There is another aspect also.. the Asian game influence on the western market, that has been going on now for a few decades or more. I think you are making it sound a little to simple here to be honest. Facts are the Asian scam games have been around for more then a decade, and before they were online they were doing gambling game scheems in IRL.
The fact that "most" f2p games are made to defraud, steal, trick, con and steal players money, is something I hope most of you understand, if not you need a reality check....
There sure are a lot of fabricated stereotypes to justify peoples beliefs when it comes to this topic. I know of no subject that everyone agrees on..yet somehow everyone who thinks one way or the other fit into a nice little box that you can point a finger at and say " EVIL!"
It's about choice. Until you understand that, you're opinion on this will always be about justifying your own choice. Not why or how other people made theirs.
Its nothing about "bad parenting" that parents do not realize their kids are gambling in games (since gambling online is Illegal here) so when little Johnny Mother buys him 200 Diamonds (or whatever) she should be made aware that little johnny can gamble that money away for potentially nothing.
I disagree. It's absolutely bad parenting to give your kid money for something online without researching it a bit first. People need to stop letting the internet raise their kids. Same with all this "cyber bullying" BS if parents would do their jobs and take a proper interest in what their kids are doing this kind of stuff would happen a lot less.
I agree with what you are saying here.
But then should we let everything just go unregulated ? When a casino tells me I have 50/1 odds they can really give me 11000000/1 and "let the buyer beware"? Can we add Virtual prostitutes into games with no age restriction (like gambling) because 'hey, dont let the internet watch your kids'...
I imagine you probably dont have kids?
I should be able to trust that any 15 year old can be given some money to play a game that is slated for "all ages" and not be gambling with real money for odds nobody knows. Hell, as an adult they are required to tell me my 'odds of winning' but kids gambling in games with no disclosure is okay? It isnt...
But I agree with the gist of what you say- I think cyberbullying and many other things (common core) are giving us a very irresponsible and dumbed down generation. I think entitlement is at an all time high. But regulating a predatory industry is just common sense.
You and Ayn Rand should get together for a Holiday.
Its nothing about "bad parenting" that parents do not realize their kids are gambling in games (since gambling online is Illegal here) so when little Johnny Mother buys him 200 Diamonds (or whatever) she should be made aware that little johnny can gamble that money away for potentially nothing.
I am talking about regulation. Knowing the ODDS of winning. When I buy a Lotto Ticket or pull a slot I know what my odds are and there is third party regulation to assure those odds. I want the same in gambing during an online game if real money is in any way involved. Period. And its coming too... Will not effect YOU as an adult. In fact, you will have the RIGHT to know your real odds and more than likely the Odds will increase once they are regulated and forced to disclose- Its win/win for the consumer.
Lol. Thanks for that. Amusing philosopher. Terrible writer.
If the word "bad" doesn't work for you, substitute lazy. There is nothing remotely unreasonable about thinking parents should pay close attention to what their kids are doing on the internet, and they should *never* provide the child with the ability to make purchases, of any kind. If a kid wants to buy something, the parent should come to the computer and do it for him. That way they can't avoid seeing what is being purchased.
As for your "win/win" scenario, it's only a win for the gamblers. The primary utility of the gambling system for the customer base as a whole is that it brings in lots of revenue for the developer to spend on further developing the game. If the odds of a positive result go up, the number of gambling packs purchased actually goes down, because people get what they were looking for in fewer packs, and revenue suffers, resulting in losses for the developer and the customer base as a whole, benefiting only the gamblers.
Originally posted by greenreen
If I play a free game for free and expect someone else to pay for me to be there, I'm enabling addicts to exist. Put another way, many people get into drug dealing just for the reasons you suggest. They are addicts and they will spend the money anyway, I might as well get my piece of the pie. Noone equates the thought that a user needs a supply and if the supply is gone they must stop. If I participate in free games, I'm enabling it all to continue.
Most of your arguments seems to be "people are stupid" throughout this topic. I agree, many people are stupid but I don't think that being smarter than them I should let them fall victim to something without them having full disclosure. Free isn't free and people still don't believe that. They rattle on about how they are getting something for free and they don't care who might be hurt by it. The companies aren't - their wallets are fatter than ever. The payers don't - they have a mental problem sometimes or in other cases an ego problem. The free players don't - they think they are getting a deal. I focus on the ones that are enablers as the ones to change, they also make up the largest portion of the games so it aligns naturally. It's easiest to become an enabler and it's easiest to wipe out of your mind because the whole thing seems legit with a gaggle of compatriots spouting in unison - we want free, we want free, we want free.
How many times now do you see people say on a sub game or any game with a box price... mmmmm I'll wait for it to go free in 6 mos. before I try it. Oddly enough, these people are going to keep free around as long as they stay the majority. There weren't this many MMO players in the olden days, these people only came because it's free and they will probably leave if it stops being free or they will realize that it never was meant to be free and catch up. If they leave then maybe we can stop getting all these poopy-pants cookie cutter games and MMO players can be happy-dappy again, short of complaining about drop rates lol
You don't create addicts. Somebody is either prone too addictive behavior, or he isn't. If he is, he will find something to be addicted to. Nothing you can do will change that, and depriving yourself of experiences you enjoy out of some delusional belief that it will somehow prevent broken people from being broken doesn't accomplish anything but you having less fun. In your drug dealer example, one person choosing not to deal drugs changes nothing. *Everyone* would have to choose not to deal drugs for anything to be accomplished, and that isn't going to happen.
All any of us can control is his own choices. You can't choose for there not to be addicts who spend irresponsibly. You can't choose for there not to be "enablers." All you can choose is whether or not you enjoy a game, or refrain from enjoying as an empty gesture in the name of "principle" which actually accomplishes nothing.
(And, as a practical matter, the elimination of cash shops wouldn't change anything for the addicts. They would just switch to buying in game currency from gold farmers.)
Originally posted by Jacxolope
Whatever the goal of the game IS....
In Runes of magic its Guild Wars (total PVP) and its total P2W in too many ways to describe. Other games can be PVE if raiding is the "goal" and you unable to do so without spending tons in the cash shop.
Every game is 'competitive' in many different ways-
Sure, if in order to participate in content you absolutely *must* purchase things from the cash shop, that is bad design, and should be changed. I agree fully that gear useful for PvP should never be sold for cash. Which games with a focus on raiding are selling raid gear for cash?
Originally posted by asmkm22 This whole topic is funny because it's basically publishers trying to pretend like they aren't out to rip people off...
Originally posted by Zlayer77
The fact that "most" f2p games are made to defraud, steal, trick, con and steal players money, is something I hope most of you understand, if not you need a reality check....
Same response for both of you. "You can't cheat an honest man."
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 CazNeerg Originally posted by JacxolopeI think alot of it is backlash over what is blatant greed.To me, a good F2P is a game I can spend $15 month for (essentially) everything- Even if it takes me time to get everything (if that makes sense)LOTRO was a good F2P, Wiz 101 was a good F2P, GW 1 was fantastic B2P model, Gw2 has a decent model, Free realms was a decent F2P model, stronghold kingdoms even worked well.The other end of the spectrum is some of the "F2P" games I have tried which would have honestly cost $40- $50 / month to be competitive and the quality of the game was horrid to begin with. Just blatant money sinks.I prefer sub games myself but they are much harder to find these day- I usually wend up spending more than $15 month on "F2P" games but not astronomicly so and I am very picky about the games I play and never support the "rip off" F2P games regardless..."To be competitive?" Please elaborate, competitive with what? In most games, the only included elements which are competitive rather than cooperative are related to PvP, and how many cash shops sell items that impact PvP performance?And again, most F2P games include an option to sub, and the sub experience is the same as it was before the game converted to F2P. The addition of the cash shop just gives more options on top of that. Originally posted by lizardbones
What are games at the other end of the spectrum? For instance, Allods Online could potentially take players to the bank for over a thousand dollars. This was driven by people who actually spent that much money and basically became juggernauts. Staying competitive was only possible by spending a LOT of money. I think it's legit in this discussion to list specific games and examples both of what is good or fair, and what is bad or unfair.Same question as above. Competitive with what?
In Allods it was PvP. I am not sure how their PvE game played out. Were the little diamonds or whatever they were necessary to complete or even enter the end game dungeons or raids? I have no idea, but for PvP, if you actually wanted to not get roflstomped, you opened your bank account and started dumping the money out.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
...............................................So given that people are willing to go into such granular detail on what developers shouldn't charge for, what exactly should they charge for in a F2P game?...............................................
Cash Shop should provide excess. Extra housing. Extra clothes. Extra mounts. Extra... anything not needed to play and enjoy the game. Make sure the items are NOT on a timer but all permanents. Clothing is best but you need to have a chatroom type setting so peeps can show off their wardrobes. Mabinogi did great balancing this.
Originally posted by asmkm22 This whole topic is funny because it's basically publishers trying to pretend like they aren't out to rip people off, and players trying to pretend like they aren't simply wanting free entertainment at no cost to themselves. Just say it like it is; people who gravitate to F2P games are just cheap asses who have essentially crippled the industry by encouraging bad game design.
There is another aspect also.. the Asian game influence on the western market, that has been going on now for a few decades or more. I think you are making it sound a little to simple here to be honest. Facts are the Asian scam games have been around for more then a decade, and before they were online they were doing gambling game scheems in IRL.
The fact that "most" f2p games are made to defraud, steal, trick, con and steal players money, is something I hope most of you understand, if not you need a reality check....
Well, to be completely honest, I don't really factor in the Asian MMO's for my opinions. That's a totally different market, and always has been. There simply aren't many people outside of Asia playing them, outside of their small but vocal fanbase. That doesn't stop people here from getting all hyped about them, but I've been around long enough to know those games are only skin deep, and not worth considering.
There is a grey area developing, however, with lots of western game developers selling out to either NCSoft or Perfect World. This is creating the lovely situation of bringing all the negative aspects of Asian game development under the guise of a western release. It's easy to filter out, but I can understand when people just assume a game like Neverwinter isn't just an Asian P2W grinder because it's "developed" by a US studio.
Originally posted by Jemcrystal Originally posted by lizardbones...............................................So given that people are willing to go into such granular detail on what developers shouldn't charge for, what exactly should they charge for in a F2P game?...............................................
Cash Shop should provide excess. Extra housing. Extra clothes. Extra mounts. Extra... anything not needed to play and enjoy the game. Make sure the items are NOT on a timer but all permanents. Clothing is best but you need to have a chatroom type setting so peeps can show off their wardrobes. Mabinogi did great balancing this.
This is not exactly on topic, but why?
Why should a game avoid P2W items in a PvP game? Why should a game provide only extra items as opposed to e.g. dungeon or raid content? This is just a bonus question.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
But then should we let everything just go unregulated ? When a casino tells me I have 50/1 odds they can really give me 11000000/1 and "let the buyer beware"? Can we add Virtual prostitutes into games with no age restriction (like gambling) because 'hey, dont let the internet watch your kids'...
I imagine you probably dont have kids?
I should be able to trust that any 15 year old can be given some money to play a game that is slated for "all ages" and not be gambling with real money for odds nobody knows. Hell, as an adult they are required to tell me my 'odds of winning' but kids gambling in games with no disclosure is okay? It isnt...
MMOs aren't made for all ages. You have to sign a tos and I think in most countries that means around the age of 18 without a parents consent. With consent it means the parents are saying they take responsiblity for what their underage children experience. It's also why any online game says online content not rated by ( whatever rating system you have ) because they can't tell you what you'll see online. So the whole kid argument isn't as valid as ppl like to make it. The answer to that is...if you don't like it don't let your kid play. They warn you for a reason.
I don't like lock boxes and think they should have to give you the odds of winning each prize. I think they have some loophole because every box wins, just not what you always want. There is no empty box so it's not gambling like in a casino. So, you are buying a random prize not "gambling" as the law sees it.
You and Ayn Rand should get together for a Holiday.
Its nothing about "bad parenting" that parents do not realize their kids are gambling in games (since gambling online is Illegal here) so when little Johnny Mother buys him 200 Diamonds (or whatever) she should be made aware that little johnny can gamble that money away for potentially nothing.
I am talking about regulation. Knowing the ODDS of winning. When I buy a Lotto Ticket or pull a slot I know what my odds are and there is third party regulation to assure those odds. I want the same in gambing during an online game if real money is in any way involved. Period. And its coming too... Will not effect YOU as an adult. In fact, you will have the RIGHT to know your real odds and more than likely the Odds will increase once they are regulated and forced to disclose- Its win/win for the consumer.
Lol. Thanks for that. Amusing philosopher. Terrible writer.
If the word "bad" doesn't work for you, substitute lazy. There is nothing remotely unreasonable about thinking parents should pay close attention to what their kids are doing on the internet, and they should *never* provide the child with the ability to make purchases, of any kind. If a kid wants to buy something, the parent should come to the computer and do it for him. That way they can't avoid seeing what is being purchased.
As for your "win/win" scenario, it's only a win for the gamblers. The primary utility of the gambling system for the customer base as a whole is that it brings in lots of revenue for the developer to spend on further developing the game. If the odds of a positive result go up, the number of gambling packs purchased actually goes down, because people get what they were looking for in fewer packs, and revenue suffers, resulting in losses for the developer and the customer base as a whole, benefiting only the gamblers.
Long quote so I will do my best to answer here.
Glad my philosophy amuses you.
If cash shops worked differently I would agree. If there was an actual Dollar amount attached to purchases. The problem is you are buying "diamonds" (or whatever) which are sold in blocks and usually left over after a purchase is made.
For instance- If a Pet was listed as $9.99 and a costume at $6.99 we would fully be in agreement.
The problem is , you are buying "diamonds" at $19.99 for 200 $10.99 for 90 etc...etc.... So "standing over your child" while they spend all their Diamonds is problematic and the game companies know this. So by the time my child is around 15 I dont feel the need to babysit his every move during an online game. Most Parents dont. Thats why there is a rating system in place (again- I am not opposed to letting my 15 year old play certain M rated games but I am aware of the content). So if I gifted him 200 Diamonds for a good report card, I expect it will spent in drips and drabs over his playtime- Not on Gambling.
My main concern is disclosure in what the odds are. how can anyone make any informed descision if lacking that crucial piece of knowledge? maybe these gambling boxes are the best deal ever...But how do we know? And how could you possibly be against regulating disclosure of the odds and age restriction (or even parental permission)
Originally posted by greenreen
If I play a free game for free and expect someone else to pay for me to be there, I'm enabling addicts to exist. Put another way, many people get into drug dealing just for the reasons you suggest. They are addicts and they will spend the money anyway, I might as well get my piece of the pie. Noone equates the thought that a user needs a supply and if the supply is gone they must stop. If I participate in free games, I'm enabling it all to continue.
Most of your arguments seems to be "people are stupid" throughout this topic. I agree, many people are stupid but I don't think that being smarter than them I should let them fall victim to something without them having full disclosure. Free isn't free and people still don't believe that. They rattle on about how they are getting something for free and they don't care who might be hurt by it. The companies aren't - their wallets are fatter than ever. The payers don't - they have a mental problem sometimes or in other cases an ego problem. The free players don't - they think they are getting a deal. I focus on the ones that are enablers as the ones to change, they also make up the largest portion of the games so it aligns naturally. It's easiest to become an enabler and it's easiest to wipe out of your mind because the whole thing seems legit with a gaggle of compatriots spouting in unison - we want free, we want free, we want free.
How many times now do you see people say on a sub game or any game with a box price... mmmmm I'll wait for it to go free in 6 mos. before I try it. Oddly enough, these people are going to keep free around as long as they stay the majority. There weren't this many MMO players in the olden days, these people only came because it's free and they will probably leave if it stops being free or they will realize that it never was meant to be free and catch up. If they leave then maybe we can stop getting all these poopy-pants cookie cutter games and MMO players can be happy-dappy again, short of complaining about drop rates lol
You don't create addicts. Somebody is either prone too addictive behavior, or he isn't. If he is, he will find something to be addicted to. Nothing you can do will change that, and depriving yourself of experiences you enjoy out of some delusional belief that it will somehow prevent broken people from being broken doesn't accomplish anything but you having less fun. In your drug dealer example, one person choosing not to deal drugs changes nothing. *Everyone* would have to choose not to deal drugs for anything to be accomplished, and that isn't going to happen.
All any of us can control is his own choices. You can't choose for there not to be addicts who spend irresponsibly. You can't choose for there not to be "enablers." All you can choose is whether or not you enjoy a game, or refrain from enjoying as an empty gesture in the name of "principle" which actually accomplishes nothing.
(And, as a practical matter, the elimination of cash shops wouldn't change anything for the addicts. They would just switch to buying in game currency from gold farmers.)
Originally posted by Jacxolope
Whatever the goal of the game IS....
In Runes of magic its Guild Wars (total PVP) and its total P2W in too many ways to describe. Other games can be PVE if raiding is the "goal" and you unable to do so without spending tons in the cash shop.
Every game is 'competitive' in many different ways-
Sure, if in order to participate in content you absolutely *must* purchase things from the cash shop, that is bad design, and should be changed. I agree fully that gear useful for PvP should never be sold for cash. Which games with a focus on raiding are selling raid gear for cash?
I again would mention Realms of magic needing purchased gear (upgrades) to raid. There have been others but I am unsure what the names were off the bat.
Originally posted by asmkm22 This whole topic is funny because it's basically publishers trying to pretend like they aren't out to rip people off...
Originally posted by Zlayer77
The fact that "most" f2p games are made to defraud, steal, trick, con and steal players money, is something I hope most of you understand, if not you need a reality check....
Same response for both of you. "You can't cheat an honest man."
But then should we let everything just go unregulated ? When a casino tells me I have 50/1 odds they can really give me 11000000/1 and "let the buyer beware"? Can we add Virtual prostitutes into games with no age restriction (like gambling) because 'hey, dont let the internet watch your kids'...
I imagine you probably dont have kids?
I should be able to trust that any 15 year old can be given some money to play a game that is slated for "all ages" and not be gambling with real money for odds nobody knows. Hell, as an adult they are required to tell me my 'odds of winning' but kids gambling in games with no disclosure is okay? It isnt...
But I agree with the gist of what you say- I think cyberbullying and many other things (common core) are giving us a very irresponsible and dumbed down generation. I think entitlement is at an all time high. But regulating a predatory industry is just common sense.
If the casino tells you one set of odds, then gives you another, that is a pretty clear case of fraud. Which is a matter of common law, and one you can take them to court over without any need for regulations. And how old are your kids? I become skeptical when you start a sentence with the words "I should be able to trust that any 15 year old..." no matter what words complete the sentence.
And you keep trying to present this like kids are being treated differently than adults, by the practice of comparing gambling outside of games to gambling inside them. The game companies aren't required to tell adults the odds behind the gambling boxes any more than they are required to tell kids. Same treatment.
As for "predatory..." lol. All you accomplish by protecting people from themselves, most of the time, is making them even less capable of learning to make better decisions. Saw a great sign the other day. "Good decisions come from experience. Experience comes from bad decisions."
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 lizardbones I'm sure everyone has seen at least one thread on at least one F2P game where whatever the developer or publisher is charging for is somehow P2W, underhanded or just a flat out rip-off. So given that people are willing to go into such granular detail on what developers shouldn't charge for, what exactly should they charge for in a F2P game? In your hypothetical scenario, keep in mind the following: * The game must actually make money. Yes, this is a consideration. Even for your favorite game, they must make money. Not only must they make money to cover expenses, they have to make a profit, or the game will not continue to exist. * "Subscription" as the answer will not work here. The game is F2P, and must sell stuff in their cash shop, either in or out of the game. * Nothing is off limits. The only wrong answer is "Subscription". ** "Some F2P Options OR Subscription" would be a fine answer. "Subscription" by itself is the only wrong answer here. It's a F2P game, so something has to be charged for in the cash shop.
so for the best f2p approach comes from the secret world imo.there is nearly no item you actually NEED in the shop. like 9999 clothings, and maybe 1 or 2 of those super disenchant thingies.they charge for issues, eg content patches, abit like they (funcom) did in AoC before TSW.awesome approach, give me more clothings to buy!
Is it just me or is there really this many people so dense they can't understand what F2P is even after so many people have pointed out several good definitions in this very thread.
F2P = No Entry Fee - You can play without putting up a single cent.
The similarity between B2P and F2P is close enough after initial entry into the game that a B2P game's ongoing revenues could be used as an example of a 'good' F2P cash shop.
Your mistaken, B2P is a completely different model than F2P. A Porsche and a Pinto both have tires and yes they are called cars, but they are completely different in that world.
B2P = You pay to get into the game
F2P = You pay nothing to get into the game
My point in how dense people are has been made. Thank you for your assistance.
But then should we let everything just go unregulated ? When a casino tells me I have 50/1 odds they can really give me 11000000/1 and "let the buyer beware"? Can we add Virtual prostitutes into games with no age restriction (like gambling) because 'hey, dont let the internet watch your kids'...
I imagine you probably dont have kids?
I should be able to trust that any 15 year old can be given some money to play a game that is slated for "all ages" and not be gambling with real money for odds nobody knows. Hell, as an adult they are required to tell me my 'odds of winning' but kids gambling in games with no disclosure is okay? It isnt...
But I agree with the gist of what you say- I think cyberbullying and many other things (common core) are giving us a very irresponsible and dumbed down generation. I think entitlement is at an all time high. But regulating a predatory industry is just common sense.
If the casino tells you one set of odds, then gives you another, that is a pretty clear case of fraud. Which is a matter of common law, and one you can take them to court over without any need for regulations. And how old are your kids? I become skeptical when you start a sentence with the words "I should be able to trust that any 15 year old..." no matter what words complete the sentence.
And you keep trying to present this like kids are being treated differently than adults, by the practice of comparing gambling outside of games to gambling inside them. The game companies aren't required to tell adults the odds behind the gambling boxes any more than they are required to tell kids. Same treatment.
As for "predatory..." lol. All you accomplish by protecting people from themselves, most of the time, is making them even less capable of learning to make better decisions. Saw a great sign the other day. "Good decisions come from experience. Experience comes from bad decisions."
I think you entirely missed my point.
And I am not presenting anything like kids are being treated differently...Have no idea where you get that. They are being treated exactly the same and thats part of my issue. =/
I want game companies to disclose the odds of any game of chance that requires real money to EVERYONE. If they lie it would be FRAUD (just like a casino)
-I also dont have a 15 year old- Was using that as an example of an age you cannot be over their shoulder constantly. I know kids are going to do whatever they can get away with...
The whole "good decisions come with experience" is totally true. But there is still an age restriction to drink, vote and gamble. I know drinking, gambling and experimenting with drugs still happens and is part of growing up- But we try to regulate these things as best we can and the internet should be no exception.
And its predatory. Absent of the odds is downright criminal imho (although legal, I know...)
Originally posted by asmkm22 This whole topic is funny because it's basically publishers trying to pretend like they aren't out to rip people off, and players trying to pretend like they aren't simply wanting free entertainment at no cost to themselves. Just say it like it is; people who gravitate to F2P games are just cheap asses who have essentially crippled the industry by encouraging bad game design.
There is another aspect also.. the Asian game influence on the western market, that has been going on now for a few decades or more. I think you are making it sound a little to simple here to be honest. Facts are the Asian scam games have been around for more then a decade, and before they were online they were doing gambling game scheems in IRL.
The fact that "most" f2p games are made to defraud, steal, trick, con and steal players money, is something I hope most of you understand, if not you need a reality check....
Well, to be completely honest, I don't really factor in the Asian MMO's for my opinions. That's a totally different market, and always has been. There simply aren't many people outside of Asia playing them, outside of their small but vocal fanbase. That doesn't stop people here from getting all hyped about them, but I've been around long enough to know those games are only skin deep, and not worth considering.
There is a grey area developing, however, with lots of western game developers selling out to either NCSoft or Perfect World. This is creating the lovely situation of bringing all the negative aspects of Asian game development under the guise of a western release. It's easy to filter out, but I can understand when people just assume a game like Neverwinter isn't just an Asian P2W grinder because it's "developed" by a US studio.
My point was that there is a blurred line between when a game is free to play (or free to pay for, because you will always have to pay something...Nothing is free) and starts to become a P2W game instead. The western market developers like cash as much as the Asian one's do... And the Asians have gotten these scams nailed after years of practice, they know exactly how to make money out of people. Selling their own gold on the side for IRL cash is one thing they used to do back in the day, publicly complaining about botters and farmers. Then turning around and selling their own ingame currency to the gamers, posing as farmers, and botters... So "players trying to pretend like they aren't simply wanting free entertainment at no cost to themselves.", Might be a bit to broad a generalization..
You have to understand as a gamer when it is time to throw in the hat, and I have long since abandoned this genre. I have gone back to playing games in IRL instead, Boardgames/Rpg games and Table top games, it has been much more rewarding then throwing my time away on the O genre(online) the rest of the words in MM...RPG are no longer part of what these games are about... All that remains is that they are still played Online...
I would say theres a few things that could work...
1.) Cosmetics: I doubt anyone would really argue here. People like looking different and its not really an advantage (well some CAN consider it to be but yeah, lets ignore those 'nit picks' or silly arguments for now). Its amazing how much they can generate. Look at League of Legends with skins being such a hot pick.
2.) Character slots/bag slots: This is probably a good 'wiggle room' space and can vary. Having multiple characters is a staple of many games. Limiting the characters available allows for potential business for those looking for more slots. While another account can bypass it, its typically useful for conveience to keep it on a single account and doesn't usually bother most people. Bag slots is perhaps more of a 'picky' part. Having more bag space purchaseable is fine, so long as stuff isn't overly stingy on space where it becomes a nessessity and drags down the expereince.
3.) Cosmetic pets/mounts: Goes along with #1, but its really in a way something that sticks out on its own. So long as they don't provide benefits (or are limited ones that can easily be over-come without providing a big advantage) they can be entertaining and worth wild having in a game and sure to generate cash.
4.) Exp boosts: Perhaps one of those "Can be P2W" deals, having exp boosts if done right i feel is a good way to 'boost' the speed of which a normal time sink takes. The "P2W" feel can easily be mitigated by not offering it right out the gate, rather providing it only after things are established after say a new piece of content might mean new levels.
5.) Expansions/modules: One of those more 'finicky' areas as what they give CAN give advantages. I don't think most would mind 'buying in' to a game given they aren't forced to buy much. Having bits and pieces you can but with a good amount of content for say $5-10 price line that can provide hours upon hours of entertainment in a f2p can be a great thing. Expansions can dive a bit higher in the price range without being too big of an issue. It depends a lot on the game as some expansions can cause players to be 'gated' as F2P and it could be alright, though at the same time it might hurt the game forcing people TO pay and having far less actually reaching the end.
If cash shops worked differently I would agree. If there was an actual Dollar amount attached to purchases. The problem is you are buying "diamonds" (or whatever) which are sold in blocks and usually left over after a purchase is made.
For instance- If a Pet was listed as $9.99 and a costume at $6.99 we would fully be in agreement.
The problem is , you are buying "diamonds" at $19.99 for 200 $10.99 for 90 etc...etc.... So "standing over your child" while they spend all their Diamonds is problematic and the game companies know this. So by the time my child is around 15 I dont feel the need to babysit his every move during an online game. Most Parents dont. Thats why there is a rating system in place (again- I am not opposed to letting my 15 year old play certain M rated games but I am aware of the content). So if I gifted him 200 Diamonds for a good report card, I expect it will spent in drips and drabs over his playtime- Not on Gambling.
My main concern is disclosure in what the odds are. how can anyone make any informed descision if lacking that crucial piece of knowledge? maybe these gambling boxes are the best deal ever...But how do we know? And how could you possibly be against regulating disclosure of the odds and age restriction (or even parental permission)
Well, honestly, I take the view that if you choose to give someone money, or something that is equivalent to money, you are choosing to let that person decide how to spend it. Even if it is a kid. So your decision point comes prior to the initial purchase of currency. You look at what the currency can be spent on, have a talk with your kid about what he intends to spend it on, then make a decision about whether to let him have it. You don't need regulations to do any of that.
As for regulation, I am opposed to it whenever it isn't absolutely necessary to preserve someone's *physical* well-being, because as I think we've established in this thread, there is no such thing as free. Regulations cost money to create, they cost money to enforce. Money which otherwise could be put to some other, more productive purpose.
Originally posted by Iylz
Your mistaken, B2P is a completely different model than F2P. A Porsche and a Pinto both have tires and yes they are called cars, but they are completely different in that world.
B2P = You pay to get into the game
F2P = You pay nothing to get into the game
My point in how dense people are has been made. Thank you for your assistance.
Completely different is a stretch. A cash shop is a cash shop is a cash shop. Whether you paid an initial fee to get into the game or not.
Originally posted by Jacxolope
I think you entirely missed my point.
And I am not presenting anything like kids are being treated differently...Have no idea where you get that. They are being treated exactly the same and thats part of my issue. =/
I want game companies to disclose the odds of any game of chance that requires real money to EVERYONE. If they lie it would be FRAUD (just like a casino)
-I also dont have a 15 year old- Was using that as an example of an age you cannot be over their shoulder constantly. I know kids are going to do whatever they can get away with...
The whole "good decisions come with experience" is totally true. But there is still an age restriction to drink, vote and gamble. I know drinking, gambling and experimenting with drugs still happens and is part of growing up- But we try to regulate these things as best we can and the internet should be no exception.
And its predatory. Absent of the odds is downright criminal imho (although legal, I know...)
Well, there are actual medical reasons for the drinking/drug restrictions. Brains that are still developing have greater chance of long-term damage from substance abuse, etc etc. So that's a bit of a different issue, and well off point.
Voting is a whole different issue as well. Should probably be restricted by IQ rather than age, I've met some ten year olds with better decision making capacity than some 40+ year olds I know.
Back to the topical element of the post though, I think we'll have to agree to disagree. Use of words like "predatory" to describe in game gambling boxes seems like gross hyperbole to me.
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 CazNeergVoting is a whole different issue as well. Should probably be restricted by IQ rather than age, I've met some ten year olds with better decision making capacity than some 40+ year olds I know.
Elections are a matter of opinion, there is no right vote.
Based on your assumption error and presented logic, I should assume you are +40 y/o mentaly retarded individual?
Originally posted by lizardbones I'm sure everyone has seen at least one thread on at least one F2P game where whatever the developer or publisher is charging for is somehow P2W, underhanded or just a flat out rip-off. So given that people are willing to go into such granular detail on what developers shouldn't charge for, what exactly should they charge for in a F2P game? In your hypothetical scenario, keep in mind the following: * The game must actually make money. Yes, this is a consideration. Even for your favorite game, they must make money. Not only must they make money to cover expenses, they have to make a profit, or the game will not continue to exist. * "Subscription" as the answer will not work here. The game is F2P, and must sell stuff in their cash shop, either in or out of the game. * Nothing is off limits. The only wrong answer is "Subscription". ** "Some F2P Options OR Subscription" would be a fine answer. "Subscription" by itself is the only wrong answer here. It's a F2P game, so something has to be charged for in the cash shop.
so for the best f2p approach comes from the secret world imo.there is nearly no item you actually NEED in the shop. like 9999 clothings, and maybe 1 or 2 of those super disenchant thingies.they charge for issues, eg content patches, abit like they (funcom) did in AoC before TSW.awesome approach, give me more clothings to buy!
Is it just me or is there really this many people so dense they can't understand what F2P is even after so many people have pointed out several good definitions in this very thread.F2P = No Entry Fee - You can play without putting up a single cent.
The similarity between B2P and F2P is close enough after initial entry into the game that a B2P game's ongoing revenues could be used as an example of a 'good' F2P cash shop.
Your mistaken, B2P is a completely different model than F2P. A Porsche and a Pinto both have tires and yes they are called cars, but they are completely different in that world.
B2P = You pay to get into the game
F2P = You pay nothing to get into the game
My point in how dense people are has been made. Thank you for your assistance.
You might be making your point, but not the way you think.
Yes, B2P and F2P are not the same thing. Nobody said they were, except where you are implying that people are saying this. Except they haven't.
After initial entry into the game (B2P this costs money, F2P this does not), both revenue generating systems have a cash shop, and charge money for content within the game. If a B2P game charges for content that many people want, and many people are not averse to paying for, then it's an example of a good cash shop. It doesn't matter that the cash shop exists in a B2P game.
The question is, "What are things that can be charged for in a F2P game?" It doesn't matter if the example comes from a B2P game.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Voting is a whole different issue as well. Should probably be restricted by IQ rather than age, I've met some ten year olds with better decision making capacity than some 40+ year olds I know.
Elections are a matter of opinion, there is no right vote.
Based on your logical error and presented logic, I should assume you are +40 y/o mentaly retarded individual?
Voting is based on opinion. However, one must be smart enough to see through all the lies told by politicians to see which one really fits their opinion of what is needed.
In this country (US) far too many people vote based off of the lies or fear created from scare campaigns then by actually reaching down in and looking at the truth and the real issues. That is essentially what the other poster is referencing and although snarky and sarcastic, the underlying point is valid. Too many people don't know how to look for real facts and just believe any random thing they hear at face value.
Voting is a whole different issue as well. Should probably be restricted by IQ rather than age, I've met some ten year olds with better decision making capacity than some 40+ year olds I know.
Elections are a matter of opinion, there is no right vote.
Based on your logical error and presented logic, I should assume you are +40 y/o mentaly retarded individual?
Heh. Not talking about "correct" outcomes. Talking about the reasoning process used to reach them. I don't care who you vote for, as long as your vote is based on rational criteria which you are mentally competent to judge which candidate more effectively meets. You are correct, there is no "right vote." But there are definitely wrong voters. But we are digressing a bit too far from the topic.
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 SnarlingWolf Voting is based on opinion. However, one must be smart enough to see through all the lies told by politicians to see which one really fits their opinion of what is needed. In this country (US) far too many people vote based off of the lies or fear created from scare campaigns then by actually reaching down in and looking at the truth and the real issues. That is essentially what the other poster is referencing and although snarky and sarcastic, the underlying point is valid. Too many people don't know how to look for real facts and just believe any random thing they hear at face value.
Oh, so you are a politician as well? Because you sound precisely like one - preaching, misleading, creating illusion of fear, pointing fingers.
Irony?
There is no need for any of that, election is a process of expression. People can express themselves, whether they want to make a research or want to vote based on their feeling, w/e they decide. It is their choice, their right.
Originally posted by CazNeergHeh. Not talking about "correct" outcomes. Talking about the reasoning process used to reach them. I don't care who you vote for, as long as your vote is based on rational criteria which you are mentally competent to judge which candidate more effectively meets. You are correct, there is no "right vote." But there are definitely wrong voters. But we are digressing a bit too far from the topic.
Correct outcomes is precisely what you talk about, just word it differently - proposing there are some votes more legitimate than others.
Human kind isn't rational, it would beat the purpose of elections and democratic system if you would want to pretend the elections are rational process.
The true response to your question is, “Nothing I want, Nothing I need, Nothing related to my game play style.” BTW cosmetic and vanity are nothing but euphemism for the concept of “Gay”. The LGBT is offended by the idea of having to support the playstyle of a freeloading community.
There are four archetypical gamer types: Killers, Explorers, Socializers, and Achievers. Typically the cash shop items not regarded as P2W target Explorers, Socializers, and Achievers (Not that this group is made up entirely of LGBT or vice versa).
Those who decry P2W, see it as anything that puts a cost on the Killer type gamer playstyle.
Pardon any spelling errors
Konfess your cyns and some maybe forgiven Boy: Why can't I talk to Him? Mom: We don't talk to Priests. As if it could exist, without being payed for. F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing. Even telemarketers wouldn't think that. It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
Comments
There is another aspect also.. the Asian game influence on the western market, that has been going on now for a few decades or more. I think you are making it sound a little to simple here to be honest. Facts are the Asian scam games have been around for more then a decade, and before they were online they were doing gambling game scheems in IRL.
The fact that "most" f2p games are made to defraud, steal, trick, con and steal players money, is something I hope most of you understand, if not you need a reality check....
There sure are a lot of fabricated stereotypes to justify peoples beliefs when it comes to this topic. I know of no subject that everyone agrees on..yet somehow everyone who thinks one way or the other fit into a nice little box that you can point a finger at and say " EVIL!"
It's about choice. Until you understand that, you're opinion on this will always be about justifying your own choice. Not why or how other people made theirs.
I agree with what you are saying here.
But then should we let everything just go unregulated ? When a casino tells me I have 50/1 odds they can really give me 11000000/1 and "let the buyer beware"? Can we add Virtual prostitutes into games with no age restriction (like gambling) because 'hey, dont let the internet watch your kids'...
I imagine you probably dont have kids?
I should be able to trust that any 15 year old can be given some money to play a game that is slated for "all ages" and not be gambling with real money for odds nobody knows. Hell, as an adult they are required to tell me my 'odds of winning' but kids gambling in games with no disclosure is okay? It isnt...
But I agree with the gist of what you say- I think cyberbullying and many other things (common core) are giving us a very irresponsible and dumbed down generation. I think entitlement is at an all time high. But regulating a predatory industry is just common sense.
Lol. Thanks for that. Amusing philosopher. Terrible writer.
If the word "bad" doesn't work for you, substitute lazy. There is nothing remotely unreasonable about thinking parents should pay close attention to what their kids are doing on the internet, and they should *never* provide the child with the ability to make purchases, of any kind. If a kid wants to buy something, the parent should come to the computer and do it for him. That way they can't avoid seeing what is being purchased.
As for your "win/win" scenario, it's only a win for the gamblers. The primary utility of the gambling system for the customer base as a whole is that it brings in lots of revenue for the developer to spend on further developing the game. If the odds of a positive result go up, the number of gambling packs purchased actually goes down, because people get what they were looking for in fewer packs, and revenue suffers, resulting in losses for the developer and the customer base as a whole, benefiting only the gamblers.
You don't create addicts. Somebody is either prone too addictive behavior, or he isn't. If he is, he will find something to be addicted to. Nothing you can do will change that, and depriving yourself of experiences you enjoy out of some delusional belief that it will somehow prevent broken people from being broken doesn't accomplish anything but you having less fun. In your drug dealer example, one person choosing not to deal drugs changes nothing. *Everyone* would have to choose not to deal drugs for anything to be accomplished, and that isn't going to happen.
All any of us can control is his own choices. You can't choose for there not to be addicts who spend irresponsibly. You can't choose for there not to be "enablers." All you can choose is whether or not you enjoy a game, or refrain from enjoying as an empty gesture in the name of "principle" which actually accomplishes nothing.
(And, as a practical matter, the elimination of cash shops wouldn't change anything for the addicts. They would just switch to buying in game currency from gold farmers.)
Sure, if in order to participate in content you absolutely *must* purchase things from the cash shop, that is bad design, and should be changed. I agree fully that gear useful for PvP should never be sold for cash. Which games with a focus on raiding are selling raid gear for cash?
Same response for both of you. "You can't cheat an honest man."
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.
Same question as above. Competitive with what?
In Allods it was PvP. I am not sure how their PvE game played out. Were the little diamonds or whatever they were necessary to complete or even enter the end game dungeons or raids? I have no idea, but for PvP, if you actually wanted to not get roflstomped, you opened your bank account and started dumping the money out.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Cash Shop should provide excess. Extra housing. Extra clothes. Extra mounts. Extra... anything not needed to play and enjoy the game. Make sure the items are NOT on a timer but all permanents. Clothing is best but you need to have a chatroom type setting so peeps can show off their wardrobes. Mabinogi did great balancing this.
Well, to be completely honest, I don't really factor in the Asian MMO's for my opinions. That's a totally different market, and always has been. There simply aren't many people outside of Asia playing them, outside of their small but vocal fanbase. That doesn't stop people here from getting all hyped about them, but I've been around long enough to know those games are only skin deep, and not worth considering.
There is a grey area developing, however, with lots of western game developers selling out to either NCSoft or Perfect World. This is creating the lovely situation of bringing all the negative aspects of Asian game development under the guise of a western release. It's easy to filter out, but I can understand when people just assume a game like Neverwinter isn't just an Asian P2W grinder because it's "developed" by a US studio.
You make me like charity
This is not exactly on topic, but why?
Why should a game avoid P2W items in a PvP game? Why should a game provide only extra items as opposed to e.g. dungeon or raid content? This is just a bonus question.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
MMOs aren't made for all ages. You have to sign a tos and I think in most countries that means around the age of 18 without a parents consent. With consent it means the parents are saying they take responsiblity for what their underage children experience. It's also why any online game says online content not rated by ( whatever rating system you have ) because they can't tell you what you'll see online. So the whole kid argument isn't as valid as ppl like to make it. The answer to that is...if you don't like it don't let your kid play. They warn you for a reason.
I don't like lock boxes and think they should have to give you the odds of winning each prize. I think they have some loophole because every box wins, just not what you always want. There is no empty box so it's not gambling like in a casino. So, you are buying a random prize not "gambling" as the law sees it.
If the casino tells you one set of odds, then gives you another, that is a pretty clear case of fraud. Which is a matter of common law, and one you can take them to court over without any need for regulations. And how old are your kids? I become skeptical when you start a sentence with the words "I should be able to trust that any 15 year old..." no matter what words complete the sentence.
And you keep trying to present this like kids are being treated differently than adults, by the practice of comparing gambling outside of games to gambling inside them. The game companies aren't required to tell adults the odds behind the gambling boxes any more than they are required to tell kids. Same treatment.
As for "predatory..." lol. All you accomplish by protecting people from themselves, most of the time, is making them even less capable of learning to make better decisions. Saw a great sign the other day. "Good decisions come from experience. Experience comes from bad decisions."
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.
Your mistaken, B2P is a completely different model than F2P. A Porsche and a Pinto both have tires and yes they are called cars, but they are completely different in that world.
B2P = You pay to get into the game
F2P = You pay nothing to get into the game
My point in how dense people are has been made. Thank you for your assistance.
I think you entirely missed my point.
And I am not presenting anything like kids are being treated differently...Have no idea where you get that. They are being treated exactly the same and thats part of my issue. =/
I want game companies to disclose the odds of any game of chance that requires real money to EVERYONE. If they lie it would be FRAUD (just like a casino)
-I also dont have a 15 year old- Was using that as an example of an age you cannot be over their shoulder constantly. I know kids are going to do whatever they can get away with...
The whole "good decisions come with experience" is totally true. But there is still an age restriction to drink, vote and gamble. I know drinking, gambling and experimenting with drugs still happens and is part of growing up- But we try to regulate these things as best we can and the internet should be no exception.
And its predatory. Absent of the odds is downright criminal imho (although legal, I know...)
My point was that there is a blurred line between when a game is free to play (or free to pay for, because you will always have to pay something...Nothing is free) and starts to become a P2W game instead. The western market developers like cash as much as the Asian one's do... And the Asians have gotten these scams nailed after years of practice, they know exactly how to make money out of people. Selling their own gold on the side for IRL cash is one thing they used to do back in the day, publicly complaining about botters and farmers. Then turning around and selling their own ingame currency to the gamers, posing as farmers, and botters... So "players trying to pretend like they aren't simply wanting free entertainment at no cost to themselves.", Might be a bit to broad a generalization..
You have to understand as a gamer when it is time to throw in the hat, and I have long since abandoned this genre. I have gone back to playing games in IRL instead, Boardgames/Rpg games and Table top games, it has been much more rewarding then throwing my time away on the O genre(online) the rest of the words in MM...RPG are no longer part of what these games are about... All that remains is that they are still played Online...
I would say theres a few things that could work...
1.) Cosmetics: I doubt anyone would really argue here. People like looking different and its not really an advantage (well some CAN consider it to be but yeah, lets ignore those 'nit picks' or silly arguments for now). Its amazing how much they can generate. Look at League of Legends with skins being such a hot pick.
2.) Character slots/bag slots: This is probably a good 'wiggle room' space and can vary. Having multiple characters is a staple of many games. Limiting the characters available allows for potential business for those looking for more slots. While another account can bypass it, its typically useful for conveience to keep it on a single account and doesn't usually bother most people. Bag slots is perhaps more of a 'picky' part. Having more bag space purchaseable is fine, so long as stuff isn't overly stingy on space where it becomes a nessessity and drags down the expereince.
3.) Cosmetic pets/mounts: Goes along with #1, but its really in a way something that sticks out on its own. So long as they don't provide benefits (or are limited ones that can easily be over-come without providing a big advantage) they can be entertaining and worth wild having in a game and sure to generate cash.
4.) Exp boosts: Perhaps one of those "Can be P2W" deals, having exp boosts if done right i feel is a good way to 'boost' the speed of which a normal time sink takes. The "P2W" feel can easily be mitigated by not offering it right out the gate, rather providing it only after things are established after say a new piece of content might mean new levels.
5.) Expansions/modules: One of those more 'finicky' areas as what they give CAN give advantages. I don't think most would mind 'buying in' to a game given they aren't forced to buy much. Having bits and pieces you can but with a good amount of content for say $5-10 price line that can provide hours upon hours of entertainment in a f2p can be a great thing. Expansions can dive a bit higher in the price range without being too big of an issue. It depends a lot on the game as some expansions can cause players to be 'gated' as F2P and it could be alright, though at the same time it might hurt the game forcing people TO pay and having far less actually reaching the end.
Well, honestly, I take the view that if you choose to give someone money, or something that is equivalent to money, you are choosing to let that person decide how to spend it. Even if it is a kid. So your decision point comes prior to the initial purchase of currency. You look at what the currency can be spent on, have a talk with your kid about what he intends to spend it on, then make a decision about whether to let him have it. You don't need regulations to do any of that.
As for regulation, I am opposed to it whenever it isn't absolutely necessary to preserve someone's *physical* well-being, because as I think we've established in this thread, there is no such thing as free. Regulations cost money to create, they cost money to enforce. Money which otherwise could be put to some other, more productive purpose.
Completely different is a stretch. A cash shop is a cash shop is a cash shop. Whether you paid an initial fee to get into the game or not.Well, there are actual medical reasons for the drinking/drug restrictions. Brains that are still developing have greater chance of long-term damage from substance abuse, etc etc. So that's a bit of a different issue, and well off point.
Voting is a whole different issue as well. Should probably be restricted by IQ rather than age, I've met some ten year olds with better decision making capacity than some 40+ year olds I know.
Back to the topical element of the post though, I think we'll have to agree to disagree. Use of words like "predatory" to describe in game gambling boxes seems like gross hyperbole to me.
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.
Elections are a matter of opinion, there is no right vote.
Based on your assumption error and presented logic, I should assume you are +40 y/o mentaly retarded individual?
You might be making your point, but not the way you think.
Yes, B2P and F2P are not the same thing. Nobody said they were, except where you are implying that people are saying this. Except they haven't.
After initial entry into the game (B2P this costs money, F2P this does not), both revenue generating systems have a cash shop, and charge money for content within the game. If a B2P game charges for content that many people want, and many people are not averse to paying for, then it's an example of a good cash shop. It doesn't matter that the cash shop exists in a B2P game.
The question is, "What are things that can be charged for in a F2P game?" It doesn't matter if the example comes from a B2P game.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Voting is based on opinion. However, one must be smart enough to see through all the lies told by politicians to see which one really fits their opinion of what is needed.
In this country (US) far too many people vote based off of the lies or fear created from scare campaigns then by actually reaching down in and looking at the truth and the real issues. That is essentially what the other poster is referencing and although snarky and sarcastic, the underlying point is valid. Too many people don't know how to look for real facts and just believe any random thing they hear at face value.
Heh. Not talking about "correct" outcomes. Talking about the reasoning process used to reach them. I don't care who you vote for, as long as your vote is based on rational criteria which you are mentally competent to judge which candidate more effectively meets. You are correct, there is no "right vote." But there are definitely wrong voters. But we are digressing a bit too far from the topic.
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.
Oh, so you are a politician as well? Because you sound precisely like one - preaching, misleading, creating illusion of fear, pointing fingers.
Irony?
There is no need for any of that, election is a process of expression. People can express themselves, whether they want to make a research or want to vote based on their feeling, w/e they decide. It is their choice, their right.
Correct outcomes is precisely what you talk about, just word it differently - proposing there are some votes more legitimate than others.
Human kind isn't rational, it would beat the purpose of elections and democratic system if you would want to pretend the elections are rational process.
The true response to your question is, “Nothing I want, Nothing I need, Nothing related to my game play style.” BTW cosmetic and vanity are nothing but euphemism for the concept of “Gay”. The LGBT is offended by the idea of having to support the playstyle of a freeloading community.
There are four archetypical gamer types: Killers, Explorers, Socializers, and Achievers. Typically the cash shop items not regarded as P2W target Explorers, Socializers, and Achievers (Not that this group is made up entirely of LGBT or vice versa).
Those who decry P2W, see it as anything that puts a cost on the Killer type gamer playstyle.Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
As if it could exist, without being payed for.
F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.
Even telemarketers wouldn't think that.
It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.