| 253 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
7/28/12 12:32:21 PM#241
Originally posted by Torvaldr You must be talking about those Asian Grinders from 10yrs ago that were pay to win.
Everquest, wasn't PayToWin... DAOC, wasn't PayToWin... UO, wasn't PayToWin... SWG, wasn't PayToWin... EQ2 , wasn't PayToWin......prior to becoming a cash-shop driven mess.
Where exactly are you fabricating this information from? 10years ago, up until 2004-2005, you paid a FLAT rate of $15/month to be the same as everyone else. If you're talking about ILLEGALLY purchasing gold from gold farmers then you disgust me, and that doesn't make a game PayToWin. It means you're a supporter of hackers and exploiters. Lieing won't get you anywhere in a thread like this. The Theory of Conservative Conservation of Ignorant Stupidity: |
|
|
7/28/12 12:33:19 PM#242
Originally posted by madazz That is the point. You do not have any commitment and do not have to stay. That is why i like F2P. And this "staying past a month" is a misnomer. No one is preventing a player to come back month later and play for a week. I do that from time to time. The beauty of F2P is .... 1) FREE .. as research as shown most players don't play a cent 2) No commitment 3) Easy in, easy out. |
|
|
Loktofeit
Elite Member
Joined: 1/13/10
EVE in 2013 - DUST 514, CSM8, Fanfest, 10th Anniversary, Uprising, Odyssey. Gonna be a good year :) |
7/28/12 1:32:26 PM#243
Originally posted by Fadedbomb Lack of familiarity of the subject matter on your part does not constitute lying on someone else's. Third party RMT was extremely big for the size of the market at the time, reaching over $1B/year by 2006, with not only the currency being a popular sale item but entire characters and accounts. Just because it wasn't run by the developers doesn't mean it wasn't an existing issue. Also, in some of the games, it wasn't even against the game rules. There is a difference between acknowledging the presence of something and condoning/supporting it. Your insults and accusations were both unwarranted and unconstructive. filmoret: One thing I have never figured out is why the game devs hardly ever fix simple problems that arise. It is like they don't care about the pvp community. Nitth: What makes you so sure its a simple fix? filmoret: Because most of them are. Sometimes its just changing a number in a code string other times its creating a few variables. However none of them should take over a few hours of coding. |
|
7/28/12 1:59:46 PM#244
@OP With my power as a consumer, when a f2p game comes along that i want to play, I'll check it out. If I can avoid spending money on the game, all the better. If I just can't avoid paying, I'll leave and play something else. No harm, no foul. In the case of GW2, I'll play as long as it's fun to me. If it's fun for a while, I'll buy some stuff on cash shop to say "thanks for this experience". Simple, yes? I'm a semi-budget-conscious consumer and if I can avoid spending money on a game that's no longer fun, I will, and if I have to pay a regular fee to play, then I damn well better play my money's worth and find fun while playing it; lest I waste my game time and unsub. The social aspects may keep me for a time, only if we do fun stuff together. Thus, the game must be fun to play with others and be worth spending my money on the content. Again, simple. I don't understand anyone touting gloom and doom for free to play games. They're free and if the consumer doesn't like their cash shops... they'll leave the game and never spend a dime. Pay to win is what it is, and most reasonable consumers realize it's a bad model and will leave. In the end, it's my disposable income, and I'll spend it how I please. TL;DR It's my money! I'll spend it how I want! Consumer powers activate! PS: I'm not the most inteligent forum poster here, but I try. :) |
|
|
7/28/12 3:39:31 PM#245
Originally posted by Fadedbomb Ease up with the rude insults there Captain America. Which one of those games hasn't required paid contentn updates that would put a player behind the curve if they didn't purchase. Which of those games didn't give an advantage to those bought gold? You don't get to choose what is a valid advantage or not. The fact is that gold buying and rmt did get people an advantage and those game were designed with that in mind. Excessive rarity kept people paying and grinding for the chance to win that prize. Permitted gold farming and bot running allowed players and professional farmers to exploit the game, while the publisher could publically decry the activity, to gain an advantage. You can posture your disgust all the time, but that doesn't change the reality of what was. Calling people liars doesn't prove or support your point, it just makes your post rude. I loved the sub for everything model that Lineage had, but the rest of the P2P world wasn't satisfied with that. They want to charge additional fees in the form of microtransactions (paid content updates, additional fluff items, account fees, etc). Your sub doesn't buy it all and never really has. Now with F2P games you can play the game and spend money as you see fit. If I don't like a F2P model then I won't support it. The model inherently provides incentive to make better games. |
|
|
7/28/12 3:44:02 PM#246
Originally posted by metatronic I have played loads of games and tryed many so called F2P games,tho I have never played a game that realy is free to play. Most of the time the free to playe games are more expensive than subscription games if you want acsess to all content and the good gear. So for now I stay avay from F2P.
|
|
|
7/28/12 6:13:34 PM#247
Originally posted by nariusseldon So basically you have no idea what the OP was trying to articulate? Your graphs proved nothing at all, and as mentioned by another poster hardly relate as well. Oh well, enjoy the mass of F2P sub-quality games heading your way that you won't last in for long. As I still firmly believe, things will get better after they get worse. It's just an industry trend.
Heck, the US automakers had to learn the hard way. Now its the game industries turn. This time Indie developers will be the imports lol. |
|
|
7/28/12 6:31:41 PM#248
Originally posted by metatronic I lol'd. Certainly, I am no fan of games converting from subscriptions to F2P models. I enjoyed LotRO way back in the day before it's expansions, but not after it was diced up into tiny chunks of unlockable content- just not the same experience for me. I think you are foolish OP for turning your nose up at GW2 B2P model. |
|
|
7/28/12 6:45:07 PM#249
Originally posted by metatronic One point you make that I can agree with "nothing is free" but having said that you may as well have made a post about how we all need to realize the sky is blue. I don't think there are many people out here who don't realize the devs WANT us to put money into the game but I'm having a hard time connecting how that is forcing anyone to do that a free to play game is free to play unless you want to "insert item,function here". The end result still is you either find the game worth the money you invest in it or you don't. the problem with ideas like yours is you somehow assume we are more sheep than you are and will simply give away money without considering whether we personally feel the investment is worth it and I don't see anything that shows you as more intelligent than me or any of the other people who frequent this site including those who support free to play games. At 15.00 a month the standard sub based game costs close to two hundred dollars a year maybe people who support free to play games should start bitching and moaning about why we are out here paying 60.00 bucks for a box and then close to 200.00 a year for it? We get it you don't feel you are strong enough to indulge in games like LOTRO without being drawn into spending more than that 200.00 a year but who are you or anyone else for that matter to tell other people they are equally as weak willed? |
|
|
7/28/12 10:48:03 PM#250
Originally posted by Loktofeit
http://thallians.blogspot.com/2010/10/lotro-gets-expensive.html
http://forums.lotro.com/showthread.php?387714-Legacy-Tier-Scrolls-are-too-expensive...
http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=242114
https://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=382556&page=3&langid=2
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=308521
http://berserkerkitten.blogspot.com/2012/02/sto-pwe-wtf.html
I've seen countless legitimate threads over and over, for years. Those above are just after a 2 minute google search. I think it makes sense that the people who pay more money in STO, DDO, and Lotro have a small (sometimes significant) advantage over people who don't pay anything at all. That is a trade off in F2P games. You wouldn't have thread after thread of people complaining about players being able to buy gear, items, abilities, or other perks that give them an advantage in these game's forums and on blogs.
Yes, it's this is a business. These companies have to make money to keep the game alive. Are they going to put an item, ability, or perk in the shop that's convenient and quicker to get by buying in the shop rather than grinding for it in the game? YES, yes they will. Is it going to be expensive? YES, yes it will. This is what people are complaining about. It's just something that comes with F2P games.
And yes, people in MMOs are competitive with each other. Even with game mechanics that help them to be cooperative instead of competitive, many players will instictively be competitive within these cooperative frameworks. That's human nature in gaming. Just like artists are naturally sensitive about their work, players are naturally competitive about there gear, items, and perks.
We can't pretend that this isn't an continual issue with F2P games in western culture. Eastern gaming market might be different. It might be more socially expected that people who have more money (and thus social stuats) should be able to buy items and have a slight competitive or status advantage vs other players in an online game. I'm not sure it will ever be an issue that western culture gets over though. |
|
|
Alders
Hard Core Member
Joined: 1/28/10
I cannot fiddle but I can make a great state of a small city. |
7/29/12 5:50:28 AM#251
Originally posted by Fadedbomb
The point i was trying to make, that you obviously missed, is that the payment model does not matter. It's how the game's mechanics and economy are built and how they discourage or support "pay to win". Those old games such as EQ, SWG, FFXI, and so on with a player run economy were run by RMT and people supporting it. That's the definition of pay to win. I didn't support it then and i sure as hell don't now. What i am saying is that MMO's are a lot less pay to win now due to the mechanics that take the importance off in game gold and place it elsewhere. This of course excludes all the Korean grinders and is more about the top AAA MMO's. Being on equal footing because you pay a monthly fee is an illusion. |
|
7/29/12 5:53:18 AM#252
yeah im like totally forced to use cashshop for convenience and appearance garbage. |
|
|
7/29/12 10:52:54 AM#253
I think a lot of people here are just delusional, or have a strong case of wishful thinking. It is quite clear that F2P is a trend, and more and more MMOs are going in this direction. And there are reasons why they are popular. It is better for many players because a) you can choose not to pay by giving up some part of the game, and b) there is no commitment. It is better for devs because it bootstrap a player base much more effectively, and on average makes more than a sub model for the same game. |
|