Theres one reason I didn't see in the "handbook" but I know its there as I penned it myself.

Real Men P2P

Lets not pretend that F2Pers portray any real semblance of manliness.  Only us big,  strong men pay to play our games.

The comments on this article are highly amusing :3

I just love how if you have a difference of opinion from someone on this site you're automatically labeled a "hater" by one or more people.  For crying out loud people.....grow the fuck up.  Not everyone is going to agree with your opinion.....ON ANYTHING.  This does not make them a hater.  It makes them an individual with their own opinions.  Maybe their opinions are as strong as YOURS and yet....in opposition.  Live with it.

Richard has purchased [Troll Blade of Doom], cost $5.

Now, if you equip it with your [Cloak of Far-fetchedness], [Loincloth of Propaganda] and [Rags of Intolerance], you will have a complete set!

Originally posted by Rawiz

Richard has purchased [Troll Blade of Doom], cost $5.

Now, if you equip it with your [Cloak of Far-fetchedness], [Loincloth of Propaganda] and [Rags of Intolerance], you will have a complete set!

Absurd! We all know it's missing the "Monocle of narrowed vision" in that set.

Originally posted by mrw0lf

Does this guy talk about anything else? As a fully paid up 'F2P Hater Handbook' member I post far less on the subject than him. One might almost feel there is an alterior motive at work, "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."

Wait... the guy that's on staff specifically to write The Free Zone column about Free to Play...  he's writing about Free to Play in each article?

That's craziness!

Spending real money in what is called by that games developers as a F2P game is totally contrary. Drop the "free" part as part of the marketing scheme and maybe some of the saner among us will come onboard. Until then, F2P is nothing but a scam. Unfortunately, many still don't WANT to believe that.

Maybe if the majority of F2P games where actually good more people would like them, you don't see as many people hating Lord of the rings online as those endless repetitions of the same Korean clone.

Originally posted by Gruug

Spending real money in what is called by that games developers as a F2P game is totally contrary. Drop the "free" part as part of the marketing scheme and maybe some of the saner among us will come onboard. Until then, F2P is nothing but a scam. Unfortunately, many still don't WANT to believe that.

Beliefs... now that's a good place to go. Let's run with that.

• Not every F2P games sells items that you need in order to progress.
• Few F2P MMOs make the claim that the entire game is free.
• Not every F2P is PvP, so 'paying for advantage over other players' is an odd argument when players aren't competing.
• The majority of F2P gamers pay absolutely nothing the entire time they play the game.
• F2P games add regular content for both free players and paying players - there is no charge for expansions.
• F2P games are digital download, offering their players the ability to try the game for as long as thy want before they opt to spend a single cent on the game.

This is where what people WANT to believe really comes into play. You do not WANT to believe those things, therefore you dismiss them as false, yet you accuse others of the same behaviour you display. You will not accept any of those things, despite the inability to present any data to refute them.

This is where the argument is at an impasse. It is not on the side of people who accept F2P as an opton for gaming, but on the other side, where arguments are fueled by unsupported talking points, insults and personal attacks against those who do not buy into what those who dislike the F2P business model WANT to believe.

Originally posted by Caskio

Reading the replies to RIchard's articles is 1 of the most entertaining things on this site.  I do have to agree with Richard, though.  I do see too many people stereotyping any kind of Free 2 Play game as Pay 2 Win irregardless if said Win can be earned without paying, it just takes a lot longer to acquire.

oh, thats quite right, but lets try this:

'f2p' is the future of mmorpgs ->  more and more casual gamers are playing mmogs -> casual gamers don't have the time to grind 50 hrs a week to keep up with those, who spend 50$ a month -> players don't want to spend 50$ a month for a game if they can get the same in return with a 'p2p' game -> casual gamers will stay away from 'f2p'.

its a summary you can get from reports so its based on research. i used 'f2p' as term twice, but both times its based on diffrent context, empiric economical data and definition:

1) 'f2p' is the future of mmorpgs = high quality games with 'unlimited but restricted trial time which are offering a premium subcription model based on monthly fee' are the future of mmorpgs

2) casual gamers will stay away from 'f2p' = more and more gamers with an average playtime of 2 hrs a day stay away from original designed free to play open world mmorpgs with an cashshop

i guess you can all see the problem with definition! and, to be honest, you can split it up much more and worst.

before dungeons & dragons online came up with a - at this time - new subscription model, 'f2p' was used only for the as 'f2p' original designed games. nowadays 'f2p' is a term used in 'bullshit bingo', a marketing phrase, it can mean anything or nothing at all like win/win situation, synergistic productive or consumer orientated.

sure, its easier for us to use the term 'f2p' and to expect that everyone know what we are meaning, but from a writer, a writer on one of the biggest mmorpgs websides of the world, i personally expect more ... at least an open mind and the will to see and explain the difference between things.

The only thing more amusing than the article are most of the above replies.

*munches popcorn*

Originally posted by gaeanprayer

The only thing more amusing than the article are most of the above replies.

*munches popcorn*

I think this claim of having popcorn right now is false. I call shennanigans.

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by mrw0lf

Does this guy talk about anything else? As a fully paid up 'F2P Hater Handbook' member I post far less on the subject than him. One might almost feel there is an alterior motive at work, "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."

Wait... the guy that's on staff specifically to write The Free Zone column about Free to Play...  he's writing about Free to Play in each article?

That's craziness!

The problem isn't that he writes about F2P games in his articles. It's that his articles take an extremely skewed and non-objective look at F2P games.

His articles don't offer anything of substance, they just serve as F2P propagandist pieces where he does nothing but praise F2P, without bothering to critically analyze the entire issue, both positives and negatives. Not only that, but he has on several occasions over several of his articles, made accusations that people who dislike F2P are narrow minded. Yet when he does this, he completely ignores any and all valid concerns, criticisms, and opinions as to why people prefer non-F2P models.

Was there actualy some sort of article here?

I believe the key word search for this peice would be *Ad Hominem*

If I read a regular column on "fly fishing", I expect to see articles on fly fishing gear, places to fly fish, fly fishing techniques and developments of interest to fly fishermen. I would it think it odd if every other article I read was nothing more then a rabid defence of fly fishing and an attempt to cast dispersion upon those who find it distastefull.

Finally...it's been a long time since my college journalism class....but I distinctly remember that journalism was supposed to involve something about reporting, facts and *gasp* an attempt at objectivity. I don't remember much in there about advocacy. Perhaps this is what they call New Journalism (tm) ?  Oddly I can't discern much difference between it and what we used to call PR.

if Lotro is any indication of what the rest of the industry is moving towards i say go for it! I love the games present model. I subed at the beginning of the game i don't now because it's unnecessary and i am doing just fine. 

Keep Chanting the "F2P is Pay to Win" Mantra = completely false notion. one cannot buy gear in Lotro and as far as im concerned it has been the most successful model.

Never Forget to Say "Freemium Isn't F2P" = false, you can still level complete deeds etc nothing is stopping you from playing in the Lotro model. sure you can't do some skirmishes or quests in certain zones but it's really not that difficult to achieve levels.

Don't Be Trapped Into Discussing Facts or Opinions = God knows that the facts are terrible things. Apparently that's the new view in everything these days that facts are entrapments designed to keep people from achieving fame for their particular conspiracy theory. The facts about the freemium model are that it's fun, it's honest, and it's the most profitable model thus far, but then again those are facts.

I say that the people who hate the freemium model for games don't really realize it's potential or have never played the model to begin with. I've been playing Lotro for almost 4 years and i have to say if other games that are presently sub only would pick up this model it would allow for multiple games to be played instead of being stuck in a single sub the entire life of an mmo not to mention having money to purchase in-game enhancements for each game i play at different times allowing for progression without a sub, i've never enjoyed Lotro as much as i do now.

I, for one, welcome our new P2P overlords.

Originally posted by Ceridith

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by mrw0lf

Does this guy talk about anything else? As a fully paid up 'F2P Hater Handbook' member I post far less on the subject than him. One might almost feel there is an alterior motive at work, "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."

Wait... the guy that's on staff specifically to write The Free Zone column about Free to Play...  he's writing about Free to Play in each article?

That's craziness!

The problem isn't that he writes about F2P games in his articles. It's that his articles take an extremely skewed and non-objective look at F2P games.

His articles don't offer anything of substance, they just serve as F2P propagandist pieces where he does nothing but praise F2P, without bothering to critically analyze the entire issue, both positives and negatives. Not only that, but he has on several occasions over several of his articles, made accusations that people who dislike F2P are narrow minded. Yet when he does this, he completely ignores any and all valid concerns, criticisms, and opinions as to why people prefer non-F2P models.

Ok, in that light, I can see your and mrw0lf's point here. Hadn't really looked at it that way. Thanks, Ceridith.

Free to play can be both good (League of Legends style) or Bad (Runes of Magic/Allods online style) the problem is in the MMO sector, most Free to play games really are massive cash grabs, the shops are choc full of progression items, the likes of which you will have great difficulty finding in game.  If a game was Free to play and you just payed for content (zones, dungeons etc) that you wanted, or customisation options then I would champion it. 

But while Free to play games are largely about relative cash spent rather than skill or time invested then people will continue to bash them.   Even Perfect World are starting to get this.  The real issue though comes down to greed, F2P games are often truley free to play at first but then they want to push their hand in your pocket to many times the value of a Subscription based game.  The much Vaunted Lotro practically dives into your pockets past level 20.  Its not subtle its not cheap and these costs snowball.

I recently started playing Spiral Knights on Steam, great game at first but then I started looking at the costs involved in progressing a character.  Its Crazy especially when if you BUY an upgrade you dont get to keep it for longer than a month. 

Fact is that at entry level F2P represents more value for money, but if you really want to immerse your self in an MMO, Subscription models from GOOD developers still represent the best bang for your buck.

show me a free to play game where you can engage in 3 end game sessions per week for the same £9 a month a sub game charges and THEN I will say that the free to play revolution is here.

Untill then I treat the F2P arena with the dubious eyes it has earned from me.

Re the above, I do mean MMO's Not MOBAS.

Watching people rage about video games from my computer is quite amusing. Mr. Aihosi, do continue writing articles. The replies are rather hilarious.

On another note-

I'm not quite sure I follow why this arguement sprang up. While advocation of one's opinions can (and in Mr. Aihosi's case, does) sound narrow-minded and somewhat intolerant, it's nothing for a mob to go after. I do realize that many of these people are well informed about what they write about, but seriously, why would you follow a coloumn on free to play MMOs if you dislike the idea? Is it for a free arguement?