I'm seeing F2P game after F2P game price gouge the fuck out of "premium services" and "boosters," sometimes for double or tripple the cost of what it would take for a monthly subscription to a P2P game .... when did this becoime ok to do?
I guess this is the victory lap F2P beating P2P or something: now that F2P has is clearly winning the battle VS P2P it dosen't have to keep competitive on comparable subscriptions pricing.
[mod edit]: the whole reason F2P took off was because it was more accessible and affordable than P2P, shit gets too bad people will just shift back in the other direction ... espacally if going B2P works out for TSW and western P2P holdouts realise that there are other options to stay competitive.
It's always been "ok" to do. If not enough people pay that price, they will either lower it or go out of business. Why shouldn't they charge what people are willing to pay? This is why I don't buy Apple products. When did it become ok to charge 1000.00 for 300.00 worth of parts?
I'm seeing F2P game after F2P game price gouge the fuck out of "premium services" and "boosters," sometimes for double or tripple the cost of what it would take for a monthly subscription to a P2P game .... when did this becoime ok to do?
I guess this is the victory lap F2P beating P2P or something: now that F2P has is clearly winning the battle VS P2P it dosen't have to keep competitive on comparable subscriptions pricing.
[mod edit]: the whole reason F2P took off was because it was more accessible and affordable than P2P, shit gets too bad people will just shift back in the other direction ... espacally if going B2P works out for TSW and western P2P holdouts realise that there are other options to stay competitive.
The frogs have been slow boiled and are still sitting in the pan.
It became ok when the buying public said it was ok, and argued on the forums and whatever to try and convince others it was also ok in order to validate their state of mind.
The carpet bagging of the games industry... at least you get to say you was here.
quality lies with the design, not the pricing structure; there are plenty of P2P games that are total shit from day one.
games that were developed to be F2P from the ground up are typically exceptional titles. granted that they tend to be smaller titles with a heavier slant on PVP to fill in the gaps, but they are still generally worth playing and (IMO) are a little more rewarding due to their quick progression.
it's all in how you look at it: F2P monetizes things that P2P gives out for free, but progression in such games is usually MUCH faster, with higher rewards for your effort VS P2P progression rates. P2P gives you everything for free, but typically makes the requirements for said items unbelievably time consuming. When it comes down to it, $50 for a high level mount may actually be more affordable than the cost in sub fees it will take you to get to the point you can actually access the comparable content.
the worst ones (which happen to most of the early F2P conversions, and the root cause for the stigma against F2P) are the ones that were designed with P2P progression rates, then converted to F2P; resulting in games that progress at the P2P snail's pace, but still make you pay for notable items in a cash shop.
Your statements are BS. The fundamental design of P2W games is based on monetization. Without this core design these companies don't make money, and the tradeoff for this design phliosphy is quality.
Your progression rate statements are ridiculous. The core design of the cash shop model is to throw in hurdles so people purchase the advancement (item). It is there to encourage you to purchase items. Why would they make things easier so you would be less inclined to purchase?
Originally posted by zymurgeist I think all the " you don't need to pay that much" posts miss the point. Of course you don't need to pay anything at all. What staggers my imagination is how is even possible to pay that much? At some point don't these companies say "Ok this is just too outrageous?" It's like the joke about selling pencils (or whatever) for a million dollars each because you only need to sell one.
yeah, and it's biting them in the ass now: notice how few new F2P localizations have come out this year VS last?
there is still just as many upcoming MMO's in Korea that could be localized, but western F2P localizers have poached off too many "Whales" and the return just aren't what they used to be.
Which would suggest that the actual paying customer base for F2P games is finite in the West and may well have peaked (and now be looking only at shrinking at the bubble bursts under the weight of education, buyer remorse, and other elements).
I wonder seriously if 2012/ 2013 will be remembered as the dark days of cash shop that we all look back at and think, ' how the fuck did anyone actually fall for that shit?'.
You're really going to pitch that level of choice as a bad thing or as price gouging? Some of you will go to some serious lengths to hate on F2P.
This is what I love about MMORPG. I didn't "pitch" anything, nor did I say jack squat about the OP, nor did I say diddly about liking or hating F2P. I answered a question -- simply, accurately, and inarguably.
Someone wanted to know what MMO has a premium sub over $20 and FE, whether you think it makes F2P look bad or not, does.
Whether there are other levels is irrelevant to the original question.
Originally posted by zymurgeist I think all the " you don't need to pay that much" posts miss the point. Of course you don't need to pay anything at all. What staggers my imagination is how is even possible to pay that much? At some point don't these companies say "Ok this is just too outrageous?" It's like the joke about selling pencils (or whatever) for a million dollars each because you only need to sell one.
yeah, and it's biting them in the ass now: notice how few new F2P localizations have come out this year VS last?
there is still just as many upcoming MMO's in Korea that could be localized, but western F2P localizers have poached off too many "Whales" and the return just aren't what they used to be.
Which would suggest that the actual paying customer base for F2P games is finite in the West and may well have peaked (and now be looking only at shrinking at the bubble bursts under the weight of education, buyer remorse, and other elements).
I wonder seriously if 2012/ 2013 will be remembered as the dark days of cash shop that we all look back at and think, ' how the fuck did anyone actually fall for that shit?'.
I think it has more to do with the number of western games going f2p and saturating the market to the point were it is no longer as enticing for publishers to localize eastern games. The customer base for everything is finite.
To me it says there is better competition and they don't need to go through hte hassle and expense of localization.
I think the next few years are when people will remember back when we all used to pay tons for subscriptions and think how the hell did we duped into throwing away that much money away.
You know, I'm not sure why you think this. Once everything goes a la carte, prices will go up. Right now F2P can save some money for some people but once things get stablized and the market gets defined more, you will end up paying more in the long run. Companies don't create revenue models that generate less money.
What you are counting on is volume, meaning if there's a huge population of players, it only takes a small percentage to pay high fees to make companies happy. Problem is, they are never happy. They will find a way to increase the percentage of players spending money and how much.
I expect sub rates to go up too. The only reason they haven't gone up is because of cash shops + subs.
Originally posted by zymurgeist I think all the " you don't need to pay that much" posts miss the point. Of course you don't need to pay anything at all. What staggers my imagination is how is even possible to pay that much? At some point don't these companies say "Ok this is just too outrageous?" It's like the joke about selling pencils (or whatever) for a million dollars each because you only need to sell one.
yeah, and it's biting them in the ass now: notice how few new F2P localizations have come out this year VS last?
there is still just as many upcoming MMO's in Korea that could be localized, but western F2P localizers have poached off too many "Whales" and the return just aren't what they used to be.
Which would suggest that the actual paying customer base for F2P games is finite in the West and may well have peaked (and now be looking only at shrinking at the bubble bursts under the weight of education, buyer remorse, and other elements).
I wonder seriously if 2012/ 2013 will be remembered as the dark days of cash shop that we all look back at and think, ' how the fuck did anyone actually fall for that shit?'.
To me it says there is better competition and they don't need to go through hte hassle and expense of localization.
I think the next few years are when people will remember back when we all used to pay tons for subscriptions and think how the hell did we duped into throwing away that much money away.
The F2P games that come out of Asia are more likely to be p2w as well and the market for that has dried up consiberably.
It's no secret that someone has to pay for the "F2P", its not the rec cross or salvation army we're talking about. but this is what many people wanted and now they got it. The cost of these game to fully enjoy them now is just much more distorted and the real cost can easily be more "hidden".
Its really like with all those low cost / cheap airlines, they have lots of hidden away costs, that make it much harder to calculate the real cost of the product you want/need (seat reservation, extra luggage, etc).
It became ok when people (aka idiots) started paying those prices.
So...1994 then. "Platinum" sub for fifty per. Of course, that was positively a relief after paying $12 per hour back in the GEnie days.
No point, except today's players seem to react always with astonishment when reminded that not everyone's entertainment budget is limited. There's nothing new under the sun, particularly not 'premium' access services. It's worth...what it's worth to a given individual. Neither more or less.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
quality lies with the design, not the pricing structure; there are plenty of P2P games that are total shit from day one.
games that were developed to be F2P from the ground up are typically exceptional titles. granted that they tend to be smaller titles with a heavier slant on PVP to fill in the gaps, but they are still generally worth playing and (IMO) are a little more rewarding due to their quick progression.
it's all in how you look at it: F2P monetizes things that P2P gives out for free, but progression in such games is usually MUCH faster, with higher rewards for your effort VS P2P progression rates. P2P gives you everything for free, but typically makes the requirements for said items unbelievably time consuming. When it comes down to it, $50 for a high level mount may actually be more affordable than the cost in sub fees it will take you to get to the point you can actually access the comparable content.
the worst ones (which happen to most of the early F2P conversions, and the root cause for the stigma against F2P) are the ones that were designed with P2P progression rates, then converted to F2P; resulting in games that progress at the P2P snail's pace, but still make you pay for notable items in a cash shop.
Your statements are BS. The fundamental design of P2W games is based on monetization. Without this core design these companies don't make money, and the tradeoff for this design phliosphy is quality.
Your progression rate statements are ridiculous. The core design of the cash shop model is to throw in hurdles so people purchase the advancement (item). It is there to encourage you to purchase items. Why would they make things easier so you would be less inclined to purchase?
Well, you need to understand that not every Free to Play game is Pay to Win. League of legends is a pretty good example of this where you are only paying to speed up something that would otherwise take time to level up and unlock the important things like runes.
I think Sogi's assessment is pretty much spot on, except this part: games that were developed to be F2P from the ground up are typically exceptional titles.
There are a LOT of free to play games designed to be free to play from the ground up - they mostly come from asian, specifically Korea. And they are shit. Complete, utter, shit. But, the market is becoming so saturated with free to play titles that gamers now have more options and no longer have to settle with the shittiest of shitty free to play titles.
Originally posted by zymurgeist At some point don't these companies say "Ok this is just too outrageous?"
A corporate board room with a conscience? I think not.
Their goal is to bleed customers (us) out of every stinkin' cent they can get away with. Consider what might happen to board room members that question the greed machine with terms like "outrageous" and you'll have your answer.
Its their duty to their share holders to make the best ROI that they can. If they over do it, then they lose out on the mid to long term profits to be had. Unfortunately, all too many suits think only in terms of this quarter. Thats how various shit happens.
Originally posted by zymurgeist At some point don't these companies say "Ok this is just too outrageous?"
A corporate board room with a conscience? I think not.
Their goal is to bleed customers (us) out of every stinkin' cent they can get away with. Consider what might happen to board room members that question the greed machine with terms like "outrageous" and you'll have your answer.
Greed is good. To get customers money, they need to provide something that is fun .. and competition compete down teh prices.
I don't need devs to be saints. I only need them to provide a fun entertainment product, preferably at low prices, and F2P fits that bill perfectly. .
Shouldnt have cried about a 15$ a month or 50 cents a day sub lol. Now you are stuck with outrageous f2p cash shops which more go pay to win lol.
Actually it's the SUBSCRIPTION that costs more not the F2P. I spend nowhere near that much a month per game for any of my games.
But, since it's a sub, what's wrong with paying a dollar a day. I mean if 50 cents is pocket change surely another 50 is peanuts as well. Why are the sub people complaining about the cost of their subs?
To get the same out of a f2p as a pay to play you are spending a great deal more than that $15 a month.
Lets look at SWTOR, probably the worste example but... lets use it anyways.
As a free to play player in SWTOR it's first going to cost you $100-$180 off the rip to unlock everything. Then it's going to cost you an additional $56 a month to get access to everything lol.
"You have to pay for four different passes to unlock four of the game's five content avenues (all but the story) and each weekly pass is 240 cartel coins. As each cartel coin costs a little over 0.727 cents USD each, 240 per pass, four passes per character, two characters, four passes a month = 7680CC, or $55.84.
Now obviously, no sane person is going to actually pay $56 a month for SWTOR. They're going to pay the $15 subscription fee, or they're not going to pay at all. Which makes one thing very painfully obvious: SWTOR's F2P isn't meant to be a free-to-play MMORPG; it's meant to be an excessively contrived demo to get people to sign up for subscriptions."
here are a LOT of free to play games designed to be free to play from the ground up - they mostly come from asian, specifically Korea. And they are shit. Complete, utter, shit.
yeah, well .... *shrug* I think you are also not considering that in Korea their MMO market is also fused with their social / casual games market.
Farmville is a MMO in every possible way except that the western market doesn't want it classified as such.
bad mechanics are bad mechanics, any game can have those, any game can also have a shitty cash shop and or P2P structure. In general, if a game is designed from the ground up with the concept that players will be purchasing in game items with out of game money, you will typically see little disturbance on gameplay in the form of cash shop hurdles.
it is all a matter of integration, something that was built for it will always work better than having it hacked in after development (see TOR). even today, most of what we see getting localized over here is still only second generation F2P titles that while they may have launched as F2P, most of their development was done during the P2P era.
Originally posted by worldalpha Our approach is to make everything affordable to get as many paying customers as possible.
which is the best thing everyone -should- do, this whale hunting is what kills the market.
it is based on data collected during the infancy of F2P's introduction and it has become woefully outdated compared to what today's player base numbers could produce on getting everyone to pay a dollar.
Originally posted by zymurgeist At some point don't these companies say "Ok this is just too outrageous?"
A corporate board room with a conscience? I think not.
Their goal is to bleed customers (us) out of every stinkin' cent they can get away with. Consider what might happen to board room members that question the greed machine with terms like "outrageous" and you'll have your answer.
Conscience? No, it's a cold calculation. Reputation has market value. That's the thing corporation haters forget, they're ultimately rational or they fall.
In theory. Matters get quite a bit different in a crony capitalist system, such as exists in the US and many other countries.
Also "rational" has different meanings, in different contexts.
Reputation *does* have great value, but that can be over ridden by government favors. Look at Comcast, which is consistently rated one of the most hated companies in the US. But that doesn't keep it from being very profitable, thanks to its monopoly status in way too many markets.
I'm seeing F2P game after F2P game price gouge the fuck out of "premium services" and "boosters," sometimes for double or tripple the cost of what it would take for a monthly subscription to a P2P game .... when did this becoime ok to do?
I guess this is the victory lap F2P beating P2P or something: now that F2P has is clearly winning the battle VS P2P it dosen't have to keep competitive on comparable subscriptions pricing.
[mod edit]: the whole reason F2P took off was because it was more accessible and affordable than P2P, shit gets too bad people will just shift back in the other direction ... espacally if going B2P works out for TSW and western P2P holdouts realise that there are other options to stay competitive.
What games are you talking about specifically?
I play numerous Freemium F2P games and they are nothing like your description.
You have premium membership, the same as it was when the games were sub based, or you have free to play and unlock basic needs, gear, etc. both memberships have opportunities to buy additional items in stores, but nothing is mandatory to game play, so where do you get these figures?
Originally posted by zymurgeist I think all the " you don't need to pay that much" posts miss the point. Of course you don't need to pay anything at all. What staggers my imagination is how is even possible to pay that much? At some point don't these companies say "Ok this is just too outrageous?" It's like the joke about selling pencils (or whatever) for a million dollars each because you only need to sell one.
yeah, and it's biting them in the ass now: notice how few new F2P localizations have come out this year VS last?
there is still just as many upcoming MMO's in Korea that could be localized, but western F2P localizers have poached off too many "Whales" and the return just aren't what they used to be.
Which would suggest that the actual paying customer base for F2P games is finite in the West and may well have peaked (and now be looking only at shrinking at the bubble bursts under the weight of education, buyer remorse, and other elements).
I wonder seriously if 2012/ 2013 will be remembered as the dark days of cash shop that we all look back at and think, ' how the fuck did anyone actually fall for that shit?'.
To me it says there is better competition and they don't need to go through hte hassle and expense of localization.
I think the next few years are when people will remember back when we all used to pay tons for subscriptions and think how the hell did we duped into throwing away that much money away.
The thing is when we were all paying the same £2.50 or whatever a week for our subs it didn't really matter if a small percentage of the player base left because the money was spread out.
But F2P? F2P relies on the whales spending a ton of cash to carry to game for all the freeloaders, and that means all it takes is a small percentage (the spenders) to see the light for the revenue model to fall flat on it's face. It's a house built on straw really. The cash shop F2P market is already showing signs of peaking in the West I think.
As for better competition making it not worth the cost of localisation... I am not sure that theory is very realistic.
"I'm seeing F2P game after F2P game price gouge the fuck out of "premium services" and "boosters," sometimes for double or tripple the cost of what it would take for a monthly subscription to a P2P game"
You're really going to pitch that level of choice as a bad thing or as price gouging? Some of you will go to some serious lengths to hate on F2P.
I'm sorry Lokto, but you're shifting goalposts there. You specifically asked
"Which MMOs charge more than $20 for premium monthly service"
You don't get to handwave away the example he provided by pointing to the sub-premium services on offer. Yes choice is good. Yes, some "Free" games charge $30 a month for their top tier service.
I'm quite happy with my £50/6months EVE subscription
It became ok when people (aka idiots) started paying those prices. What was reasonable, now becomes ridiculous, and when that happens, it is time to find new hobby or become an idiot yourself.
It is the same thing that happened with p2p. When games first came out, people demo'd, and were careful not to pay for games that weren't worth the money. Today, no more demos, people pay to beta, the idiots will pre-order in the millions months (years?) before the game has a release date. Some morons even totally give up their voices by buying lifetime subscriptions...
If you were a developer, what would you do? You mostly likely would chase the cash. If idiots are willing to pay $25 dollars for skins, why would you charge $3?
You know...I'll never get this rationale. Just because they have or are willing to spend money on those types of things doesn't mean I'll define them as being an idiot.
Would I personally do it? Hell no....
That doesn't mean I think they're stupid or I'm going to insult others for doing so.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
Comments
It's always been "ok" to do. If not enough people pay that price, they will either lower it or go out of business. Why shouldn't they charge what people are willing to pay? This is why I don't buy Apple products. When did it become ok to charge 1000.00 for 300.00 worth of parts?
The frogs have been slow boiled and are still sitting in the pan.
It became ok when the buying public said it was ok, and argued on the forums and whatever to try and convince others it was also ok in order to validate their state of mind.
The carpet bagging of the games industry... at least you get to say you was here.
Your statements are BS. The fundamental design of P2W games is based on monetization. Without this core design these companies don't make money, and the tradeoff for this design phliosphy is quality.
Your progression rate statements are ridiculous. The core design of the cash shop model is to throw in hurdles so people purchase the advancement (item). It is there to encourage you to purchase items. Why would they make things easier so you would be less inclined to purchase?
Which would suggest that the actual paying customer base for F2P games is finite in the West and may well have peaked (and now be looking only at shrinking at the bubble bursts under the weight of education, buyer remorse, and other elements).
I wonder seriously if 2012/ 2013 will be remembered as the dark days of cash shop that we all look back at and think, ' how the fuck did anyone actually fall for that shit?'.
This is what I love about MMORPG. I didn't "pitch" anything, nor did I say jack squat about the OP, nor did I say diddly about liking or hating F2P. I answered a question -- simply, accurately, and inarguably.
Someone wanted to know what MMO has a premium sub over $20 and FE, whether you think it makes F2P look bad or not, does.
Whether there are other levels is irrelevant to the original question.
I think it has more to do with the number of western games going f2p and saturating the market to the point were it is no longer as enticing for publishers to localize eastern games. The customer base for everything is finite.
You know, I'm not sure why you think this. Once everything goes a la carte, prices will go up. Right now F2P can save some money for some people but once things get stablized and the market gets defined more, you will end up paying more in the long run. Companies don't create revenue models that generate less money.
What you are counting on is volume, meaning if there's a huge population of players, it only takes a small percentage to pay high fees to make companies happy. Problem is, they are never happy. They will find a way to increase the percentage of players spending money and how much.
I expect sub rates to go up too. The only reason they haven't gone up is because of cash shops + subs.
The F2P games that come out of Asia are more likely to be p2w as well and the market for that has dried up consiberably.
In a free market that would be the case, but the only reason sub prices haven't increased is because WOW hasn't raised their price.
As one option that only gets you an "aura" that buffs others in your group. It is one choice.
Wa min God! Se æx on min heafod is!
It's no secret that someone has to pay for the "F2P", its not the rec cross or salvation army we're talking about. but this is what many people wanted and now they got it. The cost of these game to fully enjoy them now is just much more distorted and the real cost can easily be more "hidden".
Its really like with all those low cost / cheap airlines, they have lots of hidden away costs, that make it much harder to calculate the real cost of the product you want/need (seat reservation, extra luggage, etc).
Blame the I want everything for free generation
So...1994 then. "Platinum" sub for fifty per. Of course, that was positively a relief after paying $12 per hour back in the GEnie days.
No point, except today's players seem to react always with astonishment when reminded that not everyone's entertainment budget is limited. There's nothing new under the sun, particularly not 'premium' access services. It's worth...what it's worth to a given individual. Neither more or less.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Well, you need to understand that not every Free to Play game is Pay to Win. League of legends is a pretty good example of this where you are only paying to speed up something that would otherwise take time to level up and unlock the important things like runes.
I think Sogi's assessment is pretty much spot on, except this part: games that were developed to be F2P from the ground up are typically exceptional titles.
There are a LOT of free to play games designed to be free to play from the ground up - they mostly come from asian, specifically Korea. And they are shit. Complete, utter, shit. But, the market is becoming so saturated with free to play titles that gamers now have more options and no longer have to settle with the shittiest of shitty free to play titles.
Its their duty to their share holders to make the best ROI that they can. If they over do it, then they lose out on the mid to long term profits to be had. Unfortunately, all too many suits think only in terms of this quarter. Thats how various shit happens.
Greed is good. To get customers money, they need to provide something that is fun .. and competition compete down teh prices.
I don't need devs to be saints. I only need them to provide a fun entertainment product, preferably at low prices, and F2P fits that bill perfectly. .
Thanks,
Mike
Working on Social Strategy MMORTS (now Launched!) http://www.worldalpha.com
So you took a horrid game with the worst F2P format to use as your example. Ok fine lets use Aion. Ok $0 a month.
yeah, well .... *shrug* I think you are also not considering that in Korea their MMO market is also fused with their social / casual games market.
Farmville is a MMO in every possible way except that the western market doesn't want it classified as such.
bad mechanics are bad mechanics, any game can have those, any game can also have a shitty cash shop and or P2P structure. In general, if a game is designed from the ground up with the concept that players will be purchasing in game items with out of game money, you will typically see little disturbance on gameplay in the form of cash shop hurdles.
it is all a matter of integration, something that was built for it will always work better than having it hacked in after development (see TOR). even today, most of what we see getting localized over here is still only second generation F2P titles that while they may have launched as F2P, most of their development was done during the P2P era.
I would much rather pay $15 a month and also have to pay for transfers from dead servers, pets, mounts, etc....
I'm a smart consumer.
which is the best thing everyone -should- do, this whale hunting is what kills the market.
it is based on data collected during the infancy of F2P's introduction and it has become woefully outdated compared to what today's player base numbers could produce on getting everyone to pay a dollar.
In theory. Matters get quite a bit different in a crony capitalist system, such as exists in the US and many other countries.
Also "rational" has different meanings, in different contexts.
Reputation *does* have great value, but that can be over ridden by government favors. Look at Comcast, which is consistently rated one of the most hated companies in the US. But that doesn't keep it from being very profitable, thanks to its monopoly status in way too many markets.
What games are you talking about specifically?
I play numerous Freemium F2P games and they are nothing like your description.
You have premium membership, the same as it was when the games were sub based, or you have free to play and unlock basic needs, gear, etc. both memberships have opportunities to buy additional items in stores, but nothing is mandatory to game play, so where do you get these figures?
The thing is when we were all paying the same £2.50 or whatever a week for our subs it didn't really matter if a small percentage of the player base left because the money was spread out.
But F2P? F2P relies on the whales spending a ton of cash to carry to game for all the freeloaders, and that means all it takes is a small percentage (the spenders) to see the light for the revenue model to fall flat on it's face. It's a house built on straw really. The cash shop F2P market is already showing signs of peaking in the West I think.
As for better competition making it not worth the cost of localisation... I am not sure that theory is very realistic.
I'm sorry Lokto, but you're shifting goalposts there. You specifically asked
"Which MMOs charge more than $20 for premium monthly service"
You don't get to handwave away the example he provided by pointing to the sub-premium services on offer. Yes choice is good. Yes, some "Free" games charge $30 a month for their top tier service.
I'm quite happy with my £50/6months EVE subscription
Give me liberty or give me lasers
You know...I'll never get this rationale. Just because they have or are willing to spend money on those types of things doesn't mean I'll define them as being an idiot.
Would I personally do it? Hell no....
That doesn't mean I think they're stupid or I'm going to insult others for doing so.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.