They're worth the fee because you don't have that constant thought in your head that you don't have access to the full game and you'll either have to do additional grinding on top of the game's content grind, or drop big bucks for (most of the time) temporary or character-specific unlocks.
Why is it the word of the decade? Because it makes more money than a sub fee ***when the game is good enough, or P2W enough***. Why do you think ArcheAge is still running strong in NA? Because many gladly drop a whole YEAR's worth of sub in ONE NIGHT and possibly a second time if the regrades failed.
Catering to cash whales + in-game power that allows you to troll others hard = GOLD MINE for an MMO publisher. At this point, I'm starting to slowly get into the mindset that when a publisher decides to offer a sub fee which gives you full access to the game is considered a FAVOR.
The reason I asked was that instead of having a slightly fluid set number of players to draw from, millions of players now play tens to hundreds of games. Each game gets to count those accounts, whether they pay anything or not. 10 games can say "We have 30 Million players." and none of them would be lying.
Is this a good "measure" of what is successful? I guess that depends on how one defines "success."
There are dozens of ways that publishers/developers/investors define success, and even gamers.
Active User metrics are a good one to start with (Daily Active Users/Monthly Active Users). Particularly for an online-based game, as that shows the current activity level of the product - which is important for pretty well everyone. MMOs are sad places when they are empty.
Churn is another good metric to look at for success - it's essentially the opposite of the active user metrics - how many accounts are "dead" and essentially inactive.
Now that's ignoring all the business and financial aspects of a game, but as a gamer, I only care about those peripherally (as in, will publishers and investors continue to fund expansions and other new development). As a gamer, the community-based metrics are those I consider to be important to an online game, since I consider an active and vibrant community the best sign of a healthy and successful online game.
That isn't to say that a game with a DAU of 10,000 is "more successful" than one with only 5,000 - a lot of it depends on how the game was designed in the first place. Take EQ1, or FFXIV, or any number of server-based games. A single server may max out at 1,000, or 5,000, or 10,000 simultaneous users, but the game exists across multiple servers, so DAU doesn't necessarily indicate how well each of those servers may be fairing. It's all got to be taken with a grain of salt.
I have never had a problem with a gamer playing multiple games (or those games "claiming" that person as an account). Back when I was first playing around in EQ1 (early 00's) - people were fierce about their loyalty - if you played another game it was amount to sacrilige (and those that are still playing EQ1 over there mostly still feel that way). I never did understand why you couldn't play more than one game at a time, depending on your mood. In a way I suspect those that had the loyalty, the game was more about the community and less about the game - "We" as the players wouldn't be in other games, it would be other players that they didn't know (yet).
F2P is the buzzword of the decade. Cash shops rule and most do not have "must have" items in them. I'm curious, though, if players would still play their MMOs if they were asked to pay to play them. Are they "worth" a charged fee? Would you still log in?
If the game was worth paying a sub for yes I would pay.. but none of the current MMORPGs are worth paying a sub for.
I pay for every game that I want to play for longer than a day whether it is F2P or not. Recently I paid for a monthly subscription for World of Warships (1 month but didnt continue as the fun run out) and Skyforge (1 month, just started), I was paying for a year for World of Tanks (more than 12 months) first then War Thunder (close to a year also) after, but I didnt pay for FFXIV because I found it boring.
Also spent money on Hearthstone (50-60 bucks, that was a mistake but it got frustrating to keep losing).
If the game makes me enjoy myself then I consider a monthly subscription cheap for that much entertainment. I have never and will never buy anything from the cash shop,I think that is a horrible concept and can turn me off from a game.
But 12eur for a months entertainment, come on, that's a couple of beers - make a great game and charge what you want, just make it good. Dont spam me with buy this buy that while I am playing. I stopped playing WoT when gold ammo became the norm - suddenly weak spots and angling were not important, arty was nerfed and the game became a HP spam fest, concept tanks all over the place so I stopped paying and playing.
I'M all done with popular mmo's. Right now i play two. Ones an Emulator the other is community run. Smaller older player base with really great helpful people. No sub. or cash shops in either game. Both are pre Wow mmo's.
It depends on the game. I am playing some right now that I would not even consider playing if they charged a fee. If it was something that caught my attention the way SWG did, then sure I would play.
This baffles me. Why is a game "playable" but not "worth money to play?" I take it you have fun playing the games you would not spend money on, but... why?
Not sure how it 'baffles' you. Not trying to insult (actually I could not give two shits if I insult you or not) your intelligence here but it's a pretty simple concept. The game is ok, it allows me to waste time, therefore it is worth it to me to play since it is free. However it's not so mind bending good that I would in anyway pay to play the game.
Let me try another way. I like pickups, I drive 4 wheel drive trucks and motorcycles. Lets focus on the trucks for the sake of this conversation.
I prefer 4 wheel drive pickups and that is all I will spend my money on as far as 4 wheel transportation is concerned. However, if someone were to give me say a Prius and I had a long road trip in front of me, I would take the Prius for a number of reasons not least of which the money I would save on fuel.
So while I prefer pickups, the Prius is good enough since it was free and will save me money. Same concept with the games I play. They are good enough when free, but I would not pay for them.
Also, while I play a lot of video games, they are not my sole hobby nor my life. I have a very different life and very different experiences than you do. So, I am baffled at you being baffled by my opinions.
I hope this helps, but I doubt it will.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
Not 100% sure of what question the OP intended to ask.
Should we pay for games - simple answer and in general yes; one can discuss what people who play a f2p game for nothing add but as I say simple answer yes. Same deal as for food etc.
Should we pay an on-going subscription - which is probably the question intended - totally different issue.
First lets dispense with the myths:
It costs money to host the servers etc. - technically true. When UO etc. first launched - back when we did indeed buy search engines - there was an argument for doing so. GW1 demonstrated the changing economics; but if anyone is in any doubt: should we pay to use Google? Costs are relatively small these days; covered by the box price or whatever.
It pays for content. Well it might but in most games it doesn't. People talk about FFXIV but forget to mention these days that FFXI gets no new content. Subs can work well for companies - costs the same to produce content for 1 as for 10 million. Subscription freeloaders - sub a month, burn through a years content, unsub - can make life hard, hence no content anymore for FFXI. My opinion is that we are better served buying the content that we want; not buying what we don't like. How it is with most things. I don't pay the grocer money and hope they deliver what I like (and maybe take 14 months off).
Simple two-way premise: no money, no content; no content, no money. And most games work that way. Assassin's Creed, BF, CoD, Destiny, Civ, CK2, Titanfall.
And whether we buy comes down to price and value. And - because games are no different from any other product - there are reasons why it may be valuable for a company to have people play for free basically coming down to creating a community but also hoping that they may buy something of course. Same as e.g. why a football stadium gave out free tickets - television audience. And why some golf courses, gyms etc. have memberships and others use day passes.
Compare and contrast: the cost of any modern mmo vs $6 per hour (Compuserve, GEnie, et. al.)
Point of comparison is interesting when you bring that into play. By the time most millennials were using the internet, everything was 'free' under their flat $15/month fee. Hourly charges or even charges of any kind for content had faded away. So previous generations have those hourly fees as their point of comparison, whereas the majority of the most recent generation has FREE as their point of comparison.
Exactly. I still find fifty cents a day unbelievably cheap. But I didn't grow up with the expectation that entertainment should be free, and entertainment providers shouldn't get paid.
Not exactly at all. What is being left out of this comparison is that bandwidth costs from the old CServe days to AOL to EQ dialup to WoW and then on to today is that bandwidth costs to these companies has dropped from being prohibitively expensive to being their most costly overhead to incidental costs to today when bandwidth isn't a factor at all in the costs of running an MMO.
So when you compare $6 an hour (or $18 an hour prime time, bet you didn't know that and why was it more for prime-time? BANDWIDTH) to $9.89 a month to $14.99 a month to F2P, you have to include that back then they had MUCH higher costs in bandwidth expenses than they do today.
The big overhead today isn't bandwidth at all anymore. Its 500 person design teams so that half of them can sit on their ass and play WoW while they get paid. I know, I had offices right next to some.
Completely irrelevant. Never a thought in the consumer's mind, which is what was being discussed.
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
I posted in here yesterday and yes I ended up coming across as attacking the OP. Just wanted to say sorry for that and yeah sometimes I do post with way to much emotion.
But when it comes to F2P I do feel it has ruined the gaming industry with MMO's. No matter the MMO I play whether it be F2P, or B2P I will always sub to it to support the game if I love it. After all if the game doesn't make money it won't stay F2P or B2P for long.
It is no surprise that all MMO's that have ended up successful were always P2P. I wish this F2P concept was never invented. Even thou with cell phones am sure it would of come along at some point. Just wish it never hit our MMO's.
Free to play is a cheap game for those who can not afford to pay for a much better games. Thus, those playing Free style of games have to deal with all the riff-raff, or bored people who are just killing time, or snooping around in a free realm.
Free is enticing for children, because they do not earn an income, nor do they need a Credit Card.
F2P is the buzzword of the decade. Cash shops rule and most do not have "must have" items in them. I'm curious, though, if players would still play their MMOs if they were asked to pay to play them. Are they "worth" a charged fee? Would you still log in?
This thread is a perfect example of how poorly the users on the site represent the MMO community at large. F2P isn't a buzzword, it's an established and often the expected payment model of pretty much any new MMO, MOBA or any other type of multiplayer only PC game.
If anything P2P has become a buzzword, one aimed at grabbing the attention of niche, "Old School" communities like this one.
I think the failure of almost every AAA MMO in the last 10 years as P2P games pretty much proves that the majority of people wouldn't be playing these games if they were still strictly P2P.
Quick question: Do your perceive any diff in MMO vs MMORPGs ..? Do you hold them in the same regard?
Free to play is a cheap game for those who can not afford to pay for a much better games. Thus, those playing Free style of games have to deal with all the riff-raff, or bored people who are just killing time, or snooping around in a free realm.
Free is enticing for children, because they do not earn an income, nor do they need a Credit Card.
I have met some pretty mature children and some pretty immature adults.
You might want to question who you think the actual "riff raff" is.
I don't care how old someone is, if they behave maturely or at least reasonably. But just singling out younger gamers, and using that as your argument is a disservice to a lot of respectable gamers. One of the best guild leaders I have had was 17.
Better to treat people as individuals and ignore stereotypes.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
Games are not created without cost and a company needs to make a profit off them to maintain them, so whether it is "free to play", buy to play or subscription players need to support the game monetarily in order to keep playing the game. I prefer to support my games with a subscription when there is an option for it. I like the sub. model.
Games are not created without cost and a company needs to make a profit off them to maintain them, so whether it is "free to play", buy to play or subscription players need to support the game monetarily in order to keep playing the game. I prefer to support my games with a subscription when there is an option for it. I like the sub. model.
And as far as recent games go, what is the longest time you have subbed in a game for?
Because saying you like sub and actually subbing are different.
Be honest now...
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
It costs money to host the servers etc. - technically true. When UO etc. first launched - back when we did indeed buy search engines - there was an argument for doing so. GW1 demonstrated the changing economics; but if anyone is in any doubt: should we pay to use Google? Costs are relatively small these days; covered by the box price or whatever.
I agree with most of what you say here, except for the part about hosting. It does cost real money if you want to host anything commercial (although it isn't nearly as much as it used to be, you are right about that, but it is still a cost). And even something "Free" like using Google costs something, it just isn't money (I think it's something more valuable, but that part is debatable).
The one F2P game I love to play but hate their F2P setup is LOTRO. Even when you sub they have it setup to where you still need to spend in the shop to advance in some areas. Shared storage is one and increasing task limits. They should have it setup to where subbed players can use gold to advance in those areas.
Where I think SWTOR has the best setup for subbed players.
I would generally only ever play subscription MMOs.
I've never played a F2P game that I enjoyed.
Each subscription game I've played that has gone F2P has been made worse by the experience.
A lot of my reasoning is based on the way most games do F2P though. The original thought behind F2P was to remove the pay barrier to entry so that more people will play your game and can then spend money to unlock more content at a pace they find affordable. I still think thats a good idea.
The reality is overpriced cash shops charging for every tiny little feature or piece of content as well as offering advantages (like increased xp) through cash shops. So, as a free player, you're getting a far worse deal (money wise) than a subscriber in the majority of cases. As a subscriber, your actual game experience is lessened due to in game adverts, store buttons etc, plus the knowledge that if you just spend a bit of money you can level quicker, heal more, get more outfits etc just drives me insane. If a cash shop has exclusive items its an instant no-no for me.
I also like the convenience of subscribing. If a game is worth subscribing to, then its probably the only game I'll play. So, for £10 a month I know that my gaming needs are sorted. Its cheaper than when I play single player games, its better value for money than renting or buying films. With F2P games, I know its only going to be a short amount of time until I have to pay money which just puts a negative aspect over the whole game.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
If anything P2P has become a buzzword, one aimed at grabbing the attention of niche, "Old School" communities like this one.
While it is fashionable for the "current school" to denigrate the old school, remember the current school is tomorrow's old has-been fad. We're almost at the end of an arc where things are about to change again.
"Old school" players actually want to enjoy the game they are playing, not the metagame that rises up out of the increasingly shallow titles that they see. You can only milk so much out of a bad game with the metagame, and that's why there is a wave of games that go belly up.
Far from being fringe, the thoughtful people on this site represent the core of the market, and the rest are just entertaining a passing fancy. If you listen to the people who are actually interested in the virtual reality phenomenon of MMO's, you will make better games. If you listen to people who screech and chortle like howler monkeys, you will continue to make bad games until you go out of business.
You can't make money off of people who don't give you any. Ignore them. Many of them get off on exercising their little bit of power over naive developers (who listen and care too much about trends), and they get a kick out of it whenever their sassy little mouths cause someone else misery. They are no more than 3% of the market, and if you cater to them you will get about 3% of the money you should be getting.
I will be straight up honest, I'm picky when it comes to mmos, I haven't seen a good one in a long time. Paying for an mmo is gonna depend on different factors like: "Is it what I am looking for?". It all comes down to that because there are mmos out there that I don't find worth paying for, but some are. I like to support what I enjoy not something that is "meh", "okay". The other thing is what rl friends am I going to play it with, this is always a deciding factor.
If The Repopulation ended up being P2P instead of F2P, I would pay for it still because its worth it unlike WoW and WoW clones.
The acronym MMORPG use to mean Massive Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game.
But the acronym MMMORPG now currently means Microscopic Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game. Kappa.
F2P is the buzzword of the decade. Cash shops rule and most do not have "must have" items in them. I'm curious, though, if players would still play their MMOs if they were asked to pay to play them. Are they "worth" a charged fee? Would you still log in?
I am always been confused by people that refuse to play subscription games. They are usually 14-15 a month. Around the cost of a trip to McDonalds for you and a friend. I am more concerned about the quality of the game and now the monthly cost.
Free to play is a cheap game for those who can not afford to pay for a much better games. Thus, those playing Free style of games have to deal with all the riff-raff, or bored people who are just killing time, or snooping around in a free realm.
Free is enticing for children, because they do not earn an income, nor do they need a Credit Card.
Pretty sure this was troll bait, but what the heck, I will bite. Not gonna get a crazy rant out of me though.
I am well past the child age. I have paid subs for many games through the years. I am quite capable of paying for a game and subs. I even preferred to pay subs, but not because the games are better. There are several free to play games out there which hold their own against some of the best sub games. Many F2P games have sub-like offerings that bundle several cash shop benefits into one easy monthly payment.
You speak of riff-raff in F2P games as though riff-raff doesn't exist in sub games. Some would even argue that the "old school" and "hardcore" players that you can find in sub games ARE the riff-raff, elitest, snob, higher than thou players of the gaming world. As far as bored players, you must not ever watch general chat in any sub games. It is just as bad as F2P games.
You also claim that free is enticing for children because of their lack of income. In my experience, children have income...through their parents. And it is 100% disposable. It would be reasonable to assume a parent would be willing to pay for a sub vs multiple transactions for cash shop items. If all I had to pay was $15 a month for my children's entertainment, I would glady do so.
Your statement that people snoop around in a F2P game makes it sound like this is the only place this happens. Snooping around in a free realm has been around for a long time in sub games. It's called trial periods, or invite-a-friend-weekend, or 7 day pass, etc. Many of the sub games I no longer play even offer me a free week to come back and see what I am missing.
So basically, you are just spewing out a bunch of blah blah blah about F2P being inferior and attracting the riff-raff of society, as if the internet doesn't already do that just fine. You are wrong, and that's ok.
Answers
Why is it the word of the decade? Because it makes more money than a sub fee ***when the game is good enough, or P2W enough***. Why do you think ArcheAge is still running strong in NA? Because many gladly drop a whole YEAR's worth of sub in ONE NIGHT and possibly a second time if the regrades failed.
Catering to cash whales + in-game power that allows you to troll others hard = GOLD MINE for an MMO publisher. At this point, I'm starting to slowly get into the mindset that when a publisher decides to offer a sub fee which gives you full access to the game is considered a FAVOR.
Active User metrics are a good one to start with (Daily Active Users/Monthly Active Users). Particularly for an online-based game, as that shows the current activity level of the product - which is important for pretty well everyone. MMOs are sad places when they are empty.
Churn is another good metric to look at for success - it's essentially the opposite of the active user metrics - how many accounts are "dead" and essentially inactive.
Now that's ignoring all the business and financial aspects of a game, but as a gamer, I only care about those peripherally (as in, will publishers and investors continue to fund expansions and other new development). As a gamer, the community-based metrics are those I consider to be important to an online game, since I consider an active and vibrant community the best sign of a healthy and successful online game.
That isn't to say that a game with a DAU of 10,000 is "more successful" than one with only 5,000 - a lot of it depends on how the game was designed in the first place. Take EQ1, or FFXIV, or any number of server-based games. A single server may max out at 1,000, or 5,000, or 10,000 simultaneous users, but the game exists across multiple servers, so DAU doesn't necessarily indicate how well each of those servers may be fairing. It's all got to be taken with a grain of salt.
I have never had a problem with a gamer playing multiple games (or those games "claiming" that person as an account). Back when I was first playing around in EQ1 (early 00's) - people were fierce about their loyalty - if you played another game it was amount to sacrilige (and those that are still playing EQ1 over there mostly still feel that way). I never did understand why you couldn't play more than one game at a time, depending on your mood. In a way I suspect those that had the loyalty, the game was more about the community and less about the game - "We" as the players wouldn't be in other games, it would be other players that they didn't know (yet).
If the game was worth paying a sub for yes I would pay.. but none of the current MMORPGs are worth paying a sub for.
Also spent money on Hearthstone (50-60 bucks, that was a mistake but it got frustrating to keep losing).
If the game makes me enjoy myself then I consider a monthly subscription cheap for that much entertainment. I have never and will never buy anything from the cash shop,I think that is a horrible concept and can turn me off from a game.
But 12eur for a months entertainment, come on, that's a couple of beers - make a great game and charge what you want, just make it good. Dont spam me with buy this buy that while I am playing. I stopped playing WoT when gold ammo became the norm - suddenly weak spots and angling were not important, arty was nerfed and the game became a HP spam fest, concept tanks all over the place so I stopped paying and playing.
Its simple really
Let me try another way. I like pickups, I drive 4 wheel drive trucks and motorcycles. Lets focus on the trucks for the sake of this conversation.
I prefer 4 wheel drive pickups and that is all I will spend my money on as far as 4 wheel transportation is concerned. However, if someone were to give me say a Prius and I had a long road trip in front of me, I would take the Prius for a number of reasons not least of which the money I would save on fuel.
So while I prefer pickups, the Prius is good enough since it was free and will save me money. Same concept with the games I play. They are good enough when free, but I would not pay for them.
Also, while I play a lot of video games, they are not my sole hobby nor my life. I have a very different life and very different experiences than you do. So, I am baffled at you being baffled by my opinions.
I hope this helps, but I doubt it will.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
Should we pay for games - simple answer and in general yes; one can discuss what people who play a f2p game for nothing add but as I say simple answer yes. Same deal as for food etc.
Should we pay an on-going subscription - which is probably the question intended - totally different issue.
First lets dispense with the myths:
It costs money to host the servers etc. - technically true. When UO etc. first launched - back when we did indeed buy search engines - there was an argument for doing so. GW1 demonstrated the changing economics; but if anyone is in any doubt: should we pay to use Google? Costs are relatively small these days; covered by the box price or whatever.
It pays for content. Well it might but in most games it doesn't. People talk about FFXIV but forget to mention these days that FFXI gets no new content. Subs can work well for companies - costs the same to produce content for 1 as for 10 million. Subscription freeloaders - sub a month, burn through a years content, unsub - can make life hard, hence no content anymore for FFXI. My opinion is that we are better served buying the content that we want; not buying what we don't like. How it is with most things. I don't pay the grocer money and hope they deliver what I like (and maybe take 14 months off).
Simple two-way premise: no money, no content; no content, no money. And most games work that way. Assassin's Creed, BF, CoD, Destiny, Civ, CK2, Titanfall.
And whether we buy comes down to price and value. And - because games are no different from any other product - there are reasons why it may be valuable for a company to have people play for free basically coming down to creating a community but also hoping that they may buy something of course. Same as e.g. why a football stadium gave out free tickets - television audience. And why some golf courses, gyms etc. have memberships and others use day passes.
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
But when it comes to F2P I do feel it has ruined the gaming industry with MMO's. No matter the MMO I play whether it be F2P, or B2P I will always sub to it to support the game if I love it. After all if the game doesn't make money it won't stay F2P or B2P for long.
It is no surprise that all MMO's that have ended up successful were always P2P. I wish this F2P concept was never invented. Even thou with cell phones am sure it would of come along at some point. Just wish it never hit our MMO's.
Star Citizen – The Extinction Level Event
4/13/15 > ELE has been updated look for 16-04-13.
http://www.dereksmart.org/2016/04/star-citizen-the-ele/
Enjoy and know the truth always comes to light!
Free is enticing for children, because they do not earn an income, nor do they need a Credit Card.
Quick question: Do your perceive any diff in MMO vs MMORPGs ..? Do you hold them in the same regard?
You might want to question who you think the actual "riff raff" is.
I don't care how old someone is, if they behave maturely or at least reasonably. But just singling out younger gamers, and using that as your argument is a disservice to a lot of respectable gamers. One of the best guild leaders I have had was 17.
Better to treat people as individuals and ignore stereotypes.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
Because saying you like sub and actually subbing are different.
Be honest now...
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
Where I think SWTOR has the best setup for subbed players.
Star Citizen – The Extinction Level Event
4/13/15 > ELE has been updated look for 16-04-13.
http://www.dereksmart.org/2016/04/star-citizen-the-ele/
Enjoy and know the truth always comes to light!
I've never played a F2P game that I enjoyed.
Each subscription game I've played that has gone F2P has been made worse by the experience.
A lot of my reasoning is based on the way most games do F2P though. The original thought behind F2P was to remove the pay barrier to entry so that more people will play your game and can then spend money to unlock more content at a pace they find affordable. I still think thats a good idea.
The reality is overpriced cash shops charging for every tiny little feature or piece of content as well as offering advantages (like increased xp) through cash shops. So, as a free player, you're getting a far worse deal (money wise) than a subscriber in the majority of cases. As a subscriber, your actual game experience is lessened due to in game adverts, store buttons etc, plus the knowledge that if you just spend a bit of money you can level quicker, heal more, get more outfits etc just drives me insane. If a cash shop has exclusive items its an instant no-no for me.
I also like the convenience of subscribing. If a game is worth subscribing to, then its probably the only game I'll play. So, for £10 a month I know that my gaming needs are sorted. Its cheaper than when I play single player games, its better value for money than renting or buying films. With F2P games, I know its only going to be a short amount of time until I have to pay money which just puts a negative aspect over the whole game.
While it is fashionable for the "current school" to denigrate the old school, remember the current school is tomorrow's old has-been fad. We're almost at the end of an arc where things are about to change again.
"Old school" players actually want to enjoy the game they are playing, not the metagame that rises up out of the increasingly shallow titles that they see. You can only milk so much out of a bad game with the metagame, and that's why there is a wave of games that go belly up.
Far from being fringe, the thoughtful people on this site represent the core of the market, and the rest are just entertaining a passing fancy. If you listen to the people who are actually interested in the virtual reality phenomenon of MMO's, you will make better games. If you listen to people who screech and chortle like howler monkeys, you will continue to make bad games until you go out of business.
You can't make money off of people who don't give you any. Ignore them. Many of them get off on exercising their little bit of power over naive developers (who listen and care too much about trends), and they get a kick out of it whenever their sassy little mouths cause someone else misery. They are no more than 3% of the market, and if you cater to them you will get about 3% of the money you should be getting.
If The Repopulation ended up being P2P instead of F2P, I would pay for it still because its worth it unlike WoW and WoW clones.
But the acronym MMMORPG now currently means Microscopic Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game. Kappa.
I am well past the child age. I have paid subs for many games through the years. I am quite capable of paying for a game and subs. I even preferred to pay subs, but not because the games are better. There are several free to play games out there which hold their own against some of the best sub games. Many F2P games have sub-like offerings that bundle several cash shop benefits into one easy monthly payment.
You speak of riff-raff in F2P games as though riff-raff doesn't exist in sub games. Some would even argue that the "old school" and "hardcore" players that you can find in sub games ARE the riff-raff, elitest, snob, higher than thou players of the gaming world. As far as bored players, you must not ever watch general chat in any sub games. It is just as bad as F2P games.
You also claim that free is enticing for children because of their lack of income. In my experience, children have income...through their parents. And it is 100% disposable. It would be reasonable to assume a parent would be willing to pay for a sub vs multiple transactions for cash shop items. If all I had to pay was $15 a month for my children's entertainment, I would glady do so.
Your statement that people snoop around in a F2P game makes it sound like this is the only place this happens. Snooping around in a free realm has been around for a long time in sub games. It's called trial periods, or invite-a-friend-weekend, or 7 day pass, etc. Many of the sub games I no longer play even offer me a free week to come back and see what I am missing.
So basically, you are just spewing out a bunch of blah blah blah about F2P being inferior and attracting the riff-raff of society, as if the internet doesn't already do that just fine. You are wrong, and that's ok.