Originally posted by Antaran

Originally posted by kilun

Seriously do some of you even know what a childs mind process is at the age of 8 is even remotely?  The child probably and most likely didn't understand it was real money.  Knowing what cash in your hand is and what a click of a button causing massive amounts of cash to leave a real account are two different things.  Hell half of you are probably in CC debt up to your eyeballs because you can stop and exam your own finances and are bitching that an eight year old doesn't know better.  That is laughable.

I applaud the few of you who are taking the blame the corporation approach.  That is what this boils down to.  Corporations fire workers and replace them for cheaper labor and target kids at super young age(Hell just look at nick/nickjr commercials for crying out loud..half of these "scam" games are on them)

Now do I think the parent is responsible?  Absolutely.  They screwed up and are negligent parents.  They are the parents that say here kids let this entertain you and go away.  They are the same ones that let their 10 year old play GTA and then bitched about it.  There is a reason why you don't have to pass any kind of test to make babies, some people are just morons.

 not to mention the agro us parents get from our kids with all the "i want that" because of such advertisements on kids channels, on that note i'd liek to add that most kids channels require a paid subscription here in UK, i think only CBBC is on freeview now, so why the need for advertisements in first place if not to corrupt the young minds of our kids and drive us parents mad?

the agro is sometimes called Pester Power and companies are aware of how effective it is. You can read  about it here http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/parents/marketing/marketers_target_kids.cfm  .

I think in the uk there some sort of regulation on some kinds of ads towrds children plus add in the fact that in the uk you dont have anywhere near the same amounts of ads as in north america

did you know big companies hire advertising agencies that in turn employ psychologist to be more effective when 'targeting" children?

Originally posted by dirtyjoe78

When it comes to mobile games that target kids there should probably be some regulation in that space.  You can argue both directions here parents fault for getting kids a smart phone.  But lets face it it's just as cheap to get a smart phone as it is to get a standard one.  Some sort of verification email or something to the primary account holder of the phone contract should be sent in order to complete any of these kinds of transactions where its a game for kids.  If you are the primary contract holder and spend $1400 on your smurf house thats your business, but when it is a kid that probably doesn't understand exactly what they are doing when purchacing that purple polkadot wallpaper there should be some safeguards in place. 

and I will argue the other way. Giving an 8 yrs old a cell phone period is stupid and the parents should be made to pay every dime for being that irresponsible.  What does an 8 yr old need a cell phone at all for? Schools pick them up if they are caught with them, home phone are available at home, and who lets their 8 yr old to far from the house alone? It is part of the problems with kids today in general. If you give your child a piece of equipment and do not teach them the proper and responsible use of it then you need to pay the $1,400 + a "dumbass" fee.

My 10 yr old daughter wanted a cell...I asked her "why? What will you use it for?" She said to call her friends at school. "You can't take it to school, that is where you go to study and learn not text/call  friends. Besides, your at school WITH your friends, you can just lean over and talk to them". She when wiped out "I might have to call you". "If you need to call me or your mom at school, you go to the office. She said I was right "but my friends have them". "And that they aren't supposed to have them at school are they?" I replied. I then stated "If you need to call someone at home, use the home phone." She then said "But they have XYZ game you can get on the phone". "That is what your computer and game system are for".

I told her she could have a cell phone either when she was old enough to get her drivers license or got a job that could pay for it.

I was talking to a freind the other day and asked them "Do you remember what cell phones were originally made for?" He had a puzzled look on his face. I then explain "They were originally for making emergency phone calls in case you were stranded somewhere in you car or in an accident." He was like "WOW, yea you are right. I had forgotten that." The fact that they have become a status symbol to irresponsible children is a sad state we are in and dumb parents perpetuate it.

If people would start doing their jobs as responsible parents, there would be no need for "investigations" and these stories would be anecdotal at best.

Originally posted by mikenet707

Another thing the gov't should do is limit the maximun money paid for F2P games. Meaning that if my total purchases for the month go over the regular monthly subscription price then you should get the whole month to play free at full throttle if you bought things you would normally get with the monthly sub. I do understand that this is complicated buut not impossible. Now this will not work well for games that never had a monthly sub but EQ2 and others really make out very well with their F2P model. I spend more then the monthly sub sometimes and get less then then monthly subs do. No hate, just sayin. I love EQ2 :)

The government needs to keep its nose out and you need to not play a game that doesn't offer the "max money" feature. The government doing anything about how they charge for their service is insane. I enough people just say "I won't play with this payment model" they will change it or they will have no business. Getting the government involed will destroy it completely. You only think it is bad now.

[Mod Edit]

Its kind of funny seeing some of the responses some people have about things like parents actually doing their jobs and parenting & educating their child. One of you made the point of the parents maybe not using/knowing much about the products and due to that are unaware of some of the problems / risks. To those types of people, I have a question:

Do you just run out and buy powertools for your kids because they think it looks cool, then not even bother learning how to use said tool or researching how to use it safely, and then just hand it over to your kid to figure out for himself? Do you just go out and buy your teenager a new car without even bothering to teach them how to drive?

Yes, not everyone is "tech savvy" and knows everything about some of the technology such as smart phones, ipads, etc that we see today, but as a parent it is YOUR responsibility to learn about a product that you are buying for YOUR child rather than just blindly handing things over with no clue how they even work, what risks they pose (to their safety or monetary risks), or how to use them properly.

When i was growing up my mother (who raised 3 boys on her own, which makes me lol at all the people who QQ about how hard it is to raise a single child and that theyre too busy to care for them, etc) was actually involved with us and learned about the things we were interested in. If something new came out that we wanted, she would learn all about it along with us rather than just shelling out some $ for it and then passing it to us as a sad attempt at a replacement babysitter like so many parents do now. The pathetic thing is, parents used to do that back in the days of snail mail before the internet was used. Nowadays you can learn all about how to do pretty much ANYTHING from the cmfort of your home thanks to the internet, yet parents are still too lazy to bother even spending an hour or 2 reading through a few reviews, manuals, etc about what theyre buying f rtheir children.

The bottom line is that using the term "free" to discribe a game in which you CAN spend real money is misleading. Using the term "free" is a marketing ploy to draw in people. If they change the term to something else a bit more HONEST, I would have no problem with them. Until then, any game that claims to be f2p is a scam to me.

"I refer to online poker, where it's possible - and not all that unusual - to amass thousands of dollars without ever putting a cent at risk.  There's are many more cases of seeming abuse by apparently unscrupulous operators who, for example, went out of business without returning the players' money.  What's more, quite a number of reports I've seen have involved far more than $1500."

Where on earth are you playing online poker that you can "amass thousands of dollars without ever putting a cent at risk"? Screams scam to me.

I've played at both of the largest and most reputable sites (pokerstars and fulltilt, they even advertise on TV) and they and both have real and play money options, but you have to risk real money to win real money....

As for the F2P adds targetting children...yeah, its shady as hell, but it isn't much different than other products that target kids. Don't give your kids your CC info or lock it into anything they have access to FFS.

JUST AN OPINION

I don't have enough facts to say who is at fault for what the kids bought.   What is a smurfberry though and how could any ammount of them cost 1400 bucks?

F2P is a lie.  It has always been a lie.  Anytime any game or entertainment company puts out a partial product with the intention of cajoloing or luring or psychologically enticing some one into paying real money for something that does not really exist (ie a database item displayed on a sceen under certain circumstances or a new "area" that is only data in a database to be displayed), they are basing their whole business model on scamming the unwarry or less intelligent people with access to their product. They are basically playing the shell game (rigged of course). 

They are misleading their potentiel customers from the begining.  They should call their games PAYG games (pay as you go).

The fact that we keep hearing that games that have gone F2P (D&D and LOTRO come to mind) and that the revinue from these games has dramatically increased, is practical proof that there are a lot of gullible people out there who the F2P folks exploit with glee.

NO GAME SHOULD BE ADVERTIZED AS F2P UNLESS IT IS TRULY FREE TO PLAY.   ALL THE WAY THROUGH.  WITHOUT NEEDING POTIONS OR SNOWFLAKES OR SMURFBERRIES (SOLD SEPERATELY) TO ENJOY THE GAMES FULL SCOPE AND POSSIBILITIES.

Of course that would put an end to F2P games.  And that would be a good thing as they are mostly just CRAP with a promise of being wonderful .. for just a few more dollars.

I guess you can tell I hate the whole F2P greed machine ... and always will.

Again ... Not trying to critisize anyone on this forum.  JUST MY OPINION

Originally posted by Gruug

The bottom line is that using the term "free" to discribe a game in which you CAN spend real money is misleading. Using the term "free" is a marketing ploy to draw in people. If they change the term to something else a bit more HONEST, I would have no problem with them. Until then, any game that claims to be f2p is a scam to me.

 Thats like saying someone handing you a free sandwich is lying about being free because if you felt like it you could have given him $1 to thank him for the sandwich.

You ALWAYS have the option of giving $ for anything. By your logic, absolutely nothing is free because you could out of the kindness of your heart give someone some money for anything they do for you or give you.

Now if you were to grow up a bit, not be so narrow minded, and actually learn that we have this thing called free will which allows us to pick and choose what we spend $ on and wether or not something is worth the price, you could finally start being honest with yourself rather than trying to blame companies for your (and others) inability to control their own spending and make rational & logical decisions.

I have played both F2P & P2P games for years. If i start a new F2P game and see that their cash shop offers absolutely nothing of value to me, or the price is too high in exchange for how valuable/useful i feel it is for me, then i simply dont spend the $ and go on my way playing the game 100% free. I dont spend a bunch of money and then a month later look at my credit card bill in shock and awe trying to figure out how in the world those ingenious schemers at the MMO company managed to gather my credit card info and get all these charges through without my knowing like so many of the anti-f2p crowd likes to pretend happens.

Btw, a scam would be them lying to you about what is being bought or them having some extra hidden cost for an item that you are purchasing and are unaware of. Scam does not = the buyer being too ingorant or simple to think for themselves.

There is a true story in Perfect World, a boy who lived with his Grandmother got a hold of her debit card and spent her entire month's income on the game so when she went to pay her bills there was no money.  Perfect World verified the problem and refunded the money.  

This is not an uncommon happening.  Don't know what the FTC can do about it though.  

Free to Play is misleading. I don't care to use the model, but I wouldn't ban it but the name needs to change.

Originally posted by Nesrie

Free to Play is misleading. I don't care to use the model, but I wouldn't ban it but the name needs to change.

 Please explain WHY it needs to change.

Can you play the game for free? Yes

Do you have the OPTION of spending money for special things if you want them? Yes, but that doesnt effect the 1st question, hence the optional part. If you stop spending $, you can still play exactly the same as before you started spending $.

Originally posted by kaiser3282

Originally posted by Nesrie

Free to Play is misleading. I don't care to use the model, but I wouldn't ban it but the name needs to change.

 Please explain WHY it needs to change.

Can you play the game for free? Yes

Do you have the OPTION of spending money for special things if you want them? Yes, but that doesnt effect the 1st question, hence the optional part. If you stop spending $, you can still play exactly the same as before you started spending $.

But the name doesn't reflect that money can enter the picture. If that is a part if it, should the name reflect it? And how bout the fact that you don't get the entire game for free, just some of it.  In that context, the 'game' isn't free to play, just parts of the game, and other parts of that same game cost money to play. Why shouldn't a name that reflects the pricing nature of the game reflect the true nature of that pricing structure?

Originally posted by Paradigm68

Originally posted by kaiser3282

Originally posted by Nesrie

Free to Play is misleading. I don't care to use the model, but I wouldn't ban it but the name needs to change.

 Please explain WHY it needs to change.

Can you play the game for free? Yes

Do you have the OPTION of spending money for special things if you want them? Yes, but that doesnt effect the 1st question, hence the optional part. If you stop spending $, you can still play exactly the same as before you started spending $.

But the name doesn't reflect that money can enter the picture. If that is a part if it, should the name reflect it? And how bout the fact that you don't get the entire game for free, just some of it.  In that context, the 'game' isn't free to play, just parts of the game, and other parts of that same game cost money to play. Why shouldn't a name that reflects the pricing nature of the game reflect the true nature of that pricing structure?

 Thats where you and about 90% of people who complain about F2P are wrong. Have you ever played any F2P game besides LOTRO or DDO?

Those are the only 2 main ones which actually lock CONTENT. The majority of F2P games, the entire game, every single area, quest, character, etc is 100% free. The stuff you spend money on is stuff like faster XP pots, better chances at upgrading weapons, special cosmetic costumes, etc but absolutely nothing that you need to experience any part of the game.

Originally posted by kaiser3282

Originally posted by Paradigm68

Originally posted by kaiser3282

Originally posted by Nesrie

Free to Play is misleading. I don't care to use the model, but I wouldn't ban it but the name needs to change.

 Please explain WHY it needs to change.

Can you play the game for free? Yes

Do you have the OPTION of spending money for special things if you want them? Yes, but that doesnt effect the 1st question, hence the optional part. If you stop spending $, you can still play exactly the same as before you started spending $.

But the name doesn't reflect that money can enter the picture. If that is a part if it, should the name reflect it? And how bout the fact that you don't get the entire game for free, just some of it.  In that context, the 'game' isn't free to play, just parts of the game, and other parts of that same game cost money to play. Why shouldn't a name that reflects the pricing nature of the game reflect the true nature of that pricing structure?

 Thats where you and about 90% of people who complain about F2P are wrong. Have you ever played any F2P game besides LOTRO or DDO?

Those are the only 2 main ones which actually lock CONTENT. The majority of F2P games, the entire game, every single area, quest, character, etc is 100% free. The stuff you spend money on is stuff like faster XP pots, better chances at upgrading weapons, special cosmetic costumes, etc but absolutely nothing that you need to experience any part of the game.

 Wizzard 101 locks you out (lest you deposit x dollars for next hour) of the second "area"  after about 1 hr play,

I very much doubt you have even heard of the majority of F2P games. There are zillions* of them.

Zillions:  A very large unknown number that undergoes major changes on a regular basis.

Originally posted by UsedManatee

My daughter has an ipod touch that she and her little brother play on.  There are parental controls that allow for disabling of, among other things, any purchases.  This is not rocket science, the parents who either do not disable this or associate their CC with their KID'S iTunes account are morons.

This is true. If your going to put this in your child's hands then if you are noob to the whole concept of what the child may or may not have access to ...ASK  and like you did use the parental controls.

On another note.. there are plenty of 8 years old that can figure out this and poof it is gone so as an added safeguard when purchases are being made maybe the phone companies should take some responsiblity and have it so the main holder gets sent a text like someone else suggested for approval or not. Shouldn't be such a difficult task or feature to offer.  I mean truely they are looking to make money and those companies that are targeting the child audience truely don't care about anything but making money.  So investigating and looking into things like this should be done and they should be in turn held accountable for their actions or inactions. Make them care. Yes the parents are responsible, but there are far too many parents out there that have no clue sometimes what they are putting in their kids hands. Just like computers, my son is 15 and he can go to adult sites no problem. There are many areas that need to be looked at and better security needs to be in place. If  a child can get on the internet with their phone they can do the same thing. So wake up partents that think your children won't do such things cause they can do this sometimes without meaning to. Parental controls you say..they can still do that with them in place...do you have any idea how many words are connected to sites like that in a search. Our son was looking up information for a math  project and a site like that came up. My husband went to a site for his class in child education and wow guess what an adult site came up instead. So yea some safeguards and such need to be in place all the way around.

Originally posted by wahala99

Originally posted by kaiser3282

Originally posted by Paradigm68

Originally posted by kaiser3282

Originally posted by Nesrie

Free to Play is misleading. I don't care to use the model, but I wouldn't ban it but the name needs to change.

 Please explain WHY it needs to change.

Can you play the game for free? Yes

Do you have the OPTION of spending money for special things if you want them? Yes, but that doesnt effect the 1st question, hence the optional part. If you stop spending $, you can still play exactly the same as before you started spending $.

But the name doesn't reflect that money can enter the picture. If that is a part if it, should the name reflect it? And how bout the fact that you don't get the entire game for free, just some of it.  In that context, the 'game' isn't free to play, just parts of the game, and other parts of that same game cost money to play. Why shouldn't a name that reflects the pricing nature of the game reflect the true nature of that pricing structure?

 Thats where you and about 90% of people who complain about F2P are wrong. Have you ever played any F2P game besides LOTRO or DDO?

Those are the only 2 main ones which actually lock CONTENT. The majority of F2P games, the entire game, every single area, quest, character, etc is 100% free. The stuff you spend money on is stuff like faster XP pots, better chances at upgrading weapons, special cosmetic costumes, etc but absolutely nothing that you need to experience any part of the game.

 Wizzard 101 locks you out (lest you deposit x dollars for next hour) of the second "area"  after about 1 hr play

 Ah, i wasnt aware they did that with Wiz. IIRC it wasnt always like that, I havent played since like a month after it launched.. Well in the cas eof Wizard 101, then yeah the F2P title is pretty misleading. Im speaking from the dozens of them iv eplayed ove rthe years though. The whole locked content thing USED to be sort of the norm, but the developers learned that they could actually bring in more profit by leaving all of the content unlock and just adding in optional things instead.

I definitely dont agree with locked content, and in the case of DDO and LOTRO there are other ways to unlock it without paying $. But in the case of Wizard 101, if theres not an alternative to paying $ for that content, then yeah it definitely shouldnt be called F2P, it sounds more like some sort of rental.

When I speak of F2P im speaking more along the line sof games like RFO, Rappez, FLYFF, DOMO, Atlantica, SOTNW, etc where people play for months/years without having to spend a dime while others are constantly spending money by their own choosing to level faster, have better equipment, etc but none of it required to play. And believe it or not I actually have played perhaps not the majority of F2Ps (yes i know theres tons of them), but i have played way more than the average F2P player. Ive spent most of my gaming time the past couple years, other than 1 or 2 P2Ps that i play consistently, testing out a new F2P every few weeks just to see whats out there and ive seen a wide variety of systems for the F2P setup.

Originally posted by kaiser3282

Originally posted by Paradigm68

Originally posted by kaiser3282

Originally posted by Nesrie

Free to Play is misleading. I don't care to use the model, but I wouldn't ban it but the name needs to change.

 Please explain WHY it needs to change.

Can you play the game for free? Yes

Do you have the OPTION of spending money for special things if you want them? Yes, but that doesnt effect the 1st question, hence the optional part. If you stop spending $, you can still play exactly the same as before you started spending $.

But the name doesn't reflect that money can enter the picture. If that is a part if it, should the name reflect it? And how bout the fact that you don't get the entire game for free, just some of it.  In that context, the 'game' isn't free to play, just parts of the game, and other parts of that same game cost money to play. Why shouldn't a name that reflects the pricing nature of the game reflect the true nature of that pricing structure?

 Thats where you and about 90% of people who complain about F2P are wrong. Have you ever played any F2P game besides LOTRO or DDO?

Those are the only 2 main ones which actually lock CONTENT. The majority of F2P games, the entire game, every single area, quest, character, etc is 100% free. The stuff you spend money on is stuff like faster XP pots, better chances at upgrading weapons, special cosmetic costumes, etc but absolutely nothing that you need to experience any part of the game.

But all that stuff you mention is part of the game. You may not care about or value it, or think it is meaningless but it IS part of the game. And its not free.

Originally posted by Paradigm68

Originally posted by kaiser3282

Originally posted by Paradigm68

Originally posted by kaiser3282

Originally posted by Nesrie

Free to Play is misleading. I don't care to use the model, but I wouldn't ban it but the name needs to change.

 Please explain WHY it needs to change.

Can you play the game for free? Yes

Do you have the OPTION of spending money for special things if you want them? Yes, but that doesnt effect the 1st question, hence the optional part. If you stop spending $, you can still play exactly the same as before you started spending $.

But the name doesn't reflect that money can enter the picture. If that is a part if it, should the name reflect it? And how bout the fact that you don't get the entire game for free, just some of it.  In that context, the 'game' isn't free to play, just parts of the game, and other parts of that same game cost money to play. Why shouldn't a name that reflects the pricing nature of the game reflect the true nature of that pricing structure?

 Thats where you and about 90% of people who complain about F2P are wrong. Have you ever played any F2P game besides LOTRO or DDO?

Those are the only 2 main ones which actually lock CONTENT. The majority of F2P games, the entire game, every single area, quest, character, etc is 100% free. The stuff you spend money on is stuff like faster XP pots, better chances at upgrading weapons, special cosmetic costumes, etc but absolutely nothing that you need to experience any part of the game.

But all that stuff you mention is part of the game. You may not care about or value it, or think it is meaningless but it IS part of the game. And its not free.

Do you understand what the word optional means? You are NOT required to buy ANY of those things to PLAY the game. It is Free 2 Play, not Free 2 be the best and have every item in the game.

Complaining that you have to pay for things that ar enot required to access any of the content in the game is akin to complaining you got a free car, but decided you wanted some nice shiny rims and a deafening sound system (both optional) and they wouldnt give those to you free too.

Be careful what you wish for.  Typically if you let the government stick their toe in the door they will kick it open and be eating Cheetos on your couch before you know it ;-)

Originally posted by kaiser3282

Originally posted by Paradigm68

Originally posted by kaiser3282

Originally posted by Paradigm68

Originally posted by kaiser3282

Originally posted by Nesrie

Free to Play is misleading. I don't care to use the model, but I wouldn't ban it but the name needs to change.

 Please explain WHY it needs to change.

Can you play the game for free? Yes

Do you have the OPTION of spending money for special things if you want them? Yes, but that doesnt effect the 1st question, hence the optional part. If you stop spending $, you can still play exactly the same as before you started spending $.

But the name doesn't reflect that money can enter the picture. If that is a part if it, should the name reflect it? And how bout the fact that you don't get the entire game for free, just some of it.  In that context, the 'game' isn't free to play, just parts of the game, and other parts of that same game cost money to play. Why shouldn't a name that reflects the pricing nature of the game reflect the true nature of that pricing structure?

 Thats where you and about 90% of people who complain about F2P are wrong. Have you ever played any F2P game besides LOTRO or DDO?

Those are the only 2 main ones which actually lock CONTENT. The majority of F2P games, the entire game, every single area, quest, character, etc is 100% free. The stuff you spend money on is stuff like faster XP pots, better chances at upgrading weapons, special cosmetic costumes, etc but absolutely nothing that you need to experience any part of the game.

But all that stuff you mention is part of the game. You may not care about or value it, or think it is meaningless but it IS part of the game. And its not free.

Do you understand what the word optional means? You are NOT required to buy ANY of those things to PLAY the game. It is Free 2 Play, not Free 2 be the best and have every item in the game.

Complaining that you have to pay for things that ar enot required to access any of the content in the game is akin to complaining you got a free car, but decided you wanted some nice shiny rims and a deafening sound system (both optional) and they wouldnt give those to you free too.

What you refuse to understand is that the name 'pay to play' is not a complete description of the subscription model being used. Whether its optional or not, the entire game being offered is not free.