First, and my favorite payment model, is B2P with expansions. I don't mind if it has a cash shop as long as it isn't always in your face and doesn't have pay to win items. I honestly do not understand why anyone would be against a payment model that is essentially the same as single player games. It works, and it bugs me why more companies don't use it.
F2P I like as long as it doesn't have a crappy pay to win cash shop. If the game is decent, I will even pay for items in the cash shop to support the company. I am not a cash cow though, I will only provide what I feel the game itself is worth. There are a few exceptions though when it comes to particular items. I may opt to buy something that I really want from the cash shop if I feel the item is worth it by itself.
P2P I do not like. I hear so many people talk about how they will not play a game unless it's P2P, and I honestly think it's rather stupid. I don't understand that mentality. They then say how they tried some particular games that where not P2P, and they didn't like them. Did it ever occur to them .. that they simply just played really crappy games? Even a P2P game can suck. XD
I have tried plenty of P2P games, and every time I do, I feel like it's a total waste of money. A lot of people will use the excuse that $15 a month isn't a lot because it is only like 50 cents a day or something. However that is a pretty stupid argument. You can apply that to any sum of money. You can also go the opposite and say it's expensive because it's $180 per year. If you plan to play it for 3 years it's $540. This isn't including the box price they usually tag on it as well. So for 3 years you pay a total of $600.
I have played plenty of games for 3 years and have had just as much entertainment for far less. $60 compared to $600 for 3 years. You have to be rather stupid to tell me it's not expensive. The crazy thing is many people will tell me how P2P is better quality. I laugh because I don't see it.
Community? HA bull. I have met just as many immature people on a P2P as a B2P and even a F2P. The only difference between a P2P game and the others is, a P2P game will have less people in general and less people coming and going.
I got news for you though, if a game is good, people will stay P2P or F2P doesn't matter.
Originally posted by mbd1968 New games should offer a free 7-10 day trial and if you like you buy the box and pay a sub. If not, f2p. I'm tired of paying $50-60 for games that are not worth the money.
People do that all the time with spg, but doesn't seem to be a problem until it is a mmorpg. I do agree that a short trial would be nice before dropping cash for box, but doubt too many AAA companies would do that and limit their initial cash intake. I prefer a sub, as if game is compelling/good it would keep people from jumping around like they do with ftp games. Better for community and number of regular players overall. It's just too bad so many mediocre to bad games get released. I wait for reviews and let a couple weeks pass to get a better idea of if it's my kind of game, as well as fixing bugs, before I buy nowadays. AoC was last game I played from day one, as they lied about content and what worked, etc. Too many games are not finished for release, so I wait.
Here we go again.
You have absolutely no evidence to prove any of that yet you state it as if it was fact.
I call shenanigans.
I haven't met a single f2p player that does not jump from MMO to MMO.
Oh really? Well nice to meet you. Now you have :P.
I am a F2P player and spent 3 - 4 years on mabinogi alone. Now don't get me wrong .. I do try some MMO games and leave if they suck .. but I certainly don't jump from MMO to MMO.
Currently Subbed to 3 games, Eve Online, FFXIV and SW;TOR, if another game came along that was good enough i'd probably drop SW;TOR and try it, but it would have to be a sub based game as i really don't want to get into the whole F2P thing, i prefer my 'costs' up front and visible not hidden and 'escalating' which all too many F2P games seem to be, although if a really good F2P game came along i'd probably give it a go, as of yet though, there hasn't been one.
Originally posted by mbd1968 New games should offer a free 7-10 day trial and if you like you buy the box and pay a sub. If not, f2p. I'm tired of paying $50-60 for games that are not worth the money.
People do that all the time with spg, but doesn't seem to be a problem until it is a mmorpg. I do agree that a short trial would be nice before dropping cash for box, but doubt too many AAA companies would do that and limit their initial cash intake. I prefer a sub, as if game is compelling/good it would keep people from jumping around like they do with ftp games. Better for community and number of regular players overall. It's just too bad so many mediocre to bad games get released. I wait for reviews and let a couple weeks pass to get a better idea of if it's my kind of game, as well as fixing bugs, before I buy nowadays. AoC was last game I played from day one, as they lied about content and what worked, etc. Too many games are not finished for release, so I wait.
Here we go again.
You have absolutely no evidence to prove any of that yet you state it as if it was fact.
I call shenanigans.
I haven't met a single f2p player that does not jump from MMO to MMO.
Oh really? Well nice to meet you. Now you have :P.
I am a F2P player and spent 3 - 4 years on mabinogi alone. Now don't get me wrong .. I do try some MMO games and leave if they suck .. but I certainly don't jump from MMO to MMO.
But you are probably more the exception to the rule than most. You said you played that game for 3-4 yrs, but did you play other f2p games during that time? If so you split time and were not in any one game for as long as if you only played one game. So it's not just game hopping, it's a commitment, monetarily and psychologically and I believe (but could be wrong) that most that sub commit more time and loyalty to their game than f2p games. Even btp have issues. I see all the time here GW2 players say they love the game, but play other games too, or only play when new content or few times a month. If they were paying sub, they are less likely to try other games and more likely to be on more often. If not they probably wouldn't be subbed anymore. I just think on this one point sub does create more loyalty or play time.
Originally posted by mbd1968 New games should offer a free 7-10 day trial and if you like you buy the box and pay a sub. If not, f2p. I'm tired of paying $50-60 for games that are not worth the money.
People do that all the time with spg, but doesn't seem to be a problem until it is a mmorpg. I do agree that a short trial would be nice before dropping cash for box, but doubt too many AAA companies would do that and limit their initial cash intake. I prefer a sub, as if game is compelling/good it would keep people from jumping around like they do with ftp games. Better for community and number of regular players overall. It's just too bad so many mediocre to bad games get released. I wait for reviews and let a couple weeks pass to get a better idea of if it's my kind of game, as well as fixing bugs, before I buy nowadays. AoC was last game I played from day one, as they lied about content and what worked, etc. Too many games are not finished for release, so I wait.
Here we go again.
You have absolutely no evidence to prove any of that yet you state it as if it was fact.
I call shenanigans.
I haven't met a single f2p player that does not jump from MMO to MMO.
Oh really? Well nice to meet you. Now you have :P.
I am a F2P player and spent 3 - 4 years on mabinogi alone. Now don't get me wrong .. I do try some MMO games and leave if they suck .. but I certainly don't jump from MMO to MMO.
But you are probably more the exception to the rule than most. You said you played that game for 3-4 yrs, but did you play other f2p games during that time? If so you split time and were not in any one game for as long as if you only played one game. So it's not just game hopping, it's a commitment, monetarily and psychologically and I believe (but could be wrong) that most that sub commit more time and loyalty to their game than f2p games. Even btp have issues. I see all the time here GW2 players say they love the game, but play other games too, or only play when new content or few times a month. If they were paying sub, they are less likely to try other games and more likely to be on more often. If not they probably wouldn't be subbed anymore. I just think on this one point sub does create more loyalty or play time.
ROFL
Is there something wrong with trying other games? I can easily be equally or more so committed to a game, then even someone who pays, even if I try other games.
However, to answer your question, I personally didn't really try any other games when I was playing Mabinogi simply because I am rather picky. I still don't think something like that makes anyone more or less dedicated.
On top of that, we would also have to define what dedicated even means. How much time is requires to be known as a dedicated player? What if a F2P player who tried other games plays more then a P2P player? Who is more dedicated then?
Also ... don't you think if the only reason you play a game is because you payed for that month is rather like bribing.
I rather play a game because I enjoy it, not because I feel I have to, due to paying some monthly cost. Forced loyalty is not loyalty. I rather be loyal because the game is good.
I advocate for B2P for content and P2P for consistant exploit and hack proofing.
Meaning the sub is not for future content and patches. Those are all xpac B2P the sub is to keep the exploiters and hackers out with full time paid employees...
I prefer a free2sub MMO. You can pay a sub for everything gameplay related but also play for free without some perks. That way if for aome reason you don't want to sub for a month you're not locked out. The system in EQ2 is perfect now.
There are other good models but anything that seems like a blank check, chests mostly, feel wierd to me and I can't get invested.
If the game is truly worth playing and investing time in, then a sub to me is by far the best option. F2P models seem to always come back to a pay to win or nickel and dime approach which always leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
Once I'm logged into a game, the last thing I want to think about is my credit card.
I'd also be willing to bet, although I don't have statistics to prove it, that players who sub are more loyal to the brand/game and are less likely to leave for whatever the current FoTM is.
The game should either be totally free to the player or all content should be built into the sub amount (except for expansions).
I truly do not care about the payment model: ftp, b2p, p2p. Makes no difference especially as they all have a cs of some kind in it and so all run the same risks in regards to that cs.
Also I've never met anyone, in any game or in RL, who has not played more than one game. Every single one of them plays a game till they are bored. Sometimes thats a short time, sometimes thats a long time. The payment model has not seemed to affect whether they or me enjoyed the game.
There are only 3 questions I have when playing a game, in this order.
1. Do I like it?
2. How much will it cost to play the way I like?
3. Am I willing to pay whatever that cost is?
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Originally posted by Ice-Queen Subscription based mmorpg's ONLY, just too bad lately none out there worth a subscription fee.
I agree.
Really not a fan of all the "FTP" games that arent worth a sub AND actually require more cash than a sub per month to halfway enjoy them.
I also agree. F2P/Freemium Cash shops often offer more desirable items that can be achieved in game, and that includes many "vanity" items. A subscription allows me to play the game the way it should and acquire desirable items via crafting, questing, looting and/or through the in-game economy. Sadly, there isn't much in the way of subscription worthy games.
I want buy to play without cash shops, just truly downloadable content packs. This is what console games do, why can't pc mmos do this?
For example, I bought Final Fantasy 13-2, it has Downloaded Content, I then buy that content and have more fun. Why should we have to pay a subscription? Can't we just buy the game and play it like a normal console game?
Pay $60 for the base game, and then pay for whatever content packs we desire? Pay for all the expansions, but never have to worry about being locked out of your characters and locked into a subscription for life.
I do like being able to earn stuff in game instead of buying it. I miss that in Everquest 2. However, a lot of cool stuff in Eq1/2 only exist because of Free to Play, and Lord of the Rings Online has new features because of free to play.
We wouldn't be able to own multiple houses or have tons of prestige special houses and mounts without free to play. Now we have almost nothing to buy in game for platinum, but all station cash only content.
We needed a balance of both... Alas... I was a supporter of the $5 adventure packs for EQ2, but they didn't seem to be successful.
The user and all related content has been deleted.
Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.
Subscription-based is the only way for me. The moment micro-transactions get involved, it changes the relationship between the game developer/publisher and the player. With a sub, you pay once and everyone has access to the exact same content and then it's up to the game to keep you coming back for more. But with F2P and micro-transactions, the goal is to get you to use the cash shop -- it's a different goal, and it shows.
I've tried F2P-type games and B2P games. I've never stayed with them for more than a month. They leave a bad taste in my mouth, and generally just annoy the heck out of me.
Originally posted by mbd1968 New games should offer a free 7-10 day trial and if you like you buy the box and pay a sub. If not, f2p. I'm tired of paying $50-60 for games that are not worth the money.
People do that all the time with spg, but doesn't seem to be a problem until it is a mmorpg. I do agree that a short trial would be nice before dropping cash for box, but doubt too many AAA companies would do that and limit their initial cash intake. I prefer a sub, as if game is compelling/good it would keep people from jumping around like they do with ftp games. Better for community and number of regular players overall. It's just too bad so many mediocre to bad games get released. I wait for reviews and let a couple weeks pass to get a better idea of if it's my kind of game, as well as fixing bugs, before I buy nowadays. AoC was last game I played from day one, as they lied about content and what worked, etc. Too many games are not finished for release, so I wait.
Here we go again.
You have absolutely no evidence to prove any of that yet you state it as if it was fact.
I call shenanigans.
You really don't think people that choose to play f2p games aren't more likely to either a) play more than one f2p game therefore splitting their time or b) more likely to want to try any new f2p game that comes on market, than someone who commits to 3 mo or more sub plans. What evidence do you need except common sense?
Factual evidence would be nice. Duh!
If you are going to speak of something as if it is true, then you had best back it up with facts. Otherwise, it is pure speculation and leaves you with no credibility.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
There are very few sub payment model games on the market today because:
As soon as one comes out, people play it for a month and then leave. Not enough value for the money. So retention has nothing to do with the payment model and everything to do with the perceived quality of the game. So much for the sub promotes retention theory.
Second why do said games thrive as F2P payment models. Because now the consumer has control of how much he spends in game. As long as he sees value, whether it be game quality, or the fact that he is playing for free, he will stay around.
I understand that people would like one payment for all content. But until they can make the game that provides what everyone wants, it is not likely that sub model games will do well.
So both these arguments, yours and mine, have a certain validity to them. Its just that mine makes "more common sense."
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
Originally posted by mbd1968 New games should offer a free 7-10 day trial and if you like you buy the box and pay a sub. If not, f2p. I'm tired of paying $50-60 for games that are not worth the money.
People do that all the time with spg, but doesn't seem to be a problem until it is a mmorpg. I do agree that a short trial would be nice before dropping cash for box, but doubt too many AAA companies would do that and limit their initial cash intake. I prefer a sub, as if game is compelling/good it would keep people from jumping around like they do with ftp games. Better for community and number of regular players overall. It's just too bad so many mediocre to bad games get released. I wait for reviews and let a couple weeks pass to get a better idea of if it's my kind of game, as well as fixing bugs, before I buy nowadays. AoC was last game I played from day one, as they lied about content and what worked, etc. Too many games are not finished for release, so I wait.
Here we go again.
You have absolutely no evidence to prove any of that yet you state it as if it was fact.
I call shenanigans.
You really don't think people that choose to play f2p games aren't more likely to either a) play more than one f2p game therefore splitting their time or b) more likely to want to try any new f2p game that comes on market, than someone who commits to 3 mo or more sub plans. What evidence do you need except common sense?
Factual evidence would be nice. Duh!
If you are going to speak of something as if it is true, then you had best back it up with facts. Otherwise, it is pure speculation and leaves you with no credibility.
We have many F2P posters on here who tell us that's exactly what they do, I used to think they played one F2P MMO at a time for a couple of months then jump ship. How naïve I was, it seems they play a few at a time and drop each one after the two to three month point.
Comments
First, and my favorite payment model, is B2P with expansions. I don't mind if it has a cash shop as long as it isn't always in your face and doesn't have pay to win items. I honestly do not understand why anyone would be against a payment model that is essentially the same as single player games. It works, and it bugs me why more companies don't use it.
F2P I like as long as it doesn't have a crappy pay to win cash shop. If the game is decent, I will even pay for items in the cash shop to support the company. I am not a cash cow though, I will only provide what I feel the game itself is worth. There are a few exceptions though when it comes to particular items. I may opt to buy something that I really want from the cash shop if I feel the item is worth it by itself.
P2P I do not like. I hear so many people talk about how they will not play a game unless it's P2P, and I honestly think it's rather stupid. I don't understand that mentality. They then say how they tried some particular games that where not P2P, and they didn't like them. Did it ever occur to them .. that they simply just played really crappy games? Even a P2P game can suck. XD
I have tried plenty of P2P games, and every time I do, I feel like it's a total waste of money. A lot of people will use the excuse that $15 a month isn't a lot because it is only like 50 cents a day or something. However that is a pretty stupid argument. You can apply that to any sum of money. You can also go the opposite and say it's expensive because it's $180 per year. If you plan to play it for 3 years it's $540. This isn't including the box price they usually tag on it as well. So for 3 years you pay a total of $600.
I have played plenty of games for 3 years and have had just as much entertainment for far less. $60 compared to $600 for 3 years. You have to be rather stupid to tell me it's not expensive. The crazy thing is many people will tell me how P2P is better quality. I laugh because I don't see it.
Community? HA bull. I have met just as many immature people on a P2P as a B2P and even a F2P. The only difference between a P2P game and the others is, a P2P game will have less people in general and less people coming and going.
I got news for you though, if a game is good, people will stay P2P or F2P doesn't matter.
Oh really? Well nice to meet you. Now you have :P.
I am a F2P player and spent 3 - 4 years on mabinogi alone. Now don't get me wrong .. I do try some MMO games and leave if they suck .. but I certainly don't jump from MMO to MMO.
What happens when you log off your characters????.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFQhfhnjYMk
Dark Age of Camelot
likewise. nuff said.
But you are probably more the exception to the rule than most. You said you played that game for 3-4 yrs, but did you play other f2p games during that time? If so you split time and were not in any one game for as long as if you only played one game. So it's not just game hopping, it's a commitment, monetarily and psychologically and I believe (but could be wrong) that most that sub commit more time and loyalty to their game than f2p games. Even btp have issues. I see all the time here GW2 players say they love the game, but play other games too, or only play when new content or few times a month. If they were paying sub, they are less likely to try other games and more likely to be on more often. If not they probably wouldn't be subbed anymore. I just think on this one point sub does create more loyalty or play time.
ROFL
Is there something wrong with trying other games? I can easily be equally or more so committed to a game, then even someone who pays, even if I try other games.
However, to answer your question, I personally didn't really try any other games when I was playing Mabinogi simply because I am rather picky. I still don't think something like that makes anyone more or less dedicated.
On top of that, we would also have to define what dedicated even means. How much time is requires to be known as a dedicated player? What if a F2P player who tried other games plays more then a P2P player? Who is more dedicated then?
Also ... don't you think if the only reason you play a game is because you payed for that month is rather like bribing.
I rather play a game because I enjoy it, not because I feel I have to, due to paying some monthly cost. Forced loyalty is not loyalty. I rather be loyal because the game is good.
I advocate for B2P for content and P2P for consistant exploit and hack proofing.
Meaning the sub is not for future content and patches. Those are all xpac B2P the sub is to keep the exploiters and hackers out with full time paid employees...
yea...
I agree.
Really not a fan of all the "FTP" games that arent worth a sub AND actually require more cash than a sub per month to halfway enjoy them.
^This.
We are all puppets in a fancy show, the trick is to seize the ropes that bind us, and become the puppeteer
There are other good models but anything that seems like a blank check, chests mostly, feel wierd to me and I can't get invested.
If the game is truly worth playing and investing time in, then a sub to me is by far the best option. F2P models seem to always come back to a pay to win or nickel and dime approach which always leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
Once I'm logged into a game, the last thing I want to think about is my credit card.
I'd also be willing to bet, although I don't have statistics to prove it, that players who sub are more loyal to the brand/game and are less likely to leave for whatever the current FoTM is.
The game should either be totally free to the player or all content should be built into the sub amount (except for expansions).
I truly do not care about the payment model: ftp, b2p, p2p. Makes no difference especially as they all have a cs of some kind in it and so all run the same risks in regards to that cs.
Also I've never met anyone, in any game or in RL, who has not played more than one game. Every single one of them plays a game till they are bored. Sometimes thats a short time, sometimes thats a long time. The payment model has not seemed to affect whether they or me enjoyed the game.
There are only 3 questions I have when playing a game, in this order.
1. Do I like it?
2. How much will it cost to play the way I like?
3. Am I willing to pay whatever that cost is?
I also agree. F2P/Freemium Cash shops often offer more desirable items that can be achieved in game, and that includes many "vanity" items. A subscription allows me to play the game the way it should and acquire desirable items via crafting, questing, looting and/or through the in-game economy. Sadly, there isn't much in the way of subscription worthy games.
I want buy to play without cash shops, just truly downloadable content packs. This is what console games do, why can't pc mmos do this?
For example, I bought Final Fantasy 13-2, it has Downloaded Content, I then buy that content and have more fun. Why should we have to pay a subscription? Can't we just buy the game and play it like a normal console game?
Pay $60 for the base game, and then pay for whatever content packs we desire? Pay for all the expansions, but never have to worry about being locked out of your characters and locked into a subscription for life.
I do like being able to earn stuff in game instead of buying it. I miss that in Everquest 2. However, a lot of cool stuff in Eq1/2 only exist because of Free to Play, and Lord of the Rings Online has new features because of free to play.
We wouldn't be able to own multiple houses or have tons of prestige special houses and mounts without free to play. Now we have almost nothing to buy in game for platinum, but all station cash only content.
We needed a balance of both... Alas... I was a supporter of the $5 adventure packs for EQ2, but they didn't seem to be successful.
Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.
Subscription-based is the only way for me. The moment micro-transactions get involved, it changes the relationship between the game developer/publisher and the player. With a sub, you pay once and everyone has access to the exact same content and then it's up to the game to keep you coming back for more. But with F2P and micro-transactions, the goal is to get you to use the cash shop -- it's a different goal, and it shows.
I've tried F2P-type games and B2P games. I've never stayed with them for more than a month. They leave a bad taste in my mouth, and generally just annoy the heck out of me.
Factual evidence would be nice. Duh!
If you are going to speak of something as if it is true, then you had best back it up with facts. Otherwise, it is pure speculation and leaves you with no credibility.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
Here is my statement of fact.
There are very few sub payment model games on the market today because:
As soon as one comes out, people play it for a month and then leave. Not enough value for the money. So retention has nothing to do with the payment model and everything to do with the perceived quality of the game. So much for the sub promotes retention theory.
Second why do said games thrive as F2P payment models. Because now the consumer has control of how much he spends in game. As long as he sees value, whether it be game quality, or the fact that he is playing for free, he will stay around.
I understand that people would like one payment for all content. But until they can make the game that provides what everyone wants, it is not likely that sub model games will do well.
So both these arguments, yours and mine, have a certain validity to them. Its just that mine makes "more common sense."
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
We have many F2P posters on here who tell us that's exactly what they do, I used to think they played one F2P MMO at a time for a couple of months then jump ship. How naïve I was, it seems they play a few at a time and drop each one after the two to three month point.