Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
General: Revisiting the F2P Review System
SBFord
Former Associate EditorMember LegendaryPosts: 33,129
Dovetailing with Jon Wood's article about "reviewing the review process", MMORPG.com columnist Richard Aihoshi takes a look at a particular niche: Reviewing F2P games. Check out Richard's thoughts about the F2P review process before leaving us a comment or two.
To make thing easy, let’s arbitrarily say 50 to 70 hours is enough. Okay, all those who are knowledgeable enough to write reviews and willing to put this much time into a game that probably isn’t very visible, raise your hand. In case it hasn’t occurred to you, staff tend to get first choice, and unsurprisingly, they’re inclined to pick the higher-profile titles, which means many an F2P isn’t reviewed because no one suitable wants the assignment.
Read more of Richard Aihoshi's The Free Zone: Revisiting the F2P Review System.
)
Comments
I'm guessing one reason ppl are playing F2P is the same reason for searching in the bargain-bucket for eg dvd's or such, you are generally looking for a cheap deal that costs next to nothing but might entertain for a while or the rare possibility of digging up a gem?
MMO.hut did a bunch of short vids on mmogs basically getting started and getting a first impression without bothering to do any research and saying, "sit back for the ride!" So agree a no-review, only impressions (are you aware this even exists... apparently >4m ppl play it in France/Korea?! etc) will probably be more than enough for most F2P?
That said, the other thing is looking for the cream that rises to the top eg Dota games (MMOG?) such as League of Legends. It's got decent gameplay (won online awards etc) and player-friendly business model (buy a champ if you like this week's selection) vs the ubiquitous usual farming/pay-to-avoid-timesinks/win model of many F2P games. That could be worth an exception and even given a rating (not so much a score) eg 5*s in the F2P field. Why any F2P game is being reviewed if it gets less than 3*..... maybe sub numbers warrant a look: Are >1m ppl playing this!!?
Then LOTRO & DDO that probably require reviews/ratings compared to other P2P MMOs.
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
What I find lacking in modern-day reviews is information about key features/elements of the game. I need a review to tell me does the game have feature X that I like, or feature Y that I dislike. What I *don't* need the review to tell me is whether or not the reviewer likes feature X or Y, because it isn't relevant. This doesn't mean the reviewer can't/shouldn't mention things that stood out to him/her as really good or bad about the game, but to mention these things in the absence of the actual information is the problem with so many reviews.
An ideal review, in my opinion, for an MMORPG would include very specific information about the graphics, PvE, PvP, payment model, etc. allowing me to decide whether or not the game is to my own tastes without spending the money or time to actually play it, or to dig through hundreds of forum posts looking for the information.
Quite simple really, Let your readers that play the game rate it, they have the time. You do not have to pay them anything. Granted it will take time for the "cream" to rise to the top, But there again your readers can decide which posters/Reviews they value most with a approve/disapprove type system.
Once a Player/Reviewer gets a certian amount of support from his fellow gamers. He can be reconized by your site with a special title, informing others that this persons views are known and respected by others. This in no way implies they are always right. Just that others tend to agree with their points of view.
Of course members would only be able to vote for said reviewer once per account (to prevent rigging). The only down side would be they become more respected for their views. But this could have up side to your payed reviewers as well.
I actually have to disagree with Richard.
In terms of review, I really don't think there's any difference between P2Ps and F2Ps.
It applies to any MMORPG, wether they are P2P or F2P. And should a said MMORPG decide that it takes longer to reach a certain threshold compared to other MMOs, well the reviewer shouldn't have to go out of his way and take additional time to finally reach said threshold, and instead review the game as is on what he's experienced so far. I'm of the opinion that a game should be fun from the start to the finish, and if you need to take a considerably longer amount of time to reach the "fun" threshold, I'd like to know.
I also don't think that various playstyles or class choices can consume that much additional time. Once the reviewer has grasped the mechanics and features of the game, giving a shot to the various playstyle should not consume much time (RIFT is a great exemple).
This is indeed true for websites such as MMORPG.com, simply because the website and it's community focuses a lot more on P2P MMOs, but outside of MMORPG.com there are plenty of websites dedicated to reviewing F2P MMOs, so I really don't think there is an issue here.
F2Ps are indeed much easier for players to leave, but they are also much easier for players to re-join. Players are not bound by any money-constraint, unlike P2Ps, and it's not rare to see F2P players go back every 6 months or so to give games that had slightly caught their attention, another chance. It's one of the wonder of F2P games. As for one-time pictures, isn't that the case for any MMO? They all evolve after all. In my opinion it's the P2Ps who are at a disadvantage, often requiring returning users who *might* be interested in giving the game another shot to either pay a subscription fee from the get-go or have them buy Expansions.
And again, not specific to F2Ps. I'd say this is more of a "new generation"-related issue than a business model-related problem. By that I mean that MMOs nowadays focuses a lot less on community, making it far much harder for reviewers to get a glimpse of what's the community like, let alone find a guild.
I'll also disagree with F2P's having smaller population, as the same can be said, again, with P2Ps. The popular ones will be populated, the lesser popular ones will struggle a little. Great exemple would be DDO before it went F2P.
I do not quite agree with the "barrier" between F2Ps and P2Ps that Richard seems to see. This "barrier" only seems to exist on sites like MMORPG.com where the community is split, the business model being the issue most often brought up by the members. But it's not related to this topic. But looking at other websites shows that such barrier is hardly existant, nor relevant. If a player doesn't agree with a F2P's content or Cash Shop, he can leave at any time, as there are no money-contraints.
In my opinion, what clearly miss in all f2p reviews is cash shop cantent and prices.
If you got only 10 bags slots for free, and 10 unlockable slots gonna cost me 10$ per character, then i would like to know that BEFORE i register to test the game. because i will never play it with such prices.
Bags are just an example - real costs of champions online adventure packs - or CO character slots/archetypes are things customers should learn from a review.
While most F2P games do nickel and dime you on the way to level cap, it's at that where there real money squeezing happens. Usually in the form of enhancing your gear. Even LOTRO has hopped about this money train...
R.I.P. City of Heroes and my 17 characters there
In my experience with free to play mmo's or whatever you want to catagorize them as, you were always able to purchase anything from the cash shop with in game currency, granted using hard currency always saved you time, you never felt left out if you didn't empty your wallet into the game. But then again I've only played 5 F2P mmo's.
I do think all MMORPG reviews are pointless. To know whether it's worth your time or not, you need to know what the gameplay is like several months into the game... and you can't know this until you've put several months into the game. Catch 22.
All you can do is look at the list of features in the game, which is usually on the website, and maybe read a few threads on the forum to see if the playerbase is active or not. No reviewer can help with this.
Conclusion - it's impossible to review MMORPGs in a way that is at all useful to potential players.
RollieJoe (post2) said it. On top, there is the old saying a picture says more than a thousand words, so much more screenshots.
I don't think having players do reviews will work, as the reviews are colored and writers are not skilled at pointing out the important stuff. BUT talking and listening to these players is a good way for a reviewer to get a better understanding of the game. Not interested in reviewing as I don't have the english for it and I am way too straghtforward.
"I am my connectome" https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HA7GwKXfJB0
Late to this, but reality is f2p == f2-try. So this makes reviews that much useless. You can try it out for a few hours, days, weeks and leave when you decide is not for you. I have tried about 4 and stay on 2 of them. The others did not offer enough difference to make me switch or re-invest.
And, so far, not spending. The only thing I have bought in RoM is a mount, on Eden not even that (they give you an Alpaca). And I have managed to stat up my items, etc. Even in the end, untold hours of game later, if I decide to spend $10 or $20 they have more than paid for themselves.
Reviews are more an issue when you are going to put down $50 for the game and/or pay subscription to then find out it sucks (for you). You don't feel you got your money's worth. With F2P you start ahead, you get to try before you invest, if you choose to.
I agree on the players review. Let the players vote on categories and they will let others know what the game is about.