Sub is the way to go as most games stand now. The problem is that most games do not do a good job of integrating in the F2P. F2P allows players to get the demo, increase player base without risking any money. The problem is, most of these games end up losing their F2P over time because the games are so limited.
The Devs need to use the F2P players as part of the game. Make F2P players work for/in the game and pay them with P2P game time. That would allow the F2P players to stick around and HELP the P2P players to have fun. The game world and game play could be enriched with all the extra tools and options this would give the Devs.
The real F2P are usually not all that limited, it's the Freemium ones, where a subscription model is actually available that limit the "F2P" option. Games built as F2P from the ground up usually let you (theoretically) get everything in game with in-game currency. In real F2P games the free players actually do help to enrich the playing experience of the paying players. The problem is they have to keep on coming up with new ways to get the paying customers to fork over cash every few months and Pay 2 Win is just around the corner, you'll often be heading there sooner or later.
Absolutely amazing. We have people on here willing to build or buy a PC with state of the art hardware, multiple video cards, and play on multiple monitors...But they trun into the ultimate cheap azzes when it comes to actual programs for their monster PC. Here's a different take on gaming pricing. 1st, you pay for the software, $60, or whatever. That software actually works as advertised. No post beta bugs or glitches...And then, here we go, you pay a $100 a month to play. What you get is a full time 1st rate programming staff working around the clock on issues and adding new content, and real GM's in game, all of the time. Yeah, I know, it's just crazy talk..Or crazy talk is expecting awesome software to be given away for nothing..
On a side note, that would sure thin the MMODouchbags out too..hmmm...
Absolutely amazing. We have people on here willing to build or buy a PC with state of the art hardware, multiple video cards, and play on multiple monitors...But they trun into the ultimate cheap azzes when it comes to actual programs for their monster PC. Here's a different take on gaming pricing. 1st, you pay for the software, $60, or whatever. That software actually works as advertised. No post beta bugs or glitches...And then, here we go, you pay a $100 a month to play. What you get is a full time 1st rate programming staff working around the clock on issues and adding new content, and real GM's in game, all of the time. Yeah, I know, it's just crazy talk..Or crazy talk is expecting awesome software to be given away for nothing..
On a side note, that would sure thin the MMODouchbags out too..hmmm...
Roll a character on a WoW PVP server and see how thinned the MMODouchebags are by pay walls.
Also the text I highlighted in red is an extremely rare, damn near unheard of, set of circumstances but even though I spend a few hundred euros, every few years or so, to update my PC, which is way less than what you suggested, I still buy games every so often from the B2P genre or invest in a particularly good F2P title but up until now I have not and I will never pay rent on a game I already bought, you may call my a cheap ass if you so desire but I couldn't give a tosser what you say as you live in a fantasy world where every MMO gamer out there has disposable income in the amounts required to make 10-15$ a month (or more depending on how lucky you are with the conversion rates, in EVE-Online, only sub game I play and that's because I sub via plex, up until fairly recently the brits paid 12-15 quid, or thereabout, for one month of EVE whereas the rest paid either 15 euros or worse 15$) expended on a digital medium you already own a game copy of a non-issue which I am sorry to say hasn't been the case for at least half a decade if not more.
There are already demands for World of Darkness to be subscription based, because we all know what the communities are like in F2P.
Also, the quality of the game is ALWAYS better for sub games, there is always more to offer, and without any additional costs!!
Between f2p and p2p I have noticed no difference in quality, content, depth or customer service. They are about the same.
Actually there are many huge differences, graphics, more game features, more updates, better customer support. After 15 years of online gaming, I think I would know the difference.
But the biggest most important thing that you didnt mention, is the community. That is by FAR the biggest difference and imo the most important for any online game to last.
No. They are about the same. After 13 years of gaming I think I would know the difference, and there are none. Some f2p have better graphics than some p2p, some have more updates, some have more features. Some p2p have more than some f2p.
F2p games generally have the same graphics, features updates and cs. And there is no difference in the community. There are some good, some bad. IMO no real differences in percentages.
Then your out of step with todays gamers, because most of us agree that the communities in F2P games are horrible!
Not only that, other than a couple F2P games, you spend more money on F2P than a sub. Unless you want to be sub-par for weeks or months while you catch up to the players that spent money.
All the new F2P games comming out right now are using the old graphics engines, and all the old features we have seen in games for years.
Basically its like the old saying goes, "you get what your pay for".
Absolutely amazing. We have people on here willing to build or buy a PC with state of the art hardware, multiple video cards, and play on multiple monitors...But they trun into the ultimate cheap azzes when it comes to actual programs for their monster PC. Here's a different take on gaming pricing. 1st, you pay for the software, $60, or whatever. That software actually works as advertised. No post beta bugs or glitches...And then, here we go, you pay a $100 a month to play. What you get is a full time 1st rate programming staff working around the clock on issues and adding new content, and real GM's in game, all of the time. Yeah, I know, it's just crazy talk..Or crazy talk is expecting awesome software to be given away for nothing..
On a side note, that would sure thin the MMODouchbags out too..hmmm...
I agree, its pretty ironic, and I see it all the time, players spending so much money on thier machines, they treat them like pets or something. Then they go out and demand free games, wtih all this free content and on and on...its laughable!
Then when I see people try and convince me that F2P games are just as good, or even better than sub games. Its hard to debate someone who actually believes it.
Game devs are here to make money, why this is a bad thing, I will never understand. As long as I like what they are dishing out, I will gladly pay for it.
Then your out of step with todays gamers, because most of us agree that the communities in F2P games are horrible!
Not only that, other than a couple F2P games, you spend more money on F2P than a sub. Unless you want to be sub-par for weeks or months while you catch up to the players that spent money.
All the new F2P games comming out right now are using the old graphics engines, and all the old features we have seen in games for years.
I wouldn't be so sure that it's Venge who is "out of step with todays gamers," but then again I get the feeling you're working off a different dataset than Venge and the entire gaming industry is working off of.
"I agree, its pretty ironic...
Then when I see people try and convince me that F2P games are just as good, or even better than sub games. Its hard to debate someone who actually believes it."
Speaking of irony...
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
There are already demands for World of Darkness to be subscription based, because we all know what the communities are like in F2P.
Also, the quality of the game is ALWAYS better for sub games, there is always more to offer, and without any additional costs!!
Between f2p and p2p I have noticed no difference in quality, content, depth or customer service. They are about the same.
Actually there are many huge differences, graphics, more game features, more updates, better customer support. After 15 years of online gaming, I think I would know the difference.
But the biggest most important thing that you didnt mention, is the community. That is by FAR the biggest difference and imo the most important for any online game to last.
No. They are about the same. After 13 years of gaming I think I would know the difference, and there are none. Some f2p have better graphics than some p2p, some have more updates, some have more features. Some p2p have more than some f2p.
F2p games generally have the same graphics, features updates and cs. And there is no difference in the community. There are some good, some bad. IMO no real differences in percentages.
Then your out of step with todays gamers, because most of us agree that the communities in F2P games are horrible!
Not only that, other than a couple F2P games, you spend more money on F2P than a sub. Unless you want to be sub-par for weeks or months while you catch up to the players that spent money.
All the new F2P games comming out right now are using the old graphics engines, and all the old features we have seen in games for years.
Basically its like the old saying goes, "you get what your pay for".
No I'm not. I would say you are out of step, most agree that there is no difference.
And most agree that most do not spend anything in f2p.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
F2p has been around longer than p2p, it has shown it's longevity both in individual games and in the market.
This may be a bubble we are in right now, however f2p itself is not going anywhere.
This is SO not true. Your not talking about mmos or any other "real" games.
Even back in the early days of MUDS you had to pay by the hour, the only free games were arcade type games on web browsers.
MIght be more accurate to say f2p MMO's have been around longer than p2p MMORPG, as Garriot in UO coined the term MMORPG.
and F2P have just as long a history as p2p
However MMO's were around before then. Others that were possible the first are M59, The Realm and Nexus in late 1996. These are debatable well because The realm reached a max of 100-200 people online.
Furcadia was around in 1996 also. A f2p game with a CS.
edited - I orginally stated that while muds are indeed the grandfather to MMO's, they are not MMO's. However upon reflection there really is no difference between a mud and an MMO, especially a graphical. At least nothing significant, except perhaps the number of people that can play at one time. So I'll fall back to the definition of MMO. If the mud is online and can hold more people than a traditional multiplayer (whatever that number is), I'd consider an MMO.
Therefore my statement about f2p being longer or as long as p2p is now false unless others have information about f2p muds. However I will still assert that f2p has just as long a history as the type of MMO's that we usually recognize as MMO's that being the m59, UO, EQ, WoW.... model - being a visual world, with lots of activities and lots of people.
Originally posted by SaltDaFries Most of the time people will spend way more money on a F2P game over time rather than a sub game whether they are aware of it or not.
Actually the data shows that 60-90 percent of the people in the games spend nothing at all.
Which data? One that is supplied by by a non invested source? One that is neutral in their agenda and not here just to shill a business model that ultimately is only good for the share holder.
Links to this data please?
We've linked it for you in enough threads over the past few years that at this point you've got to be kittening. No one can participate in this many discussions about this very topic and be so unaware of the most basic and readily available information on the subject matter.
I mean, seriously, you're going onthree years with this "Link please?" stuff, and we're tired of giving it to you over and over since it obviously doesn't make a difference - you're going to forget in a week anyway.
Google is your friend. Use it.
No, the onus is on the poster to supply the supporting links, not for me to go looking for info that supports their point.
I ask for links because I have yet to be shown any neutral non invested source that is at all convincing and, simply, most of what pro cash shop fans post is just industry shilled recieved wisdom.
How much has your opinion changed about all this after all this time though? Seeing as you have challanged me in that area... How much have you taken anything on board that's been said to you? Or do you just think it's for everyone else to adjust automatically to your way of thinking? You seem to forget whatever is said to you in far less then a week, in all honesty.
I am not gonna trawl through your post history to show how dogmatic and repetitious your posts are on this subject, because, frankly, I haven't the time to waste in that way, but I sure that anyone who has that sneaks a look would see this is a clear case of pot calling the kettle black.
Saying this though, I would prefer to not personalise this any further and just stick to the topic. I am not here to make personal criticsims of anyone or how they post, I am here to discuss games and, in this case, the revenue model situation. I suggest we draw a line under this and stick to that. If you insist on carrying on though please do it via PM? That way you can make whatever point you might want about me personally without derailing the thread any further.
Originally posted by SaltDaFries Most of the time people will spend way more money on a F2P game over time rather than a sub game whether they are aware of it or not.
Actually the data shows that 60-90 percent of the people in the games spend nothing at all.
Which data? One that is supplied by by a non invested source? One that is neutral in their agenda and not here just to shill a business model that ultimately is only good for the share holder.
Links to this data please?
We've linked it for you in enough threads over the past few years that at this point you've got to be kittening. No one can participate in this many discussions about this very topic and be so unaware of the most basic and readily available information on the subject matter.
I mean, seriously, you're going onthree years with this "Link please?" stuff, and we're tired of giving it to you over and over since it obviously doesn't make a difference - you're going to forget in a week anyway.
Google is your friend. Use it.
No, the onus is on the poster to supply the supporting links, not for me to go looking for info that supports their point.
I ask for links because I have yet to be shown any neutral non invested source that is at all convincing and, simply, most of what pro cash shop fans post is just industry shilled recieved wisdom.
How much has your opinion changed about all this after all this time though? Seeing as you have challanged me in that area... How much have you taken anything on board that's been said to you? Or do you just think it's for everyone else to adjust automatically to your way of thinking? You seem to forget whatever is said to you in far less then a week, in all honesty.
I am not gonna trawl through your post history to show how dogmatic and repetitious your posts are on this subject, because, frankly, I haven't the time to waste in that way, but I sure that anyone who has that sneaks a look would see this is a clear case of pot calling the kettle black.
Saying this though, I would prefer to not personalise this any further and just stick to the topic. I am not here to make personal criticsims of anyone or how they post, I am here to discuss games and, in this case, the revenue model situation. I suggest we draw a line under this and stick to that. If you insist on carrying on though please do it via PM? That way you can make whatever point you might want about me personally without derailing the thread any further.
It's been done dozens and dozens of times on this site. You've been around long enough to see them. We have provided them dozens and dozens of times.
We have done our part and more. If by now you still don't believe them, then nothing anyone can say will change your mind.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Originally posted by SaltDaFries Most of the time people will spend way more money on a F2P game over time rather than a sub game whether they are aware of it or not.
Actually the data shows that 60-90 percent of the people in the games spend nothing at all.
Which data? One that is supplied by by a non invested source? One that is neutral in their agenda and not here just to shill a business model that ultimately is only good for the share holder.
Links to this data please?
Google is your friend. Use it.
No, the onus is on the poster to supply the supporting links, not for me to go looking for info that supports their point.
I ask for links because I have yet to be shown any neutral non invested source that is at all convincing and, simply, most of what pro cash shop fans post is just industry shilled recieved wisdom.
It's been done dozens and dozens of times on this site. You've been around long enough to see them.
You didn't read my reply? Because you seem to just be repeating the same thing without taking it into account.
Yes, I said I have seen them, and I have also said every link I have every been given has led to jaundiced, shilled, industry led garbage.
I keep asking in the hope that one day someone will come up with a credible non F2P industry led neutral source.
There won't be one lol. Unless a game is made on the cheap it does not get held up by F2P. Is F2P a good addition to get more people in the door and more attention to the game? Yes. Does a lot of the "F2P data" get muddled by a game's sub option? Yep. Of course people are going to say F2P is the future and P2P is dying. It's wishful thinking because if it's true then they will never run out of games to play, righ? Lol, right and the quality of the current titles will continue, right.... riiiight
Originally posted by Aelious There won't be one lol. Unless a game is made on the cheap it does not get held up by F2P. Is F2P a good addition to get more people in the door and more attention to the game? Yes. Does a lot of the "F2P data" get muddled by a game's sub option? Yep. Of course people are going to say F2P is the future and P2P is dying. It's wishful thinking because if it's true then they will never run out of games to play, righ? Lol, right and the quality of the current titles will continue, right.... riiiight
There is no evidence to either way.
But the point is this .. today .. there are plenty of F2P fun titles. The trend is going F2P .. so i expect so next year. 5 year down the road .. who knows. Anything can change.
And there is no reason not to take advantage of the F2P boom now. If it dies in a few years, who cares? I will find somethign else to do.
Then your out of step with todays gamers, because most of us agree that the communities in F2P games are horrible!
Not only that, other than a couple F2P games, you spend more money on F2P than a sub. Unless you want to be sub-par for weeks or months while you catch up to the players that spent money.
All the new F2P games comming out right now are using the old graphics engines, and all the old features we have seen in games for years.
I wouldn't be so sure that it's Venge who is "out of step with todays gamers," but then again I get the feeling you're working off a different dataset than Venge and the entire gaming industry is working off of.
"I agree, its pretty ironic...
Then when I see people try and convince me that F2P games are just as good, or even better than sub games. Its hard to debate someone who actually believes it."
Speaking of irony...
Feelings aren't facts, I know thats a popular theme these days, but no. You are not only out of step, but your not even in the same reality.
How many titles recently started with box sells, then P2P, only to turn into F2P after they turned out to be garbage? I lost count myself. If F2P means a game is just as good as the rest, then why does it always turn out that way?
I see a lot of new games comming out that are F2P from the start, many play in your browswer, and most with cash shops of course. They are NOTHING compared to sub games, especially in content, no way no how!
How many titles recently started with box sells, then P2P, only to turn into F2P after they turned out to be garbage? I lost count myself. If F2P means a game is just as good as the rest, then why does it always turn out that way?
Because fewer and fewer players are willing to pay for a sub? Because there are more competition that goes F2P? Tell me, when is the big success of a sub game?
F2p has been around longer than p2p, it has shown it's longevity both in individual games and in the market.
This may be a bubble we are in right now, however f2p itself is not going anywhere.
This is SO not true. Your not talking about mmos or any other "real" games.
Even back in the early days of MUDS you had to pay by the hour, the only free games were arcade type games on web browsers.
MIght be more accurate to say f2p MMO's have been around longer than p2p MMORPG, as Garriot in UO coined the term MMORPG.
UO was not free, I wonder if you even know what your talking about.
Good thing I never stated UO was free. In my edit I stated f2p MMO's has been around longer than MMORPG, and just as long as MMO's have.
And to your other comment at Lokto, saveral games went f2p not because they were garbage (which is completely subjective) but because the developers believed they could make even more money with f2p than p2p. EQ, EQ2 and LOTRO are 3.
And there are many f2p games out there with just as much content, quality, depth and cs as p2p. And there are p2p that don't have as much content, quality, depth and cs as some f2p. There is no difference. You are deluding yourself.
If p2p means it's just as good as f2p, then why doesn't it always turn out that way?
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Comments
The real F2P are usually not all that limited, it's the Freemium ones, where a subscription model is actually available that limit the "F2P" option. Games built as F2P from the ground up usually let you (theoretically) get everything in game with in-game currency. In real F2P games the free players actually do help to enrich the playing experience of the paying players. The problem is they have to keep on coming up with new ways to get the paying customers to fork over cash every few months and Pay 2 Win is just around the corner, you'll often be heading there sooner or later.
Absolutely amazing. We have people on here willing to build or buy a PC with state of the art hardware, multiple video cards, and play on multiple monitors...But they trun into the ultimate cheap azzes when it comes to actual programs for their monster PC. Here's a different take on gaming pricing. 1st, you pay for the software, $60, or whatever. That software actually works as advertised. No post beta bugs or glitches...And then, here we go, you pay a $100 a month to play. What you get is a full time 1st rate programming staff working around the clock on issues and adding new content, and real GM's in game, all of the time. Yeah, I know, it's just crazy talk..Or crazy talk is expecting awesome software to be given away for nothing..
On a side note, that would sure thin the MMODouchbags out too..hmmm...
F2P means:
"oh, we screwed up, they ar enot going for it, let's save what we can and go f2p to stretch it as long as we can"
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
Roll a character on a WoW PVP server and see how thinned the MMODouchebags are by pay walls.
Also the text I highlighted in red is an extremely rare, damn near unheard of, set of circumstances but even though I spend a few hundred euros, every few years or so, to update my PC, which is way less than what you suggested, I still buy games every so often from the B2P genre or invest in a particularly good F2P title but up until now I have not and I will never pay rent on a game I already bought, you may call my a cheap ass if you so desire but I couldn't give a tosser what you say as you live in a fantasy world where every MMO gamer out there has disposable income in the amounts required to make 10-15$ a month (or more depending on how lucky you are with the conversion rates, in EVE-Online, only sub game I play and that's because I sub via plex, up until fairly recently the brits paid 12-15 quid, or thereabout, for one month of EVE whereas the rest paid either 15 euros or worse 15$) expended on a digital medium you already own a game copy of a non-issue which I am sorry to say hasn't been the case for at least half a decade if not more.
Then your out of step with todays gamers, because most of us agree that the communities in F2P games are horrible!
Not only that, other than a couple F2P games, you spend more money on F2P than a sub. Unless you want to be sub-par for weeks or months while you catch up to the players that spent money.
All the new F2P games comming out right now are using the old graphics engines, and all the old features we have seen in games for years.
Basically its like the old saying goes, "you get what your pay for".
This is SO not true. Your not talking about mmos or any other "real" games.
Even back in the early days of MUDS you had to pay by the hour, the only free games were arcade type games on web browsers.
I usually read what large corporations say with a grain of salt. Many times they put making money above what the players want.:)
I agree, its pretty ironic, and I see it all the time, players spending so much money on thier machines, they treat them like pets or something. Then they go out and demand free games, wtih all this free content and on and on...its laughable!
Then when I see people try and convince me that F2P games are just as good, or even better than sub games. Its hard to debate someone who actually believes it.
Game devs are here to make money, why this is a bad thing, I will never understand. As long as I like what they are dishing out, I will gladly pay for it.
I wouldn't be so sure that it's Venge who is "out of step with todays gamers," but then again I get the feeling you're working off a different dataset than Venge and the entire gaming industry is working off of.
"I agree, its pretty ironic...
Then when I see people try and convince me that F2P games are just as good, or even better than sub games. Its hard to debate someone who actually believes it."
Speaking of irony...
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
You missed the part where today's gamers also agree that communities in non-F2P games are horrible.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
If they ignore what the players want, they stop making money.
Just sayin'...
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
No I'm not. I would say you are out of step, most agree that there is no difference.
And most agree that most do not spend anything in f2p.
MIght be more accurate to say f2p MMO's have been around longer than p2p MMORPG, as Garriot in UO coined the term MMORPG.
and F2P have just as long a history as p2p
However MMO's were around before then. Others that were possible the first are M59, The Realm and Nexus in late 1996. These are debatable well because The realm reached a max of 100-200 people online.
Furcadia was around in 1996 also. A f2p game with a CS.
edited - I orginally stated that while muds are indeed the grandfather to MMO's, they are not MMO's. However upon reflection there really is no difference between a mud and an MMO, especially a graphical. At least nothing significant, except perhaps the number of people that can play at one time. So I'll fall back to the definition of MMO. If the mud is online and can hold more people than a traditional multiplayer (whatever that number is), I'd consider an MMO.
Therefore my statement about f2p being longer or as long as p2p is now false unless others have information about f2p muds. However I will still assert that f2p has just as long a history as the type of MMO's that we usually recognize as MMO's that being the m59, UO, EQ, WoW.... model - being a visual world, with lots of activities and lots of people.
Interesting reading here:
http://www.raphkoster.com/2006/03/31/are-muds-and-mmorpgs-the-same-thing/
No, the onus is on the poster to supply the supporting links, not for me to go looking for info that supports their point.
I ask for links because I have yet to be shown any neutral non invested source that is at all convincing and, simply, most of what pro cash shop fans post is just industry shilled recieved wisdom.
How much has your opinion changed about all this after all this time though? Seeing as you have challanged me in that area... How much have you taken anything on board that's been said to you? Or do you just think it's for everyone else to adjust automatically to your way of thinking? You seem to forget whatever is said to you in far less then a week, in all honesty.
I am not gonna trawl through your post history to show how dogmatic and repetitious your posts are on this subject, because, frankly, I haven't the time to waste in that way, but I sure that anyone who has that sneaks a look would see this is a clear case of pot calling the kettle black.
Saying this though, I would prefer to not personalise this any further and just stick to the topic. I am not here to make personal criticsims of anyone or how they post, I am here to discuss games and, in this case, the revenue model situation. I suggest we draw a line under this and stick to that. If you insist on carrying on though please do it via PM? That way you can make whatever point you might want about me personally without derailing the thread any further.
It's been done dozens and dozens of times on this site. You've been around long enough to see them. We have provided them dozens and dozens of times.
We have done our part and more. If by now you still don't believe them, then nothing anyone can say will change your mind.
oh goody another one of these threads.
read my sig its says what i think. this argument is getting stupid P2P is dieing, even if i dont like or agree with it.
F2P may be the way of the future, but ya know they dont make them like they used to
Proper Grammer & spelling are extra, corrections will be LOL at.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Some people are sticking their head in the sand, ignoring all evidence and data. Yeah, P2P *is* dying.
Actually it is already dead for me. I won't play a sub game anymore.
You didn't read my reply? Because you seem to just be repeating the same thing without taking it into account.
Yes, I said I have seen them, and I have also said every link I have every been given has led to jaundiced, shilled, industry led garbage.
I keep asking in the hope that one day someone will come up with a credible non F2P industry led neutral source.
There is no evidence to either way.
But the point is this .. today .. there are plenty of F2P fun titles. The trend is going F2P .. so i expect so next year. 5 year down the road .. who knows. Anything can change.
And there is no reason not to take advantage of the F2P boom now. If it dies in a few years, who cares? I will find somethign else to do.
Feelings aren't facts, I know thats a popular theme these days, but no. You are not only out of step, but your not even in the same reality.
How many titles recently started with box sells, then P2P, only to turn into F2P after they turned out to be garbage? I lost count myself. If F2P means a game is just as good as the rest, then why does it always turn out that way?
I see a lot of new games comming out that are F2P from the start, many play in your browswer, and most with cash shops of course. They are NOTHING compared to sub games, especially in content, no way no how!
But you go ahead and keep deluding yourself.
UO was not free, I wonder if you even know what your talking about.
Because fewer and fewer players are willing to pay for a sub? Because there are more competition that goes F2P? Tell me, when is the big success of a sub game?
Good thing I never stated UO was free. In my edit I stated f2p MMO's has been around longer than MMORPG, and just as long as MMO's have.
And to your other comment at Lokto, saveral games went f2p not because they were garbage (which is completely subjective) but because the developers believed they could make even more money with f2p than p2p. EQ, EQ2 and LOTRO are 3.
And there are many f2p games out there with just as much content, quality, depth and cs as p2p. And there are p2p that don't have as much content, quality, depth and cs as some f2p. There is no difference. You are deluding yourself.
If p2p means it's just as good as f2p, then why doesn't it always turn out that way?