Simple question inspired by the "Free players get what they deserve" thread.

I'll weigh in on this one. No they do not. 

I would say yes, they have the right to complain. What they do not have is an expectation of satisfaction for their complaint.

Speach is free, solutions to problems are not. You get what you pay for. If you are not paying then you get the right to the free speach, since it is free, but you don't have a right to the solution in a timely manner. Paying customers are always served first.

Usually feedback, message board access, in game support and what not in F2P games doesn't open up until people become paying members in one form or another.

So this is a stupid argument.

Originally posted by Quaiden

I would say yes, they have the right to complain. What they do not have is an expectation of satisfaction for their complaint.

 

Speach is free, solutions to problems are not. You get what you pay for. If you are not paying then you get the right to the free speach, since it is free, but you don't have a right to the solution in a timely manner. Paying customers are always served first.

+1

Originally posted by 3-4thElf

Usually feedback, message board access, in game support and what not in F2P games doesn't open up until people become paying members in one form or another.

So this is a stupid argument.

Name a single game in which this is the case.. I can't come up with any.

Originally posted by Zooce
Valid critisim is valid no matter who utters the words.

+1

It shouldn't matter if you are a paying player if your criticism is valid. However, "complaining" is pretty much always ignored regardless of how much money you spend on a game.

---

Originally posted by Abuz0r
Free players always complain,  they have to realize they're only there to entertain the actual customers

---

Originally posted by Quaiden

Originally posted by 3-4thElf

Usually feedback, message board access, in game support and what not in F2P games doesn't open up until people become paying members in one form or another.

So this is a stupid argument.

Name a single game in which this is the case.. I can't come up with any.

DDO and LotRO are two. Any of the SEO games including DCUO has a similar system set up. Even the Korean F2P games like TERA do this.

Subscribers have fewer rights to complain...there werent enough of them for the company so they went F2P to targert a NEWER LARGER AUDIENCE.

The F2P market is larger and can generate more money.

Not to mention the FACT that most subscribers are blind as a bat fanboys that feels its better to HIDE what is wrong with the game than help the company SEE IT, FIX IT, and bring in MORE PLAYERS...most subscribers HURT games more than help. Guess thats why game makers like Raph Koster has been telling the industry to ignore the players, the players like to be told by the company what it is they like and instead listen to the people that DONT play their game to learn how to draw them in.

Right?

People complain about anything if there is a forum, anyway. Who is going to enforce this "right" or the "lack of"?

Discussing a right without any enforcement mechanism is just ... moot. So what if we vote and "decide" that they don't have the right to complain. What are you going to do? Hunt those who complain down, and ask them sign an agreement not to do so again?

No such thing as "free". Your freedom of speech is paid for by those that serve and died in our military that protect you and your freedoms. And in most cases freedom of speech has its limits. Try going into court and telling the judge you can say what you want because you have freedom of speech and see how long it takes before you are in the county jail for contempt. 

Its Subscription free option, not really 100% free. You are not contributing anything to the developement, upkeep, and success of said game. If i were to move in with you and start telling you what to do and how to do it in your own home, and i pay no bills or rent............ how long before you boot me out?

Sure people have the right to voice issues with a game, but trying to change it, have less restrictions, and make it easier for them over paid customers....no. To voice concern over bugs, the gameplay, and free content.... yes.

You dont have "rights" in video games, you waivered that once you signed their agreement to play.

Originally posted by Onomas

No such thing as "free". Your freedom of speech is paid for by those that serve and died in our military that protect you and your freedoms. And in most cases freedom of speach has its limits. Try going into court and telling the judge you can say what you want because you have freedom of speach and see how long it takes before you are in the county jail for contempt. 

Its Subscription free option, not really 100% free. You are not contributing anything to the developement, upkeep, and success of said game. If i were to move in with you and start telling you what to do and how to do it in your own home, and i pay no bills or rent............ how long before you boot me out?

Sure people have the right to voice issues with a game, but trying to change it, have less restrictions, and make it easier for them over paid customers....no. To voice concern over bugs, the gameplay, and free content.... yes.

You dont have "rights" in video games, you waivered that once you signed their agreement to play.

Well said, I like this.

No. 

They are simply the cattle on which the rest of us feed.

Yes they do.

Free players are still consuemrs of the service, they are pretty much essential for F2P model to ever succeed due to providing larger playerbase that fills the game. Games convert to F2P form subscritpion based in part due to the fact that the game's population becomes so small it's hard for paying members to do anything other than solo content, free players are the meat. 

Another reason is the fact that each free player is potential spender at some point. If the free player feels like he is treated way worse than paying member and the free part of the game is significantly limited there is good chance they won't stick around long enough to even consider spending money on either convinience or vanity stuff. 

The whole idea of good F2P system is to find thtat delicate balance that gives noticeable boost for paying members while still offering neough of the game for the free players for them to want to invest some money eventually. Ignore then and youloose them forever. Simple as that. 

A free player enters a game, enjoys the game well enough, but is on the fence about the idea of paying for the product itself, or purchasing items from the in game store.  Free player voices his/hers ideas/concerns on the forums, or in game and is met by a community that respond with the vapid belief that "free players don't matter".  The developers of the game are of the mindset that the community is corrent.

Company loses possible income do to the vapid belief that "free players don't matter".

Originally posted by 3-4thElf

Originally posted by Quaiden

Originally posted by 3-4thElf

Usually feedback, message board access, in game support and what not in F2P games doesn't open up until people become paying members in one form or another.

So this is a stupid argument.

Name a single game in which this is the case.. I can't come up with any.

DDO and LotRO are two. Any of the SEO games including DCUO has a similar system set up. Even the Korean F2P games like TERA do this.

Interesting. I have played all of those games.. I have not paid for any of them. I am able to log into the forums and create tickets to support and have on both DDO and LotRO.