I have a beef with each pay style.

My beef with B2P or subscriptions is that they are usually no better than the best f2p games, but they are usually cheaper.

My beef with f2p games is a lot of them are extraordinarily shallow. The ones that are actually worth playing are outrageously expensive(see EQ2 and SWTOR). Honestly, those two games are not worth a sub fee, but you can't really play them for free(or a minimal cost), either. Both of those games failed to generate enough subs at 15 a month. So, instead the idea was to get more out of the suckers that played.

Originally posted by Rthuth434

Originally posted by lugal
People who claim they feel like they are forced to play every day if they sub to game, do they feel the same way about their internet access? Do they enjoy the unlimited access(bandwith throtling not withstanding) the monthly fee provides? Would they prefer a f2p package instead?

daily internet and phone use is part of our lives if you're not in the third world...this is a stupid question. there's no goddamn question about it becauseyou can't do your work or school work or keep in touch with your friends and family without a phone or internet.

You do not need internet to stay in contact with anybody. THat is why their is the post ofice and the telephone and most basic of all, feet. We choose the internet for the convience. Can we live without the internet, yes we can and most in the world still do. Now, if you can not communicate with friends and family without the internet, seems you have some issues. So, my question is quite valid.

Also, in large parts of the world, people do not have unlimited access to the internet like we do. Even that is coming to an end soon as well. Most cellular caries no longer offer unlimited data, Time Warner is testing a teired internet access system. It will not be long till you have a f2p like internet service. You get TImewarners internet, but if you want to see stuff hosted outside thier network, gonna have to pay.

Originally posted by Vesavius

Originally posted by Torvaldr

Originally posted by Vesavius

Originally posted by Torvaldr

I'm not renting temporary access to my games anymore.  That's the foundation of my move away from sub-locked games.  The money I spent on renting temporary access is basically flushed down the sewer until and unless I cough up more cash.  I don't find value in that payment model.

No, instead people are renting temporary inventory space, temporary mounts, and temporary buffs that make the game actually bearable to progress in.

And let's not even touch on the strong trend of making loot a paid for RNG gamble. Or the pay to achieve factor in buying progression (because in these games,developing your character, even visually, *is* a form of progression). Lets not talk about how they create super transient and non committed player bases that make it very hard to build half way decent communities (and give us ones that usually just end up as a toxic sludge of trolling).

Yeah, cash shops are awesome. The piecemeal breaking up of content to be sold to us for 10 times (or whatever) the price of an expack (which you could also actually, y'know, play) is a fantastic step forward for the consumer.

I find full on value in a sub that allows me to play as much as I like and access all the content in game according to my own achieving (and not the use of my CC).

'F2P' and cash shops have a horrible additional impact on core game design. They are a shady model that hides true cost and one that has an active interest in manipulating it's more gullible and vulnerable players to spend ever more. Folks need to think about the true price of it all before stopping at 'kewl, I saved £10 this month' (because, if they were truthfull, they probably didn't).

Yeah, people can rent stuff in sub-free games too, but I don't support those features financially.  I don't rent stuff from the cash shop in sub-free games either.  I buy things that enhance my account like storage, characters slots, or mounts/items.  I also subscribe and buy premium status.  Like I said I'm subscribed to Tera at the moment.

The difference being sub-locked games only offer rental. Sub-free games offer choice.

I get where you are coming from Tor, but obviously others do feel the need to buy this stuff... Could you drop your sub right now and still feel competitive, or even on par with your subbing guildies, at end game? Would dropping it cause you to eventually just stop playing maybe?  Do many top level payers not sub? How much 'choice' is there in reality?

I haven't logged into TERA recently... how much would, say, a tab of storage, an extra char slot, a mount, and a single outfit cost when added up? Just out of interest. 

One of the problems that grew with me also as I played TERA was that it sells keys to lock boxes as well as rentable stuff in it's pretty overpriced (IMO) shop... keys that unlock chests with vendorable gems that sell for gold, in some cases (diamonds?) a lot of gold. I like a lot about TERA, but this kind of RNG gambling to get loot (a randomised method of gold selling that actually has no set value for your purchase) is a nasty trend in monetisation that I can't support even by playing the game (even though I enjoy it in a lot of ways).

I also get where you're coming from.  I think for some player types the standard p2p or sub works out great.

The perks I like out of the sub in that game are the xp bonuses, gold drop buff, and the 10 key allotment.  The store discount is nice, but I haven't used it yet.  The elite mount is okay too, but I already have a couple nice mounts.

There are things I like and don't like about the Tera cash shop.  The stuff I don't like are the items you rent - mounts and skins - which I think are expensive.  I like that they offer a lot of choice though.  You can rent a skin for a day or week.  You can buy the mount skin for your character or account.  It really does seem to offer payment however you like.

I don't have to buy storage or character slots because I'm a founder.  Honestly I'm an opportunist more than I am a f2p religious zealot.  I saw what I could unlock with the founder purchase before f2p and snapped it up on 2 accounts.  The character tabs and bank slots are what I would consider reasonably priced.  Both a character slot and a bank tab are 495 emp each.  You can buy all three bank tabs for 1395 as a bundle.

I do feel like my sub gives me an advantage compared to when I'll drop back down to regular status.  I feel competitive, or rather able to participate in groups with others at my level regardless of my account status.

The lockbox issue is understandable.  I would rather there be no lockboxes either, but I haven't found them to be an impediment.  I make money from selling them in the AH.  I make money from them by selling the gems or items they drop.  Some stuff was useful but nothing I remember.  I know I don't and won't buy keys, but I will use the keys I get from my elite package and from events.

That all aside.  What I like is that I can drop into STO and do DOFF missions for a bit and then hop into Tera and farm mobs.  If I don't feel like doing that I can play GW2 or TSW.  I rotate through games and play them until I need a change.  The sub-free option allows me to do that how I like.

Originally posted by lugal

Originally posted by Rthuth434

Originally posted by lugal
People who claim they feel like they are forced to play every day if they sub to game, do they feel the same way about their internet access? Do they enjoy the unlimited access(bandwith throtling not withstanding) the monthly fee provides? Would they prefer a f2p package instead?

daily internet and phone use is part of our lives if you're not in the third world...this is a stupid question. there's no goddamn question about it becauseyou can't do your work or school work or keep in touch with your friends and family without a phone or internet.

You do not need internet to stay in contact with anybody. THat is why their is the post ofice and the telephone and most basic of all, feet. We choose the internet for the convience. Can we live without the internet, yes we can and most in the world still do. Now, if you can not communicate with friends and family without the internet, seems you have some issues. So, my question is quite valid.

Also, in large parts of the world, people do not have unlimited access to the internet like we do. Even that is coming to an end soon as well. Most cellular caries no longer offer unlimited data, Time Warner is testing a teired internet access system. It will not be long till you have a f2p like internet service. You get TImewarners internet, but if you want to see stuff hosted outside thier network, gonna have to pay.

We use our internet and mobile phones daily.  They are part of how our family functions.  You could take your analogy all the way: you don't need cars or restaurants or civil services or utilities.

The fact is I do use my internet everyday.  If I had an expensive internet package and didn't use it often I would drop it or choose a cheaper package.  I'm subbed to Tera for the time being.  I do feel like a good use of my money is to focus on that game while I'm spending extra on it.  If I'm subbed to a game and don't play it actively I do feel like I've wasted money I could have spent better elsewhere.

Originally posted by Torvaldr

Originally posted by lugal

Originally posted by Rthuth434

Originally posted by lugal
People who claim they feel like they are forced to play every day if they sub to game, do they feel the same way about their internet access? Do they enjoy the unlimited access(bandwith throtling not withstanding) the monthly fee provides? Would they prefer a f2p package instead?

daily internet and phone use is part of our lives if you're not in the third world...this is a stupid question. there's no goddamn question about it becauseyou can't do your work or school work or keep in touch with your friends and family without a phone or internet.

You do not need internet to stay in contact with anybody. THat is why their is the post ofice and the telephone and most basic of all, feet. We choose the internet for the convience. Can we live without the internet, yes we can and most in the world still do. Now, if you can not communicate with friends and family without the internet, seems you have some issues. So, my question is quite valid.

Also, in large parts of the world, people do not have unlimited access to the internet like we do. Even that is coming to an end soon as well. Most cellular caries no longer offer unlimited data, Time Warner is testing a teired internet access system. It will not be long till you have a f2p like internet service. You get TImewarners internet, but if you want to see stuff hosted outside thier network, gonna have to pay.

We use our internet and mobile phones daily.  They are part of how our family functions.  You could take your analogy all the way: you don't need cars or restaurants or civil services or utilities.

The fact is I do use my internet everyday.  If I had an expensive internet package and didn't use it often I would drop it or choose a cheaper package.  I'm subbed to Tera for the time being.  I do feel like a good use of my money is to focus on that game while I'm spending extra on it.  If I'm subbed to a game and don't play it actively I do feel like I've wasted money I could have spent better elsewhere.

You do not need returants, you can cook. FOr first world standard of lviing, you do need civil services like water and power, but to live, no.

The argument Im trying to show is the falacy of paying a sub and not using it 24/7. People in the USA pay for the internet with unlimited access. Do they use it 24/7? No they do not and no they can not. Just like a sub based mmo. I do nt mind the price for Eve Online, for I know the world will be there when I get home and that certain types fo people are moderated out by the company.

What should be discussed, is what price is fair for the product. The $15 price point probably needs to change in this day and age of numerous choices for MMO's.

I fully agree with everything stated in the original post. I feel pretty much as the author does on the general direction of mmo's. For me if  I like the game enough I'll deal with whatever it's revenue model is I don't really care anymore about arguing which one is better. If the game is good it will get my support but I won't spend real money on vanity items or stuff like xp boosts if the game is boring enough that I want to skip ahead in the leveling process then it's probably not worth playing in the first place.

I do agree with what others have stated about the console games with nonsense like paying an extra $15 to unlock what's already on the disc that I just payed $60 for or for paying an extra $10 for a hat or different cosmetic weapon skin that is total nonsense in my opinion.

"When free-to-play conversions were first touted and attempted"

Must be shooting for a job at a news organization because you sure do love to write without investigating...

F2P has been around since late 90s. Its only new to...newbs.

The pay model was created partly on a LIE and partly on something that hasnt APPLIED IN A DECADE. They created the pay model stating it was to cover the server cost and bandwidth costs...bandwidth costs today are next to NOTHING and the only companies that use outsourced servers are FREAKING MORONS...at the time of the creation of the monthly sub, every single company bought their own servers and ran them, the cost was made up by game sales.

The lie, needs to die. It has already been proven that companies can make a ton of profit with ZERO subscriptions just as it has already been proven that a sub does NOT bring in quality updates to a game...that one has been proved countless times aint that right Funcom fans?

End the lie.

I'll gladly pay $15/mo for a game like EVE or WOW. Not because they need it but because I feel they've earned it.

I tipped $5 once for the guy who stir-fried my dinner. I could've played for 10 days with that money.

The author seem to dislike Lotro "Turbine points" system – and only God knows why. Since I know of 2 games that are fremium at its best. it's Istaria (no cash shop and everyone gets everything) and Lotro (cash shop easily avoidable with few restrictions).

There also some logic errors in the article:

1. No one forces OP to play any mmorpg. No one forces him even to play. And if I play game and have no fun - I just quit it, no matter p2p, b2p, f2p, p2w or else.

2.  Lotro cash shop may be completely avoided.  To make matters worse, many deeds are just doomed for auto-completing, like "Strike enemies with ANC attack for 750 times". Exploration deeds are almost doomed for that too and I am not talking about quests: any area does have >40-70 quests.

3. Lotro is not a charitable game: pay what you wish, donate if you wish. WIkipedia does live for such requests...not online games. It offers very simple model: basic areas and quests/deeds are free for everyone, subscriber or not. Some 'advanced" areas are free for subscribers only. And yet some, like Moria, Rohan - are purchasable for everyone who has enough Turbine points or cash. A customer does gain privileges in Lotro: already mentioned bags, fast-travel, no currency cap...and 500 Turbine points monthly.

Yet this is how Turbine rewards its customers. I found it only naturally: if you have paying person, paying person must have certain privileges in freemium game.

Same goes with any other game, from Runescape to SWTOR: if you pay, you have more options. One can blame it or praise it - but the fact is, that paying customers allow game to live. Such like me, free-to-play - just leech resources and should be thankfull to paying customers.

Looks like OP just dislikes pop-ups ("Did you know that Our Store offers Robo Space Chicken Helloween Costume just for XXX gold?") or something like Lotro-like manequins, yet somehow makes conclusion it makes his dollars less valuable.

OP fought the logic and OP has won. Logic retreats...

I see a few posts saying TERA is a good f2p business model.  They may allow players unlimited access to the game but the buffs for subscribing players are huge for the type of game it is. Halved dungeon cooldowns and increased drops within dungeons is massive when the entirety of the measly end game is focused around getting gear from dungeons to +1 your gear, so allowing players to do this much much faster is definitely p2w just veiled because while you get a huge bonus you are not receiving it upfront you still have to work for it a bit. They there is EMP their p2w currency selling the top alkahests and instance reset scrolls, again people say this is fine... seems that they would need to put 100% alks in the shop for some people to finally realize it is p2w.

And the given proof spoken about by some comments here on internet beingm uch cheaper than before via bandwidth used in the games is very true, but then also all other fees related to mmos have gone up immensely. The guys behind skullgirls wanted 150k to release a new character to their game and they got it because they sowed the people what the money was going to, and it paid 10 (iirc) employees 600$ a week (low for software development employees) for 10 weeks, and the rest went to legal/voicework/balancing. And that is a 2d arcade fighter. point is gmes are getting more expensive to make but getting cheaper to distribute.

I agree with the article, there are far too many games, that only differ in name, that have saturated the market making F2P seem so viable.

Interesting article. And coming not so far off the heels of another similar article at GamesIndustry.biz.

The article writer should check out the following

Fearing the Microtransaction Future

Then after reading it scroll down to the comments by lead game designer of Avalance Studios - Andreas Gschwari.

Perhaps our student (Scumbag?) friend (From an ex-game developer & father of three) ought to take a look at the question from a different perspective? 

Many of the games which are healthly surviving at the moment are due to taking on a whole or partial FTP format. Having been a member of these communities who have watched number decline, the influx of new players has changed the feel of the game completely.

Another thing to consider is that, If a game change makes the game unpopular then the response time of the players on a subscription based game will be very slow in comparison to a free to play game. Subscribers tend to hang on hoping that things will change through their loyalty to the developers. In a free to pay game the opposite is true. Players will cease to log on very quickly as the herd instinct takes them away to another free to play.

Finally, as I posted I'm a father of three. While I can afford to give my three kids (Having dad as a programmer means they are all games officianados and avid LOTRO players), I can afford the odd treat, paying for a top rated game for all of them isn't on the cards. Free to play allows me to let them enjoy themselves without breaking my piggy bank, a point which is close to every scumbag student and father of three on the planet.

@Aeolyn "As a consumer and a parent I would just like to state that in my opinion f2p should be classified under gambling guidelines.  "

Have you checked the EULA on some of the games? They do have a minimum player age in them?

But I understand your problem and I would like to see the opportunity to enter credit card details in a one-shot approach.

Most of these account save the credit card details and allow one click sales. The temptation is that a child will use the card either not realising or purposely to get items in a game.

A parent mode would be the answer to that where game credit could be paid in that could be assigned to multiple accounts so that no banking details are present on the childs account.

Perhaps this is something that MMORPG could champion?

Originally posted by Aeolyn
As a consumer and a parent I would just like to state that in my opinion f2p should be classified under gambling guidelines.  

Many will learn their lesson with the shock of opening their cc statement for the first or second time, but for those who have an addiction problem, ie. gambling, these "game" tactics are just dirty and should be legislated just like casinos.  It's one thing to charge $10-20/mo for a service but it's totally another to allow micro-transactions that can easily add up to thousands more for the same product not to mention for a service that is marketed directly at minors.

o.O if you're a parent worth his/her salt you would've thaught your children the value of money from an early age and not left your cc readily accessible if you didn't. It isn't F2P's fault you can't take responsibility for your kids education or their access to your bank account of all things.

Adendum: Using Paypal could very well stiffen any such "gambling" by kids and most F2P games accept Paypal as a payment method, as long as you make sure your password is 12-20 characters long, your kids never find it out and that you set up the payment system in the F2P game right you'll never have an issue with it. Blaming a game for your issues is the same as blaming a movie, a type of music, a book.

Originally posted by Aeolyn
Wow, assume much?  I wasn't talking from personal experience.... just as both a consumer and a parent this is such an obvious gateway to mainstream gambling that I believe it should fall under those guidelines... sheesh.

Again your opinion, most F2P games offer ways to reign in any such activities through smart use of their payment systems, I rather doubt a gambling establishment would offer their vic.... players ways of controlling their spending. Also unlike gambling establishments which take your money (for the most part) without giving anything back most F2P games with such "gambling" features offer some rewards (example: lockboxes in Star Trek Online) you still get something for your investment, it may not be what you wanted but it is something and well... yeah...  http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gambling 1a applies to any P2P game as well and 1b does not apply to F2P games because the outcome is far from uncertain because you know you will get an item you just donno which one ( do note I am making reference here to F2P games which are free to play, not pay to win games or outright scams pretending to be free to play or buy to play, example: War Z).

Originally posted by Aeolyn
As a consumer and a parent I would just like to state that in my opinion f2p should be classified under gambling guidelines.  

Many will learn their lesson with the shock of opening their cc statement for the first or second time, but for those who have an addiction problem, ie. gambling, these "game" tactics are just dirty and should be legislated just like casinos.  It's one thing to charge $10-20/mo for a service but it's totally another to allow micro-transactions that can easily add up to thousands more for the same product not to mention for a service that is marketed directly at minors.

in games that have boxes for sale for cash that contain random items with the possibility of their being a 'rare' item inside, that is imo, the very definition of gambling. It would probably be very easy for someone to get carried away with it, or in the case of a child with access to their parents credit card information you don't need the actual card after all in order to use it when buying things online, then it becomes a bit dodgy, there was after all, recently an incident involving itunes and in game purchases made by a 5 year old child over the course of just an hour or so, that resulted in the child racking up a whopping £1700.00 in charges through in app (cash shop) purchases in a F2P game, itunes refunded the money in that occasion, but it does highlight just how monetised F2P games can be, and the dangers of unsupervised play by minors in them.