I think you need to find out what players love the most from three different games,FFXI,Everquest 2,WOW.These 3 games have just about every possible angle covered in gaming.

FFXI has a couple features that are automatic winners,their SUB CLASS system and the ability to play ALL class on the same player.The combat system is also second to none,you could implement the Everquest [copied by WOW] design of having tiered/ranked spells,that adds a little extra to the game.I do not believe for a second that grouping is the wrong way to go ,all a developer needs is to implement it properly,so that it does not become cumbersome for the player.The only reason grouping is shun is because players are either lazy or have no patience,you could still cater to them using good grouping mechanics.

Wow is basically a design to achieve advancement through questing and repetitive questing.This is a very important choice to make in the initial game design,especially if you plan on allowing all class to be played on the same player.This is because each time they create a new class they would have to repeat those quests over and over until boredom sets in.

I believe a game should be about enjoying every level,this is done by utilizing fun creative combat and utilizing ideas outside of the box.This would be achieved by making levels extremely slow to gain,after all the purpose is fun and not to see how fast you gain levels.This can be done in several ways ,without getting too creative.This is by using the stop xp gain,designed by Everquest and a combination of FFXI's weapon skill system.In FFXI you not only gain xp for levels but you must gain skill points for your weapon,otherwise it's damage and effectiveness is weak.You could further this by utilizing the same idea for armor as well.

To make a VERY slow level grind work is to have things for players to need/want to do for each level.This design usually fails ONLY because games have nothing to give players at each level other than your basic "next" spell or ability.Some other ideas for level grind are again seen in EQ2.You give mobs the ability to spawn "tiered" mobs.This means that every time you clear a cluster of mobs there is a chance to spawn the "next" higher tier of mob.The end goal is to spawn the highest tier mob for either quest or rare loot.The idea i like is to have drops 'combine"to make a sort of super loot or super drop.This would be done by having individual drops from each level,so players that want to achieve these "super" drops would need to continue to kill at each level.

My idea for a loot table is to implement the idea of turning off XP,so it gives players choice.With xp turned off you have a higher % to reach the best loot table drops.SO when you meet that Boss mob,he can give enormous xp or a better loot table the choice is yours.

To further make a game intuitive is by utilizing a scalable mob system.This system could really get creative ,an idea is to scale the loot table and xp .So say if you solo,the top end loot table starts at 3% and each player up to a max of 6 you add,adds another 2% chance to the top end loot table.Each level a player is over the mobs level,you subtract 1%.Doing the math you can see how it is still advantageous to form a group of 6,yet the ability to solo is still there,this is a design that works for all players.

There is basically too many things from those 3 games to mention in less than a 10 page essay,so you need to fully understand those 3 games and you can create a very good game.

Risk ruins Pug World PvP

So limit the risk, or be forced to deal with limited player base in World PvP.

WPvP is all about numbers. the larger the group, the more epic the battles. Dont mess that up with super high DP. You will scare away most players interested in WPvP

Assuming that you're gunning for a Fantasy based MMORPG, I'll toss out the bare bones wish list of what I'm looking for in my next game to play.

Character Classes - I think the days of single roles attached to a class are done. While the holy trinity of  tank-dps-healer  may take a while to move forward, I believe World of Warcraft took a good step in letting classes choose through specialization with which role they would fill. I think Runes of Magic and Guildwars took it to better places with a main class+chosen subclass system. I also respect Final Fantasy's Sub Job system, so take your pick. Choose a path, but take classes away from the single role "locked forever" thing that Everquest and Aion offered.

Class Levels - I prefer a skill based point system over using the tried and true level system. But if for game creation's sake you MUST go with having classes advance through leveing, take a note from Final Fantasy Online and City of Heroes. Both games allow players of higher and lower levels adventure together with meaningful rewards for the players invovled for doing so. This is the way of the future. Players will have different play schedules and time to commit to a game, but they will ALWAYS want to play with their friends. Enable them to do this via this mechanic, and I promise you that at least 25% of your game's being a success will be assured. If not more.

PvP - Games that focus solely or almost solely on Player vs Enemy play, such as original Everquest and Middle Earth Online have drawn in their fair share of players, but properly thought out PvP brings in the biggest crowd. World of Warcraft had VERY solid ideas involving PvP with early zones being safe and later zones being contested. WoW's Battlegrounds were also pretty well thought of for the time too. Dark Age of Camelot provided much of the same, but really nailed things by including 3 antagonistic player factions. There is NO reason why a modern MMORPG can't cater to both crowds anymore - too much has been learned from past games for this excuse. Three factions seems to be the way to go in my opinion in stirring things up and dealing with faction population imbalance through mechanics that can be applied when players go to make characters on a current server.

Endgame Goals - PvE endgame goals are incredibly simple. Raids. Group risk to gain rewards through coordinated Group accomplishments. Again, Dark Age of Camelot had the idea of PvP objectives being required to be taken and held by a player faction in order to unlock PvE dungeon raid content for desirable rewards, and this hasn't been effectively copied. I don't know why. It did a LOT to help promote a sense of community through several layers with the players in the factions, with respect being given both ways between those who enjoyed PvP and those who preferred PvP play. An MMORPG that allows players to destroy enemy faction towns and key NPC's will probably never see the light of day, but this form of objective system is especially effective in satisfying PvP players in feeling that what they're doing is worthwhile. That the goals are real.

Player Crafting - If the very best loot can only come from the hardest Raids and the most expensive PvP reward system, then allow crafting to fill 2 niches, much like Warcraft provides for. Allow players to make high quality (even if it isn't the extreme top end quality) gear and weapons for the different tiers of leveling up...  and make each profession produce 2 or more DISTINCT enhancement items that can ONLY be gained from tradeskills. Did your character just win a great new sword from a raid? Perhaps slotting gems from the proper crafter will make it that much better, an enchantment from an enchanter will enhance it further, or a Smith might be able to add a final touch of refinement and tempering to have it evolve just one step higher in performance. Mid-game rewards for crafting through the basics, End-game smaller but critical rewards for having put in the work to get there.

Game Performance - Both Warcraft and Aion were built from the core up to work on a wide variety of systems, and while some may put down total graphic appearance on high end machines, they bet on the right horse with that philosophy when it came to making money. Do the same thing. BUT. IRON OUT YOUR GAME BUGS AND ANIMATIONS AND LAG before letting the game take it step into Open Beta. The player community has hit too many dead ends with half-assed finished products making it to game launch when it comes to performance, lag, and how their characters look when they fight. If you played Age of Conan and Warhammer Online at launch, you know what I'm talking about. Players WILL hold performance issues against the company very, very quickly. Make the extra effort.

I would actually rather play an MMO based on something sci-fi at this point, like Shadowrun. Fantasy has been ground into the dirt by everyone else. But if you have to go the fantasy route, I think I kinda do speak for a lot of players with these points. Best of luck.

Make what you want and don't listen to what people want, because people don't know what they want and they will just cause you to fail. It's happened more than once in the past.  

Seriously. Make what you would enjoy. Then take player's advice with a grain of salt, once you make a product they can play.

Originally posted by Gyrus

I think you are approaching this wrong.

Your first step is to decide on your market. Then you can decide what risk is appropriate.
Your OP makes me think you are designing a game YOU want to play... that is more than fair enough and answers many of your questions.

Then the only thing you need to worry about is how many people will like what you like.

There is no 'maths' for what is right.  Many things will factor in including human psychology and the way all the elements of your game fit together.

Having a talented dev team does not impress me.  We have seen many talented dev teams turn out complete dogs lately.

Oh, and don't forget community management.  The instant you formally announce your game and a forum is created (make sure you launch your forum first or you will lose control right there) your community begins to form.  It is that community and those community standards that will carry over into the game.  So, if you allow your forum to be dominated by a bunch of 1337 talking fanbois then don't be surprised when those same people gank and zerg and smacktalk your customers away when (if) the game goes live.

Quoting because it's worth repeating. Very good advice, Gyrus!

 Sandbox style, eh?

I'd consider removing the whole concept of BoE Armor and Weapons, and keep weapons and armor somewhat simple. Just weight and encumbrance that would affect spell casting, movement speed, attack speed, ect. Like an Iron Sword would be heavier and has less chance of glancing blows compared to say a Mythril Sword which would be faster, and lighter. This has a bonus in that it can be melded together with crafting and gathering to create an entirely player run economy, which is one major aspect of sandbox type themes.

Perhaps, since a great many people play to advance their character, the acquisition of power could instead be in the finding/learning of new skills from tomes or enemies or dungeons. Kind of encourage exploration, which I think was a major aspect of Asheron's Call. I spent the majority of my time in AC just running around, taking in the sights, trying to find hidden and out of the way places.
 

Also. Player Created Books. Do Not have a quest journal, instead, allow us to make our own. I used to enjoy reading player works in AC, and the ability to write your own books is a huge boon to immersion. Maps. I do not necessarily like Satellite images for maps. Hand drawn, kind of realistic (based on setting in which satellite could work), or the ability to create your own could be neat.

Quests. Avoid tons of meaningless tasks that pass as quests in modern day MMOs. I'd rather they be quite rare and epic and vague.

In AC I really loved the spell casting system where you had to find how to cast your own spells. I think they may have had too many variables so that it became more of a pain than a boon, but I think the idea has potential if implemented correctly. That is, assuming you have mages.

Just kind of a minor personal thing I've always wanted in an MMO, a Chemist/Alchemist playstyle that was more than just creation of healing pots. I'd like to be able to make Molotovs, explosives, acids, caltrops, ect that have a more offensive orientation, perhaps also require a throwing skill to use effectively. Mabye in more modern/sci-fi incarnations, bio chemistry, and genetic engineering, creation of combat clones, ect.

I'd also like to see an MMO that does away with in combat healing and tanking. But, its more work tbh. If you're interested there is a discussion I linked below about the Holy Trinity. 

And Finally. Genre. Fantasy has been done to death, resurrected, done to death, resurrected, done to death. Sci Fi is getting used more, so you may try something else entirely. I believe there was a Poll on the Mainpage here on MMORPG.com that asked players what kind of genre/setting/theme they'd like to see in a new MMO.

Some threads for reference on what players have been arguing on and wishing for:

Holy Trinity (combat organization): http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/257561/Do-you-enjoy-playing-the-Holy-Trinity-game-mechanic-If-so-how-much.html

Downtime: http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/257681/page/1

Geographical Obstacles: http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/256590/page/1

At your own risk, you can read through debates on Solo vs. Group content here: http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/255852/page/1

What is more Important in an MMO: http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/258002/page/1

They may be some good reads, or some insights you may not have yet gleaned, or possible ideas for your game.  Good Luck. I hope you succeed.

I loved skimming this thread, some great ideas. I am just going to stick to what has worked in MMO’s before, so I know these ideas can be implemented.

Buddy system like CoH.
Realm versus Realm like DAOC.
Combat like AoC.
Power trees like AoC.
The keep system of AoC, but easier to build the borderlands version.
Quests as varied as LotRo.
Classes which feel as natural and complimentary as Lotro before they added two classes.
A tome of deeds and knowledge like in WAR.
Scenarios like WAR’s but with minimum benefits, otherwise people just play the scenarios.
The ability to write on objects like scrolls in game like in AC.
Different languages for different races and a common tongue like in Everquest.
The ability to set up a shop or school like in UO.
Crafting at a complexity level of Vanguard’s.
The diplomacy system of Vanguard.
End game being a mixture of DAOC rvr with AoC style guild keeps and Lotro raids.

 My first thought is an open player-driven economy where 99% of the items in-game are player crafted (the last 1% would be ultra-rares that obviously only a few people in the  game could possibly get

First and foremost I would like to thank everyone who has thus far posted helpful insight.  I will present these ideas at the end of the week to everyone.  They are very interested in what you have to say, in fact we were discussing them last night until the wee hours of the morning.  

On a more personal note:

I absolutly love the energy in this thread.  Keep them coming.  It really energizes the staff to know people have not given up on the genre.

Cheers,

Sal Parvini

One thing I always like in an MMO is an 'epic battle' type of thing, now immediately people think PvP, but PvE can also be combined with this, for example:

PVE:

Every hour or so a group of people can sign up to do one of these 'epic battles' (Maybe 15~20 people ?) then when its full or the recruitment time runs out the players are transported to another map where they have to work together to defeat a common enemy that if they fought alone they would lose. By this I dont mean spawn them, then fight the boss. I mean spawn them in the map and have them work towards a vertain point on the map, killing monsters along the way, then a boss at the end.

This idea has alot of potential as you can get creative, creating things like defensive quests or quests where you have to retrieve an item without killing the boss.

PVP:

Aika is a good example of this from what I've seen, epic battles with many people just having an all out war ! but be creative, team deathmatch gets boring after a while, so objective matches would be fun too.

Originally posted by salardc

First and foremost I would like to thank everyone who has thus far posted helpful insight.  I will present these ideas at the end of the week to everyone.  They are very interested in what you have to say, in fact we were discussing them last night until the wee hours of the morning.  

On a more personal note:

I absolutly love the energy in this thread.  Keep them coming.  It really energizes the staff to know people have not given up on the genre.

 

Cheers,

 

Sal Parvini

Is it just me or does this guy sound exactly like a Nigerian scammer?

Originally posted by Crallzon

Originally posted by salardc

First and foremost I would like to thank everyone who has thus far posted helpful insight.  I will present these ideas at the end of the week to everyone.  They are very interested in what you have to say, in fact we were discussing them last night until the wee hours of the morning.  

On a more personal note:

I absolutly love the energy in this thread.  Keep them coming.  It really energizes the staff to know people have not given up on the genre.

 

Cheers,

 

Sal Parvini

 

Is it just me or does this guy sound exactly like a Nigerian scammer?

 

It is my pleasure to contact you for a business venture which I intend to establish in your country.Though I have not met with you before but I believe, one has to risk confiding in someone to succeed sometimes in life.

We are simply trying to make a great game for you to consume in pleasurable bliss for you personal gain. If you help us now you will be part of a great new experience that will make you rich and famous among all MMORPG enthusiasts. We simply require you to send us a certified check with the sum of $500 attached so we can buy cookies for our hamsters in the server farm. You will get return instantly a certificate of beta test and donation and you can access the beta server hastily. If released the game in the world you will get your $500 investment back and with projected sales of $200 million you also get $1 million profit share.

Please remember to make the check payable to the honorable Master Looter Sir Leeroy Jenkins of Stormwind.

With pleasurable delight and god bless you,

Sir Leeroy Jenkins of Stormwind
Master Looter and King
1467 ND-K Buabodabi

Nigeria

Sidekicking.  Introduced in City of Heroes, I view this as almost required for any new level-based game that gets released.  The #1 complaint of my RL friends who play MMOs is being prevented from playing with one another due to game mechanics (like one player being level 20 and the other 50.)

Sidekicking temporarily raises the effective level of the lower player to the higher one's level, letting both characters fight and advance together.  The sidekick gets the health, damage, and to-hit of a higher level character, but not the abilities.  In a gear-based game, I would imagine the sidekick's gear being amplified as well (so the level 20 strength/constitution helm now gives him the stats it would if it was a comparable level 50 str/con helm.)

Game Performance.  I'll echo this.  Basically one of the reasons behind Blizzard's success long before WOW was to make sure their game ran great on low-end systems.

If players have to upgrade their system just to play your game, your game's cost to them just went from $50 to $450.  That's a big difference.

So the trick is getting artists who are capable of making things look amazing on the tightest of texture/polygon budgets. ;)

Fun Combat.  If combat is the #1 activity players engage in in this game world, it has to be fun.  Choices need to matter and things need to not be repetitive.

If you have talent and programmers on your side, and the budget to work out the kinks, consider a non-standard combat system.  Consider hiring someone with non-RPG combat systems design experience (last company I was with contracted out the combat designer from God of War 2 to help with our combat; it helped alot.)  Make sure you make a combat system consistent with the game you're trying to sell though.  While I tend to enjoy hybridizing RPGs with more playerskill-based genres like FPSes, a big reason RPGs are popular is precisely because much of victory isn't playerskill-based.

Otherwise the safe bet is to build off the existing MMORPG combat model.  There are still plenty of ways to be unique within existing targeting systems; Champions Online convinced a good chunk of players it was "more actiony" simply by making mobs die a little faster, having colorful comic-inspired power bars, and adding a simple realtime block mechanic.

Reactionary abilities are awesome.  Spell interrupts and realtime blocking are both reactive abilities which reward the player for reacting to very obvious enemy states (spellcasting, and power attacks from Champions).  These make players feel clever.

Periodic abilities are also important.  By periodic I mean abilities that are sometimes awesome, and sometimes not.  This may be the 3-minute cooldown that turns you into a raging maniac for 15 secs, or the ability which is only available after certain triggers (after you dodge or crit).  These are the ways combat remains interesting and less repetitive, as the "optimal" ability rotation changes from mob to mob.

Don't implement duplicate abilities.  If two abilities perform the same function, ditch one.  "A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." -Antoine De Saint-Exupery  This quote basically describes the act of distilling the game down to the core of what makes things fun, and not having redundant or unnecessary things mucking up the gameplay.

Originally posted by salardc

 As for the guild system, we have a special "proprietary" allegiance system in mind.  Their will be certain bonuses for fighting with you guildmates.  Playing with your monarch will amplify these bonuses.  Your monarch, in return, gains bonuses for the amount guild members near him/her in battle.  There will be more on this later as things develope.  We are still working on balance issues with steamrolling through areas and pleliminary calculations show me that too much experience can be "passed up" too quickly.  We however, do not want to penelize players for playing with guild members, so efforts are being put into balancing this aspect of game play.

The monarchy system will be a major portion of the game, in regards to NPC city building, PC city/fortification building, crafting abilities and vendors.  More on this later.  Needless to say, it will behoov any guild to protect their king and castle.

   

Oh, now see this is starting to put me off a bit already.  I'm not sure what you have in mind so I'll reserve judgement but I detest any game design which makes me highly dependant on a guild and especially if it's the usuall sort of thing where one guy gets to be dictator for life and if I don't kiss his ass I'm shit outa luck.

I won't create and lead my own guild because I have no desire to do that but at the same time I refuse to be somebodies' flunky / bitch.

You might think this contradicts what I said about wanting grouping to be important again but no, I do want grouping to be important again.  I just don't want it to be in the context of a system which forces me to subordinate myself to the "authority" of another player.

Just to add what Axehilt left out out about sidekicking (what I call buddy system) is that you could level down to a friends level too. This meant that you could play a quest at his lower level. In other words everyone could team with everyone else to do any quest. With the caveat that you need a few levels under your belt for travel powers and to be useful to a high level team.

Mentoring was actually as i remember a mechanic EQ2 introduced.This allowed you to mentor down to anyone in your group,the player you choose becomes your level.Something else SOE did was very unique,when a high level player joined it sort of made everyone an average level of the combined levels,hate was according to this average level.So a 50+30+10=all had level 30 aggro.It meant easier times for the low level but brought the high level down a notch,so that he may not easily waltz through perhaps.

FFXI was the next game to use the mentor mechanic,but where that game failed is,they gave  mentor penalties like no skill ups on weapons.The two games actually had a slight twist to each other,FFXI allowed the use of all your same spells but they were scaled down,EQ2 you had to use the appropriate level spells,no scaling down ,only on gear.

I have said it many times,because i feel not many have yet played EQ2 or FFXI,FFXI is pre WOW and EQ2 was released a few weeks earlier than Wow.Just about every idea thought of to this date has been done in those two games.

Something that isn't 100% Fantasy/LOTR/WoW like would be absolutely lovely.  Sci-Fi/Post Apocalyptic would be good.

Something that works like Pokemon would be my ideal MMO, and it would work so incredibly well.

I think its cool that you're working on a new MMORPG...BUT, one question, F2P or P2P? (free to play or pay to play?) Honestly and I'm sure anyone on here would agree with me on this,If you want your game to be sucessful and have a wide active community you should deffinently start it out as a F2P. Now, I know who ever is on the DEV team for this game is reading this probably going "GET THE F*#% OUT OF HERE!" but, seriously, listen to this and think open-mindly and logically.

There's this new great game that looks like a  VERY well upgraded version of oh,I don't know maybe a game like, "Asheron's call" It's got a huge world to discover,many different types of monsters,weapons,quests and,you can even make your own guild.The game looks very promising.It also costs $19.99 a month to play.While some will be able to afford this cost others,will not. If you release it as a F2P so that EVEYONE is able to play it and slowly for the next few monthes incorporate things that cost money like, varied types of weapons and armor that you can buy, special quests that give you rare items and possibly even sooner or later,start charging to play the game.Now,I know people are probably thinking, "Well, if you're gonna charge for the game at one point or another why not start right away?" And the simple answer to that question would be,If you start a game for free and you have a wide user base and they all love the game.If you start throwing things little by little into the game that cost money true fans of the game would most likely be more inclined to say, "Ya know what? I've always liked this game, I'd like to see it progress further plus, I'll get a weapon with 3000 + hit points on it. Let me get the diamond sword for $10,00" And, after about a good amount of time let's say, 6 monthes to a year. You start charging for the game then, once again the "I've always liked this game.I'd like to see it progress further." Motto comes into play.I honestly think thats where A LOT of MMORPGS make the biggest mistake and end up just killing their own game. "LET ME CHARGE $30.00 A MONTH FOR A GAME THAT SUCKS AND RUNS SLOW AND HAS HORRIBLE GRAPHICS!!" Well,if you had started it out as a F2P even if the graphics were bad but, you had a good storyline you'd have a bigger community saying this should happen to the game or this quest should be added here or this feature should be included so that your community stays happy and active.I mean I used to play a text/browser based MMORPG called ruletheseas.com the game is free to play (obviously) and it has a community of close to 500,000 players but,they sell in game weapons and ships and points and all for anywhere from 5-500 bucks a purchase and the thing is that, PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY BUYING THEM!!! So,that just goes to show you that if a FREE TEXT BASED/BROWSER BASED game is makin good money if, you made a game like "Asheron's call" with better graphics and pretty much let the community do what they want by that i mean, add good features(EX:Create your own guild) and even if you just started it out as a F2P and then later on made it a P2P just imagine what kind of game you could create.

But,that's just my good ole' dreamers opinion....

Originally posted by KingScar

I think its cool that you're working on a new MMORPG...BUT, one question, F2P or P2P? (free to play or pay to play?) Honestly and I'm sure anyone on here would agree with me on this,If you want your game to be sucessful and have a wide active community you should deffinently start it out as a F2P. Now, I know who ever is on the DEV team for this game is reading this probably going "GET THE F*#% OUT OF HERE!" but, seriously, listen to this and think open-mindly and logically.

There's this new great game that looks like a  VERY well upgraded version of oh,I don't know maybe a game like, "Asheron's call" It's got a huge world to discover,many different types of monsters,weapons,quests and,you can even make your own guild.The game looks very promising.It also costs $19.99 a month to play.While some will be able to afford this cost others,will not. If you release it as a F2P so that EVEYONE is able to play it and slowly for the next few monthes incorporate things that cost money like, varied types of weapons and armor that you can buy, special quests that give you rare items and possibly even sooner or later,start charging to play the game.Now,I know people are probably thinking, "Well, if you're gonna charge for the game at one point or another why not start right away?" And the simple answer to that question would be,If you start a game for free and you have a wide user base and they all love the game.If you start throwing things little by little into the game that cost money true fans of the game would most likely be more inclined to say, "Ya know what? I've always liked this game, I'd like to see it progress further plus, I'll get a weapon with 3000 + hit points on it. Let me get the diamond sword for $10,00" And, after about a good amount of time let's say, 6 monthes to a year. You start charging for the game then, once again the "I've always liked this game.I'd like to see it progress further." Motto comes into play.I honestly think thats where A LOT of MMORPGS make the biggest mistake and end up just killing their own game. "LET ME CHARGE $30.00 A MONTH FOR A GAME THAT SUCKS AND RUNS SLOW AND HAS HORRIBLE GRAPHICS!!" Well,if you had started it out as a F2P even if the graphics were bad but, you had a good storyline you'd have a bigger community saying this should happen to the game or this quest should be added here or this feature should be included so that your community stays happy and active.I mean I used to play a text/browser based MMORPG called ruletheseas.com the game is free to play (obviously) and it has a community of close to 500,000 players but,they sell in game weapons and ships and points and all for anywhere from 5-500 bucks a purchase and the thing is that, PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY BUYING THEM!!! So,that just goes to show you that if a FREE TEXT BASED/BROWSER BASED game is makin good money if, you made a game like "Asheron's call" with better graphics and pretty much let the community do what they want by that i mean, add good features(EX:Create your own guild) and even if you just started it out as a F2P and then later on made it a P2P just imagine what kind of game you could create.

But,that's just my good ole' dreamers opinion....

God no, just no. No dumb "item mall" systems with irl transactions, finance it with ads for the sake of game economy!

Yea,that would work to but do you HONESTLY think they'll get anywhere near as much money from ads as they would from selling items? NO exactly I'm not saying i like it but if people want a GOOD F2P game then this is probably that best way so the developers aren't getting screwed over as neither is the community either