I'd like to note that I really wouldn't have a problem with games that offered a TIERED subscription or PAY AS YOU go model.
Something like "get X hours of game-play per month free, buy X amount hours more if you want it. Y amount for an unlimited amount". THAT would be option that was consumer/player friendly and offer more opportunity for casual players to play at thier own pace...and probably not have very significant negative gameplay effects.
Note that this is specificaly NOT the sort of model for what F2P games are doing. Instead they are doing a buy this ITEM for X dollars, buy this potion that makes your attacks more powerfull, buy this consumable that makes you level faster.
There is a reason for that....it's because they are not really trying to open up more options for "consumers".....they are trying to use the same sort of tactics that casino's use on compulsive gamblers or drug pushers use on addicts.
They don't make thier money off of people that play thier products for free or who spend a few bucks here and there on an occasional purchase...that's a really crappy rate of return for them. They make thier money (and target) the "high-rollers".... people that have trouble controling thier compulsuions....and they use alot of the same tactics, breaking up payments into small chunks so as not to realize how much they are spending, using points or chips instead of actual currency....and creating situations where the user feels discomfort and has an opportunity to pay to alleviate said discomfort.
In gamers case the compulsion is to "achievement".....whether that achievement takes the form of aquisition of vanity items "Look at me I have the rainbow colored pony".....the aquisition of power "My attack power is 10 points higher then yours, I'm level 50 now and I got there into two weeks...you're only level 40 and it took you a year" or the aquisition of status/recognition "I beat dungeon X, I gained Trait/Deed Justice 7"
Although in many (not all cases) it MAY be possible to achieve the same without a purchase... they designer makes it painful/unpleasant enough to do so....that the user who suffers the compulsion will pay to alleviate that pain/discomfort and get the reward immediately (or at least very much more quickly).
The reason why this mechanism is so disturbing is not just that it preys upon the weak but that it is very much the anthisis of what "Games" are supposed to be about....which is achievement is the measure of a players performance.....not the measure of how much they are willing to spend...or their lack of self-control.
That's why pretty much all the F2P games....including the Freemium ones..and even P2P with item shops are "Pay to Win"..... It's just that some of the people paying define "Winning" as aquiring a rainbow colored pony, instead of beating another player in a duel.
IF this model really were about giving consumers more options and allowing a larger audience to play......then they would be selling play time directly...and in different packages.....rather then selling things that aquire time/effort/grind/work to aquire....or in some cases simply aren't availble inside the game at all. It's because they are NOT making money off people who simply enjoy playing...they are making money off of people who enjoy (or have a need for ) WINNING
P2P has never suited me. I tend to dip in and out of games, rarely playing one for more than a couple of weeks at a time. Then I leave it alone for a few months. F2P means I can dip in and out of various games as I like.
Well said. I've had alot of fun playing various games over the years. The longest I've wanted to be devoted to a single MMO was about four months. Usually after a few weeks of play time I want a change of pace for awhile and I'll pick up a different hobby for a spell, then I'll return to MMOs. Maybe I'll return to the last one I was playing, sometimes I return to an earlier one.
P2P has never suited me. I tend to dip in and out of games, rarely playing one for more than a couple of weeks at a time. Then I leave it alone for a few months. F2P means I can dip in and out of various games as I like.
No offense but I don't think MMOGS are for you. MMORPGS are (or should be) about sticking with them but on the other hand I can somehow understand you, people are getting sick of playing these limited, easymode lobbyish games more and more.
Played Rift for maybe 2 month and felt just tired, cause of the been there done that feeling.
We need a MMORPG Cataclysm asap, finish the dark age of MMORPGS now!
"Everything you're bitching about is wrong. People don't have the time to invest in corpse runs, impossible zones, or long winded quests. Sometimes, they just want to pop on and play." "Then maybe MMORPGs aren't for you."
I haven't read most of the replies here, so I might be repeating what others said, but I will state my opinion anyway.
F2P is only the future for games that can't reach a level of quality they deem worthy of a P2P model. Yes, there are some games out there that are worthy of it but choose to be F2P and are fun to play, but this is a minority is the ocean of bad F2P games.
If F2P is the future then it looks like MMO's will slowly be dying off for me then. When you need to offer advantages in-game and not have people earn them on their own merit is when the series is dead. The fact so many people love the model shows that they: are either poor and can't afford a P2P game, or they are so inept they need to be handed everything and not have to put forth any skill or effort for anything.
My final statement is go play any decent P2P game and go play any F2P game. You can see almost immediately the level of polish, the level of work, anything. Its so different and this is why F2P will always be a sub par system.
I dislike both F2P and subscription-base business models. The only business model I feel comfortable with is buying the box and being able to play as much as you want, like GW or Diablo for example.
Now about F2P, it's good to try a game without spending money, but on average I find them to be (note the paradox) too expensive. When you account the sum of micro transactions you need to get the same gameplay as a subscription-based game, it usually adds up to much more money, so I don't even bother to try them anymore, as if I like the game it will be a money sink in the end anyway.
I dislike both F2P and subscription-base business models. The only business model I feel comfortable with is buying the box and being able to play as much as you want, like GW or Diablo for example.
Now about F2P, it's good to try a game without spending money, but on average I find them to be (note the paradox) too expensive. When you account the sum of micro transactions you need to get the same gameplay as a subscription-based game, it usually adds up to much more money, so I don't even bother to try them anymore, as if I like the game it will be a money sink in the end anyway.
I kinda feel the same way, especially since P2P games started to sell stuff as well.
F2P either tends to get expensive or very grindy. B2P don't have you to play constantly, so they can take away some timesinks and know you will be back for the expansion instead.
"Now that high-quality, big-budget multiplayer games are going free to play, I think the negative stigma that once surrounded free to play games will soon (finally) be dispelled. Players will realize that a business model is just that, and does not speak directly to the quality of a game."
What a line of BS. Give us a good quality P2P game and this FTP cancer will go away.
LOL love the naysayers on this comment page. 1: it doesn't matter how the article presented it, all you have to be is a player to see how much money they are making on F2P models 2: they make more money because you aren't spending it on air waiting for content 3: they make more content because they can put out mini patches since they have more money coming in 4: the players don't have to deal with greedy devs like Blizzard who wanna squeeze every sub to death by making content last as mind numbingly exhaustively long as possible to force people to keep subs longer.
All in all, it's a win win. Don't have to be a journalist to see just go play one of the games, you'll see. I recommend LOTRO
LMAO! So the devs of P2P games are greedy and the Devs of F2P aren't? I want some of that stuff your smoking!
I'm not an IT Specialist, Game Developer, or Clairvoyant in real life, but like others on here, I play one on the internet.
LOL love the naysayers on this comment page. 1: it doesn't matter how the article presented it, all you have to be is a player to see how much money they are making on F2P models 2: they make more money because you aren't spending it on air waiting for content 3: they make more content because they can put out mini patches since they have more money coming in 4: the players don't have to deal with greedy devs like Blizzard who wanna squeeze every sub to death by making content last as mind numbingly exhaustively long as possible to force people to keep subs longer.
All in all, it's a win win. Don't have to be a journalist to see just go play one of the games, you'll see. I recommend LOTRO
LMAO! So the devs of P2P games are greedy and the Devs of F2P aren't? I want some of that stuff your smoking!
I love the "making content last as long as possible to keep people subscribing longer" statement. All the hysterically hyperbolic adjectives he uses are a nice touch, too.
Accusing Sub-based MMO devs of "squeezing every sub to death" is the height of irony coming from someone who clearly condones the F2P/Cash Shop route. How do you "squeeze every sub to death" when you're getting the same sub fee regardless?
Perhaps he means that "they provide content to keep players playing for a long time, thus getting them to pay more over time"? Okay... but then what exactly is the problem with that? MMORPGs are long-term games. That's whole point, to keep players entertained for the long-term so they will find the game worth the monthly fee and keep playing...
See, everytime I see a remarks like itgrowls's, I see someone who:
A) Either doesn't get it, or is deliberately ignoring the fact that MMORPGs are supposed to be long-term games. The content is supposed to keep players engaged and playing for the long term. That's the point. That's what separates them from standard single-player games that last maybe 30 hours and then are "over", leaving only the option to go through and play through it all again. MMORPGs don't "end". They go on indefinitely.
This is why MMORPGs continue to add content over time... to provide more content for people to play.
Complaining that "content in MMORPGs is designed to take a long time" is like complaining that "Motorcycles are only built with 2 wheels" or that vegetarian restaurants don't offer steak on the menu. It's bashing something for being exactly what it's supposed to be. From itgrowls's point-of-view, his remark would be like stating "motorcycle vendors are forcing customers to balance on only two wheels" or "vegetarian restaurant owners are forcing their customers to not eat meat".
In the case of motorcycles, if only having two wheels bothers you, then buy a car instead. If not having meat on the menu bothers you, then don't eat a vegetarian restaurant. And, likewise, if feeling the content seems too dragged out or progress seems too slow in a given MMO... then don't play. It really is that simple.
If a player, like itgrowls, goes into a MMORPG and feels that "all the content is taking too long for them to get through", then they have gone into it with an attitude that is at odds with how MMOs are designed to be and, I would guess, expects to be able to race through everything.
See, the idea is this: You enjoy the game, you find it worth the monthly sub, you keep playing. As soon as you no longer find the game enjoyable or worth the monthly sub, you cancel and move on. Which leads me on to the next point...
Seems to be missing a very important detail: MMORPG devs can't force their players to do anything, including playing the game at all. If a player finds that aspects of the game are simply too tedious, too slow or otherwise unenjoyable to them, and they feel the experience is not worth their time or money - ready for this, itgrowls? It might blow your mind - They have the very simple option of canceling their account and not playing anymore.
The developer is not forcing you to do all that content that you find boring and too slow. They're offering it for the people who find the content to be well-paced, acceptable and - gasp - even fun!. If you don't fit that category, then the obvious conclusion is: It's the wrong game for you. If you find that the game feels too slow or too dragged out and you're not enjoying yourself.. then the logical conclusion is to stop playing. That's called using your brain.
C) All of the above.
Sub-based developers have to earn their players' sub money every month. Keeping your players entertained 30 days at a stretch is a pretty serious task - especially given how quickly people charge through content these days (itgrowls's claim of content "being too slow" notwithstanding). If a player is feeling the game isn't fun enough for them to continue playing, they're not going to re-sub and the developer loses a customer.
Cash Shop based MMOs on the other hand - the true F2P type - are designed to get as much as they can as often as they can. They do this by identifying every element of a MMORPG that's important to players - progression, inventory, travel, HP and MP management, etc - and design the game to deliberately make those elements as restrictive, slow or tedious as possible.. Why? Then, they create items to sell in their cash shop that conveniently address all those very issues. The quote in my signature sums it up beautifully.
There are at least 3 main areas where F2P/Cash Shop MMOs are screwed with to drive more people into and get more money out of their cash shop:
1. The basic game design. The entire game is designed from the ground up with built-in "pot holes" to try to funnel players into the cash shop to spend money, as much as possible.
2. The indirect association of real money to virtual items by utilizing "cash shop points" instead of straight currency values. When you remove the absolute dollar value from something, people tend to not worry so much about how much it's actually worth. In other words, it's easier to get people to spend more money on something, if you can eliminate the $$$ from the equation. F2P/Cash Shop devs know this, and they exploit the hell out of it. It allows the Cash Shop folks to really screw with their pricing setups, as I explain in my last point...
3. The point packages are always "staggered" to be at odds with the tiered pricing of items in the shop. The end result being that players will often have to buy more points than they need because the next point package down isn't enough to get a given item. And then, of course, the points they have left over after a transaction won't be enough to buy anything worthwhile either, so they have to buy even more.
Different MMOs do it to different degrees... but in the end, they all use the same tricks to get people to spend as much as possible, as often as possible.
The evidence for all this is right there in front of people. All they have to do is take off the rose-colored glasses, look at it critically and see how these games are actually set up.
I was initially okay with cash shop MMOs, until I started to notice a pattern in the ones I was playing and decided to look deeper. That's when/how I realized all the ways so-called F2P MMO developers are doing their damndest to nickel and dime their players.
Sub-based MMO devs regularly discuss new things they're trying, or new approaches to established systems they're implementing to give players a fresh, interesting and, ideally entertaining gaming experience that they will feel is worth the subscription fee.
F2P/Cash Shop based MMOs are regularly discussing new ways they're finding to "monetize their players" in order to squeeze as much money as they can out of them.
Sub-based MMO devs see us as customers, but also as gamers**. F2P/Cash Shop MMO devs see us as milking cows, from which they want every last drop.
** - I exclude the sub-based MMO devs who also implement items as cash shop exclusives on top of their box fee and sub. That is worse, in my opinion, than the F2P/Cash Shop approach. At least with the F2P setup there is no initial nor ongoing investment required. So, one could - if they wanted to - justify spending the money in the cash shop because of that (and I know that's exactly what people do).
But when you're already getting a box fee, plus a monthly sub from your players... it is nothing short of shameless, blatant greed to start selling cash shop items on top of that. I know there are people who say "Well they're usually fluff items and you don't have to buy them if you don't want to". That's all well and good.. But the bigger point is this: They shouldn't be sold in a cash shop to begin with, whether a given individual wants them or not. There's no justification for it. They're doing it purely as a cash grab, nothing more.
"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'm just going to play D3 and GW2, you girls can keep your F2P "games".
The funny thing is, as much as I love GW2, that so called 'buy to play' is just 'free to play' that charges you for the initial box.
GW2 will still have a cash shop that will sell fluff and content, the same as GW1, and exactly the same as other 'F2P' titles we see.
The 'B2P is better then F2P' statement is a myth, except for maybe that B2P has the advantage of not attracting the constantly whining entitled freeb crowd because they won't spend the money on a box.
No, GW is not exactly like the other 'Free to Play' games, as the items sold on their store don't have a strong impact on the game as the ones sold on true 'Free to Play' game stores. Buying fancy clothes and additional character slots doesn't make the game unfair for other players, while being able to buy exclusive premium items, gear, potions, etc does.
Because, they cant compete with P2P, why? here are my reason's new players wont spend a dollar just to try a game. P2P games requires load, subreciption fee's and even installer's and the bad thing about that is that players who dont like the game and paid for it would be pissed off. here are the reasons why everyone is going F2P: they attract more players, make more money since players would make such things like donation's, even though it free to play some items are still bought in the game, its a fad thats why many games have gone F2P, more players means more players will join due to fad and more money.
"Now that high-quality, big-budget multiplayer games are going free to play, I think the negative stigma that once surrounded free to play games will soon (finally) be dispelled. Players will realize that a business model is just that, and does not speak directly to the quality of a game."
This is a complete and total aberration of the truth!
Let's examine the F2P business model, firstly by looking at what drives the revenue. In a subscription based model, the gameplay content drives the revenue. When a developer adds a new area, a new raid, a new boss, etc, people subscribe to play it, thus increasing revenue. Now with this model these new 'gameplay' features get the focus of the developers attention, therefore there are always expansions and new things to explore and conquor. Thus the game evolves and develops and usually improves because of this, it forces to the developer to create new and better gameplay content.
Now, the F2P business model. In contrast to the subscription business model, the revenue generating content in these game are not gameplay, it is the cash shop, or whatever mechanism is used to, at best nudge, or at worse, force people to purchase individual items within the game for real money. Now, if with the subscription model developers must constantly add new gameplay content to the game to drive revenue, what must the developers in the F2P model do in order to acquire revenue? Yes, that's right add more items to the cash shop, and 'engineer' the game towards their necessity.
So, therefore, the F2P developers main goal is to constantly add more items into the cash shop, and taylor the game in a manner that requires their use. Now, with the developer's focus being on what generates the revenue, in this case the cash shop, doesn't it stand to reason that the other aspects of the game might suffer, such as actual gameplay? It seems obvious to me, why pay developers to develop content that isn't generating revenue?
It does stand to reason that games developed with the F2P model only exist to push or force their players to purchase things in the cash shops, since that is the only means of revenue, and because of this, there are little developmental resources left to actually build a world class game that is 'fun' to play.
The quality of F2P games suffer for these very reasons, while some may actually be free to download and play, eventually the players will hit a wall where they are forced to spend money either to remain competitive, or to avoid the absolute mind-numbing and punishing grind they will be subject to if they choose not to spend money.
In closing, I pose a question to all gamers. Why would you choose to pay individually for items, gold, or whatever else, that you were able to acquire or achieve in the past through a much cheaper, single monthly subscription?
..and to say this... Free to Play is a misnomer, a falacy, these games have never been free, they are not free now, and they never will be. Please use your intelligence, and spend your money wisely, and stop being fleeced by dishonest and corrupt publishers and companies.
Comments
I'd like to note that I really wouldn't have a problem with games that offered a TIERED subscription or PAY AS YOU go model.
Something like "get X hours of game-play per month free, buy X amount hours more if you want it. Y amount for an unlimited amount". THAT would be option that was consumer/player friendly and offer more opportunity for casual players to play at thier own pace...and probably not have very significant negative gameplay effects.
Note that this is specificaly NOT the sort of model for what F2P games are doing. Instead they are doing a buy this ITEM for X dollars, buy this potion that makes your attacks more powerfull, buy this consumable that makes you level faster.
There is a reason for that....it's because they are not really trying to open up more options for "consumers".....they are trying to use the same sort of tactics that casino's use on compulsive gamblers or drug pushers use on addicts.
They don't make thier money off of people that play thier products for free or who spend a few bucks here and there on an occasional purchase...that's a really crappy rate of return for them. They make thier money (and target) the "high-rollers".... people that have trouble controling thier compulsuions....and they use alot of the same tactics, breaking up payments into small chunks so as not to realize how much they are spending, using points or chips instead of actual currency....and creating situations where the user feels discomfort and has an opportunity to pay to alleviate said discomfort.
In gamers case the compulsion is to "achievement".....whether that achievement takes the form of aquisition of vanity items "Look at me I have the rainbow colored pony".....the aquisition of power "My attack power is 10 points higher then yours, I'm level 50 now and I got there into two weeks...you're only level 40 and it took you a year" or the aquisition of status/recognition "I beat dungeon X, I gained Trait/Deed Justice 7"
Although in many (not all cases) it MAY be possible to achieve the same without a purchase... they designer makes it painful/unpleasant enough to do so....that the user who suffers the compulsion will pay to alleviate that pain/discomfort and get the reward immediately (or at least very much more quickly).
The reason why this mechanism is so disturbing is not just that it preys upon the weak but that it is very much the anthisis of what "Games" are supposed to be about....which is achievement is the measure of a players performance.....not the measure of how much they are willing to spend...or their lack of self-control.
That's why pretty much all the F2P games....including the Freemium ones..and even P2P with item shops are "Pay to Win"..... It's just that some of the people paying define "Winning" as aquiring a rainbow colored pony, instead of beating another player in a duel.
IF this model really were about giving consumers more options and allowing a larger audience to play......then they would be selling play time directly...and in different packages.....rather then selling things that aquire time/effort/grind/work to aquire....or in some cases simply aren't availble inside the game at all. It's because they are NOT making money off people who simply enjoy playing...they are making money off of people who enjoy (or have a need for ) WINNING
Well said. I've had alot of fun playing various games over the years. The longest I've wanted to be devoted to a single MMO was about four months. Usually after a few weeks of play time I want a change of pace for awhile and I'll pick up a different hobby for a spell, then I'll return to MMOs. Maybe I'll return to the last one I was playing, sometimes I return to an earlier one.
No offense but I don't think MMOGS are for you. MMORPGS are (or should be) about sticking with them but on the other hand I can somehow understand you, people are getting sick of playing these limited, easymode lobbyish games more and more.
Played Rift for maybe 2 month and felt just tired, cause of the been there done that feeling.
We need a MMORPG Cataclysm asap, finish the dark age of MMORPGS now!
"Everything you're bitching about is wrong. People don't have the time to invest in corpse runs, impossible zones, or long winded quests. Sometimes, they just want to pop on and play."
"Then maybe MMORPGs aren't for you."
I haven't read most of the replies here, so I might be repeating what others said, but I will state my opinion anyway.
F2P is only the future for games that can't reach a level of quality they deem worthy of a P2P model. Yes, there are some games out there that are worthy of it but choose to be F2P and are fun to play, but this is a minority is the ocean of bad F2P games.
If F2P is the future then it looks like MMO's will slowly be dying off for me then. When you need to offer advantages in-game and not have people earn them on their own merit is when the series is dead. The fact so many people love the model shows that they: are either poor and can't afford a P2P game, or they are so inept they need to be handed everything and not have to put forth any skill or effort for anything.
My final statement is go play any decent P2P game and go play any F2P game. You can see almost immediately the level of polish, the level of work, anything. Its so different and this is why F2P will always be a sub par system.
I dislike both F2P and subscription-base business models. The only business model I feel comfortable with is buying the box and being able to play as much as you want, like GW or Diablo for example.
Now about F2P, it's good to try a game without spending money, but on average I find them to be (note the paradox) too expensive. When you account the sum of micro transactions you need to get the same gameplay as a subscription-based game, it usually adds up to much more money, so I don't even bother to try them anymore, as if I like the game it will be a money sink in the end anyway.
I kinda feel the same way, especially since P2P games started to sell stuff as well.
F2P either tends to get expensive or very grindy. B2P don't have you to play constantly, so they can take away some timesinks and know you will be back for the expansion instead.
/signed
LMAO! So the devs of P2P games are greedy and the Devs of F2P aren't? I want some of that stuff your smoking!
I'm not an IT Specialist, Game Developer, or Clairvoyant in real life, but like others on here, I play one on the internet.
I love the "making content last as long as possible to keep people subscribing longer" statement. All the hysterically hyperbolic adjectives he uses are a nice touch, too.
Accusing Sub-based MMO devs of "squeezing every sub to death" is the height of irony coming from someone who clearly condones the F2P/Cash Shop route. How do you "squeeze every sub to death" when you're getting the same sub fee regardless?
Perhaps he means that "they provide content to keep players playing for a long time, thus getting them to pay more over time"? Okay... but then what exactly is the problem with that? MMORPGs are long-term games. That's whole point, to keep players entertained for the long-term so they will find the game worth the monthly fee and keep playing...
See, everytime I see a remarks like itgrowls's, I see someone who:
A) Either doesn't get it, or is deliberately ignoring the fact that MMORPGs are supposed to be long-term games. The content is supposed to keep players engaged and playing for the long term. That's the point. That's what separates them from standard single-player games that last maybe 30 hours and then are "over", leaving only the option to go through and play through it all again. MMORPGs don't "end". They go on indefinitely.
This is why MMORPGs continue to add content over time... to provide more content for people to play.
Complaining that "content in MMORPGs is designed to take a long time" is like complaining that "Motorcycles are only built with 2 wheels" or that vegetarian restaurants don't offer steak on the menu. It's bashing something for being exactly what it's supposed to be. From itgrowls's point-of-view, his remark would be like stating "motorcycle vendors are forcing customers to balance on only two wheels" or "vegetarian restaurant owners are forcing their customers to not eat meat".
In the case of motorcycles, if only having two wheels bothers you, then buy a car instead. If not having meat on the menu bothers you, then don't eat a vegetarian restaurant. And, likewise, if feeling the content seems too dragged out or progress seems too slow in a given MMO... then don't play. It really is that simple.
If a player, like itgrowls, goes into a MMORPG and feels that "all the content is taking too long for them to get through", then they have gone into it with an attitude that is at odds with how MMOs are designed to be and, I would guess, expects to be able to race through everything.
See, the idea is this: You enjoy the game, you find it worth the monthly sub, you keep playing. As soon as you no longer find the game enjoyable or worth the monthly sub, you cancel and move on. Which leads me on to the next point...
The developer is not forcing you to do all that content that you find boring and too slow. They're offering it for the people who find the content to be well-paced, acceptable and - gasp - even fun!. If you don't fit that category, then the obvious conclusion is: It's the wrong game for you. If you find that the game feels too slow or too dragged out and you're not enjoying yourself.. then the logical conclusion is to stop playing. That's called using your brain.
C) All of the above.
Sub-based developers have to earn their players' sub money every month. Keeping your players entertained 30 days at a stretch is a pretty serious task - especially given how quickly people charge through content these days (itgrowls's claim of content "being too slow" notwithstanding). If a player is feeling the game isn't fun enough for them to continue playing, they're not going to re-sub and the developer loses a customer.
Cash Shop based MMOs on the other hand - the true F2P type - are designed to get as much as they can as often as they can. They do this by identifying every element of a MMORPG that's important to players - progression, inventory, travel, HP and MP management, etc - and design the game to deliberately make those elements as restrictive, slow or tedious as possible.. Why? Then, they create items to sell in their cash shop that conveniently address all those very issues. The quote in my signature sums it up beautifully.
There are at least 3 main areas where F2P/Cash Shop MMOs are screwed with to drive more people into and get more money out of their cash shop:
1. The basic game design. The entire game is designed from the ground up with built-in "pot holes" to try to funnel players into the cash shop to spend money, as much as possible.
2. The indirect association of real money to virtual items by utilizing "cash shop points" instead of straight currency values. When you remove the absolute dollar value from something, people tend to not worry so much about how much it's actually worth. In other words, it's easier to get people to spend more money on something, if you can eliminate the $$$ from the equation. F2P/Cash Shop devs know this, and they exploit the hell out of it. It allows the Cash Shop folks to really screw with their pricing setups, as I explain in my last point...
3. The point packages are always "staggered" to be at odds with the tiered pricing of items in the shop. The end result being that players will often have to buy more points than they need because the next point package down isn't enough to get a given item. And then, of course, the points they have left over after a transaction won't be enough to buy anything worthwhile either, so they have to buy even more.
Different MMOs do it to different degrees... but in the end, they all use the same tricks to get people to spend as much as possible, as often as possible.
The evidence for all this is right there in front of people. All they have to do is take off the rose-colored glasses, look at it critically and see how these games are actually set up.
I was initially okay with cash shop MMOs, until I started to notice a pattern in the ones I was playing and decided to look deeper. That's when/how I realized all the ways so-called F2P MMO developers are doing their damndest to nickel and dime their players.
Sub-based MMO devs regularly discuss new things they're trying, or new approaches to established systems they're implementing to give players a fresh, interesting and, ideally entertaining gaming experience that they will feel is worth the subscription fee.
F2P/Cash Shop based MMOs are regularly discussing new ways they're finding to "monetize their players" in order to squeeze as much money as they can out of them.
Sub-based MMO devs see us as customers, but also as gamers**. F2P/Cash Shop MMO devs see us as milking cows, from which they want every last drop.
** - I exclude the sub-based MMO devs who also implement items as cash shop exclusives on top of their box fee and sub. That is worse, in my opinion, than the F2P/Cash Shop approach. At least with the F2P setup there is no initial nor ongoing investment required. So, one could - if they wanted to - justify spending the money in the cash shop because of that (and I know that's exactly what people do).
But when you're already getting a box fee, plus a monthly sub from your players... it is nothing short of shameless, blatant greed to start selling cash shop items on top of that. I know there are people who say "Well they're usually fluff items and you don't have to buy them if you don't want to". That's all well and good.. But the bigger point is this: They shouldn't be sold in a cash shop to begin with, whether a given individual wants them or not. There's no justification for it. They're doing it purely as a cash grab, nothing more.
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
No, GW is not exactly like the other 'Free to Play' games, as the items sold on their store don't have a strong impact on the game as the ones sold on true 'Free to Play' game stores. Buying fancy clothes and additional character slots doesn't make the game unfair for other players, while being able to buy exclusive premium items, gear, potions, etc does.
Because, they cant compete with P2P, why? here are my reason's new players wont spend a dollar just to try a game. P2P games requires load, subreciption fee's and even installer's and the bad thing about that is that players who dont like the game and paid for it would be pissed off. here are the reasons why everyone is going F2P: they attract more players, make more money since players would make such things like donation's, even though it free to play some items are still bought in the game, its a fad thats why many games have gone F2P, more players means more players will join due to fad and more money.
Iron Realms really pioneered this whole F2P model back in 1997. I can't believe how many years developers got away with subscription fees.
Iron Realms was selling mall items to players when Blizzard was still in diapers.
"Now that high-quality, big-budget multiplayer games are going free to play, I think the negative stigma that once surrounded free to play games will soon (finally) be dispelled. Players will realize that a business model is just that, and does not speak directly to the quality of a game."
This is a complete and total aberration of the truth!
Let's examine the F2P business model, firstly by looking at what drives the revenue. In a subscription based model, the gameplay content drives the revenue. When a developer adds a new area, a new raid, a new boss, etc, people subscribe to play it, thus increasing revenue. Now with this model these new 'gameplay' features get the focus of the developers attention, therefore there are always expansions and new things to explore and conquor. Thus the game evolves and develops and usually improves because of this, it forces to the developer to create new and better gameplay content.
Now, the F2P business model. In contrast to the subscription business model, the revenue generating content in these game are not gameplay, it is the cash shop, or whatever mechanism is used to, at best nudge, or at worse, force people to purchase individual items within the game for real money. Now, if with the subscription model developers must constantly add new gameplay content to the game to drive revenue, what must the developers in the F2P model do in order to acquire revenue? Yes, that's right add more items to the cash shop, and 'engineer' the game towards their necessity.
So, therefore, the F2P developers main goal is to constantly add more items into the cash shop, and taylor the game in a manner that requires their use. Now, with the developer's focus being on what generates the revenue, in this case the cash shop, doesn't it stand to reason that the other aspects of the game might suffer, such as actual gameplay? It seems obvious to me, why pay developers to develop content that isn't generating revenue?
It does stand to reason that games developed with the F2P model only exist to push or force their players to purchase things in the cash shops, since that is the only means of revenue, and because of this, there are little developmental resources left to actually build a world class game that is 'fun' to play.
The quality of F2P games suffer for these very reasons, while some may actually be free to download and play, eventually the players will hit a wall where they are forced to spend money either to remain competitive, or to avoid the absolute mind-numbing and punishing grind they will be subject to if they choose not to spend money.
In closing, I pose a question to all gamers. Why would you choose to pay individually for items, gold, or whatever else, that you were able to acquire or achieve in the past through a much cheaper, single monthly subscription?
..and to say this... Free to Play is a misnomer, a falacy, these games have never been free, they are not free now, and they never will be. Please use your intelligence, and spend your money wisely, and stop being fleeced by dishonest and corrupt publishers and companies.