I tend to think like Quizzical does. Charge for things/services I (the player) does not care about. It will differ with every player and what they enjoy doing.
Simply stated, charge the other players.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
If the game is charging people money....even just SOME of the people money...and even OPTIONALLY, then that game is NOT FREE. The term "free to play" is inaccurate and misleading. UNTIL such time as there is truly a real FREE f2p game, I will not use the term to describe such. And further, I will accuse any company that claims their game is f2p to be selling customers a scam. Plain and simple.
In general people are fine for them to add and charge what ever they want for things they arent interested in. For intance pvp'ers are perfectly fine if they add what lvl grade of pve gear in a store, since it doesnt effect them, pve'ers afre perfectly fine with pvp gear being added since it doesnt effect them.
Cosmetic items seem to be accepted in general .. untill its an item "they"want then people will complain it would have been availeble for free.
I personally dont have much issues with fluff , some services such as name changes, server transfers etc etc. Nor to I mind gear in the store, as long as its entry lvl or maybe 1 step above it, for both pvp and pve. People who are willing to spent money on gear often would find a way to do so anyway.
Originally posted by iridescence I'm not saying F2P can't be done well but I really don't understand why people refuse to see the obvious problems that F2P often creates.
Because there are no problems. The issue and error in assumption is on your end.
Originally posted by Gruug If the game is charging people money....even just SOME of the people money...and even OPTIONALLY, then that game is NOT FREE. The term "free to play" is inaccurate and misleading. UNTIL such time as there is truly a real FREE f2p game, I will not use the term to describe such. And further, I will accuse any company that claims their game is f2p to be selling customers a scam. Plain and simple.
You are apparently misled but the term isn't inaccurate. You just do not understand what the term stands for.
F2P derives from P2P as model where you pay upfront for access to service. F2P then means there is no entry fee. There is no more into the term.
World of Warcraft item shop is a prime example of what impact the item shop should have on a game and what items should be available. Players can play the game and fully enjoy it without having to make a business decision every couple of hours. In other words, the item shop should contain insignificant game items.
If the game is charging people money....even just SOME of the people money...and even OPTIONALLY, then that game is NOT FREE. The term "free to play" is inaccurate and misleading. UNTIL such time as there is truly a real FREE f2p game, I will not use the term to describe such. And further, I will accuse any company that claims their game is f2p to be selling customers a scam. Plain and simple.
F2P simply means free to pick up and play. Which is not an overly complicated thing to understand. IF games were Calling themselves "not for profit", you may have a point.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I think DDO had a decent Model (unlock content/extra classes/race) but can earn in game. Tera as mentioned before is also decent. Some more unusual models would be the Second Life model, allow users to Mod the game essentially, allow them to sell their creations and take a cut. There is also AO model where they had the help of sponsors with in game ads. I really think now is the time for developers/producers to get creative with their revenue streams. The old formats are struggling. Product placement and sponsorship could be a win/win if done in the proper context. For example lets say WOD had a McDonalds in game as a location, that is product placement and more immersive then 'Bob's Burgers'. And used Smith and Wesson guns, so on. Why are there so many fantasy games btw?
Ultimately that depends on the publisher/developer. However we all have our idea on what should and shouldn't be charged for. For the sake of discussion my list is as follows:
Charge a fee for:
-Cosmetics
-Boosts
-Higher level zones with all the content for the level range (similar to LOTRO)
Originally posted by Rockniss World of Warcraft item shop is a prime example of what impact the item shop should have on a game and what items should be available. Players can play the game and fully enjoy it without having to make a business decision every couple of hours. In other words, the item shop should contain insignificant game items.
The evolution of WoW's cash shop is like watching a pot of frogs being slowly brought to a boil.
Nobody wants to carry a freeloader in their group anyways. I know I don't depend on leeches. I'd rather they didn't exist. It would bring back serious gaming.
Who cares what they may or may not spend one day. Most likely they move on to the next F2P of the month. You haven't been paying attention to populations in game lately, have you?
Nope, freeloaders should stay the way they are, limited and dependent on other people spending. Only, people paying the bills are getting tired of hearing the whines of the leeches.
Now there is something that really should be a contradiction in terms: "serious gaming." If you're taking it seriously, you're missing the point.
Originally posted by iridescence
If a lot of people really do expect games for free then I agree with you but this seems like a strawman as I assume most people realize that either you will have a sub fee or a cash shop in a game (games that try to have both can burn in hell...). Some people just prefer paying the up front sub fee to reward the developer for making a good game rather than reward the developer for making cash shop junk to sell them.
I'm not saying F2P can't be done well but I really don't understand why people refuse to see the obvious problems that F2P often creates.
As for why people complain about the price of games, maybe someone from the company will hear you? I don't know but it makes more sense than most of the things people regularly complain about on here.
What obvious problems? Most F2P games offer subs, and if you get a sub, your personal experience ends up exactly the same as if the F2P option didn't exist. So, if you don't like the way F2P is done in a particular game, sub instead. Problem solved.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
Originally posted by TheCrow2k People need to get over this whole "boosts or advantages in PvE is pay 2 win" because it is total nonsense. Selling things that give a tangible advantage in PvP is not acceptable because its direct competition on an uneven playing field. Selling PvE items doesn't really hurt anyone &companies can make some money.
Selling PVE items doesn't "hurt" anyone and isn't as directly unfair as selling PvP items but it can still make the game less fun for those who don't want to fork over the huge amounts of cash to buy pixels. If you actually want the stuff in the cash shop F2P actually starts to become very expensive. Why is it so unreasonable for people to complain about that if just paying a sub would actually be cheaper for what they want?
Um the topic is what can f2p games sell, not should F2P games have subscriptions.
If you want that fancy cloak of the peacock that does nothing more than look nice then I won't be at all upset if you buy and wear it and I don't have one. Likewhise I couldn't care less if other players around me are gaining 50% more XP because they paid money.
It helps to keep in mind those paying players keep the game free for non paying players.
Lastly I never condone selling of functional equipment in cash shops.
Games generally can't survive on cosmetics alone so offering players something they can buy to speed up leveling makes total sense.
I find in general F2P games are of lesser quality and update their content less frequently and put in boring grinds hoping people will pay to skip them. This is perfectly logical to me as companies do what you pay them to do. If people are mainly paying for cash shop items guess what the company is going to spend most of their development resources on?
The other bad thing that some F2P games do is charge you so much to unlock basic things that it ends up costing more than a sub to play them as intended. There is also the immersion factor. Who wants to see "click here to use your credit card!" "Buy our hobbit presents with ShireBux (tm)!¨" all the time in an otherwise immersive game? I find it especially saddening that this crap is even infecting single player games which you still have to pay full box price for.
Maybe some people really think all this stuff is awesome and if so I guess we just disagree. But a lot of the threads on this site seem to share the sentiment that quality of games have gone downhill in recent years and I don't think you can totally ignore cash shops as at least a partial cause of that if you hold that belief. Games companies want our money so payment model can never be separated from core game design.
1. Cosmetic items *ONLY* if you can earn a huge variety of cosmetic items without paying
2. Exp potions. Most games leveling is the best part anyway, if people want to rush through it, go nuts
Thats about it. If you are going to charge for anything else like bag space or races/classes/content your game should have a sub option that gets everything for free, with a point stipend for cosmetic items.
I find in general F2P games are of lesser quality and update their content less frequently and put in boring grinds hoping people will pay to skip them. This is perfectly logical to me as companies do what you pay them to do. If people are mainly paying for cash shop items guess what the company is going to spend most of their development resources on?
The other bad thing that some F2P games do is charge you so much to unlock basic things that it ends up costing more than a sub to play them as intended. There is also the immersion factor. Who wants to see "click here to use your credit card!" "Buy our hobbit presents with ShireBux (tm)!¨" all the time in an otherwise immersive game? I find it especially saddening that this crap is even infecting single player games which you still have to pay full box price for.
Maybe some people really think all this stuff is awesome and if so I guess we just disagree. But a lot of the threads on this site seem to share the sentiment that quality of games have gone downhill in recent years and I don't think you can totally ignore cash shops as at least a partial cause of that if you hold that belief. Games companies want our money so payment model can never be separated from core game design.
I hate to break it to you, but most games that have a F2P option started out without one, and already had the "boring grinds" included in the subscription only version of the game. And as I pointed out to a previous poster, just because there is a F2P option with annoying restrictions doesn't mean you have to take it. Most games have a choice to sub.
Also, content design and cash shop item design are typically done by different teams, and in games with a decent revenue stream, both get their fair share of development dollars. And charging more for the same experience from F2P that you get from a sub isn't a "bad" thing the games do. It's a good thing. An equivalent experience needs to cost more when it comes from one time fees than when it comes from a monthly fee, or there would be no more incentive to sub for people who want the complete experience.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
There is so many of them it doesn't really matter anyway.
So what you're saying is F2P games should just shut down? Because if they don't charge for anything, that's the only other option. Games aren't charities.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
There is so many of them it doesn't really matter anyway.
So what you're saying is F2P games should just shut down? Because if they don't charge for anything, that's the only other option. Games aren't charities.
If you want to charge money, don't make a free to play game.
Oh you want to call it free to play and charge money too. Cake and eat it too.
Charge for whatever you want. There are so many of these games now it doesn't matter. Call it super free to play too.
"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"
I'm honestly fine with most F2P stores, including LOTRO, SWTOR and GW2 (technically B2P, but whatever).
What I dislike is mainly the gambling boxes that in particular infest SWTOR, but also GW2 and LOTRO to a lesser extent. Let us buy the stuff up front, don't put it behind RNG when we're paying real money.
My other dislike with F2P-models are how they're aimed at getting subscribers to pay more than they otherwise would have paid if the game was solely subscription based (i.e. "whales"). The monthly allotment you get when you subscribe of whatever currency the game uses is usually woefully small compared to the prices in the store, and there is a lot of content you don't get when subscribing. Ideally I'd like to completely ignore the ingame store when subscribing to a F2P-game, without feeling like I'm missing out.
Comments
I tend to think like Quizzical does. Charge for things/services I (the player) does not care about. It will differ with every player and what they enjoy doing.
Simply stated, charge the other players.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
If the game is charging people money....even just SOME of the people money...and even OPTIONALLY, then that game is NOT FREE. The term "free to play" is inaccurate and misleading. UNTIL such time as there is truly a real FREE f2p game, I will not use the term to describe such. And further, I will accuse any company that claims their game is f2p to be selling customers a scam. Plain and simple.
Let's party like it is 1863!
In general people are fine for them to add and charge what ever they want for things they arent interested in. For intance pvp'ers are perfectly fine if they add what lvl grade of pve gear in a store, since it doesnt effect them, pve'ers afre perfectly fine with pvp gear being added since it doesnt effect them.
Cosmetic items seem to be accepted in general .. untill its an item "they"want then people will complain it would have been availeble for free.
I personally dont have much issues with fluff , some services such as name changes, server transfers etc etc. Nor to I mind gear in the store, as long as its entry lvl or maybe 1 step above it, for both pvp and pve. People who are willing to spent money on gear often would find a way to do so anyway.
Because there are no problems. The issue and error in assumption is on your end.
You are apparently misled but the term isn't inaccurate. You just do not understand what the term stands for.
F2P derives from P2P as model where you pay upfront for access to service. F2P then means there is no entry fee. There is no more into the term.
F2P simply means free to pick up and play. Which is not an overly complicated thing to understand. IF games were Calling themselves "not for profit", you may have a point.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I think DDO had a decent Model (unlock content/extra classes/race) but can earn in game. Tera as mentioned before is also decent. Some more unusual models would be the Second Life model, allow users to Mod the game essentially, allow them to sell their creations and take a cut. There is also AO model where they had the help of sponsors with in game ads. I really think now is the time for developers/producers to get creative with their revenue streams. The old formats are struggling. Product placement and sponsorship could be a win/win if done in the proper context. For example lets say WOD had a McDonalds in game as a location, that is product placement and more immersive then 'Bob's Burgers'. And used Smith and Wesson guns, so on. Why are there so many fantasy games btw?
Ultimately that depends on the publisher/developer. However we all have our idea on what should and shouldn't be charged for. For the sake of discussion my list is as follows:
Charge a fee for:
-Cosmetics
-Boosts
-Higher level zones with all the content for the level range (similar to LOTRO)
-Alternate Mounts
-Races
Not to Charge for:
-Temporary Items
-Raid Gear , even if it's lower tier
-Respecs
-Skills
-Permissions to wear purple gear (See SWTOR)
-Classes
"If I offended you, you needed it" -Corey Taylor
The evolution of WoW's cash shop is like watching a pot of frogs being slowly brought to a boil.
What obvious problems? Most F2P games offer subs, and if you get a sub, your personal experience ends up exactly the same as if the F2P option didn't exist. So, if you don't like the way F2P is done in a particular game, sub instead. Problem solved.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.
Selling PVE items doesn't "hurt" anyone and isn't as directly unfair as selling PvP items but it can still make the game less fun for those who don't want to fork over the huge amounts of cash to buy pixels. If you actually want the stuff in the cash shop F2P actually starts to become very expensive. Why is it so unreasonable for people to complain about that if just paying a sub would actually be cheaper for what they want?
Um the topic is what can f2p games sell, not should F2P games have subscriptions.If you want that fancy cloak of the peacock that does nothing more than look nice then I won't be at all upset if you buy and wear it and I don't have one. Likewhise I couldn't care less if other players around me are gaining 50% more XP because they paid money.
It helps to keep in mind those paying players keep the game free for non paying players.
Lastly I never condone selling of functional equipment in cash shops.
Games generally can't survive on cosmetics alone so offering players something they can buy to speed up leveling makes total sense.
I find in general F2P games are of lesser quality and update their content less frequently and put in boring grinds hoping people will pay to skip them. This is perfectly logical to me as companies do what you pay them to do. If people are mainly paying for cash shop items guess what the company is going to spend most of their development resources on?
The other bad thing that some F2P games do is charge you so much to unlock basic things that it ends up costing more than a sub to play them as intended. There is also the immersion factor. Who wants to see "click here to use your credit card!" "Buy our hobbit presents with ShireBux (tm)!¨" all the time in an otherwise immersive game? I find it especially saddening that this crap is even infecting single player games which you still have to pay full box price for.
Maybe some people really think all this stuff is awesome and if so I guess we just disagree. But a lot of the threads on this site seem to share the sentiment that quality of games have gone downhill in recent years and I don't think you can totally ignore cash shops as at least a partial cause of that if you hold that belief. Games companies want our money so payment model can never be separated from core game design.
1. Cosmetic items *ONLY* if you can earn a huge variety of cosmetic items without paying
2. Exp potions. Most games leveling is the best part anyway, if people want to rush through it, go nuts
Thats about it. If you are going to charge for anything else like bag space or races/classes/content your game should have a sub option that gets everything for free, with a point stipend for cosmetic items.
I hate to break it to you, but most games that have a F2P option started out without one, and already had the "boring grinds" included in the subscription only version of the game. And as I pointed out to a previous poster, just because there is a F2P option with annoying restrictions doesn't mean you have to take it. Most games have a choice to sub.
Also, content design and cash shop item design are typically done by different teams, and in games with a decent revenue stream, both get their fair share of development dollars. And charging more for the same experience from F2P that you get from a sub isn't a "bad" thing the games do. It's a good thing. An equivalent experience needs to cost more when it comes from one time fees than when it comes from a monthly fee, or there would be no more incentive to sub for people who want the complete experience.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.
Free to play shouldn't charge for anything.
There is so many of them it doesn't really matter anyway.
"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"
So what you're saying is F2P games should just shut down? Because if they don't charge for anything, that's the only other option. Games aren't charities.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.
If you want to charge money, don't make a free to play game.
Oh you want to call it free to play and charge money too. Cake and eat it too.
Charge for whatever you want. There are so many of these games now it doesn't matter. Call it super free to play too.
"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"
You are mistaking F2P for non-profit. F2P only means there is no entry fee.
Wal-mart is now free to shop.
"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"
So is the MMO market.
That would be more accurate.
"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"
I'm honestly fine with most F2P stores, including LOTRO, SWTOR and GW2 (technically B2P, but whatever).
What I dislike is mainly the gambling boxes that in particular infest SWTOR, but also GW2 and LOTRO to a lesser extent. Let us buy the stuff up front, don't put it behind RNG when we're paying real money.
My other dislike with F2P-models are how they're aimed at getting subscribers to pay more than they otherwise would have paid if the game was solely subscription based (i.e. "whales"). The monthly allotment you get when you subscribe of whatever currency the game uses is usually woefully small compared to the prices in the store, and there is a lot of content you don't get when subscribing. Ideally I'd like to completely ignore the ingame store when subscribing to a F2P-game, without feeling like I'm missing out.