Since there's quite a number of people who despise cash shop, I think P2P games without a cash shop should take advantage of this opportunity to distinguish themselves from the pack, it might entice players to go to these games.

I don't know how many P2P games don't have a cash shop at all, but I think (relaunched) FFXIV and Rift are two games.

Why don't they promote the fact they are cash shop free, sounds like an idea to me.

I mean every F2P game promotes the fact they are "FREE" why shouldn't games without a cash shop promote the fact they are "Cash shop free".

Just my 2 cents.

Several reasons:

1. "One less feature than everyone else!" is not a strong selling point
2. Blocking a potential avenue of revenue, especially one that is proven to be widely accepted and a good revenue source is never a solid financial road to travel
3. There's really no data to suggest that there's even an audience that is looking for that.

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Several reasons:

1. "One less feature than everyone else!" is not a strong selling point
2. Blocking a potential avenue of revenue, especially one that is proven to be widely accepted and a good revenue source is never a solid financial road to travel
3. There's really no data to suggest that there's even an audience that is looking for that.

Personally, I fucking despise cashshops. 

1. Having a cash shop is not a feature.

2. If the company is intent on not adding a cash shop there's no harm in stating it.

3. Obviously this isn't true, there's a massive audience that doesn't want particular types of cash shops -- Those that offer some form of tangible benefit. That's why GW2 went to great lengths to explain the fact that their cash shop wouldn't offer such benefits.

I prefer subscription games, and honestly I'd never play a game with a cash shop. Thankfully, there are developers who realize that there is an audience.

I like sub games and don't like F2P (which usually comes with a cash shop).

There have been two games now that I left when they introduced the F2P plan, Vanguard and LOTRO.

For me, sub is a selling point. I do look at the way they are going to generate funds and I prefer it to be a flat fee. There are only 2 exceptions I let past my no F2P law. Ryzom because they have great mechanics for skill creation and digging is fun and GW2 because they had a great manifesto (that changed so I no longer play it). I still paid for Ryzom sub while playing GW2 and never logging into Ryzom. I now have it to return to anytime I want to open the client up.

The only thing that can get me past F2P is outstanding gameplay. Since I don't normally try any F2P game, if they have great mechanics, they better push them harder than they do F2P because any game that starts out F2P I don't give a chance to review. That is an instant turnoff for me to see F2P or cash shop.

Originally posted by CalmOceans

Since there's quite a number of people who despise cash shop, I think P2P games without a cash shop should take advantage of this opportunity to distinguish themselves from the pack, it might entice players to go to these games.

I don't know how many P2P games don't have a cash shop at all, but I think (relaunched) FFXIV and Rift are two games.

Why don't they promote the fact they are cash shop free, sounds like an idea to me.

I mean every F2P game promotes the fact they are "FREE" why shouldn't games without a cash shop promote the fact they are "Cash shop free".

Just my 2 cents.

Rift has a cash shop in the same sense WoW has.  A couple months ago they started selling a tiger mount for 15 bucks (and have 2 seperate CE upgrades for additonal mounts)

The reason games arent going to do it s because games cant guarantee they wont add a cash shop in the future.  

Originally posted by Jayaris

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Several reasons:

1. "One less feature than everyone else!" is not a strong selling point
2. Blocking a potential avenue of revenue, especially one that is proven to be widely accepted and a good revenue source is never a solid financial road to travel
3. There's really no data to suggest that there's even an audience that is looking for that.

Personally, I fucking despise cashshops. 

1. Having a cash shop is not a feature.

2. If the company is intent on not adding a cash shop there's no harm in stating it.

3. Obviously this isn't true, there's a massive audience that doesn't want particular types of cash shops -- Those that offer some form of tangible benefit. That's why GW2 went to great lengths to explain the fact that their cash shop wouldn't offer such benefits.

I prefer subscription games, and honestly I'd never play a game with a cash shop. Thankfully, there are developers who realize that there is an audience.

 

1 - ok, that's a good point. That was rather subjective, so categorically stating it is a feature would be incorrect.

2 - never say never in business, especially when PR and the customer is concerned, and definitely when revenue is concerned :)

3 - You say obviously it's not true and then... prove that people do want a cash shop? We already know that. There's a big difference between a specific type of cash shop (which is still a cash shop) and NO cash shop, correct?

Look, you say there is data that shows there's an audience of people interested in the same type of game that also do not want a cash shop. Link to it. There are about fifty or so people on these boards that would love to get their hands on that data just to quote, link, requote and boldface it over and over in every thread. Hell, some would even pay you for that data. Share it.

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by Jayaris

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Several reasons:

1. "One less feature than everyone else!" is not a strong selling point
2. Blocking a potential avenue of revenue, especially one that is proven to be widely accepted and a good revenue source is never a solid financial road to travel
3. There's really no data to suggest that there's even an audience that is looking for that.

Personally, I fucking despise cashshops. 

1. Having a cash shop is not a feature.

2. If the company is intent on not adding a cash shop there's no harm in stating it.

3. Obviously this isn't true, there's a massive audience that doesn't want particular types of cash shops -- Those that offer some form of tangible benefit. That's why GW2 went to great lengths to explain the fact that their cash shop wouldn't offer such benefits.

I prefer subscription games, and honestly I'd never play a game with a cash shop. Thankfully, there are developers who realize that there is an audience.

 

 

2 - never say never in business, especially when PR and the customer is concerned, and definitely when revenue is concerned :)

 

Just ask SoE about this one

Originally posted by Jayaris

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Several reasons:

1. "One less feature than everyone else!" is not a strong selling point
2. Blocking a potential avenue of revenue, especially one that is proven to be widely accepted and a good revenue source is never a solid financial road to travel
3. There's really no data to suggest that there's even an audience that is looking for that.

Personally, I fucking despise cashshops. 

1. Having a cash shop is not a feature.

2. If the company is intent on not adding a cash shop there's no harm in stating it.

3. Obviously this isn't true, there's a massive audience that doesn't want particular types of cash shops -- Those that offer some form of tangible benefit. That's why GW2 went to great lengths to explain the fact that their cash shop wouldn't offer such benefits.

I prefer subscription games, and honestly I'd never play a game with a cash shop. Thankfully, there are developers who realize that there is an audience.

 

I would say it's because companies (especially MMO's and politicians actually) have too many times been caught in a trap where they stated they would not do something, then the situation changed and they felt they neededto do that very thing and thier customers revolted.  IMO it's better not to say anything at all than take a stand that may not be defensibleor realistic in the future. 

err what Loktofelt allready said ":)

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Several reasons:

1. "One less feature than everyone else!" is not a strong selling point
2. Blocking a potential avenue of revenue, especially one that is proven to be widely accepted and a good revenue source is never a solid financial road to travel
3. There's really no data to suggest that there's even an audience that is looking for that.

Cash shop is not a feature, at least not more than not having a cash shop is feature also.

Anyway. Personally cash shop along with similar things like selling currency (plex, gems) is for me personally growing to be the most important 'barier'.    Its existence in mmorpg growed to be deal-breker for me.

Hmm I'm not sure it isn't a feature.  A cash shop is a distinctive attribute that can help or at least partially define a game.  That is the definition of a feature.

For my mind, having a CS or conversely not having it is a distinctive attribute that can help or at least partially define a game.

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

Hmm I'm not sure it isn't a feature.  A cash shop is a distinctive attribute that can help or at least partially define a game.  That is the definition of a feature.

For my mind, having a CS or conversely not having it is a distinctive attribute that can help or at least partially define a game.

That's why I edited my post and added second part to first sentence.

I mean viewing CS like that - yes it is feature, but so is not having it, since absence of CS also can define a game.

So by having or not having CS we always gain one feature and lose another.  Would not be first 'exluding themself' pair of features.

Originally posted by Jayaris

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Several reasons:

1. "One less feature than everyone else!" is not a strong selling point
2. Blocking a potential avenue of revenue, especially one that is proven to be widely accepted and a good revenue source is never a solid financial road to travel
3. There's really no data to suggest that there's even an audience that is looking for that.

Personally, I fucking despise cashshops. 

1. Having a cash shop is not a feature.

2. If the company is intent on not adding a cash shop there's no harm in stating it.

3. Obviously this isn't true, there's a massive audience that doesn't want particular types of cash shops -- Those that offer some form of tangible benefit. That's why GW2 went to great lengths to explain the fact that their cash shop wouldn't offer such benefits.

I prefer subscription games, and honestly I'd never play a game with a cash shop. Thankfully, there are developers who realize that there is an audience.

 

I agree. I hate cash-shops as it adds nothing useful for me and breaks the immersion in the game.

I'm not currently looking for an additional game, but a clearly defined and consistent business model is definitely one of the things I look for when I am.

Originally posted by fenistil

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

Hmm I'm not sure it isn't a feature.  A cash shop is a distinctive attribute that can help or at least partially define a game.  That is the definition of a feature.

For my mind, having a CS or conversely not having it is a distinctive attribute that can help or at least partially define a game.

That's why I edited my post and added second part to first sentence.

I mean viewing CS like that - yes it is feature, but so is not having it, since absence of CS also can define a game.

So by having or not having CS we always gain one feature and lose another.  Would not be first 'exluding themself' pair of features.

 

Yes.  I agree.  Sometimes two features are not complementary to each other :)

Games without a cash shop should advertise it.

yes.