Its funny to me that Richard is making an arguement for choice of payment models, when there is no choice in the marketplace. True choice in payment models would be that the game you like offers more than one option, independent of the others. For example, if EVE went "F2P" where would those players go that like EVE but not that payment model. There isnt another game like EVE in the marketplace. So there is no choice really. Where do WOW players go if they want an alternative payment method? Nowhere.
As far as I know, there is only one game that is giving (or going to give) true payment model choice and that is EQII. By opening an alternative payment model server gives the MMO community real choice. There will be the standard P2P model and the F2P model on different servers. One community does not affect the other. In fact, transfers from one server to another are only going to be one way, from P2P to F2P.
This is freedom of choice.
Yohoho Puzzle Pirates also has seperate F2P and subscription servers. I would normally consider a sub ocean when I wanted to play, but the poker players on the F2P Servers make it too easy.
My choice is B2P games, with a different logic in cash-shop if the company wants more money, like Guild Wars. It's the only thing between P2P and F2P models that work for players and for the company. I wouldn't mind playing P2P games if i had the money, but unfortunately i dont have that kind of money so I have to play F2P games that CAN work in this lousy laptop. But I must say that there are some good F2P games out there (but there's always something wrong with most of them: the community, the devs/GMs/Support help, the way the game is build at higher lvls, or any other thing that I don't remmember now).
In terms of having games with different choices of paying model, than I guess it's true that there aren't almost any. But I see that some game companies are already starting creating different paying models for the same game, leaving the players the choice of paying for a month, paying for days or paying for hours. But having F2P and P2P models in the same game its like having a randy cat and a raging dog in the same room and try to make them be good friends: it seems impossible and probably is, but who knows?!?!
Are you really trying to argue that the pay model of a MMO has any bearing on how much we enjoy the game? Give it a rest!!! The payment is darn near inconsequential. Its whats inside the game that matters.
As far as f2p games most are gear grinds that force you to buy the upgrades from the cash shop. No thanks!!! Even DDO is starting down this path. You can now buy green steel ingredients, and they force guilds to buy upgrades for air ships exclusively from the shop. We see that with time DDO will even be adding more to the shop just as predicted by us vocal players.
All f2p/cash shop games have one thing in mind; how can we force the player to spend more money in the cash shop? Their answer is by not having it in the game, or forcing people to sped more to progress at a reasonable pace. Is this how you like to play your games Richard? Sounds horrible to me.
Are you really trying to argue that the pay model of a MMO has any bearing on how much we enjoy the game? Give it a rest!!! The payment is darn near inconsequential. Its whats inside the game that matters.
As far as f2p games most are gear grinds that force you to buy the upgrades from the cash shop. No thanks!!! Even DDO is starting down this path. You can now buy green steel ingredients, and they force guilds to buy upgrades for air ships exclusively from the shop. We see that with time DDO will even be adding more to the shop just as predicted by us vocal players.
All f2p/cash shop games have one thing in mind; how can we force the player to spend more money in the cash shop? Their answer is by not having it in the game, or forcing people to sped more to progress at a reasonable pace. Is this how you like to play your games Richard? Sounds horrible to me.
Since LOTRO announced the move to F2P the door is now open. I suspect Turbine kept CS advantages in DDO to a minimum until the LOTRO switch was made. I am a bit surprised they heated the water up so early but its not unexpected, just earlier than expected.
WOW isnt great because it has 12 million players. WOW has 12 million players because its great.
The game's Mabinogi, the only F2P game I have spent money on. Not only can you shear sheep, you can be a sheep, which lead to hilarity when people mistook you for an npc and tried to chase you around to shear your wool. Best pet system I have ever seen in an MMO but a horrible grind at midgame levels.
If gamers had freedom of choice, it means they can play what they feel and when some bigshot comes their way, they can simply say "I can play another game", the subscription Fees in games restrict the population to a few games, and it protects peoples accomplishments in games.
A gamer doesn't want to play 10+ games to be able to compete. They prefer just playing one. If people have freedom of Choice, it means the weight of a game becomes lower and competition between each game becomes a lot more intense.
Most of the people who support one system are self-centered towards the system throwing politics or any moral/philosophical argument...
They forget in the very end they are defending and supporting a video game, something used for entertainment....
Its funny to me that Richard is making an arguement for choice of payment models, when there is no choice in the marketplace. True choice in payment models would be that the game you like offers more than one option, independent of the others. For example, if EVE went "F2P" where would those players go that like EVE but not that payment model. There isnt another game like EVE in the marketplace. So there is no choice really. Where do WOW players go if they want an alternative payment method? Nowhere.
As far as I know, there is only one game that is giving (or going to give) true payment model choice and that is EQII. By opening an alternative payment model server gives the MMO community real choice. There will be the standard P2P model and the F2P model on different servers. One community does not affect the other. In fact, transfers from one server to another are only going to be one way, from P2P to F2P.
This is freedom of choice.
But in EVE you can play for free, and many do. In fact EVE has the only F2P option that really is free, and it's the only MMO that offers a genuine choice AFAIK, without gimping the F2P players or the P2P players. The F2P and P2P players co-exist in perfect equality. All credit to CCP for squaring the circle here, and for (so far) resisting the temptation to ruin a great system by selling anything other than game time.
The...hypocrasy of this Aihoshi article is near earth shattering.....
MikeB, Jon, this is getting borderline insulting. I know you two guys are intelligent and you can read his articles over the past year and see that what is written in this one is, ridiculous to say the least. I know you two probably can't say anything publicly but, c'mon, do...something? Please?
I 2nd that. Cant you guys do something? This is getting quite insultning and wont bring more to this forum.
The...hypocrasy of this Aihoshi article is near earth shattering.....
MikeB, Jon, this is getting borderline insulting. I know you two guys are intelligent and you can read his articles over the past year and see that what is written in this one is, ridiculous to say the least. I know you two probably can't say anything publicly but, c'mon, do...something? Please?
I 2nd that. Cant you guys do something? This is getting quite insultning and wont bring more to this forum.
You do know that since you object to RA's columns, that you have the option of not reading them any more? That seems to me to be the simple solution to the problem.
The...hypocrasy of this Aihoshi article is near earth shattering.....
MikeB, Jon, this is getting borderline insulting. I know you two guys are intelligent and you can read his articles over the past year and see that what is written in this one is, ridiculous to say the least. I know you two probably can't say anything publicly but, c'mon, do...something? Please?
I 2nd that. Cant you guys do something? This is getting quite insultning and wont bring more to this forum.
You do know that since you object to RA's columns, that you have the option of not reading them any more? That seems to me to be the simple solution to the problem.
Yup. I do know that. But once and while I check what RA is writing (becuse I like to read about mmo´s) . And to my suprise its always the same crap going on.
You do know that since you object to RA's columns, that you have the option of not reading them any more? That seems to me to be the simple solution to the problem.
There is a difference between objecting to a column and objecting to the person behind the column.
Voicing criticism to the staff is just as much an option as turning a blind eye a problem.
You do know that since you object to RA's columns, that you have the option of not reading them any more? That seems to me to be the simple solution to the problem.
There is a difference between objecting to a column and objecting to the person behind the column.
Voicing criticism to the staff is just as much an option as turning a blind eye a problem.
That assumes that there is a problem to start with. Much of this is perception, in other words subjective. I've never been "insulted" by one of his columns, nor have I taken what is posted here personally. I follow the principle that if I do not like something, then I don't invest my time and effort in it.
P2P is a shift from everyone being on the same level (figuratively not litterally) towards whoever has the bigger wallet "wins". And by wins I mean faster leveling, easier leveling, having access to premium content and so on. And for someone who are competetive that is HUGE.
So if this kind of games continue to prosper then more and more MMORPGs will turn into this because all they care about is the profit (like almost all private corporations). And as a player we need to realise that MMORPGs as we know it might cease to exist and instead whoever has the biggest wallet is the one who has the upper hand.
In real life that is the case but does it really need to be in a GAME? Cant games be just games and not differentiate between the has and has nots?
Or to put it differently, F2P is like doping. Those who has access to it can do it and will get an edge, where as those who do not will not wont stand much of a chance. Fourtunately doping is not allowed but soon the equivalence will be common in MMORPGs. Do we as players really want that?
Great reply, says it all, Richard needs to be smacked upside the head with it.
With each financially successful F2P game it encourages more and more developers to follow the model which ultimately reduces my choices in games, and that is worth fighting over and resisting fully.
Selfish, sure is, but then I don't care right? I want games made to my tastes and not someone else's and no, I don't think we can all just get along.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
P2P is a shift from everyone being on the same level (figuratively not litterally) towards whoever has the bigger wallet "wins". And by wins I mean faster leveling, easier leveling, having access to premium content and so on. And for someone who are competetive that is HUGE.
So if this kind of games continue to prosper then more and more MMORPGs will turn into this because all they care about is the profit (like almost all private corporations). And as a player we need to realise that MMORPGs as we know it might cease to exist and instead whoever has the biggest wallet is the one who has the upper hand.
In real life that is the case but does it really need to be in a GAME? Cant games be just games and not differentiate between the has and has nots?
Or to put it differently, F2P is like doping. Those who has access to it can do it and will get an edge, where as those who do not will not wont stand much of a chance. Fourtunately doping is not allowed but soon the equivalence will be common in MMORPGs. Do we as players really want that?
Great reply, says it all, Richard needs to be smacked upside the head with it.
With each financially successful F2P game it encourages more and more developers to follow the model which ultimately reduces my choices in games, and that is worth fighting over and resisting fully.
Selfish, sure is, but then I don't care right? I want games made to my tastes and not someone else's and no, I don't think we can all just get along.
Well, thats the nature of markets. If there is increasing demand for such things, absent government interference, that demand will be supplied (or even in spite of such interference, given past history). Self interest is involved in all sides of a market. If the Dev's think they can make more money from F2P games, then thats what they will develop. Our personal choice as gamers is to play the games that are available (if we enjoy them), or find another hobby.
P2P is a shift from everyone being on the same level (figuratively not litterally) towards whoever has the bigger wallet "wins". And by wins I mean faster leveling, easier leveling, having access to premium content and so on. And for someone who are competetive that is HUGE.
So if this kind of games continue to prosper then more and more MMORPGs will turn into this because all they care about is the profit (like almost all private corporations). And as a player we need to realise that MMORPGs as we know it might cease to exist and instead whoever has the biggest wallet is the one who has the upper hand.
In real life that is the case but does it really need to be in a GAME? Cant games be just games and not differentiate between the has and has nots?
Or to put it differently, F2P is like doping. Those who has access to it can do it and will get an edge, where as those who do not will not wont stand much of a chance. Fourtunately doping is not allowed but soon the equivalence will be common in MMORPGs. Do we as players really want that?
Great reply, says it all, Richard needs to be smacked upside the head with it.
With each financially successful F2P game it encourages more and more developers to follow the model which ultimately reduces my choices in games, and that is worth fighting over and resisting fully.
Selfish, sure is, but then I don't care right? I want games made to my tastes and not someone else's and no, I don't think we can all just get along.
Seeing as how the options for pure P2P MMOs with a sub are indeed shrinking, it's a very worthwhile endeavor. But sadly, except for a few companies who are remaining stalwart - for now - it seems a losing battle. The power of money will always win out.
I mean, just compare the number of "cash shop" MMOs versus those with a sub fee listed on this site's game list right now. It's about a 3-to-1 ratio right now, favoring free/cash shop MMOs. No one can say that P2P MMOs aren't shrinking in number with any amount of intellectual honesty.
That said, I have to wonder if Richard's incredulity extends to those on the F2P side who demonize P2P MMOs and fill their forums with posts about how "the game should go F2P", or how "F2P would be the best way to go" or "the game needs F2P to be truly successful"? Would he argue for the same tolerance when it comes down to those arguing closed-mindedly for F2P? Would he shake a finger at those who insist that people who prefer P2P are "living in the past" and other manner of condescending, dismissive remarks? I wonder.
Just like the whole PvP debate, the F2P debate has become a recurring topic in the threads of pretty much every P2P MMO I follow. People who now think every MMORPG out there must be F2P or "they're doing it wrong".
Us fans of P2P MMOs get sick of being hounded about how superior F2P is as well, Richard. What do you have to say to them, considering they're on your side of the fence in the debate?
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
That assumes that there is a problem to start with. Much of this is perception, in other words subjective. I've never been "insulted" by one of his columns, nor have I taken what is posted here personally. I follow the principle that if I do not like something, then I don't invest my time and effort in it.
That is the great thing about discussion forums. Everyone can share their opinions and no one needs to tell them to go away, shut up or ignore something. That sort of goes against what discussion forums are all about, yeah?
It isn't like only a few people have pointed out the problems with richardsarticles. Nor does someone need to be personally insulted to recognize his attitude or lack of any real topic other than to whine about people.
I'm just saying it might be refreshing to actually read about a specific game in the free zone column instead of reading about people who refuse to accept free to play games.
I like some pistorial samples, like I made before with dopings etc. So let be one more.
I like wines and been member of wine clubs, made lectures etc. Like I like on-line gaming. And making a good wine is too art, it needs time and sorting and big care and knowledge collected by generations and in result we will get beautiful samples for different tastes. Yes, not cheap, but not awfully expensive starting from 20 USD going to 50-100 USD. I don't talk now exclusive things for many thousand bucks. But wines everybody (not homeless bums) can allow. And this small chateu's make some 1000 hectolitres wine max in year and earn maybe Mio-two. And then comes big wallet and see it, and say then: why to care with knowledge, why to care at all. Let grab technically all shit and brew that shit and let sell it in cheap plastic containers. And what we get - we can produce million hectolitres, sell it by 5 - 10 times profit and earn hundreds of millions.
Target is same - both drinks contain alcohol, both make ya drunk and dizzy. But to axept this then soon we havn't any other chanches, then there will not be freedom of choiche. Litlle idealistic firms just die out, and any capable to survive can do this only changing his so-so tolerable product in finest bullshit. And then ya freedom of chiche is to choose between bad, worse and worst, or just not drink wine at all.
And to tolerate silently gives companies just idea they are right (or at least let them think: all customer are so dumb and brainless that we must not to care about products, we must care how to take all their money from them and how to kill our concurents. And such kind of "educational" articles like this by RA is just like on the professional oenologist (wine science) and gourmet webpage some co-worker starts to write that we must have choiche - big choiche of drinking liquid shit
"So, I've never understood why some people are so vehement in favoring subscription. They support the revenue model of their choice, but apparently can't stand it when others don't share their preference."
Well, Richard, to be perfectly honest, I consistently play subscription based MMO games, but before paying for one I usually try at least 3 other F2P titles with similar gameplay, so apparently I "can stand" item mall games. I and most certainly have nothing against people who play item mall games. And I am pretty sure that 99.95% of all other MMO players have nothing against each other, whether they enjoy WoW, EVE, or Allods. In fact, I am pretty sure only problem most of us have is with people like you who think others are DOUCHEBAGS just because they don't make the same choices YOU do. Freedom of choice? Or did you rather mean the RIGHT choice? Just tell us for once which particular titles you would rather have us play and shut up once and for all.
"So, I've never understood why some people are so vehement in favoring subscription. They support the revenue model of their choice, but apparently can't stand it when others don't share their preference."
Well, Richard, to be perfectly honest, I consistently play subscription based MMO games, but before paying for one I usually try at least 3 other F2P titles with similar gameplay, so apparently I "can stand" item mall games. I and most certainly have nothing against people who play item mall games. And I am pretty sure that 99.95% of all other MMO players have nothing against each other, whether they enjoy WoW, EVE, or Allods. In fact, I am pretty sure only problem most of us have is with people like you who think others are DOUCHEBAGS just because they don't make the same choices YOU do. Freedom of choice? Or did you rather mean the RIGHT choice? Just tell us for once which particular titles you would rather have us play and shut up once and for all.
Heheh, I remember that article. That was a doozy, even by Richard's standards.
And see, I think that's the problem he has here. Articles like the "snob" one, and various others he's posted where he's declared people who don't see things his way are "in denial" or whatever, still exist for people to read, and people have read them.
So when he posts an article in which he suddenly takes this conciliatory tone and says "why can't we all - F2P and P2P - just get along?", it just rings *extremely* hollow and very disingenuous, because he's made it very clear what he *really* thinks of those who don't share his point-of-view.
The closest he could come to making a statement that wouldn't be contradictory to the point-of-view he's established over the past many months, would be to say: "People who don't agree with me about F2P are entitled to their opinions. They're wrong, and in denial, but they're entitled to their opinions".
And this is all based entirely on his numerous past articles where he's taken broad-sweeping pot-shots at those who've disagreed.
I think I'd appreciate it more, as well, if he just stuck to topical things - like talking about specific games, or trends in the genre, etc... any other topic that doesn't brush the "F2P versus P2P mindset" topic.
...
In a nutshell... Here's one of my biggest problems with F2P/Item Mall games - beyond anything else...
I like immersion. I like being drawn into whatever I'm reading, watching, listening to or playing.
When I'm playing a P2P MMO - where everything can be done, achieved and acquired within the context and confines of the game world itself, I'm drawn in. Assuming there's nothing around to distract me and I have the time to kill, I can lose myself in a good game - MMO or otherwise - for hours.
Playing a P2P MMO, for me, is like putting a good flick in the DVD player, turning down the lights and immersing myself in a good story for 2 or so hours.
F2P/Cash Shop games, on the other hand, are like the public Televison version of that same movie... the dialog is altered, the movie is shortened and there's commercial breaks pulling me out of it just as I'm beginning to get settled in.
When I'm playing a F2P/Cash Shop MMO, I can't become immersed, because there are too many things preventing it. Namely, the regular reminders to "go use the cash shop!". It could be ads like "Special Deal On HP Potions!" popped up on the screen as in some MMOs, or being told by a NPC that I was interested in getting a quest from that "You must purchase this content. Click Here to go visit our cash shop now!".
That, alone, is enough to turn me off to F2P/Cash Shop.
Then there's the way the gameplay is fundamentally different and the dishonest way they're often marketed and spun by various PR types.... both topics that could warrant their own threads (and have in the past).
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
I really don't see a reason for it to be honest, except that most F2P mmo's got their start on foreign soil and standards off the coast are different than standards in the U.S.
People forget that MMO's are now worldwide and each area has their own player preferences.. If you were to go to MMOSite and compare the player reviews to a site like this, the difference is like night and day. Being that most MMOSite users do not even speak english yet they treat the F2P as something totally different than say your average mmorpg.com user. This is because F2P's are seen differently in those places than here. The F2P model basically got it's start from foreign soil, and being that the games carry a different quality standard (like grind based, gender locked etc..) many folks simply will not waste their time.
Me?
I started playing MMO's with Everquest back in 99. My first P2P experience.. It was awesome, but I never looked at it as a "P2P" game, but simply an MMO.. My first F2P was Silkroad Online.. For a free game (when my parents canceled my EQ account) its quality was AMAZING to me.. I thought to myself, why pay to play a game when I can play this one for free? the only difference I truly saw in the games were the price tags. One charged me money per month, while the other let me pay for whatever I wanted to.. No real "quality" differences.. Never really noticed much of a difference in player "quality" either except for the fact that now I was playing with some people who did not speak english, it was broader.
You have to know where the game is coming from before you judge it for being a P2P or a F2P.. It doesnt really matter what it costs to play, it matters WHERE it is coming from and who the target audience is. Many people on here look at Hello Kitty Online as a joke, but yes EVEN that game has a playerbase.. WHY? Because it was targeted at young asian girls (Hello Kitty is hugely popular in Asia).. Guess who probably accounts for most of the player base in that game? It's a F2P, yeah, but it was a targetted F2P.. not just some "crappy" game put out to waste space..
This rift between the biggest mmo gaming hubs in the world is why I will probably never see cool titles like Gundam Operation Online, Romance of the Three Kingdoms online, and King of fighters online in english.. We just don't see things like they do..
P2P is a shift from everyone being on the same level (figuratively not litterally) towards whoever has the bigger wallet "wins". And by wins I mean faster leveling, easier leveling, having access to premium content and so on. And for someone who are competetive that is HUGE.
So if this kind of games continue to prosper then more and more MMORPGs will turn into this because all they care about is the profit (like almost all private corporations). And as a player we need to realise that MMORPGs as we know it might cease to exist and instead whoever has the biggest wallet is the one who has the upper hand.
In real life that is the case but does it really need to be in a GAME? Cant games be just games and not differentiate between the has and has nots?
Or to put it differently, F2P is like doping. Those who has access to it can do it and will get an edge, where as those who do not will not wont stand much of a chance. Fourtunately doping is not allowed but soon the equivalence will be common in MMORPGs. Do we as players really want that?
Great reply, says it all, Richard needs to be smacked upside the head with it.
With each financially successful F2P game it encourages more and more developers to follow the model which ultimately reduces my choices in games, and that is worth fighting over and resisting fully.
Selfish, sure is, but then I don't care right? I want games made to my tastes and not someone else's and no, I don't think we can all just get along.
Well, thats the nature of markets. If there is increasing demand for such things, absent government interference, that demand will be supplied (or even in spite of such interference, given past history). Self interest is involved in all sides of a market. If the Dev's think they can make more money from F2P games, then thats what they will develop. Our personal choice as gamers is to play the games that are available (if we enjoy them), or find another hobby.
Well it's a little more complicated then that. The Development Houses and Publishers don't have a perfect perception or understanding of the market or what demand actualy is. If they did, every product/project they produced would be insanely profitable...and they'd never have to worry about loosing capital. At best they can say X seems to be working, after something has already been released. Even the company that produces X and is able to do market surveys and get customer feedback often has a very imperfect understanding of exactly WHY X is working in that particular instance....and why (as often happens) when they or thier competitors try to reproduce X in a different instance or situation it flops.
The reality is more like 7 blind men all trying to describe an elephant. They all percieve some small part of it, but they don't get the whole picture...and often what they percieve is very different from what is actualy the case. Speaking from first hand experience, ALOT of the decision makers at these companies base thier decisions on nothing really more substantial then "buzz" or "hype". If that weren't the case...we would never have seen things like the .COM bubble. happen. Some-times that "buzz" or "hype" is driven by people with a particular agenda to sell or drive a particulal solution. In some cases it's driven by paid consultants or market analysts.... sometimes those people do have real insight as to what is going on driven by hard research....other times thier as clueless as anyone else and are just reaching for straws, because they are being paid to provide advice, and they've got to offer some answer other then "I don't really know" in order to justify a paycheck. Often times this perception IS driven by what industry journalists write... which brings us to articles like Richards.
Basicaly, companies make decisions not based upon actual market demand, but thier perception of market demand. Which brings us to what are real options are as consumers....which is not just simply "play what is offered or leave"... doing that pretty much assures that your preferences will never be reflected in the market...... because the decision makers won't ever know what those preferences are. As consumers, if we ever want to see our preferences reflected in the market, it's incumbant upon us to be pro-actively vocal about those prefences... so we don't surrender our influence over the PERCEPTION of market demand to those who are. People like Richard have a built in soap-box. The rest of us don't... but what we can do is post responses to articles such as these....make suggestions in feedback venues, send e-mail, make phone calls....and write letters. In fact of those, an actual snail mail.... politiely expressing your preferences.... typed out, spelled correctly and mailed to the company with a postage stamp on it..is one of the most powerfull things that you can do.
Individualy, those don't mean much.... but if a company starts recieving them in volume, you can bet it starts to take notice.
Comments
Yohoho Puzzle Pirates also has seperate F2P and subscription servers. I would normally consider a sub ocean when I wanted to play, but the poker players on the F2P Servers make it too easy.
Mogris
My choice is B2P games, with a different logic in cash-shop if the company wants more money, like Guild Wars. It's the only thing between P2P and F2P models that work for players and for the company. I wouldn't mind playing P2P games if i had the money, but unfortunately i dont have that kind of money so I have to play F2P games that CAN work in this lousy laptop. But I must say that there are some good F2P games out there (but there's always something wrong with most of them: the community, the devs/GMs/Support help, the way the game is build at higher lvls, or any other thing that I don't remmember now).
In terms of having games with different choices of paying model, than I guess it's true that there aren't almost any. But I see that some game companies are already starting creating different paying models for the same game, leaving the players the choice of paying for a month, paying for days or paying for hours. But having F2P and P2P models in the same game its like having a randy cat and a raging dog in the same room and try to make them be good friends: it seems impossible and probably is, but who knows?!?!
Came in here thinking the thread was going to discuss the lack of "Freedom of Choice" in todays mmorpgs. It isnt..
Lol me too! -.-"
Another one of these, great.
Are you really trying to argue that the pay model of a MMO has any bearing on how much we enjoy the game? Give it a rest!!! The payment is darn near inconsequential. Its whats inside the game that matters.
As far as f2p games most are gear grinds that force you to buy the upgrades from the cash shop. No thanks!!! Even DDO is starting down this path. You can now buy green steel ingredients, and they force guilds to buy upgrades for air ships exclusively from the shop. We see that with time DDO will even be adding more to the shop just as predicted by us vocal players.
All f2p/cash shop games have one thing in mind; how can we force the player to spend more money in the cash shop? Their answer is by not having it in the game, or forcing people to sped more to progress at a reasonable pace. Is this how you like to play your games Richard? Sounds horrible to me.
Since LOTRO announced the move to F2P the door is now open. I suspect Turbine kept CS advantages in DDO to a minimum until the LOTRO switch was made. I am a bit surprised they heated the water up so early but its not unexpected, just earlier than expected.
WOW isnt great because it has 12 million players. WOW has 12 million players because its great.
The game's Mabinogi, the only F2P game I have spent money on. Not only can you shear sheep, you can be a sheep, which lead to hilarity when people mistook you for an npc and tried to chase you around to shear your wool. Best pet system I have ever seen in an MMO but a horrible grind at midgame levels.
Its more about fear.
If gamers had freedom of choice, it means they can play what they feel and when some bigshot comes their way, they can simply say "I can play another game", the subscription Fees in games restrict the population to a few games, and it protects peoples accomplishments in games.
A gamer doesn't want to play 10+ games to be able to compete. They prefer just playing one. If people have freedom of Choice, it means the weight of a game becomes lower and competition between each game becomes a lot more intense.
Most of the people who support one system are self-centered towards the system throwing politics or any moral/philosophical argument...
They forget in the very end they are defending and supporting a video game, something used for entertainment....
But in EVE you can play for free, and many do. In fact EVE has the only F2P option that really is free, and it's the only MMO that offers a genuine choice AFAIK, without gimping the F2P players or the P2P players. The F2P and P2P players co-exist in perfect equality. All credit to CCP for squaring the circle here, and for (so far) resisting the temptation to ruin a great system by selling anything other than game time.
Give me liberty or give me lasers
I 2nd that. Cant you guys do something? This is getting quite insultning and wont bring more to this forum.
I7@4ghz, 5970@ 1 ghz/5ghz, water cooled||Former setups Byggblogg||Byggblogg 2|| Msi Wind u100
You do know that since you object to RA's columns, that you have the option of not reading them any more? That seems to me to be the simple solution to the problem.
Yup. I do know that. But once and while I check what RA is writing (becuse I like to read about mmo´s) . And to my suprise its always the same crap going on.
I7@4ghz, 5970@ 1 ghz/5ghz, water cooled||Former setups Byggblogg||Byggblogg 2|| Msi Wind u100
There is a difference between objecting to a column and objecting to the person behind the column.
Voicing criticism to the staff is just as much an option as turning a blind eye a problem.
Hi, just found this thread about p2p and f2p conflict. uhmm, for me, i just dont care if the game i am playing is in p2p or f2p.
The most important thing is that i enjoy the game and it has a good community. DOnt care if im gonna pay for that game ^_^. chill guys.
That assumes that there is a problem to start with. Much of this is perception, in other words subjective. I've never been "insulted" by one of his columns, nor have I taken what is posted here personally. I follow the principle that if I do not like something, then I don't invest my time and effort in it.
Great reply, says it all, Richard needs to be smacked upside the head with it.
With each financially successful F2P game it encourages more and more developers to follow the model which ultimately reduces my choices in games, and that is worth fighting over and resisting fully.
Selfish, sure is, but then I don't care right? I want games made to my tastes and not someone else's and no, I don't think we can all just get along.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Well, thats the nature of markets. If there is increasing demand for such things, absent government interference, that demand will be supplied (or even in spite of such interference, given past history). Self interest is involved in all sides of a market. If the Dev's think they can make more money from F2P games, then thats what they will develop. Our personal choice as gamers is to play the games that are available (if we enjoy them), or find another hobby.
Seeing as how the options for pure P2P MMOs with a sub are indeed shrinking, it's a very worthwhile endeavor. But sadly, except for a few companies who are remaining stalwart - for now - it seems a losing battle. The power of money will always win out.
I mean, just compare the number of "cash shop" MMOs versus those with a sub fee listed on this site's game list right now. It's about a 3-to-1 ratio right now, favoring free/cash shop MMOs. No one can say that P2P MMOs aren't shrinking in number with any amount of intellectual honesty.
That said, I have to wonder if Richard's incredulity extends to those on the F2P side who demonize P2P MMOs and fill their forums with posts about how "the game should go F2P", or how "F2P would be the best way to go" or "the game needs F2P to be truly successful"? Would he argue for the same tolerance when it comes down to those arguing closed-mindedly for F2P? Would he shake a finger at those who insist that people who prefer P2P are "living in the past" and other manner of condescending, dismissive remarks? I wonder.
Just like the whole PvP debate, the F2P debate has become a recurring topic in the threads of pretty much every P2P MMO I follow. People who now think every MMORPG out there must be F2P or "they're doing it wrong".
Us fans of P2P MMOs get sick of being hounded about how superior F2P is as well, Richard. What do you have to say to them, considering they're on your side of the fence in the debate?
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
Freedom of choice in what game types or payment models one wants to mess with? nothing
Freedom of choice in Game? human nature. Too much freedom is a bad thing within mmorpgs.
Playing: Rift, LotRO
Waiting on: GW2, BP
That is the great thing about discussion forums. Everyone can share their opinions and no one needs to tell them to go away, shut up or ignore something. That sort of goes against what discussion forums are all about, yeah?
It isn't like only a few people have pointed out the problems with richardsarticles. Nor does someone need to be personally insulted to recognize his attitude or lack of any real topic other than to whine about people.
I'm just saying it might be refreshing to actually read about a specific game in the free zone column instead of reading about people who refuse to accept free to play games.
I like some pistorial samples, like I made before with dopings etc. So let be one more.
I like wines and been member of wine clubs, made lectures etc. Like I like on-line gaming. And making a good wine is too art, it needs time and sorting and big care and knowledge collected by generations and in result we will get beautiful samples for different tastes. Yes, not cheap, but not awfully expensive starting from 20 USD going to 50-100 USD. I don't talk now exclusive things for many thousand bucks. But wines everybody (not homeless bums) can allow. And this small chateu's make some 1000 hectolitres wine max in year and earn maybe Mio-two. And then comes big wallet and see it, and say then: why to care with knowledge, why to care at all. Let grab technically all shit and brew that shit and let sell it in cheap plastic containers. And what we get - we can produce million hectolitres, sell it by 5 - 10 times profit and earn hundreds of millions.
Target is same - both drinks contain alcohol, both make ya drunk and dizzy. But to axept this then soon we havn't any other chanches, then there will not be freedom of choiche. Litlle idealistic firms just die out, and any capable to survive can do this only changing his so-so tolerable product in finest bullshit. And then ya freedom of chiche is to choose between bad, worse and worst, or just not drink wine at all.
And to tolerate silently gives companies just idea they are right (or at least let them think: all customer are so dumb and brainless that we must not to care about products, we must care how to take all their money from them and how to kill our concurents. And such kind of "educational" articles like this by RA is just like on the professional oenologist (wine science) and gourmet webpage some co-worker starts to write that we must have choiche - big choiche of drinking liquid shit
"So, I've never understood why some people are so vehement in favoring subscription. They support the revenue model of their choice, but apparently can't stand it when others don't share their preference."
Well, Richard, to be perfectly honest, I consistently play subscription based MMO games, but before paying for one I usually try at least 3 other F2P titles with similar gameplay, so apparently I "can stand" item mall games. I and most certainly have nothing against people who play item mall games. And I am pretty sure that 99.95% of all other MMO players have nothing against each other, whether they enjoy WoW, EVE, or Allods. In fact, I am pretty sure only problem most of us have is with people like you who think others are DOUCHEBAGS just because they don't make the same choices YOU do. Freedom of choice? Or did you rather mean the RIGHT choice? Just tell us for once which particular titles you would rather have us play and shut up once and for all.
Heheh, I remember that article. That was a doozy, even by Richard's standards.
And see, I think that's the problem he has here. Articles like the "snob" one, and various others he's posted where he's declared people who don't see things his way are "in denial" or whatever, still exist for people to read, and people have read them.
So when he posts an article in which he suddenly takes this conciliatory tone and says "why can't we all - F2P and P2P - just get along?", it just rings *extremely* hollow and very disingenuous, because he's made it very clear what he *really* thinks of those who don't share his point-of-view.
The closest he could come to making a statement that wouldn't be contradictory to the point-of-view he's established over the past many months, would be to say: "People who don't agree with me about F2P are entitled to their opinions. They're wrong, and in denial, but they're entitled to their opinions".
And this is all based entirely on his numerous past articles where he's taken broad-sweeping pot-shots at those who've disagreed.
I think I'd appreciate it more, as well, if he just stuck to topical things - like talking about specific games, or trends in the genre, etc... any other topic that doesn't brush the "F2P versus P2P mindset" topic.
...
In a nutshell... Here's one of my biggest problems with F2P/Item Mall games - beyond anything else...
I like immersion. I like being drawn into whatever I'm reading, watching, listening to or playing.
When I'm playing a P2P MMO - where everything can be done, achieved and acquired within the context and confines of the game world itself, I'm drawn in. Assuming there's nothing around to distract me and I have the time to kill, I can lose myself in a good game - MMO or otherwise - for hours.
Playing a P2P MMO, for me, is like putting a good flick in the DVD player, turning down the lights and immersing myself in a good story for 2 or so hours.
F2P/Cash Shop games, on the other hand, are like the public Televison version of that same movie... the dialog is altered, the movie is shortened and there's commercial breaks pulling me out of it just as I'm beginning to get settled in.
When I'm playing a F2P/Cash Shop MMO, I can't become immersed, because there are too many things preventing it. Namely, the regular reminders to "go use the cash shop!". It could be ads like "Special Deal On HP Potions!" popped up on the screen as in some MMOs, or being told by a NPC that I was interested in getting a quest from that "You must purchase this content. Click Here to go visit our cash shop now!".
That, alone, is enough to turn me off to F2P/Cash Shop.
Then there's the way the gameplay is fundamentally different and the dishonest way they're often marketed and spun by various PR types.... both topics that could warrant their own threads (and have in the past).
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
I really don't see a reason for it to be honest, except that most F2P mmo's got their start on foreign soil and standards off the coast are different than standards in the U.S.
People forget that MMO's are now worldwide and each area has their own player preferences.. If you were to go to MMOSite and compare the player reviews to a site like this, the difference is like night and day. Being that most MMOSite users do not even speak english yet they treat the F2P as something totally different than say your average mmorpg.com user. This is because F2P's are seen differently in those places than here. The F2P model basically got it's start from foreign soil, and being that the games carry a different quality standard (like grind based, gender locked etc..) many folks simply will not waste their time.
Me?
I started playing MMO's with Everquest back in 99. My first P2P experience.. It was awesome, but I never looked at it as a "P2P" game, but simply an MMO.. My first F2P was Silkroad Online.. For a free game (when my parents canceled my EQ account) its quality was AMAZING to me.. I thought to myself, why pay to play a game when I can play this one for free? the only difference I truly saw in the games were the price tags. One charged me money per month, while the other let me pay for whatever I wanted to.. No real "quality" differences.. Never really noticed much of a difference in player "quality" either except for the fact that now I was playing with some people who did not speak english, it was broader.
You have to know where the game is coming from before you judge it for being a P2P or a F2P.. It doesnt really matter what it costs to play, it matters WHERE it is coming from and who the target audience is. Many people on here look at Hello Kitty Online as a joke, but yes EVEN that game has a playerbase.. WHY? Because it was targeted at young asian girls (Hello Kitty is hugely popular in Asia).. Guess who probably accounts for most of the player base in that game? It's a F2P, yeah, but it was a targetted F2P.. not just some "crappy" game put out to waste space..
This rift between the biggest mmo gaming hubs in the world is why I will probably never see cool titles like Gundam Operation Online, Romance of the Three Kingdoms online, and King of fighters online in english.. We just don't see things like they do..
Well it's a little more complicated then that. The Development Houses and Publishers don't have a perfect perception or understanding of the market or what demand actualy is. If they did, every product/project they produced would be insanely profitable...and they'd never have to worry about loosing capital. At best they can say X seems to be working, after something has already been released. Even the company that produces X and is able to do market surveys and get customer feedback often has a very imperfect understanding of exactly WHY X is working in that particular instance....and why (as often happens) when they or thier competitors try to reproduce X in a different instance or situation it flops.
The reality is more like 7 blind men all trying to describe an elephant. They all percieve some small part of it, but they don't get the whole picture...and often what they percieve is very different from what is actualy the case. Speaking from first hand experience, ALOT of the decision makers at these companies base thier decisions on nothing really more substantial then "buzz" or "hype". If that weren't the case...we would never have seen things like the .COM bubble. happen. Some-times that "buzz" or "hype" is driven by people with a particular agenda to sell or drive a particulal solution. In some cases it's driven by paid consultants or market analysts.... sometimes those people do have real insight as to what is going on driven by hard research....other times thier as clueless as anyone else and are just reaching for straws, because they are being paid to provide advice, and they've got to offer some answer other then "I don't really know" in order to justify a paycheck. Often times this perception IS driven by what industry journalists write... which brings us to articles like Richards.
Basicaly, companies make decisions not based upon actual market demand, but thier perception of market demand. Which brings us to what are real options are as consumers....which is not just simply "play what is offered or leave"... doing that pretty much assures that your preferences will never be reflected in the market...... because the decision makers won't ever know what those preferences are. As consumers, if we ever want to see our preferences reflected in the market, it's incumbant upon us to be pro-actively vocal about those prefences... so we don't surrender our influence over the PERCEPTION of market demand to those who are. People like Richard have a built in soap-box. The rest of us don't... but what we can do is post responses to articles such as these....make suggestions in feedback venues, send e-mail, make phone calls....and write letters. In fact of those, an actual snail mail.... politiely expressing your preferences.... typed out, spelled correctly and mailed to the company with a postage stamp on it..is one of the most powerfull things that you can do.
Individualy, those don't mean much.... but if a company starts recieving them in volume, you can bet it starts to take notice.