Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
General: 10 Misconceptions, Two Opinions, Part 1
SBFord
Former Associate EditorMember LegendaryPosts: 33,129
In this week's Free Zone column, writer Richard Aihoshi partners up with Massively.com's Beau Hindman to talk about the ten most common misconceptions that many players have about the free-to-play MMO genre. Today, MMORPG.com features the first five misconceptions and the column will continue on Wednesday at Massively. Read today's installment and weigh in with your thoughts.
A few weeks ago, I received a note from Beau Hindman, my free to play columnist counterpart at Massively.com and obviously a fellow observer of the category. In the course of introducing himself, he dropped the idea that we might try to work on something together. This seemed like it could be interesting and fun, both for ourselves and our respective readers. After a bit of discussion, we decided to compare and contrast our feelings about a number of the misconceptions we can't seem to escape. The first part of our discussion is below; Beau will bring you the rest on Wednesday.
Read 10 Common Misconceptions About Free to Play Games with Richard Aihoshi and Beau Hindman. Thoughts? Tell us on our forums.
Comments
"This is a fairly common example of the kind of over-generalization some anti-F2Ps engage in to support their personal agendas. "
Throw the term "liberal media" into that line and I would have sworn it came direct from Sarah Palin's mouth, and sadly that was the vibe from the whole article.
This didn't see so much about clearing up misconceptions, but yet another article (like pretty much all of yours are) where your anger at those who aren't blinded by the love for F2P titles like you are, spills over into writings.
Thanks again, Richard!
Speaking for myself (although Richard could probably back me up on this) I can say that these 5 points (10 in total when my column comes out) represent what I have heard for a long, long time concerning FTP games. It was fun to see how we answered the questions, and very insightful for me to hear from one of my favorite writers!
Beau
Listen to the Spouse Aggro podcast at spouseaggro.com. Twitter: spouseaggro
More of the same from Mr. Aihoshi. I think, or consider, that most intelligent gamers against F2P don't cite many of these reasons as being the cause for straying away.
Personally, the quest types and translation couldn't really matter less to me than they already do, because MMO's come in a pretty standard variety, and you usually know what to expect from the content if you've done enough research. As for not making very much money, I've never heard or have seen anyone claim that F2P's are a less profitable platform for MMOG's. In fact, I'd say most of us state that we realize they're designed to be money makers from the ground up, and for some of us, this is a very serious issue. Are all MMO's created to make money? Yes. Do they have to be blatantly obvious, cash-grab screw-jobs to still make ends meet? No.
I'd also like to point out that, again, for most people who have tried a few F2P games, spending cash getting to the "end game" isn't really an issue. Most of the titles allow you to level fairly easily and without forcing players to spend money until a large investment of time has been made, but I keep thinking back to Allods Online, and the twenty dollar, full slot bags that are pretty much required for high level players, or any player not interested in having to do vendor runs ever couple of minutes to have some remaining bag space. This is just an example, but these experiences are created with manufactured hinderances, for the purpose of drawing players into spending money to get around them. While I agree, the transactions are hardly ever necessary at the beginning, that's rarely the case near the end, and to say that players who want to compete or play at a level that would not normally cost them anything extra in a subscription based MMO, could possibly end up costing extensively in a F2P. That, to me, is more a barrier to entry than a subscription fee, especially when starting a new MMO, and all I'm thinking about is what's necessary to get to the "end game". Granted, if most F2P's gave me a susbscription option, that completely turned off the cash shop for my account and gave me in-game access to all of the content, I wouldn't have anything to complain about.
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
What anger?
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
I like Sarah Palin. ANYWAY, I only have experience to back up the kill 10/100 rats quests, as EVERY FTP I've played plops you in the middle of said rats and expects you to just start killing them by the droves, instead of giving you a nice storyline to follow giving you reasons for why you are killing all of these creatures. It's all about the soul of the game and the delivery. I haven't found a FTP give me the experience or "masked" grind that games like WoW or Lotro give. If they did, then they would be much more popular and might be able to hold my attention long enough for me to care and to continue playing past my first hour.
Perhaps this will all change once we get games that have "souls" going FreeToTry like Lotro and EQ2. Time will tell I suppose. Although, sometimes I think EQ2 is borderline as shallow, questwise as all these FTPs, heheh.
Good article, but its probably a waste of time to try to change the minds of rabid haters.
They think that because they tried a korean grinder that sucked they think that its the same in all F2P games. Thats like I would say that all P2P MMOs are cheap, shallow and have very little content with a nickel and diming cash shop just because STO is like that.
If WoW = The Beatles
and WAR = Led Zeppelin
Then LotrO = Pink Floyd
While I agree with you on some parts of that wall o' text, this is an article about the "misconceptions" of the F2P genre. These aren't reasons why we don't play the games, just common misconceptions. Yes, most people think they are poorly translated. Yes, most people think the quests suck. Yes, a lot of people think because they are "free" to play that they don't make much money to develop new content.
Obviously, these things are not true, hence the word "misconceptions" in the title.
No offense Richard, but if you took 1/10 of the effort you spend towards talking about F2P's criticisms, and devoted that towards actually showcasing the good F2P's in-depth, explaining how those specific games buck the trend, and why they deserve to be placed on a pedistal... well, you'd probably accomplish more, to be frank.
Just to address the points:
"All F2P games require spending a lot of money to reach high levels"
I trust the second part of this article will address the REAL complaint that people have? Namely "All F2P games require spending a lot of money of reach high power levels"? Few people (even the detractors) deny that you can reach the high levels with enough time and effort. Where the real problem arises is the inability to compete with similarly-leveled players who have purchased CS items that give them extra power. And this IS a rampant problem. Are there exceptions to the rule? No doubt. See my opening paragraph.
"F2P games make no money, or make very little"
Do people really believe this? The proliferation of the F2P genre should speak for itself - somebody is clearly making money from it.
"The quests in F2P games consist mainly of "kill 10 rats" quests, except it's more like "kill 100 rats"
Valid, actually. Definitely not a F2P-specific issue, although the rewards for killing the 10 rats have a distinct tendency to be proportionately smaller without the aid of CS items. And there is still a definite shortage of games offering items/options to simply reduce overall grind for a moderate fee (i.e. items acting as monthly subscriptions), and too many offering the grind-reductions in increments measured in minutes and hours.
"Most F2P games are rushed into America, resulting in broken English translations"
Whether "most" applies or not these days, it's still a problem. And it's not a difficult one to correct in many cases - just have a English-fluent (well-fluent, I mean) person sit down and read every sentence in the game, and have him judge it. In lieu of the acres of gaming code already needing to be handled, it's not actually that difficult. And there are still far too many games that fail this test.
"Cash shops encourage developers to work only on cash shop content"
A developer doesn't NEED to work excessively on CS content - once they've created an initial need for power and time, the items sell themselves. XP pots/bags/ items don't need to be constantly re-engineered once you have them designed. Things like mounts and costumes require more effort, but they' And there's a flipside to your offered counter-argument - since the majority of F2P's allow for CS items to be resold for in-game currency, any work spent on CS items doesn't apply "only" to the paying customers.
Cute article, I'm sure the second half will be similar, but I think the time would be better served by highlighting the gems of the industry and bringin them to the forefront (and criticising the trash!), rather than this engaging in generic apologetics.
Edit: And while I'm sure the second half of your article is already written, I would be interested to see the complaint "F2P Cash Shops sell items that differ from online casinos only in semantics" addressed.
A Modest Proposal for MMORPGs:
That the means of progression would not be mutually exclusive from the means of enjoyment.
Yeah, that's fair enough, though I'd venture further to say that these misconceptions are fairly personal or experiential. I haven't seen many of these listed objects come to life through the forums, actually, which may have everything to do with what threads I pay attention to. Still, against F2P or not, I'd say most of these misconceptions belong to people who haven't really tried many F2P games, or at least those that have been more recently produced. Personally, I did view these as reasons why a particular individual, who didn't like F2P, would not try a cash-shop or micro transaction based MMOG. They seemed pretty one-sided and paint anti-F2P'ers in a light that I find somewhat insulting, but the author's entitled to an opinion like anyone else, and is also entitled to present his collection of data and experiences in any manner he so chooses. I just don't agree (obviously).
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
I don't hate the f2p model with microtransactions but deliver us a quality triple A mmo using that business model. Don't give us yesterday's technology with today's premium prices.
The arguement is never ending, I say F2P is out for money , and someone else says it's for casual adults who don't have the time the more dedicated gamers do. It's not an arguement based on what is charged for content, exspansions, or fluff. The base arguement has to do with character progression.
It all falls to this : Will I support your progression earned with money, over my progression earned with time? No .. I will never support someones ability to purchase progression.Progression can be many things : Exp potions, Armor, Weapons, inventory space, movement increase, etc etc anything that negates or eases the time requirements to progress over/under those who don't. I will however support every F2P model that does not allow its users the option to purchase progression.
That is where you run into opposition, that is where those of us who take gaming seriously ( I am fully aware this makes me a Nerd) begin to get rabid. Also I feel it nessecary to include that I am infact a serious and in some titles professional gamer ; I am still married, my stepson is 18 and I have a wonderful job which requires me to be on call 24/7. It's a choice ... not a matter of age and/or time.
For me it's simple when I find a f2p game that cna hold my attention for any length of time and which I tihnk deserves my dollars to support I will play it.This has yet to happen though and no amount of articles and/or cajoling and railing the authors produce against equally valid but opposite opinions to theirs will change my games on the current crop of F2P games.
F2P devs must be bringing money to this site by the truckloads. I havnt seen this much propaganda since the last Obama speech.
WOW isnt great because it has 12 million players. WOW has 12 million players because its great.
...and after a brief detour, we return to the regularly scheduled propaganda from Richard!
No discussion of any specific games, why they are good or what a dev team has done; just another tirade on why everyone who dislikes F2P is wrong, misinformed and irrationally biased. Yet again using generic strawmen, what a shock.
"All F2P games require spending a lot of money to reach high levels" Never seen that argument raised against F2P personally, but I'll admit I don't go looking for all the anti-F2P threads.
"F2P games make no money, or make very little" Never seen that one either; What I and others have said is that F2P games do not make the up front money from box sales that sub-based games do, this makes it harder to get massive investment to cover large development costs.
"The quests in F2P games consist mainly of "kill 10 rats" quests, except it's more like "kill 100 rats"" Again, I've seen that complaint about all MMOs, never directed specifically at F2P. Now if you are trying to talk about how F2P games require more "grind" than sub MMOs that is different, it's also not a misconception.
"Most F2P games are rushed into America, resulting in broken English translations" I've never seen this claimed this way. Many of the F2P titles have had bad translations, but not because they were rushed. Generally the complaint is that they are older "recycled" games that are cheaply ported to the western market after they are released to the asian market. Again, it's not a misconception. While not true of all F2P games it has certainly been the case on way too many of them.
"Cash shops encourage developers to work only on cash shop content" This is a misconception how exactly? "F2P" games only make money off the cash shop, so point me at a management team that doesn't focus on revenue?? Every company that has gone or is going F2P has pulled devs to work on the F2P release from other content.
No kidding!
If we could trap the methane from all the BS piling up on this subject, the US could reduce thier oil consumption by %50!
Anyone who says "all F2P games are like XX" are obviously wrong. But there are certainly trends. They are usually grindy. They are usually lacking in good PvP or high-end PvE. They usually designed to require you to spend money to keep up. That is a fine business model. But it tends to make for crappy games. They're easy and accessible, if that's what you're looking for. Most people who genuinely like video games aren't looking for that, though. I know I'm not. While there's no rule that says F2P games can't compete with P2P, they usually don't.
Important facts:
1. Free to Play games are poorly made.
2. Casuals are not all idiots, but idiots call themselves casuals.
3. Great solo and group content are not mutually exclusive, but they suffer when one is shoved into the mold of the other. The same is true of PvP and PvE.
4. Community is more important than you think.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
This article was your last chance with me. Same old stuff you've regurgitated a hundred times. Instead of telling people what F2P games do WELL (which is damn near nothing that I've ever seen) you spend the entire time whining about how people's understandings of F2P games arent true for ALLLLLLLlllll of them! How you got to write for this website with this consistant low-quality regurgitated output is simply mindboggling.
Is there any way to remove email notices about 'General News' that come from this Richard idiot? I've pretty much had it with this free to play propaganda spam. I like amny other writers, but along with the majority of the other posters here Im sick and tired of being spammed with Richard's mindless bologna.
How this can be a misconception? Most (Or even all) of the F2P's out there forces you -INDIRECTLY- (I.e the GRIND) to SPEND on the game.
It's not like someone wouldn't feel like spending on better gear/items/etc after grinding nonstop for 10 hours and see little to no progress.
And I lol'd @ how does "grind" has been mentioned to nonexistant on F2P's. Really. How many F2P's have you tried out to reach that conclusion?
And no, this Is not a obsession with one game, since I've tried Perfect World, Runes of Magic, Aika Online, Wonderking, Maple Story, Dragonica, Atlantica, Lunia and taking more than 20 hours (or even more than It)to gain one level Is, indeed, a grind to my eyes.
My reason to disalike F2P has nothing to do with anything stated in this article.
But lets face it, nothing is free in this world, they make F2P games to make profit. same as P2P
But with Sub type games at least I know what it will cost me to get all the content and that evertyihing is a lil more balanced for all players.
I dont want to have to bother with cash shops and pick out what I need and what I dont, I just want to pay my $15 for hour and hours of cheap entertainment.
Which is what MOST people want dispite the huge amount of Pay 2 Win propaganda this site and many other industry shills like it spout.
F2P is kinda like get what you pay for. Apparently people do shop at Walmart today.
Perhaps there are some things in F2P that works but I dislike the model as a longterm course companies are pursuing.
There is some short term amusement in the 2 bit purchases, you know like Sunday comics are amusing. Some content like the front page article is entertaining or informational. But every Sunday newspaper ends in the recycle bin Sunday evening. I want more investment in a MMO, I don't want to be an A-D-D fadville gamer.
This quote got me:
"All F2P games require spending a lot of money to reach high levels"
Probably not true for all f2p games, BUT I have yet to play one that does not require spending a lot more than a normal subscription cost per month. Heck just buying a mount in most of these games is a 3 month subscription cost.
So on that point the author is wrong. Just because you can find one that isn't, you can bet it is not one of the mainstream games, they all are expensive to play.
So wheres the problem if you have the option of a 15 dollar subscription and locking all the games features or playing a limited amount of the games content free ? You can still do the same thing as before so the arguements against the hybrid model don't make any sence to me at all . I do see problems in games placed souly on cash shops . But these are two very different buisness models under the free to play banner .
I think had games managed to challenge Warcraft in the past 5 years we would'nt have been here now but the majority of current mmo gamers believe its the only game that has any decent content and to be honest although its a game that does'nt appeal to me there really are very few mmos that have been released in that time that are worth a monthly fee .
The other options these games have is buy to play as with Guild Wars(With the kind of content Warhammer has and limited development it would have done well as a buy to play game and proberbly would have made a lot more money ) or offer a more compeditively priced subscription fee . I've argued in forums for years that this should have been looked at a lot earlier in regards to many game but you always get plenty of idiots who know nothing about buisness or how competition works saying they would pay 30 dollars a month for a decent mmo .
Change was always inevitable . Out of the batch of new MMOs to be released in the coming year and a half realistically proberbly only StarWars KoToR has any realistic chance of making it a success .
Many games now face the option of changing the way they make money or slowly heading into oblivion . I dunno about everyone else out there I would prefer an mmo market where games survive when they can't attract enough subscribers than one where only a few games exist for more than a couple of years .
If the majority of new mmos end up closing thier doors within a reasonably short period of 2-4 years becuase they don't change and adapt there will be even less people willing to invest time and money in them .
Thank god the likes of SOE and Turbine have seen sence .
Richard, you have beat this topic to death. Not everyone is going to agree with you, especially when you rarely talk about the GAMES you are supposed to be covering and almost exclusively focus on talking about why people who disagree with you are wrong.
Pure crap again.