This week in the Free Zone, Richard Aihoshi looks at single and small group play styles in free to Play MMOs.

Many serious MMOG fans think of the genre as being defined by guilds, raids and other elements that involve bunches of players doing things together. It's true there's no feeling in gaming that truly compares to multiple groups working as one to take down a boss, or to battles with dozens or even hundreds of combatants on each side. However, that's not necessarily the way most users actually play.

A lot of people either prefer the play style sometimes known as massively single-player, or spend more time within it than they might think. I doubt that there's anything approaching a universally accepted definition of this term, so for the purposed of this column, I'll use mine, even though it's something of a misnomer. When I refer to MSOG play, I'm not just talking about soloing, but also small group play similar to what you'd experience in the online mode of a standalone game.

Read more here.

Nice read, my main issue with F2Ps generally is that they don't seem as complete as a P2P game but I am fast becoming a more casual duck in and out gamer, that does not want to raid, as the commitments to that are too strong and would take too much away from family.  Even though I have been caught up in it and possibly will be again just waiting for the kids to leave the family home :)

Good points. Due to a lack of time, patience over the last few years, I've ended up solo 95% plus of the time. Thus games that  require grouping for the high end content don't appeal to me.  But that tends to leave the really shallow grinders as the alternative. Which gets way beyond boring after awhile. I like WoW as one can solo from 1-80 if one wishes to, but then one will never manage to get much more than blue level gear(I'm not any good at PvP). The few epics my main has are from crafting or the rare guild raid or PUG.  But thats just the way of such things<shrug>.

The interesting conundrum, which Mr. Aihoshi doesnt really describe in detail but just hints at, is the fact that the type of gameplay that leads people to the F2P titles, the above-mentioned MSOGs, makes them not quite wanted customers there, whereas they would be LOVED by Pay-to-Play Titles, because they pay, dont use up much of anything, are never unhappy about content and probably dont cause any ruckus ingame either.

The problem is, the F2P genre cannot live on these people, they live (more even thant the Pay-to-Play genre) off the long-termers, the people who see investing money into their characters as a reasonable thing, which probably means they want to stay for a while. Conversely, the Pay-to-Play genre, in the ever-ongoing quest to minimize cost but maximize profits, would rather not have to provide quality long term entertainment, but would be happy to have people playing the low-level starting areas and the simple-to-provide solo content over and over, even if its just for a month or two, since they still bought the client and at least one month subscription.

So, in this I think we see a growing rift between the customers each segment HAS, and the customers each segment ideally wants.

 Nice to venture  into this aspect of MMO gaming. Good stuff!

I think the MSOG is the silent majority of gamers. They have consoles and play single player games for the most part or are burned out (or aged gracefully into things like full time employment, a family, etc) from time consuming MMO demands. They know it will be a cold day in hell to really experience dedicated end game goals unless...

The game offers something really outstanding.

I don't have numbers or stats, but I believe the MSOG gave us WoW and captured/ converted a lot of these types to give WoW its popularity.  The MMO longtooths who reveled in UO, EQ, SWG enjoy the hardcore time commitment these games offered.  they scoff at a casual style game, but hardcore players are not the majority.

Ok, it is much easier to understand how from his point of view that RMT is inevitable.  He is a dabbler.  Nothing wrong with that.  And I agree there are a lot of players that do exactly that.  Probably best to dabble in the genre rather to dive in, because the time commitment can be overwhelming for someone with other time constraints.

 Mr Aihoshi,

   Great article and I can really identify with playing an online game solo. I played Hellgate:London solo all the way to cap except for sporadic groups here and there. I had a summoner and never really needed a group, I brought my own. I played that game free 'til the end and can tell you I was still social however still chose to roll alone most of the time. One reason is that I like the way content is made in an open world MMOG, single player built RPG's sometimes have a very linear feel to it. And usually don't have the options that a MMOG has, apart from games like Oblivion and the Neverwinter Nights series.

   I am a westerner and can't understand why F2P, which in my opinion should be called pay as you go hasn't had better reception from the P2P camp. I was brought up on "pay this or no play for you!" ideology and no matter if I stopped playing it 2 days after I subscribed I was booked for a month or maybe more.

   I like the freedom that a F2P gives me, I almost feel as if the game is disposable in a way. I played perfect world for exactly 4 hours, didn't find it to my taste and uninstalled. Risk free, not a dime lost in the process, and that's a world renowned game! One thing that sometimes turns me off is the fact that it pushes the cash shop on you from the very beggining, but I do realize that this is a business and these games don't run on good looks, charm and personality.

   Do you think a game like MxOnline who SEO recently  announced was being closed down at the end  of june should go the f2p route? It saved Anarchy Online, why not matrix.

Play safe,

~Ink

Originally posted by Khaunshar

The interesting conundrum, which Mr. Aihoshi doesnt really describe in detail but just hints at, is the fact that the type of gameplay that leads people to the F2P titles, the above-mentioned MSOGs, makes them not quite wanted customers there, whereas they would be LOVED by Pay-to-Play Titles, because they pay, dont use up much of anything, are never unhappy about content and probably dont cause any ruckus ingame either.

The problem is, the F2P genre cannot live on these people, they live (more even thant the Pay-to-Play genre) off the long-termers, the people who see investing money into their characters as a reasonable thing, which probably means they want to stay for a while. Conversely, the Pay-to-Play genre, in the ever-ongoing quest to minimize cost but maximize profits, would rather not have to provide quality long term entertainment, but would be happy to have people playing the low-level starting areas and the simple-to-provide solo content over and over, even if its just for a month or two, since they still bought the client and at least one month subscription.

So, in this I think we see a growing rift between the customers each segment HAS, and the customers each segment ideally wants.

Actually the P2P segment seeks both the "migrating" gamer and the stable (I will not call it hardcore, because you can still play casually, it's just the fact you play that same game be it 1 hour a month or 10 hours a day) gamer.

The only problem with P2P in that case is because they have a high initial cost, the retail cost plus a monthly fee (which some believe $15 is a rip-off if you play less than half-your-life-hours a month). P2P games would be much more appealing for the "MSOG" players if they allowed a hour-plan purchase.

Back to F2P, F2P actually likes these players, as they'll eventually leech a few dozens of dollars from them before they leave, or they'll get hooked and start paying hundreds of bucks a month for the kind of items the author mentioned, the percentage of players they get hooked in this way is incredibly low, but as they pay much more than a monthly fee game would cost them, it takes few of them to reach that stable income every MMO needs to survive.

Anyway, I understand the MSOG view as I am one of these players (although I have a main "home" game I end up returning, and many of which I cycle through and then I seek a few new experiences) and it is a nice read into showing this playing style many think is the death of MMOs, though I do it with P2P titles.

I dont believe at all that the MSOGs gave us the WoW of today. Mr. Aihoshi is not at all talking about that audience.

The current WoW was aimed at players who want to stick to WoW, want to achieve, want to get most or everything and want to be given the endgame content, but they want it with less time, less practice and less attention involved. They are not dabblers. If anything, most of the "new" WoW crowd are even more interested in items, progress, and their character than even the more fanatic MMORPGs of old, because its all about the feeling of personal reward.

Mr. Aihoshi is talking about people who just dont get into these games that deep. Those that do not need , seek nor want endgame content, because they get lost along the way and probably leave anyway. That is certainly NOT the modern MMO mass audience at all. It may be a large number, but its a large number spread over countless games.

Pay-to-Play games take everyone, yeah. After all, everyone gives them money. But the preferred customer is the undiscerning customer, and in the case of a pay-to-play, a slow moving player is better than an achiever. A dabbler who buys the box and stays 2 months is probably quite common, however with the size of modern p2p MMOs, the dedicated gamer can probably be at the end of the content in the same timespan. Whereas the dabbler may, or may not prolong his subscription, that isnt something the developer can influence a lot, or has to care for. However, with the normal player, who doesnt jump ship ever 10 weeks or so, the developer has to provide content, incentives, has to work for his money. That is why the dabbler, since he pays just the same price for less goods, is more popular.

On the other hand, dabblers are the worst kind of customers to the free-to-plays, since they do not spend money, AND they do not really provide content for the paying players, whether as being group mates, or audience for great items and achievements or generally being active. The MSOG has nothing to offer for a Free-to-Play, until he converts into either a paying, or at least  (see past essays by Mr. Aihoshi) a continuosly present gamer to fill the world.

One more thing to take into account: The MSOG, and actual many casual gamers of today, are not very passionate about the games they play. The people that set up a thottbot.com, or allakhazam when it started, the people who write on boards, who bring others to play, who write guides and all, these are the basic lifeblood of many games, they allow the developers to get away with horrible CS and QA, but these are also the people slowly being pushed out in favor of easier customers, like the MSOG. I personally dont think the MSOG really enjoys and dabbles in a game just filled with his peers. Even this kind of player profits and enjoys the background, the addons, the spoiler sites and all the other benefits of a more dedicated player base.

Read the whole article, liked it very much, but <raises hand> I have a question, where did he learn my gaming 'life-story?'  ^^

In my opinion there is nothing to disagree with, he made every valid point I might have were our positions are reversed.  The few games I have really stuck with were ones were their were people and good social activities, and one game that was just TOO pretty to put down until the client gave my computer the hiccups.

But I would like to say on behalf of those of us who do bounce between f2p's, some of us, myself included don't really have the disposable cash to spend on a subscription game.  Even if I did, there would be a chance that I wouldn't like it any better than an f2p.

Personally, I think manufactures need to reconsider the standard model for games and really try to keep the interest of us non-hardcore type of players.

P.S.  I absolute adore that he called them MMOg's instead of mmorpg's.

I have to say that at least I now understand both why he thinks RMT is inevitable and generally "doesn't get" hardcore actual MMORPG players. His average time committment to a game makes that glaringly obvious.

I suppose my counter question for the MSOG crowd is simple, why do you seek to play MMORPGs when they clearly don't suit your lifestyle choices - why join a game you lack the time to play properly and then insist that *IT* be changed to accomodate you?

I have nothing against solo play or single player games - in fact I tend to play them myself when life/work/family don't leave me time for MMOs. But I have never gone into an MMORPG when I didn't have the time to commit and expected to get everything anyways.

This snippet cracked me up though, "the vocal anti-F2P minority" , given that every poll here has showed that the majority of people here at least dislike the F2P model.

Originally posted by Khaunshar

<shortened, Sorry I hate making massive quotes>

One more thing to take into account: The MSOG, and actual many casual gamers of today, are not very passionate about the games they play. The people that set up a thottbot.com, or allakhazam when it started, the people who write on boards, who bring others to play, who write guides and all, these are the basic lifeblood of many games, they allow the developers to get away with horrible CS and QA, but these are also the people slowly being pushed out in favor of easier customers, like the MSOG. I personally dont think the MSOG really enjoys and dabbles in a game just filled with his peers. Even this kind of player profits and enjoys the background, the addons, the spoiler sites and all the other benefits of a more dedicated player base.

First, sorry about the double post, but this quote appeared after I started reading the full article and I didn't refresh to see the new comments.

That really isn't true, There have been a couple of f2p's that I am quite passionate about and regularly recommend them to other players.  Asda story and Ether Saga Online if you are curious.  While it is true enough that I don't play either at the moment, the reason with quitting the first was for a lack of an end game content, i.e. no quests all grind.  The other was because it was a bit too much for an un-upgraded computer.

While I certainly can't counter much of your well reasoned argument, everyone is truly looking for something very personal from a game.  This is where MMOg's suffer the most, from a lack of variety, while I would certainly not presume to put down the hardcore players out there.  I tend to think it's these 'lifeblood players' that make us Msog's so prevelant, game designers want to make money, so they go for what has made money before.  Now I can't argue to economics, if there was away to inject innovation into mmog's without risking a complete flop I would think that alot of msog's would convert to the 'faithful' so to speak.

Originally posted by ericbelser

I have to say that at least I now understand both why he thinks RMT is inevitable and generally "doesn't get" hardcore actual MMORPG players. His average time committment to a game makes that glaringly obvious.

I suppose my counter question for the MSOG crowd is simple, why do you seek to play MMORPGs when they clearly don't suit your lifestyle choices - why join a game you lack the time to play properly and then insist that *IT* be changed to accomodate you?

I have nothing against solo play or single player games - in fact I tend to play them myself when life/work/family don't leave me time for MMOs. But I have never gone into an MMORPG when I didn't have the time to commit and expected to get everything anyways.

This snippet cracked me up though, "the vocal anti-F2P minority" , given that every poll here has showed that the majority of people here at least dislike the F2P model.

I've never asked that any game be changed to fit my personal choices. They are mine after all. This is simply a hobby for me. As such, my time and attention is limited to those times I have spare of both.  I have no problem with spending money in F2P cash shops in games that I enjoy. Its how the Dev's make money after all.  I had a lot more time and energy back when Asherons Call first launched(3 plus years). The only other games I've spent years in are Eve(3 plus years) WoW(4 plus years). Everything else tends to be limited to 3-6 months these days.  I'm always looking for another game to try, which is why I've played all of the major, and many of the minor games at launch.  Perhaps some day the pace of my life will slow down, and/or I'll find a game thats worth spending all of my time/attention on.

Originally posted by ericbelser

I have to say that at least I now understand both why he thinks RMT is inevitable and generally "doesn't get" hardcore actual MMORPG players. His average time committment to a game makes that glaringly obvious.

I suppose my counter question for the MSOG crowd is simple, why do you seek to play MMORPGs when they clearly don't suit your lifestyle choices - why join a game you lack the time to play properly and then insist that *IT* be changed to accomodate you?

I have nothing against solo play or single player games - in fact I tend to play them myself when life/work/family don't leave me time for MMOs. But I have never gone into an MMORPG when I didn't have the time to commit and expected to get everything anyways.

This snippet cracked me up though, "the vocal anti-F2P minority" , given that every poll here has showed that the majority of people here at least dislike the F2P model.

I dabble, but mainly because I'm still looking for the right MMO, however I'll take a stab at responding to you.

He understands the hardcore bunch perfectly, it is after all the hardcore group of gamers that fuel RMT, these hardcore gamers just don't have the time to commit that their passion and hunger dictates, so they turn to money to make up for it.

MSOG players probably seek something that can only be found in an MMO, whether this is the persistant world or the social interactions (even if they don't interact), is unclear, it is likely a number of different reasons though. Maybe it is something like watching videos on YouTube without actually ever uploading a video of your own? You want to see what others are doing, you want to be involved in what others are doing, but you don't want to commit yourself to actually doing those things yourself.

Are MSOG the shy people of the MMO world? :)

Even if everyone on MMORPG.com didn't like the F2P model, on a global scale, those who don't like it are definitely a minority. I wouldn't care to force anyone to it though, I view the MMO genre as being two seperate genres, those with a subscription and those without (item shop or not). I believe going forward we will see more cross over between financial models, with shops in subscription games, but there is clearly a different design, development and methodoligy behind the two types of MMO.

I've worked on both subscription MMOs and free MMOs and the communities are vastly different on a generic level, I'm truely happy that both exist though, the genre would be a lot more depressing if everyone had to find $20 mil before they could even start thinking about making an MMO.

Originally posted by Szark

This week in the Free Zone, Richard Aihoshi looks at single and small group play styles in free to Play MMOs.

Many serious MMOG fans think of the genre as being defined by guilds, raids and other elements that involve bunches of players doing things together. It's true there's no feeling in gaming that truly compares to multiple groups working as one to take down a boss, or to battles with dozens or even hundreds of combatants on each side. However, that's not necessarily the way most users actually play.

A lot of people either prefer the play style sometimes known as massively single-player, or spend more time within it than they might think. I doubt that there's anything approaching a universally accepted definition of this term, so for the purposed of this column, I'll use mine, even though it's something of a misnomer. When I refer to MSOG play, I'm not just talking about soloing, but also small group play similar to what you'd experience in the online mode of a standalone game.

Read more here.

It is well written but only to P2P audiences, as there are a number of flaws.

As a game designer in a MMO company, P2P MMO depends on the reputation of the company, strong IP or else the business model would not be viable. However, i would like to thanks all the P2P customers for their support...

F2P comes in as a grimmick to attract the attention of new fans and customers. While many Korean MMO are F2P in other countries, they are P2P in S.Korea however.

True to say, which game company do not wish for P2P to exist forever? Afterall, it is a stable revenue source. But dont expect too much from young teens with limited allowances.

As the game industry develop, the new generation of gamers become wiser, become exposed to better games and are less commited to just one game. They just want to try new stuffs, get their money worth. Who would want to pay for a game that once you stop your subscription, u no longer have any access to your account? It like renting a car. In F2P game, u actually own the car and you top up the gas if you want to travel the extra mileage.

Anyway, the market is flooding with many free2play MMOs that allowed a Player to solo as well. You just need to search for it. That an unfair comparison. Just my 2cents.

Magiclight I think you it all the good points!

I can identify myself as MSOG or even MSORPG.

Based on what? and how it is linked with RMT

- I love creating characters having all the possibilities ahead of me. Thus I like trying new games where I can 'create' life. If games offer character appearance change via RMT I'd be all over it. New hairstyle etc just like in real life.

- I like my characters to look stylish and in general to look good. I rather craft those items myself but I don't mind if I can buy appearance items from RMT (or better yet... buy recipes that I can combine to create something unique). Stress on word appearance. Stats and other things that impact playability should be separate and there I don't want to see RMT used. I want to earn those - that those are based on skill not my wallet.

- I play a lot, minimum 5-6hours a day. But I mainly play solo or duo/trio with the few good friends that I've played with for few years. This is not to say that I can't help others when needed but I want to do that casually - even without joining their group. Some games have this like buffing and healing outside group. So I like doing that when I pass by and I see someone in trouble.

- I also like to roleplay... light rp but still.

- I like housing, mounts etc. This can easily be linked with RMT... it's not essencial for the game play - people don't NEED them. But the ones who like this aspect would spend quite a bit money on it.

The way RMT usually is used is not appealing to me. But if it is used for customer services (changing servers etc) and getting fluff stuff... appealing on the vanity, to the side of us that wants us to make our character to look the way we want... I'd love it but it's not hindering me to experience the game.

MMORPGs don't really cater to players who have little/much time with little/much money that like to solo/play in small group, craft and socialize.

I wonder if SW:TOR is anywhere close to this? I have KOTOR in mind but in MMO environment. Just add in crafting and socializing aspect and that would be my dream.

you remind me of the players in Maple Story. Man there are tons of players who have paid to just have new hair styles or non-functional equips to look like a particular anime character, like naruto.

I'm not saying anything bad, just so you know. Just that you remind me of them. I should thank you actually you make F2P games possible =D =D =D

Originally posted by ericbelser

I have to say that at least I now understand both why he thinks RMT is inevitable and generally "doesn't get" hardcore actual MMORPG players. His average time committment to a game makes that glaringly obvious.

I suppose my counter question for the MSOG crowd is simple, why do you seek to play MMORPGs when they clearly don't suit your lifestyle choices - why join a game you lack the time to play properly and then insist that *IT* be changed to accomodate you?

I have nothing against solo play or single player games - in fact I tend to play them myself when life/work/family don't leave me time for MMOs. But I have never gone into an MMORPG when I didn't have the time to commit and expected to get everything anyways.

This snippet cracked me up though, "the vocal anti-F2P minority" , given that every poll here has showed that the majority of people here at least dislike the F2P model.

What makes you think that there is a "proper" way to play and that the proper way is the way you play rather than the way someone else plays?  Different people like different things, and if someone plays a game a certain way and gets enjoyment out of it, what is improper about that?

What is there to laugh about in calling F2P haters a minority when, for example, there are F2P games that have anywhere between 4 to 9 times the user accounts that WoW has subscribers?  It's not unusual in any arena for a vocal minority to appear more prevalent than it really is simply because it screams the loudest.  Polls here are terribly unscientific and flawed, so pointing to them as evidence of anything is probably not a good idea.

Originally posted by spLagger

you remind me of the players in Maple Story. Man there are tons of players who have paid to just have new hair styles or non-functional equips to look like a particular anime character, like naruto.

 

I'm not saying anything bad, just so you know. Just that you remind me of them. I should thank you actually you make F2P games possible =D =D =D

lol hardly my style... I'm just a middle-aged female who likes her toons to look good lol. That doesn't yet state whats the actual play-content that I like. I've played EQII, Vanguard and currently playing AoC (since they put RMT into VG). I like challenge in my games.

Give me murder mystery game to play and I still want my character to look good :)

still make me think of them =P It makes me a bit evnious, but I just can't bring myself to pay for any of them. Again I thank you for keeping F2P games Free =)

Originally posted by bmdevine

Originally posted by ericbelser

I have to say that at least I now understand both why he thinks RMT is inevitable and generally "doesn't get" hardcore actual MMORPG players. His average time committment to a game makes that glaringly obvious.

I suppose my counter question for the MSOG crowd is simple, why do you seek to play MMORPGs when they clearly don't suit your lifestyle choices - why join a game you lack the time to play properly and then insist that *IT* be changed to accomodate you?

I have nothing against solo play or single player games - in fact I tend to play them myself when life/work/family don't leave me time for MMOs. But I have never gone into an MMORPG when I didn't have the time to commit and expected to get everything anyways.

This snippet cracked me up though, "the vocal anti-F2P minority" , given that every poll here has showed that the majority of people here at least dislike the F2P model.

What makes you think that there is a "proper" way to play and that the proper way is the way you play rather than the way someone else plays?  Different people like different things, and if someone plays a game a certain way and gets enjoyment out of it, what is improper about that?

What is there to laugh about in calling F2P haters a minority when, for example, there are F2P games that have anywhere between 4 to 9 times the user accounts that WoW has subscribers?  It's not unusual in any arena for a vocal minority to appear more prevalent than it really is simply because it screams the loudest.  Polls here are terribly unscientific and flawed, so pointing to them as evidence of anything is probably not a good idea.

He is not attacking, or trying to enforce, a "proper" way of playing. He is merely stating that among the dozens of different ways to play MMORPGs, a few are not suited at ALL, by design, to the genre without it having to be demolished and rebuilt, then alienating other playstyles.

Whether or not there is a majority or a minority of P2P subscribers or not is irrelevant, both market segments have huge numbers, and are viable audiences for dozens of games at once, so there is absolutely no need to further soften up gameplay in order to appeal to enough customers... as EVE shows, you can be supremely profitable with a game that by all accounts should have died in its childbed going by the cries of the modern casuals.

The problem is that some people have playstyles utterly unsuited to the goals they want to reach. Again, these are not the MSOGs in Mr. Aihoshis sense, because to be a MSOG, its pretty important that you LACK the mid-term and long-term goals binding you to a game. Basically, a MSOG is defined by a short timespan to play one particular game, and a general disinterest in both social and achievement ties to any single game.

The problem of players with very lazy, or time-restricted, or unskilled, or simply disinterested playstyles who nevertheless demand games to conform to them, and give them the topmost rewards and achievements, is an entirely different can of worms that has been opened in the past few years and really doesnt pertain to the MSOG playstyle.

As I said before, the interesting thing is that the F2P genre supports and actually encourages a playstyle that is probably the worst possible for its business model.

Originally posted by Flirt

I can identify myself as MSOG or even MSORPG.

........

MMORPGs don't really cater to players who have little/much time with little/much money that like to solo/play in small group, craft and socialize.

Wow! I found a soul-mate! :)

You described it so perfectly that nothing else can be added. And your hopes for SWG: TOR has a serious reason - EA mentioned once they are still thinking about paying model. Anyway, it is more and more common in P2P games to add some minor social features for additional fees. Mb one day they will lower general fees and find a better compromise.

Nice read.

I must say that article describes my play style almost word-for-word.

Further, a fair few of the titles I play/try out are F2P too - and sometimes I get nice surprises in that realm too.

Another reason to add to those listed in the article, why my play style is more solo than anything else, is quite simply because a large percentage of players in any given MMOG are either douchebags or just don't mix with my "vibe".
Also, a lot of the time other peoples motives for playing an MMOG are quite different to mine and we just don't mix.

Glad to hear I'm not the only one. :)

Originally posted by Khaunshar

Originally posted by bmdevine

What makes you think that there is a "proper" way to play

What is there to laugh about in calling F2P haters a minority when, for example, there are F2P games that have anywhere between 4 to 9 times the user accounts that WoW has subscribers? 

He is not attacking, or trying to enforce, a "proper" way of playing. He is merely stating that among the dozens of different ways to play MMORPGs, a few are not suited at ALL, by design, to the genre without it having to be demolished and rebuilt, then alienating other playstyles.

When a game designer creates a game, they have clear visions in mind of how long - in terms of gameplay time - it will take to reach the "endgame" and to acquire items. The "proper" way to approach an MMORPG in which it is intended that you spend months, if not years, playing is to expect to spend that amount of time to reach the rarest content. Likewise, in most the expectation is that you will have to make friends and join a guild to access that highest content.

I have no issue with the actual MSOG players as he describes himself, but there are a significant number (and growing) of players in MMORPGs who don't have (or don't wish to spend) the time to reach those accomplishments and to make the guild connections. They are the ones constantly demanding "more solo content" or complaining about how hard and elitist the endgame is. They tend to be the ones who want to RMT their way around the time aspect. If you're not one of them , then you aren't who I was addressing.

On the 2nd part, he isn't posting on some global news service nor was he talking about global opinion. I have NO idea what the global opinion survey numbers are on F2P vs P2P and I doubt he does either.