only play for a day and then quit again.
I doubt GW2 could sustain a much higher price tag for the box than what people already paid to be first in on games like Rift and Earthrise, and if they release shoddy expansions at a too rapid pace, players simply won't purchase them, plus their reputation will be shot, so they'll have to do it right. I have great respect for a company willing to do it right, rather than go for more profit but less satisfied customers, but the reason pay to play works so well is that we, the customers, keep coming back for more. I'm as guilty as anyone, especially lately. Free trials have saved me some money, but lately I'm eager to be one of the first in crowd and it has cost me.
Meanwhile, free to play games have gotten very little out of me over the years. In fact, Entropia was the only one that got anything. And because I liked to play more hours per month than $15-$20 could possibly sustain, I soon gave up on it. It's a neat game, it's just not in my budget. I don't think it's in the budgets of very many people, to be honest. It's not pay to win, though. It's just pay to do the fun things, and pay a lot.
Ramble ramble. What was my point?
Oh yeah. Some free to play companies have shady reputations, some have better reputations. Deserved or not. But the same is true for pay to play game companies. Guild Wars is a game with a solid reputation overall, judging by everything I've read (wasn't my cup o tea, as with DAoC, something about the UI and graphics made me sad). If Guild Wars 2 is done right, customers might use the power of their wallets to force other game companies to reconsider their current business practices. If not, we're probably stuck with more of the same for a long, long time to come.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
~Albert Einstein
I still think runescape had the best format of all. It was completely free to play except with less gameplay and ads and a premium option that quadrupled the amount of stuff available and removed ads. and on top of that, if u played on a free world, none of the premiums had an advantage over you since it was turned off on free worlds. And the free game was enouh of a game in itself.
If games followed runescapes model, i would love it. But, your game has to have enough content to support that, which most games don't.
and also, b2p+ packs is a very good model imo.
I really dislike the cash shop item f2p's tho. Thats the only thing I can't stand. F2p that sells content is perfectly fine, but not items. But thats not worse than p2p's that sell each expansion seperately+sub+cash shop items.
1. Fancy sway over reality? HAHA! Well then how about you make a F2P account on LOTRO and see if it would cost you more than the $150 I posted to get all the content in the game right now! That is exactly what I did to get the numbers I used, it was not theory it is called a fact that anyone can look up for themselves! Let’s see your facts to back up what you are saying here, since I can backup mine with facts where are yours?
2. And as I stated for people that like playing short term the pay 2 play models is better, but for anyone that wants to play the game over years it is not. How hard is that to understand, is basic math too much for you here? Let’s see with the purchase of the game at $60 and then another 1 to 3 months at $15 that still comes out to be $75 to $105. So yes it is cheaper than the $150 freemium you would pay on LOTRO for that short of play time, but see here is the catch if you ever want to return to the game you will have to pay them more money. So your cost keeps going up but mine on the freemium side will not, it does not increase from the $150 unless I want to buy vanity items or some other stupid item. But that is where self control comes in, I can stop myself from buying things like that so my cost will never rise above $150 while your pay 2 play will keep going up. Interesting who would of thought that a month to month payment would cost more than buying something out right, oh wait anyone that understands math!
3. That is awesome you call me naïve and then you go on to make a statement that only F2P sees people as wallets. Well let’s see World of Warcraft makes $67,500,000 a month off of just the North American and Europe subscription fees, plus they also charge for expansions. They also have a vanity item cash shop to get even more money out of their customer base! Yep sounds to me like it is only F2P companies see clients as wallets oh wait! Also what happened to your roof on your Pay to play games seems like with the cash shop (in games like WoW) it died a horrible death.
Dude just admit that you do not like any type of MMO besides pay 2 play and be done with this topic. Nothing anyone is going to say is going to change your mind that F2P and feemium are the devil and pay 2 play is god’s gift to gamers.
It was a ramble, a long rambe, but a very nice ramble. We hope to hear more of your rambling in the future. : )
I said I think not. Learn to read...
LOTRO devs making more money as F2P does not mean F2P MMORPGs are more successful. I cant imagine a F2P game making more than WoW, Aion or Rift. But if you know something that I dont, please post it.
My gaming blog
Looking at the google docs of the cash shop your $150 price tag doesn't really represent the cost of the P2W model. You should really compare the full cost of P2W vs the monthly cost of P2P.
P2P would be the equivalent of obtaining every expansion possible and using every item at all times in the item mall.
I want a re-release.
Take in the game, change it a little and release it under a different name. Update it constantly instead of never.
But that ain't gonna happen and if F2P is what takes to get steady updates so be it. No, I don't play now because the game have no updates at all .
That is a good point. There are very few P2P game with frequent expansions, most don't even have more than one even though they've been out for a few years. Some none at all.
At the very least the Issues which City of Heroes brought out every year should be a baseline for how much content to bring out on P2P games.
I know of some F2P games which have brought out more content in 3 or so years than P2P's have in 8.