Originally posted by AlBQuirky

 

---

Originally posted by Loktofeit

---

Originally posted by Ichmen
a quality f2p title will allow you to play fully without paying a dime.

---

Can you explain the business model in that scenario?

---

But I thought only a handful of players actually "paid" anything in most F2P games. They counted on "whales" to support the games. Is this not true? Are you suggesting that all these "I don't pay a cent!" posts about F2P games are just hyperbole?

Well, AlBSnarky, how do the 10% and the 1% pay money if there's no cost for anything?  He presented a scenario that seemed to have no payment model. I was asking what he was considering for a revenue source, not questioning established practice.

As far as the business model goes... "Vanity Items" seem to be a popular thing pointed to as acceptable in a cash shop. Mounts, potions, "grind eraser items", and the like could also be popular to players. Lots of things devs can create and sell to players :) A player doesn't have to buy the items, but they are there if they feel the need, or a players wants to support the game they are playing.

Vanity items are popular here on MMORPG.com as a cash shop item because they are pointing to the content that they wouldn't buy or that is unimportant to them. Again, I was asking what he proposed for his scenario, not questioning a monetization system that I am more than familiar with. To your point, however, several of those items you listed are regularly contested as 'need' items. Accelerants or boosters being the most common, often presented as the iconinc Pay to Win item.

Technically they are free to play, you dont ahve to pay anything to play the basic game.. but like anyone companies are out to make money not just entertain you for free..

So it should stay f2p i dont like f2p as such as i dont like the idea of cash shops but there we go..

Sorry but F2P sounds good to me, it means you can play the game without spending a dime on it.

Unless we're talking about people under 15 years old, I find it unnecessary to change the term "F2P". Everyone knows these days that F2P includes some sort of limitation or most likely a Cash Shop.

I truly don't see a problem with using the term F2P, everyone knows you can "donate" to them in one way or another and in exchange you can receive certain bonuses/items/gifts as a "Thank you for your donation/contribution kind lady/sir."

Free to play is misleading. The game's publishers are trying to convince customers that they are playing for free, yet at the same time their only source of income is payments made by those people playing for free. But I'm not under illusion that people who like a F2P game, or publishers of that game, would admit that the game is really not free to its players and change the label. To counter this, I propose inflating the F2P -term by using it with every possible game, no matter the payment method and costs, until the term becomes meaningless.

WoW is F2P because once you pay the necessary game, expansion packs, monthly fees, vanity mounts, etc. the game costs nothing else to play. Also GW2 is FP2 because once you pay the box costs and costs of cash shop items the game costs nothing else to play.

''Free to play'' but mostly; ''pay to enjoy''. And in MY experience, f2p usually ends up costing MORE THAN what p2p costs on a monthly basis (ca 15$ a month).

So it should be called: FTP B PTE... ? :P

So, if not f2p, what would you call League of Legends and Team Fortress 2?

Ups...

I guess there ARE f2p games out there done right...

Originally posted by hfztt

So, if not f2p, what would you call League of Legends and Team Fortress 2?

Ups...

I guess there ARE f2p games out there done right...

There are.........they are few in number, BUT there are.

Games with subscriptions are oftern referred to as Subscription, or Sub-based MMOs.

In that vein, I see nothing wrong wtih referring to F2P with Cash Shop as "Microtransaction MMOs" or "MT MMOs"

The freemium model MMOs, like LoTRO, DDO, etc... could be referred to as Freemium.

Something like GW1 or GW2 could simply be referred to as B2P, or Buy-To-Play.

In fact, a lot of those terms are used already. They're just not always used correctly and people tend to throw them around without thought to what they actually imply, such as people calling GW2 "F2P", when it clearly isn't.

I mean, if we want to identify MMOs by their revenue model in that way, it's easy enough to simply refer to what the game's primary means of earning revenue is. Yeah there are "mix-and-match" combinations out there, but each MMO has a model that is its primary one, with other things being there as alternate revenue streams.

And to think I got scolded for saying not everything in the MMORPG genre should be called an MMORPG.  HEH.

To the topic, I think some of the F2P games should be called GCG/GCM (Gated Community Games/Model) or something with Gate in the name.  I say that because a lot of the F2P games don't allow you to play the entire game or have access to end game items unless you pay.  Money is the only thing that opens the gate.

---

Originally posted by Loktofeit

---

Originally posted by AlBQuirky  

---

Originally posted by Loktofeit

---

Originally posted by Ichman
a quality f2p title will allow you to play fully without paying a dime.

---

Can you explain the business model in that scenario?

---

But I thought only a handful of players actually "paid" anything in most F2P games. They counted on "whales" to support the games. Is this not true? Are you suggesting that all these "I don't pay a cent!" posts about F2P games are just hyperbole?

---

Well, AlBSnarky, how do the 10% and the 1% pay money if there's no cost for anything?  He presented a scenario that seemed to have no payment model. I was asking what he was considering for a revenue source, not questioning established practice.

---

Originally posted by AlBQuirky

 

---

Originally posted by Loktofeit

---

Originally posted by Ichmen
a quality f2p title will allow you to play fully without paying a dime.

---

Can you explain the business model in that scenario?

---

But I thought only a handful of players actually "paid" anything in most F2P games. They counted on "whales" to support the games. Is this not true? Are you suggesting that all these "I don't pay a cent!" posts about F2P games are just hyperbole?

 

As far as the business model goes... "Vanity Items" seem to be a popular thing pointed to as acceptable in a cash shop. Mounts, potions, "grind eraser items", and the like could also be popular to players. Lots of things devs can create and sell to players :) A player doesn't have to buy the items, but they are there if they feel the need, or a players wants to support the game they are playing.

I would like to point out that while Aion's F2P model might be great for the consumer it has "proven" to be a poor choice for the producer/distributor.  Another quarter like the one listed in the link provided and I wouldn't expect to see the current F2P model to remain in place for much longer.

http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/08/08/ncsoft-weathers-6m-loss-in-q2/

A quote from the link, "Aion was also blamed for the company's financial woes, as revenues in that title sharply decreased due to fewer microtransaction sales."

Too many fish, not enough whales.

A free to "play" game would mean to have the ability to play the entire product for free. That simply does not exist. Essentially what we have here with the "F2P" model, is the ability to "dip your toes in" for free (or sometimes a wee bit more, woohoo!). It boils down to "free to try". If you desire to actually go for a swim for real, you're going to have to open up your wallet. Bottom line. For my taste, a fair flat rate makes much more sense. This should be a fucking no brainer.

After observing this industry for many years, it would appear that this payment model is simply a symptom of a horribly stagnated genre. There is such a lack of quality fresh ideas and intelligently designed mechanics that few games truly justify a monthly fee anymore. Instead, we have an excess of disposable games that attempt to do nothing more than squeeze the sponge.

It aint pretty, but sooner or later, something's gotta give.

The problem with the use of f2p is that it's not entirely right and not entirely wrong.

f2p games ARE f2p. One can download and play it. However, there are barriers set in place in such a way that players are encouraged to spend a little money to remove them or to make things a bit more sane in some situations.

There is not one f2p game that I know of that one can't download and "play for free". However that doesn't mean that everything is available or that things will progress easily or that all areas are accessible.

It means one can play it for free but run into barriers here and there.

It's somewhat misleading but not entirely untrue.

Originally posted by ajayazir
I like paying for pixels, money needs to go somewhere right!?

When you buy a game you are "paying for pixels".

And when you buy music you are paying for sound waves. Hmmm, and when you watch a movie you are either paying for pixels and/or paying for light waves.

I like PAG. It sounds offensive. Just like most F2P games are.

I think sites like this need to start charging for Original Posts, that would cut down on so much wasted bandwidth.

Originally posted by AlBQuirky

In the truest sense of the term, free to play is just that. One can play the game and not spend a wooden nickel. There are many games that follow this model.

Where the model gets a bad name is from companies that restrict a player until they HAVE to pay something to play.

Wizard101 is a prime example of this. You can play for free as long as you wanted. Unfortunately, in their very linear game, you had to clear 5 areas in the starter zone to advance to the next zone. They locked out 2 of those zones until you paid something for each zone, or bought a sub. Technically, yes, you can play the game for free. You can play the same 3 areas over and over and over for free as long as your heart desires. You can even fill all of your 6 character slots. And play the same three areas over and over and over.

Vanguard, EQ, and EQII are all "free to play" games. You can play through the games without spending a wooden nickel. However, SOE places restrictions on what you can play from the get go. In essence, most of the game is free to play. I happen to enjoy playing Bards. In every one of these games, bard type classes are pay to play. And SOE likes to use the slogan "Free to play. Your way." That is a lie. I cannot play the character (a bard type class) *I* want for free.

As far as I know, Nexon games offer truly F2P games. I have played a few, but not for very long. (None of them grabbed my interest.) I did not run into restrictions in these games. There may be some, I just may not have played long enough to encounter them.

"F2P" is viable term, I think. Unfortunately, it gets abused by too many gaming companies. It ends up with a bad name.

Something I want to add to your examples.  The F2P design where the developers, as the levels progress, begin to throw increasingly larger obstacles at the player to push the player to purchase from the item shop.  A great, old example I saw was XP requirements for the next level.  In the beginning, progression felt fast.  Naturally you run into some slowdown.  Then at some level where the player has typically invested alot of time, the XP requirement skyrockets.  I'm talking ridiculous, multiplied levels of XPs compared to before.  Before that massive jump, XP potions were available, but you felt they weren't needed.  You progressed fast enough.  Then when the increasingly larger mountains of XP requirements begin to take their toll on the player, those XP potions that you need to pay for are looking more and more tempting.  It's like the game slapping a player and forcing them to look at and purchase from the item shop.

Oh, by all means, the game is still technically "free."  You CAN keep playing through the mountains of gameplay obstacles, but if you really want to enjoy the game and not be weighted down by these specifically designed hassles, you need to pay up.

So much for free...