Originally posted by gracefield

Originally posted by Witteker

Wow, there are a lot of people who post.

But when a P2P goes F2P, that already means it's not a good model.  It was not designed with F2P in mind.

There are some things that need to be considered for F2P:

 

1.  All content needs to be free.  No charging money for opening up zones or anything like that.

2. You do not sell items that give advantage in game, except for time savings, etc., meaning you sell fluff, like cosmetic, pets, etc.

3. The fluff needs to be also purchasable by game money.

 

So, the game is entirely free to play and the only way the company is going to make any money is by selling cosmetic crap in its cash shop?

Please, never go into business for yourself....

This shows your ignorance.  Above model makes the most money.  It needs to be B2PF2P though.  No subscription but pay for game and expansions.  People who play feel they are obliged to pay money to help the developers.  Play GW2, and you'll see what I mean.

Originally posted by Onomas

Seriously, who the heck cant afford 30 cents a day for unlimited entertainment this day in age? Even going to the movies will cost you 1-3 months in subs lol.

but it isn't .30 a day. I play 5 games currently Wife plays 4, kid plays 4 as well.

that isn't .30 a day it is $3.90 a day. so, lets see 3.90 X 30, that is $117 a month

Lets compare an allocation of $10 a person,

$117 > $30

Yes I'm still spending money, but I'm not wasting $87 that we may or may not be able to play that month.

ok, so lets see, I save $87 a month, for 12 Months, Gee I saved $1044 A year, you know what that buys? My daughter can easily go to a week of camp. I can get my car fixed on most problems and still have money left over. I can go to a movie instead. heck I can RENT a ton of movies instead.

 I can do some improvments on my house instead. I can use it to take my family on a car trip. So many things I can do with an extra $1000 a year. it isn't just $0.30 a day. Mostly because I cannot just pay by a day-to-day basis. If I could just plunk in $0.30 a day on the day's I wanted out of a month I'd have no problem.

This is all EXTRA things I can do instead of sitting in front of a game.

Originally posted by mrrshann618

Originally posted by Onomas

Seriously, who the heck cant afford 30 cents a day for unlimited entertainment this day in age? Even going to the movies will cost you 1-3 months in subs lol.

 

but it isn't .30 a day. I play 5 games currently Wife plays 4, kid plays 4 as well.

that isn't .30 a day it is $3.90 a day. so, lets see 3.90 X 30, that is $117 a month

Lets compare an allocation of $10 a person,

$117 > $30

Yes I'm still spending money, but I'm not wasting $87 that we may or may not be able to play that month.

ok, so lets see, I save $87 a month, for 12 Months, Gee I saved $1044 A year, you know what that buys? My daughter can easily go to a week of camp. I can get my car fixed on most problems and still have money left over. I can go to a movie instead. heck I can RENT a ton of movies instead.

 I can do some improvments on my house instead. I can use it to take my family on a car trip. So many things I can do with an extra $1000 a year. it isn't just $0.30 a day. Mostly because I cannot just pay by a day-to-day basis. If I could just plunk in $0.30 a day on the day's I wanted out of a month I'd have no problem.

This is all EXTRA things I can do instead of sitting in front of a game.

Well your average family doesnt play 13 games at the same time lol. How do you have time as a family with 13 games, work, and other family duties. Thats just crazy. But thats your problem, not everyone elses. We shouldnt have to suffer through F2P garbage just so you can play 13 games. But you are spending 30$ a month, thats still not free nonetheless.

I dont even have time to play more than 1-2 games tops, how the heck do you manage 13?

it isn't that I play that many, it is that I have to PAY for that many if I want the ability to play anytime I want like in a f2p. I do not PLAY 13, I PLAY 5, but wife and kids still come from my pocket.

In order to play a sub game I have to be subbed. that requires a minimum of $15 a month on a month to month basis (not a batch buy). I have some friends that play 1 game, but not others, so If I want to play with my friend Bob for a few days that he has off. I have to be subbed to his game.

Oh wait, my wife and daughter hate that game, so If I want to play with them I have to sub for another $15. Darn, that is already $30 just to play with different people that I want to.

unless you are suggesting that there should only be 1 game that people sub to and damn the rest?

"F2P is not a sell out or bad"

Wrong. (in my mind's eye it is)

"Sell Out" has been defined in the past as giving Players to option to "buy" their way through gameplay or game challange instead of earning it through gameplay ingame in character. All F2P MMOs rely on Cash Shops as a part of generating revenue, and Cash Shops sell not just cosmetics but also advantage, therefore....

Therefore F2P MMOs are indeed "Sell outs" by definition.

and... no matter how you slice it... to me a "sell out" is always bad.

No matter what way a MMO Publisher funds their MMO, I will never agree with buying advantage through a Cash shop. Anything a character gets ingame should only be gotten through gameplay and reward ingame, not through an external means such as a Cash Shop. To me Official Cash Shops are as wrong as third party gold sellers. You want to buy advantage in a "game"? Go play the Stock Market.

It's obvious my ethics system does not match yours, so I imagine we won't agree on much else. I am not about to adopt your ethics so I will bow out of this discussion.

Whether "F2P is not a sell out or bad" completely depends on a Player's Ethics, not grammer, and definately not about economics either. Since most people alive now think it's OK to sacrafice ethics for economics,( and I don't,) maybe there is where our difference of opinion really is.

Yeah F2P is bad. Frankly I've mentioned the reasons so many times in so many places I'm too bothered to type them all out again just to watch someone say - but it's freeeeeeeeeeeeeee. *cracks neck*

If your game starts one way and you change it to be another way then yes, you sold out.

There's a general idea that people change about every 5 years. If a game hasn't been out for 5 years and they change before that, they are breaking down what we know as predictable behavior.

I will never, repeat never play any F2P game when it's known to me. Just changing your payment model to nothing doesn't drag me closer to your game to help save it, it only drives me further away. It proves to me that you don't value your own product. I don't purchase things in stores without knowing the price first either. I'm not a dolt and I know that you need money to run the game. Let's not play games in the interim about it. Set a price and shut up or I will never test your funky "free to stay away" game :)

Guess how much I spent in GW2 - zero, nunca, nodda, nothing, zip, zilch, diddly squat, and a big fat goose egg. I bought it, that was all I said I would do. No amount of events pressured me into entering one credit card number. No amount of boxes that dropped for me without a key I would have to buy to open them intrigued me into paying.

How long I pay my sub games is for years and I have purchased lifetime previously. No shady numbers for me thanks, I want a flat fee, that's my payment model choice and always will be.  

This is the perfect representation of what I do when a game goes F2P when I am subbed to it. (I'm talking about you LOTRO and Vanguard). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQXuazYI_YU

Originally posted by greenreen

Yeah F2P is bad. Frankly I've mentioned the reasons so many times in so many places I'm too bothered to type them all out again just to watch someone say - but it's freeeeeeeeeeeeeee. *cracks neck*

If your game starts one way and you change it to be another way then yes, you sold out.

There's a general idea that people change about every 5 years. If a game hasn't been out for 5 years and they change before that, they are breaking down what we know as predictable behavior.

I will never, repeat never play any F2P game when it's known to me. Just changing your payment model to nothing doesn't drag me closer to your game to help save it, it only drives me further away. It proves to me that you don't value your own product. I don't purchase things in stores without knowing the price first either. I'm not a dolt and I know that you need money to run the game. Let's not play games in the interim about it. Set a price and shut up or I will never test your funky "free to stay away" game :)

Guess how much I spent in GW2 - zero, nunca, nodda, nothing, zip, zilch, diddly squat, and a big fat goose egg. I bought it, that was all I said I would do. No amount of events pressured me into entering one credit card number. No amount of boxes that dropped for me without a key I would have to buy to open them intrigued me into paying.

How long I pay my sub games is for years and I have purchased lifetime previously. No shady numbers for me thanks, I want a flat fee, that's my payment model choice and always will be.  

This is the perfect representation of what I do when a game goes F2P when I am subbed to it. (I'm talking about you LOTRO and Vanguard). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQXuazYI_YU

The game needs to have been designed with F2P in mind from the getgo.  If a game went from P2P to B2P, that is bad model. 

The thing I don't like about P2P is not the cost.  In fact, for entertainment value, it is very, very cheap.  What I don't like is the way they need to keep you playing, keep you addicted.  They don't want you to take a break.  It doesn't act like real life.  In real life you don't have vertical progression.  The rewards keep coming, and you expect it.  That makes people conditioned to be rewarded for every little thing they do.  People become dependent on the game.  And the game needs to do this, to keep you playing so you continue your subscription.

Originally posted by greenreen

Yeah F2P is bad. Frankly I've mentioned the reasons so many times in so many places I'm too bothered to type them all out again just to watch someone say - but it's freeeeeeeeeeeeeee. *cracks neck*

If your game starts one way and you change it to be another way then yes, you sold out.

There's a general idea that people change about every 5 years. If a game hasn't been out for 5 years and they change before that, they are breaking down what we know as predictable behavior.

I will never, repeat never play any F2P game when it's known to me. Just changing your payment model to nothing doesn't drag me closer to your game to help save it, it only drives me further away. It proves to me that you don't value your own product. I don't purchase things in stores without knowing the price first either. I'm not a dolt and I know that you need money to run the game. Let's not play games in the interim about it. Set a price and shut up or I will never test your funky "free to stay away" game :)

Guess how much I spent in GW2 - zero, nunca, nodda, nothing, zip, zilch, diddly squat, and a big fat goose egg. I bought it, that was all I said I would do. No amount of events pressured me into entering one credit card number. No amount of boxes that dropped for me without a key I would have to buy to open them intrigued me into paying.

How long I pay my sub games is for years and I have purchased lifetime previously. No shady numbers for me thanks, I want a flat fee, that's my payment model choice and always will be.  

This is the perfect representation of what I do when a game goes F2P when I am subbed to it. (I'm talking about you LOTRO and Vanguard). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQXuazYI_YU

Arenanet doesn't care if you don't buy stuff from them.  They just want you to play at your free will.  There are plenty of people who never buy any gems.  I think more than 50% of players never buy any gems.  And Arenanet doesn't mind that.  They designed the game from the getgo with this in mind. 

Originally posted by VoreDock

 

I am sick of all you people saying free to play is a sell out or a bad

 

Tera , SWTOR , Aion  all for teas games went  F2P for one reason  to  give  sub players more people to play with

 

All had   good numbers but Dev’s can’t justify a games life to publishers on anything less than great numbers

So F2P was added  you can still sub and many do

 

F2P is a good thing after all without it publishers like EA would kill games and even the sub players would be left out

 

Or have we all forgot SWG   (Star Wars Galaxys )

It is bad, that's the thing. It not only shows that the business end wasn't sustainable or well planned, but shows a lack of interest in their game. The three games you mentioned had abyssmal reception and offered nothing worth playing. I can't imagine publishers killing games as a bad thing. They're a bad investment for many companies, and those resources could be better allocated somewhere else.

Originally posted by mrrshann618

it isn't that I play that many, it is that I have to PAY for that many if I want the ability to play anytime I want like in a f2p. I do not PLAY 13, I PLAY 5, but wife and kids still come from my pocket.

In order to play a sub game I have to be subbed. that requires a minimum of $15 a month on a month to month basis (not a batch buy). I have some friends that play 1 game, but not others, so If I want to play with my friend Bob for a few days that he has off. I have to be subbed to his game.

 

Oh wait, my wife and daughter hate that game, so If I want to play with them I have to sub for another $15. Darn, that is already $30 just to play with different people that I want to.

 

unless you are suggesting that there should only be 1 game that people sub to and damn the rest?

That pretty much exactly what he's suggesting. Your situation doesn't apply to him so he's saying that's your problem. Instead of looking at the big picture and seeing how the f2p system is a beneift to someone he looking at it through a very narrow window. Not that it really matters it won't be to long before most games if not all offer some sort of f2p or freemium model. He'll be eatting his own words then.

Originally posted by Witteker

Originally posted by greenreen

Yeah F2P is bad. Frankly I've mentioned the reasons so many times in so many places I'm too bothered to type them all out again just to watch someone say - but it's freeeeeeeeeeeeeee. *cracks neck*

If your game starts one way and you change it to be another way then yes, you sold out.

There's a general idea that people change about every 5 years. If a game hasn't been out for 5 years and they change before that, they are breaking down what we know as predictable behavior.

I will never, repeat never play any F2P game when it's known to me. Just changing your payment model to nothing doesn't drag me closer to your game to help save it, it only drives me further away. It proves to me that you don't value your own product. I don't purchase things in stores without knowing the price first either. I'm not a dolt and I know that you need money to run the game. Let's not play games in the interim about it. Set a price and shut up or I will never test your funky "free to stay away" game :)

Guess how much I spent in GW2 - zero, nunca, nodda, nothing, zip, zilch, diddly squat, and a big fat goose egg. I bought it, that was all I said I would do. No amount of events pressured me into entering one credit card number. No amount of boxes that dropped for me without a key I would have to buy to open them intrigued me into paying.

How long I pay my sub games is for years and I have purchased lifetime previously. No shady numbers for me thanks, I want a flat fee, that's my payment model choice and always will be.  

This is the perfect representation of what I do when a game goes F2P when I am subbed to it. (I'm talking about you LOTRO and Vanguard). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQXuazYI_YU

Arenanet doesn't care if you don't buy stuff from them.  They just want you to play at your free will.  There are plenty of people who never buy any gems.  I think more than 50% of players never buy any gems.  And Arenanet doesn't mind that.  They designed the game from the getgo with this in mind. 

Where is your proof how many people buy gems. While it's fine to have an opinion, one without any fact behind it isn't even logical.

They designed the game with the cash shop. They designed the game for it to accept payments. I'm not sure why you think that they aren't interested in every penny that people will give to them in it.

Here are the logical reasons I have to back up my thoughts. Each new event introduced a new chest to purchase with money. Instead of fixing game bugs, they had a higher priority on making things that could be purchased in addition to what already was in existence. If you think they waste development time on adding chests because no one uses the cash shop, you aren't being logical. I'm going by what they did, not what they say. I'm looking at what they chose to spend time producing as "content" - mind you - some of what they call "expansion" worthy.

For you to even claim that 50% of people need to use the cash shop to make the game sustainable, you would have to have a person that said they used the cash shop for people like me that said they didn't. Not sure how you decided that 50% was even their goal or their intention. If you aren't in the building it's not up to you to decide what their operating costs are and what is needed to be stable in future.

I don't doubt that people are paying them in the cash shop especially since on Reddit I have seen bank reports saying such, I simply said it wasn't me.

There's a reason I pointed that out. The reason is  n topic. The OP makes the assumption that F2P is not bad. I gave them a reason it was bad. I played a game where I didn't participate in buying things. I wasn't vain enough to care if I got the limited time event items so they could throw 1k events and the sentiment wouldn't change no matter how long I would have continued playing.

I played about the time I would have paid for a sub game in the box fee. I got in, saw what I needed to see the game wasn't going the path they said in their manifesto and I exited. I could play the game anytime I like and have no interest any longer. Get it? Gameplay wins over payment model. That's why F2P doesn't save games and it is bad. It's so cute that people think F2P is about giving you control in spending, it's about pitting you against your neighbor. It's not about fostering a community. It's about hoping you will buy more than your neighbor and show off to them or getting you to spend more money because you spend it over time so that you don't notice that you spent more than you would have with a sub fee. It's marketing, not anything based on saving games or bringing them back, it's about advertising to you in your own game.

Prove it to yourself, has the cash shop ever given you a total of what you spent for the month and suggested that you slow down? Has it ever stopped advertising to you once you spent over 15 a month? Has it ever once said, you spent enough? Sub games do, they have a maximum payment accepted for each month. The best part is a sub game will let you setup a recurring sub so that you never have to think about the money. You just say - can I afford 15 bucks a month - ok, automatic payment. Now I can play the game and never think about money or what I "can't" do unless I pay, I can do anything. In the words of "as sold on tv", you "set it and forget it".

There are lots of things we can do for free in the real world. I could scrub my tub down throwing up glitter and saying ding every 5 minutes but I know that you get what you pay for.

All the people being floated by others in free games, their time will come to an end. They aren't very good at keeping a secret and that spoils most free things especially because every time you talk to them they gloat about how little they spend. It's like a badge of honor to them to say they love games but don't believe people that make games should be able to eat.

Would I want to be subject to my game lasting whether the big spenders stay or go, no, I'd much rather just give them what we all know they want - enough cash to keep it online and make a few bucks instead of riding a gravy train that has an ending point. The first one being that the F2P market is swamped with titles. Sub games don't have nearly the competition they used to.

It's all the free games fighting for players, the sub games have their fans that stick around year after year. For all of the people that don't pay, the big spenders will decide for them what games are eventually purged or stay on the market. That's one heck of a hand dealt to them isn't it and people are playing that game with them every day as long as they lean on their support. They choose to let those people decide what games turn a profit and those that won't. Ahhh but what do they care, it's all free right. They'll just find another game if one closes and follow their big poppa' where he spends money. :) What choice do they have.

quote above.

1. Too long to read.

2. It is not possible for me to find out how many don't buy gems.  But I know several people who don't, you being one of them.  50% is just a number I threw out there, but it's probably more than that.  I have no idea, but definitely and certainly you don't have to buy any gems whatsoever to play this game.  Money is easy to come by.  You would only buy gems just to get things going faster. 

3. The F2P model in some games take into account the fact that a lot of the people just won't spend any money at all on cash shop.  This is common sense.  This is obvious.  They also know that the moment they force people to use cash shop, they'll lose customers.  Why would they do this?  And they don't do this.  Those games that went from P2P to F2P behave differently though.

Originally posted by Witteker

quote above.

1. Too long to read.

2. It is not possible for me to find out how many don't buy gems.  But I know several people who don't, you being one of them.  50% is just a number I threw out there, but it's probably more than that.  I have no idea, but definitely and certainly you don't have to buy any gems whatsoever to play this game.  Money is easy to come by.  You would only buy gems just to get things going faster. 

3. The F2P model in some games take into account the fact that a lot of the people just won't spend any money at all on cash shop.  This is common sense.  This is obvious.  They also know that the moment they force people to use cash shop, they'll lose customers.  Why would they do this?  And they don't do this.  Those games that went from P2P to F2P behave differently though.

You quoted and answered me twice, I took my time to address all of your points and you say - too long to read?

Don't ever quote me again and expect a response.

F2P is a fad that is finally fading.

thank god.

Now we can return to eveloping good games not cheap games.

Originally posted by VoreDock

 

I am sick of all you people saying free to play is a sell out or a bad

'F2P' cash shop gaming *is* bad, whether you are sick of it or not.

It promotes transient uninvested playerbases that make incredibly bad and unstable communities, it corrupts core game design in order to manipulate the player into the shop, and relies on exploiting the vulnerable to support the industry. All these are bad things.

It is an unethical and obtuse (pricing wise) model that only in the end benefits the freeloader and conpany shareholder, neither of which I have any interest in helping.

The only reasons I have ever heard to support the model have been incredibly selfish ones that fail to look at any kind of wider picture.

There is no point in talking about F2P on a website based in the western world, too many people that dont know anything about it other than their limited exposure and a massive opinion closed to what they dont know and completely unwilling to learn or change.

Best to just let their world slowly die around them and move forward knowing you are keeping up with the world evolving around you.

What is bad, is switching to f2p when your game has not been designed for it. But honestly, are you going to tell me that LoL is a bad game because its f2p? Absolutely not.