Can you link to some of the F2P games where the costs of items and services are hidden or not present on the site? The normal response to that is about how in MMO x a person would have to pay y thousands to have the best gear. Feel free to go there, if you want, but I'd much rather you answer the question with a couple of links to F2P games where the cost of items and services are hidden or not present on the site.
The point is not whether you can see what is for sale, but rather that you will need these things once you played for awhile, but at when you start playing you are not aware of this. When you find a game you like, you WILL invest time in it - Invested time makes it harder to just quit a game once you realize the real payment cost, hence making it more likely you buy items of the shop = You got tricked.
Buying a pet or other display items are pretty harmless, but many of these so called free to play games can only be played endgame/finished with a purchase. Offcourse many of these games devs know this argument and made the game so that you actually can, but only in theory because it would take thousands of boring grind hours to do it.
And then there is the fact that item shops can change at any time, going from non essential shops with pets to essential purchases for those who want to stay in the high game. There are no guarantees of anything in this world, but an item shop is a sign of intentions. Micro transactions are a harder discussion because you could argue that it is just buying a game in very small bits, but on the other hand it is a hidden expense put on you once you are ... hooked.
Beeing aware of this I really don't fall into that trap anymore, but an example from old times is Conquer Online (not sure it exist still) - In that game it was essential to upgrade your gear to progress, upgrading gear required hmm dragonballs or something which were rare, but fortunately item shops provided dragonballs .. and it was not cheap if you wanted to be in the "endgame". Hmm Balloons TD a little fine tower defense game .. last levels only beatable with a RMT purchase. Settlers 7 (what a dissapointing game) came with only 7 maps or something, the rest were purchasable. Dragon Age had areas and adventures only playable with RMT purchases. Never played Runes of Magic but I am told it is an expensive game to play for real. I am sure others can list many more examples.
A lot of typing but I didn't see any links to MMOs that had these hidden mandatory costs and such. Did you forget to include them?
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
Can you link to some of the F2P games where the costs of items and services are hidden or not present on the site? The normal response to that is about how in MMO x a person would have to pay y thousands to have the best gear. Feel free to go there, if you want, but I'd much rather you answer the question with a couple of links to F2P games where the cost of items and services are hidden or not present on the site.
The point is not whether you can see what is for sale, but rather that you will need these things once you played for awhile, but at when you start playing you are not aware of this. When you find a game you like, you WILL invest time in it - Invested time makes it harder to just quit a game once you realize the real payment cost, hence making it more likely you buy items of the shop = You got tricked.
Buying a pet or other display items are pretty harmless, but many of these so called free to play games can only be played endgame/finished with a purchase. Offcourse many of these games devs know this argument and made the game so that you actually can, but only in theory because it would take thousands of boring grind hours to do it.
And then there is the fact that item shops can change at any time, going from non essential shops with pets to essential purchases for those who want to stay in the high game. There are no guarantees of anything in this world, but an item shop is a sign of intentions. Micro transactions are a harder discussion because you could argue that it is just buying a game in very small bits, but on the other hand it is a hidden expense put on you once you are ... hooked.
Beeing aware of this I really don't fall into that trap anymore, but an example from old times is Conquer Online (not sure it exist still) - In that game it was essential to upgrade your gear to progress, upgrading gear required hmm dragonballs or something which were rare, but fortunately item shops provided dragonballs .. and it was not cheap if you wanted to be in the "endgame". Hmm Balloons TD a little fine tower defense game .. last levels only beatable with a RMT purchase. Settlers 7 (what a dissapointing game) came with only 7 maps or something, the rest were purchasable. Dragon Age had areas and adventures only playable with RMT purchases. Never played Runes of Magic but I am told it is an expensive game to play for real. I am sure others can list many more examples.
A lot of typing but I didn't see any links to MMOs that had these hidden mandatory costs and such. Did you forget to include them?
The trouble is, games start being designed not for fun, but to make as much money as possible by integrating the cash shop as much as possible. "Monetization" it's called.
You end up with things like Atlantica, where if you want a new mount, you have to pay $10 for a 5% chance of getting one. People there are recentlly upset about a $150 monthly limit, because it means they likely won't be getting a new mount (which come out every month or so), since they can only buy 15 boxes, which isn't enough.
Or on the flip side, something like the recent abomination that is LOTRO. People have complained about Legendary items for years. So they finally fixed it. How? By letting you customize them however you wish, in the cash shop. Only $8 for each scroll you buy, so hey, you can have the perfect Legendary Item for only $100 or so...
(And yes, you can theoretically grind both the shards to buy those scrolls, and the TP as well, but both take so much time, it's not very fun.)
If a game is P2P, then why the hell should I pay a monthly subscription if I'm not getting all of the content?
The items I'm talking about are outside the normal content. If you want to pay an extra $5 for a golden horse while everybody else rides a black one, why not. I dunno, to me content means gameplay, not eye candy. Guess I'm just a no frills kinda' guy.
I consider "normal content" to be pretty much everything in the game. If it exists in the game it should be acquired through ingame means, the only exception beign expansion content -- in which case the expansion unlocks the ability to acquire the item ingame.
Charging a subscription and selling "fluff" for extra is double dipping.
I completely agree. What someone finds as 'fluff' is someone else's content. I believe that RMT is actually a disincentive to solid game development.
The trouble is, games start being designed not for fun, but to make as much money as possible by integrating the cash shop as much as possible.
That theory only makes sense if your contention is also that the average MMO gamer is a complete moron. Here's why I say that:
An MMO is a game. It is a service that people voluntarily play and voluntarily pay for.
If a game is not fun, people will not play it, nor will they pay for it.
If a game ceases to be fun, people will stop playing it and, as a result, stop paying for it.
Other than a complete moron, who would continue to voluntarily sink time or money into an entertainment activity that isn't entertaining them?
Persoally, I don't think MMO gamers are morons. I think they spend their time and money on what they enjoy. If they aren't getting value from it, they will move on to something else. If they like the service they are getting, not only will they pay the standard amount but will actively look for ways to buy extras that enhance their enjoyment.
The argument of "games are not being designed for fun anymore" is getting old. Put just two minutes of thought into that statement and you'll see how truly illogical such a statement is.
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
If you've never seen a mandatory item shop, Isabelle, you've never palyed Allods. One day I was happily killing creatures with my warrior threesome (don't remember the race name, but they were 3 of the cutest little critters ever), and the next day those same creatures were kicking my furry little butts. They had actually decreased my damage output to force me to use an item shop buff. I cursed loudly, logged off, and never went back. Never will no matter what they do. That really pissed me off. That is the danger of RMT. The developers can change the rules at any time, forcing you into the item shop or out of the game. I refuse to pay for content that should already be included. DLC is just as bad if not worse. DLC 2 weeks after launch? Really? That should have been in the game then, not something additional they developed later, which might make sense. Okay, just venting now, but the point is RMT=bad.
If a game is P2P, then why the hell should I pay a monthly subscription if I'm not getting all of the content?
The items I'm talking about are outside the normal content. If you want to pay an extra $5 for a golden horse while everybody else rides a black one, why not. I dunno, to me content means gameplay, not eye candy. Guess I'm just a no frills kinda' guy.
I consider "normal content" to be pretty much everything in the game. If it exists in the game it should be acquired through ingame means, the only exception beign expansion content -- in which case the expansion unlocks the ability to acquire the item ingame.
Charging a subscription and selling "fluff" for extra is double dipping.
I completely agree. What someone finds as 'fluff' is someone else's content. I believe that RMT is actually a disincentive to solid game development.
Upon further review, may have to go with you guys on this. I can see how any shop on a sub based game could eventually be harmful.
OMG! Somebody who actually revised his opinion in a forum! I'm going to go off and discipline myself immediately.
Upon further review, may have to go with you guys on this. I can see how any shop on a sub based game could eventually be harmful.
OMG! Somebody who actually revised his opinion in a forum! I'm going to go off and discipline myself immediately.
It actually happens pretty often, the difference between a smart person and an idiot is that a smart person can revise his oponion after a discussion. An idiot will never consider that he might be wrong.
RMT have nothing to do in a game with monthly payment. The only possible exception would be if the player make extra work for the dvs constantly, a $1 or $5 for people who delete their characters for one thing would be fair, some people here have deleted their Wow character every time they try to quit and then called Blizz support 3 days later to have them put them back again.
But all skins should be part of the subscription, if they can't earn enough money then they can raise the price, I don't mind paying 16-20 bucks instead to get rid of stuff like that.
F2P games and even B2P games are different. F2P games needs to get in money and I can understand if they sell useful items there. As long as you can get similar things by farming in game it is all fine. P2P can sell fluss and expansions (both full and mini), they need money as well but not to the same degree as F2P games do.
So if you prefer buying stuff a F2P is the right choice.
The argument of "games are not being designed for fun anymore" is getting old. Put just two minutes of thought into that statement and you'll see how truly illogical such a statement is.
It may be getting old, but it is partially true. The P2W payment model focuses on making game mechanics both monetizable and fun.
IMO, there is only 1 acceptable RMT model and CCP uses it with their plex system.
The argument of "games are not being designed for fun anymore" is getting old. Put just two minutes of thought into that statement and you'll see how truly illogical such a statement is.
It may be getting old, but it is partially true. The P2W payment model focuses on making game mechanics both monetizable and fun.
IMO, there is only 1 acceptable RMT model and CCP uses it with their plex system.
I thought runescapes F2P model was well set up
I think paying money for additional content / zones / pvp arena's is acceptable...
or access to raid zones that drop high-end gear like maybe pay 5 bucks for access to a raid zone for a week..
Straight out selling items hasn't seemed to work in any F2P game i've tried.. It becomes to costly to play the games at end-game level.
I think F2P works best as a sort of an extended trial and if you really enjoy the game pay extra for specific zone access or special events.
Buying items flat out from an item shop ruins the fun for me of working for the items and , to me at least, feels like the amount of money you spend becomes more important than how well you play the game.
Paying for access to a raid zone... you still have to actually work for the gear and beat the zone to obtain items... so its acceptable to me.
The argument of "games are not being designed for fun anymore" is getting old. Put just two minutes of thought into that statement and you'll see how truly illogical such a statement is.
It may be getting old, but it is partially true. The F2P payment model focuses on making game mechanics both monetizable and fun.
What you're saying is that in the subscription model the developer doesn't focus on making the content that is fun and keeps you paying for months on end? That the devs of UO, EQ, DAoC, etc just made subscription-based games with little or no consideration with whether it kept you paying for more than a couple months?
In a F2P game, the devs design the game so that they have to give at least 10-15% of the people an incentive to repeatedly spend money. In a subscription game, the devs design the game so that they have to give 100% of the people an incentive to repeatedly spend money. The revenue-generation efforts of the devs with the subscription game aren't as visible and direct, but they are just as present, if not more.
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
The argument of "games are not being designed for fun anymore" is getting old. Put just two minutes of thought into that statement and you'll see how truly illogical such a statement is.
It may be getting old, but it is partially true. The F2P payment model focuses on making game mechanics both monetizable and fun.
What you're saying is that in the subscription model the developer doesn't focus on making the content that is fun and keeps you paying for months on end? That the devs of UO, EQ, DAoC, etc just made subscrition-based games with little or no consideration with whether it kept you paying for more than a couple months?
In a F2P game, the devs design the game so that they have to give at least 10-15% of the people an incentive to repeatedly spend money. In a subscription game, the devs design the game so that have to give 100% of the people an incentive to repeatedly spend money. The revenue-generation efforts of the devs with the subscription game aren't as visible and direct, but they are just as present, if not more.
It does sometimes seem like many games are appealing to peoples lack of willpower (i.e. addiction) rather than their entertainment value. I can sit and play a slot machine all day, but that's not really fun, you know? Look at how many players only play these games (P2P and F2P) for one or two months only and jump from game to game looking for a home. A far stretch from the days when players used to play the same online game for years and years. There may be more of a selection now, but you get my drift.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
If a MMO has what it takes to bring in players and keep them happy then they should be no need for RMT because the ever increasing and sustaining of subs is guaranteed way to increase profits and sustain them. If i pay for a game and am a loyal subscriber to a game then i expect to be able to get everything the game has for that price. In my opinion a RMT transaction is ok for expansions like mentioned above but the F2P market is nothing more than a money scam plain and simple. AKA rich bitches with to much money and not enough skill to keep up with the rest of the skilled players. If someone buys a name change or race or something like that well thats exceptable to me i suppose but anything added to the game with RMT that is not included with the monthly fee. To me thats just saying ur game isnt good enough, or that they think players are mindless moneypits. I personally think its both but to me if u put out a good game and keep up with the content and i dont know, do ur damn job as game developers u wont have to worry bout milking ur customer base hoping to dry them out before the game falls apart.
Applications for MMO guilds??? Sorry not that pathetic just yet
The days of subscribe to play MMO games are coming to an end. In the next couple of years I think we will see a lot more Buy to Play, and Microtransactional MMO games some of which will still have "premium access" for those willing to pay a monthly subscription.
You can see the shift already, casual and so called "social gaming" (a total misnomer since the games in this category are largely not social at all) trend is a large part of what is driving this change.
I normally agree with you but on this topic I strongly disagree.
"It might even mean games developers get to start concentrating on the fun aspect of their games rather than on ways in which to wring yet another month of subs out of people by extending the daily grind." This, in particular, strikes me as wishful thinking.
What I find most telling is how you originally refused to partake in RMT. You once hated the idea. So, what happened? The idea didn't change. You did. Or rather, I would suggest that you were gradually changed. From my experience - mainly with Turbine and DDO - you have been carefully manipulated and trained to the point of "making peace". For example, the practice of giving out some "free" coins so that players get accustomed to using the item shop is a fantastic form of manipulation. WoW's "trick" of mixing item shop with charity was also a stroke of marketing genius. These and other tricks have been very sucessful at manipulating players like you to "soften" you towards RMT.
I think you should trust your instincts more. You were initially leery of RMT, and even the subscription model. I think this is spot on. The subscription model serves the interests of the developers not the players.
People, you are being farmed. If you just accept everything these companies promote you are just sheep, bleating every now and again but ultimately following the crowd and doing as you are told, buying the products you are told to buy.
I've argued this before but what we really need is a site like this to stand up for the players, a kind of consumer protection perspective.
As far as I can tell, this site is really more about "protecting" the developers. And no, not because this site is being "paid off" but perhaps because the site managers are good friends with many developers, plus the perspective you get of players on these forums doesn't exactly win your heart towards them lol. Nevertheless, there is so little real criticism. It's a shame.
I'm so glad somebody notices and cares about that.
Ah to hell with you Parsley, and you're opinion on buying gold or item shops or whatever. I used to hate item shops and gold farmers and all that stuff, then I realized that the only reason I hated any of it was because I was jealous of those who could buy what I could not/ was not willing to.
That right there is what all this "hating" comes down to... jealousy. It's about the "haves" and the "have nots". Peopel who buy gold for instance don't HURT developers... in fact they HELP them... because if you are playing you are paying. If you buy gold or whatever you are more likely to keep playing because you've invested real money into the game, beyond that of the subscription fee (assuming there is one). It's the developers fault if they don't see the opprotunity to sell gold themselves and cash in on it. They could completely cut out the middleman, make money, and put gold farmers out of business in one fell swoop... yet they don't. Their loss.
You're little dream of e-communism, where everyone is electronicly equal and measured by their play time and not their bank account is cute... but not realistic. Fact is that people of means will always have an advantage over everyone else. It doesn't matter what you think about it, it simply is how it is.
if a game is designed well enough to pull excess funds out of the system for instance eve has the means by which you can turn the gold you earn in game into actual game time. it pulls chunks of money out of the economy and prevents it from piling up.
likewise you can do the same by buying the isk from someone in game as an exchange for giving them game time.
it does get rid of the gold farmers sort of but eve is unique in that the whole game econmy is built on the player you dont get NPC's that sell ore eventyhing has to be aquired.
most other games actually have merchants that sell things that you use to craft which at least part of the game economy is built on and as suhc gold in these systems quickly acumulate to epic propoortons. consider that daoc when it first started it was an achievment to reach a plat (1000 gold) but that in itself took until very close to end game and that money would soon be swallowed up by having to purchase items and gear. however the money never left game once it was farmed. yes horses and rez sickness and repairs took small amounts but never enough to really make a dent on the game.
unless your game is designed to pull gold out of the system then you cant really risk selling it in an RMT envriornment.
Problem is games are designed around the business model rather than the business model around the game.
So we get crap games most of the time. Proof in the pudding there.
Make a great game, then decide, depending on how people want to pay you, what your business model is. You get better games and more innovative business models. How bout that instead? Wouldn't that be better for gamers?
See you in the dream.. The Fires from heaven, now as cold as ice. A rapid ascension tolls a heavy price.
Problem is games are designed around the business model rather than the business model around the game.
So we get crap games most of the time. Proof in the pudding there.
Make a great game, then decide, depending on how people want to pay you, what your business model is. You get better games and more innovative business models. How bout that instead? Wouldn't that be better for gamers?
That's what is happening now, Fikus.
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
Problem is games are designed around the business model rather than the business model around the game.
So we get crap games most of the time. Proof in the pudding there.
Make a great game, then decide, depending on how people want to pay you, what your business model is. You get better games and more innovative business models. How bout that instead? Wouldn't that be better for gamers?
That's what is happening now, Fikus.
New games are being designed like that?
Im pretty sure the business model is the first thing they decide. Then design a game to best monetize that model rather than a great game. You would think they would be one in the same, but unfortunately they're not. So we end up with poor games with extended grinds and withheld content.
See you in the dream.. The Fires from heaven, now as cold as ice. A rapid ascension tolls a heavy price.
Problem is games are designed around the business model rather than the business model around the game.
So we get crap games most of the time. Proof in the pudding there.
Make a great game, then decide, depending on how people want to pay you, what your business model is. You get better games and more innovative business models. How bout that instead? Wouldn't that be better for gamers?
That's what is happening now, Fikus.
New games are being designed like that?
Im pretty sure the business model is the first thing they decide. Then design a game to best monetize that model rather than a great game. You would think they would be one in the same, but unfortunately they're not. So we end up with poor games with extended grinds and withheld content.
Are you saying that the companies are all changing their business models on some kind of unified lark? Isn't it more plausible that they are changing their business models based on how people want to pay them?
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
Problem is games are designed around the business model rather than the business model around the game.
So we get crap games most of the time. Proof in the pudding there.
Make a great game, then decide, depending on how people want to pay you, what your business model is. You get better games and more innovative business models. How bout that instead? Wouldn't that be better for gamers?
That's what is happening now, Fikus.
New games are being designed like that?
Im pretty sure the business model is the first thing they decide. Then design a game to best monetize that model rather than a great game. You would think they would be one in the same, but unfortunately they're not. So we end up with poor games with extended grinds and withheld content.
Are you saying that the companies are all changing their business models on some kind of unified lark? Isn't it more plausible that they are changing their business models based on how people want to pay them?
No, considering .05% pay all the bills.
I guess you could say that most want 'free' games if you wanna go there. But then like i said, we get crap games. Proof is in the pudding.
Are you saying companies just design great games, then decide what business model fits perfect with their game? Like Blizzard says they do?
See you in the dream.. The Fires from heaven, now as cold as ice. A rapid ascension tolls a heavy price.
I am not down with 15 bucks a month paying nothing more than account maint. For the most part, keeping an account on a server does not cost that much. Item shops not only charge customers for miniscule things, they strip already thin expansion packs of real content and pretty much remove free updates all together in many games.
parrotpholk-Because we all know the miracle patch fairy shows up the night before release and sprinkles magic dust on the server to make it allllll better.
Problem is games are designed around the business model rather than the business model around the game.
So we get crap games most of the time. Proof in the pudding there.
Make a great game, then decide, depending on how people want to pay you, what your business model is. You get better games and more innovative business models. How bout that instead? Wouldn't that be better for gamers?
That's what is happening now, Fikus.
New games are being designed like that?
Im pretty sure the business model is the first thing they decide. Then design a game to best monetize that model rather than a great game. You would think they would be one in the same, but unfortunately they're not. So we end up with poor games with extended grinds and withheld content.
Are you saying that the companies are all changing their business models on some kind of unified lark? Isn't it more plausible that they are changing their business models based on how people want to pay them?
No, considering .05% pay all the bills.
I guess you could say that most want 'free' games if you wanna go there. But then like i said, we get crap games. Proof is in the pudding.
Are you saying companies just design great games, then decide what business model fits perfect with their game? Like Blizzard says they do?
You're off by a few decimal points there. 5-10% typically spend money in F2P MMOs.
You've been writing 'Proof is in the pudding' a lot of your recent posts but you never explain what you're really talking about. A catchy phrase doesn't really prove anything, especially when F2P games have a much more impressive history of stable launches, regular updates, monthly in-game events and successful expansions over the past three years than subscription games have.
Companies look at how people choose to spend their money and build their business models accordingly. We could look just at MMOs or we could look at entertainment services in general. Most people currently like a base monthly fee plus the option for additional features and services. Your posts seem to infer that the older MMOs were made to provide enjoyment and the newer MMOs are made to provide cash flow. Do you really believe that the business model wasn't at the forefront of decisions when creating games like M59, UO, AC and EQ, and that the business model did not dictate a good portion of design decisions throughout development?
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
Problem is games are designed around the business model rather than the business model around the game.
So we get crap games most of the time. Proof in the pudding there.
Make a great game, then decide, depending on how people want to pay you, what your business model is. You get better games and more innovative business models. How bout that instead? Wouldn't that be better for gamers?
That's what is happening now, Fikus.
New games are being designed like that?
Im pretty sure the business model is the first thing they decide. Then design a game to best monetize that model rather than a great game. You would think they would be one in the same, but unfortunately they're not. So we end up with poor games with extended grinds and withheld content.
Are you saying that the companies are all changing their business models on some kind of unified lark? Isn't it more plausible that they are changing their business models based on how people want to pay them?
No, considering .05% pay all the bills.
I guess you could say that most want 'free' games if you wanna go there. But then like i said, we get crap games. Proof is in the pudding.
Are you saying companies just design great games, then decide what business model fits perfect with their game? Like Blizzard says they do?
You're off by a few decimal points there. 5-10% typically spend money in F2P MMOs.
You've been writing 'Proof is in the pudding' a lot of your recent posts but you never explain what you're really talking about. A catchy phrase doesn't really prove anything, especially when F2P games have a much more impressive history of stable launches, regular updates, monthly in-game events and successful expansions over the past three years than subscription games have.
Companies look at how people choose to spend their money and build their business models accordingly. We could look just at MMOs or we could look at entertainment services in general. Most people currently like a base monthly fee plus the option for additional features and services. Your posts seem to infer that the older MMOs were made to provide enjoyment and the newer MMOs are made to provide cash flow. Do you really believe that the business model wasn't at the forefront of decisions when creating games like M59, UO, AC and EQ, and that the business model did not dictate a good portion of design decisions throughout development?
.05% pays all the bills. The rest doesnt spend enough to matter. Any other facts?:)
Legalize cheating to profit. Great game design. And just like thier design, they stole the idea from others.
See you in the dream.. The Fires from heaven, now as cold as ice. A rapid ascension tolls a heavy price.
Comments
A lot of typing but I didn't see any links to MMOs that had these hidden mandatory costs and such. Did you forget to include them?
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
This.
Free to play means pay to win.
The trouble is, games start being designed not for fun, but to make as much money as possible by integrating the cash shop as much as possible. "Monetization" it's called.
You end up with things like Atlantica, where if you want a new mount, you have to pay $10 for a 5% chance of getting one. People there are recentlly upset about a $150 monthly limit, because it means they likely won't be getting a new mount (which come out every month or so), since they can only buy 15 boxes, which isn't enough.
Or on the flip side, something like the recent abomination that is LOTRO. People have complained about Legendary items for years. So they finally fixed it. How? By letting you customize them however you wish, in the cash shop. Only $8 for each scroll you buy, so hey, you can have the perfect Legendary Item for only $100 or so...
(And yes, you can theoretically grind both the shards to buy those scrolls, and the TP as well, but both take so much time, it's not very fun.)
R.I.P. City of Heroes and my 17 characters there
I completely agree. What someone finds as 'fluff' is someone else's content. I believe that RMT is actually a disincentive to solid game development.
That theory only makes sense if your contention is also that the average MMO gamer is a complete moron. Here's why I say that:
An MMO is a game. It is a service that people voluntarily play and voluntarily pay for.
If a game is not fun, people will not play it, nor will they pay for it.
If a game ceases to be fun, people will stop playing it and, as a result, stop paying for it.
Other than a complete moron, who would continue to voluntarily sink time or money into an entertainment activity that isn't entertaining them?
Persoally, I don't think MMO gamers are morons. I think they spend their time and money on what they enjoy. If they aren't getting value from it, they will move on to something else. If they like the service they are getting, not only will they pay the standard amount but will actively look for ways to buy extras that enhance their enjoyment.
The argument of "games are not being designed for fun anymore" is getting old. Put just two minutes of thought into that statement and you'll see how truly illogical such a statement is.
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
If you've never seen a mandatory item shop, Isabelle, you've never palyed Allods. One day I was happily killing creatures with my warrior threesome (don't remember the race name, but they were 3 of the cutest little critters ever), and the next day those same creatures were kicking my furry little butts. They had actually decreased my damage output to force me to use an item shop buff. I cursed loudly, logged off, and never went back. Never will no matter what they do. That really pissed me off. That is the danger of RMT. The developers can change the rules at any time, forcing you into the item shop or out of the game. I refuse to pay for content that should already be included. DLC is just as bad if not worse. DLC 2 weeks after launch? Really? That should have been in the game then, not something additional they developed later, which might make sense. Okay, just venting now, but the point is RMT=bad.
Upon further review, may have to go with you guys on this. I can see how any shop on a sub based game could eventually be harmful.
OMG! Somebody who actually revised his opinion in a forum! I'm going to go off and discipline myself immediately.
It actually happens pretty often, the difference between a smart person and an idiot is that a smart person can revise his oponion after a discussion. An idiot will never consider that he might be wrong.
RMT have nothing to do in a game with monthly payment. The only possible exception would be if the player make extra work for the dvs constantly, a $1 or $5 for people who delete their characters for one thing would be fair, some people here have deleted their Wow character every time they try to quit and then called Blizz support 3 days later to have them put them back again.
But all skins should be part of the subscription, if they can't earn enough money then they can raise the price, I don't mind paying 16-20 bucks instead to get rid of stuff like that.
F2P games and even B2P games are different. F2P games needs to get in money and I can understand if they sell useful items there. As long as you can get similar things by farming in game it is all fine. P2P can sell fluss and expansions (both full and mini), they need money as well but not to the same degree as F2P games do.
So if you prefer buying stuff a F2P is the right choice.
It may be getting old, but it is partially true. The P2W payment model focuses on making game mechanics both monetizable and fun.
IMO, there is only 1 acceptable RMT model and CCP uses it with their plex system.
I thought runescapes F2P model was well set up
I think paying money for additional content / zones / pvp arena's is acceptable...
or access to raid zones that drop high-end gear like maybe pay 5 bucks for access to a raid zone for a week..
Straight out selling items hasn't seemed to work in any F2P game i've tried.. It becomes to costly to play the games at end-game level.
I think F2P works best as a sort of an extended trial and if you really enjoy the game pay extra for specific zone access or special events.
Buying items flat out from an item shop ruins the fun for me of working for the items and , to me at least, feels like the amount of money you spend becomes more important than how well you play the game.
Paying for access to a raid zone... you still have to actually work for the gear and beat the zone to obtain items... so its acceptable to me.
What you're saying is that in the subscription model the developer doesn't focus on making the content that is fun and keeps you paying for months on end? That the devs of UO, EQ, DAoC, etc just made subscription-based games with little or no consideration with whether it kept you paying for more than a couple months?
In a F2P game, the devs design the game so that they have to give at least 10-15% of the people an incentive to repeatedly spend money. In a subscription game, the devs design the game so that they have to give 100% of the people an incentive to repeatedly spend money. The revenue-generation efforts of the devs with the subscription game aren't as visible and direct, but they are just as present, if not more.
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
It does sometimes seem like many games are appealing to peoples lack of willpower (i.e. addiction) rather than their entertainment value. I can sit and play a slot machine all day, but that's not really fun, you know? Look at how many players only play these games (P2P and F2P) for one or two months only and jump from game to game looking for a home. A far stretch from the days when players used to play the same online game for years and years. There may be more of a selection now, but you get my drift.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
If a MMO has what it takes to bring in players and keep them happy then they should be no need for RMT because the ever increasing and sustaining of subs is guaranteed way to increase profits and sustain them. If i pay for a game and am a loyal subscriber to a game then i expect to be able to get everything the game has for that price. In my opinion a RMT transaction is ok for expansions like mentioned above but the F2P market is nothing more than a money scam plain and simple. AKA rich bitches with to much money and not enough skill to keep up with the rest of the skilled players. If someone buys a name change or race or something like that well thats exceptable to me i suppose but anything added to the game with RMT that is not included with the monthly fee. To me thats just saying ur game isnt good enough, or that they think players are mindless moneypits. I personally think its both but to me if u put out a good game and keep up with the content and i dont know, do ur damn job as game developers u wont have to worry bout milking ur customer base hoping to dry them out before the game falls apart.
Applications for MMO guilds??? Sorry not that pathetic just yet
The days of subscribe to play MMO games are coming to an end. In the next couple of years I think we will see a lot more Buy to Play, and Microtransactional MMO games some of which will still have "premium access" for those willing to pay a monthly subscription.
You can see the shift already, casual and so called "social gaming" (a total misnomer since the games in this category are largely not social at all) trend is a large part of what is driving this change.
I'm so glad somebody notices and cares about that.
Ah to hell with you Parsley, and you're opinion on buying gold or item shops or whatever. I used to hate item shops and gold farmers and all that stuff, then I realized that the only reason I hated any of it was because I was jealous of those who could buy what I could not/ was not willing to.
That right there is what all this "hating" comes down to... jealousy. It's about the "haves" and the "have nots". Peopel who buy gold for instance don't HURT developers... in fact they HELP them... because if you are playing you are paying. If you buy gold or whatever you are more likely to keep playing because you've invested real money into the game, beyond that of the subscription fee (assuming there is one). It's the developers fault if they don't see the opprotunity to sell gold themselves and cash in on it. They could completely cut out the middleman, make money, and put gold farmers out of business in one fell swoop... yet they don't. Their loss.
You're little dream of e-communism, where everyone is electronicly equal and measured by their play time and not their bank account is cute... but not realistic. Fact is that people of means will always have an advantage over everyone else. It doesn't matter what you think about it, it simply is how it is.
if a game is designed well enough to pull excess funds out of the system for instance eve has the means by which you can turn the gold you earn in game into actual game time. it pulls chunks of money out of the economy and prevents it from piling up.
likewise you can do the same by buying the isk from someone in game as an exchange for giving them game time.
it does get rid of the gold farmers sort of but eve is unique in that the whole game econmy is built on the player you dont get NPC's that sell ore eventyhing has to be aquired.
most other games actually have merchants that sell things that you use to craft which at least part of the game economy is built on and as suhc gold in these systems quickly acumulate to epic propoortons. consider that daoc when it first started it was an achievment to reach a plat (1000 gold) but that in itself took until very close to end game and that money would soon be swallowed up by having to purchase items and gear. however the money never left game once it was farmed. yes horses and rez sickness and repairs took small amounts but never enough to really make a dent on the game.
unless your game is designed to pull gold out of the system then you cant really risk selling it in an RMT envriornment.
Problem is games are designed around the business model rather than the business model around the game.
So we get crap games most of the time. Proof in the pudding there.
Make a great game, then decide, depending on how people want to pay you, what your business model is. You get better games and more innovative business models. How bout that instead? Wouldn't that be better for gamers?
See you in the dream..
The Fires from heaven, now as cold as ice. A rapid ascension tolls a heavy price.
That's what is happening now, Fikus.
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
New games are being designed like that?
Im pretty sure the business model is the first thing they decide. Then design a game to best monetize that model rather than a great game. You would think they would be one in the same, but unfortunately they're not. So we end up with poor games with extended grinds and withheld content.
See you in the dream..
The Fires from heaven, now as cold as ice. A rapid ascension tolls a heavy price.
Are you saying that the companies are all changing their business models on some kind of unified lark? Isn't it more plausible that they are changing their business models based on how people want to pay them?
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
No, considering .05% pay all the bills.
I guess you could say that most want 'free' games if you wanna go there. But then like i said, we get crap games. Proof is in the pudding.
Are you saying companies just design great games, then decide what business model fits perfect with their game? Like Blizzard says they do?
See you in the dream..
The Fires from heaven, now as cold as ice. A rapid ascension tolls a heavy price.
I am not down with 15 bucks a month paying nothing more than account maint. For the most part, keeping an account on a server does not cost that much. Item shops not only charge customers for miniscule things, they strip already thin expansion packs of real content and pretty much remove free updates all together in many games.
parrotpholk-Because we all know the miracle patch fairy shows up the night before release and sprinkles magic dust on the server to make it allllll better.
You're off by a few decimal points there.
5-10% typically spend money in F2P MMOs.
You've been writing 'Proof is in the pudding' a lot of your recent posts but you never explain what you're really talking about. A catchy phrase doesn't really prove anything, especially when F2P games have a much more impressive history of stable launches, regular updates, monthly in-game events and successful expansions over the past three years than subscription games have.
Companies look at how people choose to spend their money and build their business models accordingly. We could look just at MMOs or we could look at entertainment services in general. Most people currently like a base monthly fee plus the option for additional features and services. Your posts seem to infer that the older MMOs were made to provide enjoyment and the newer MMOs are made to provide cash flow. Do you really believe that the business model wasn't at the forefront of decisions when creating games like M59, UO, AC and EQ, and that the business model did not dictate a good portion of design decisions throughout development?
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
.05% pays all the bills. The rest doesnt spend enough to matter. Any other facts?:)
Legalize cheating to profit. Great game design. And just like thier design, they stole the idea from others.
See you in the dream..
The Fires from heaven, now as cold as ice. A rapid ascension tolls a heavy price.