Trending Games | Elder Scrolls Online | WildStar | Star Wars: The Old Republic | Heroes of the Storm

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,643,968 Users Online:0
Games:681  Posts:6,077,615
Rift (Rift)
Trion Worlds | Official Site
MMORPG | Genre:Fantasy | Status:Final  (rel 03/01/11)  | Pub:Trion Worlds
PVP:Yes | Distribution:Download | Retail Price:Free | Pay Type:Free | Monthly Fee:Free
System Req: PC | Out of date info? Let us know!

General Discussion Forum » The Pub at MMORPG.COM » F2P ... Tell me whats wrong with it...

9 Pages « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 » Last Search
172 posts found
  Dihoru

Elite Member

Joined: 1/11/06
Posts: 2326

2/12/13 5:55:33 PM#41
Originally posted by Starpower
Originally posted by Dihoru
Originally posted by Starpower

I don't like being nickled and dimed in the games I play period. Specially when it comes to slowing my progression or halting it to entice me to buy things to keep everything at a normal pace.  I have yet to see a F2P title that truly only let me pay for the features I want.

 

For instance I could care less about raids so I feel it should be an optional payment option. I want F2P titles work the same way my TV Provider does. I can pick and choose between the programs I want and only pay for those period. Not having a multitude of channels part of a package I will never use.

Donno about modularity but you could try Neverwinter when it's out or one of the other Cryptic games as they allow you to earn microtransaction points via in-game currency transactions (dilithum to cryptic points in STO for example).

Thanks for the offer but I highly doubt Cryptic will ever produce anything I will be even remotely interested in. Pick another developer for me. Preferably one with a better track record

Preferably one with a better track record? You do know there aren't any objectively or even subjectively out there with a better track record than Cryptic no matter what people say they are still better then a majority of the established devs out there (STO might not be a shining beacon of innovation but... it is still a decent game, same can be said of their other titles, decent games which have seen a more than adequate level of support). The only devs who haven't stunk up their reputation that badly is CCP but they've kinda fucked themselves over with Dust 514 everyone else and I mean everyone else has allot of shit they've pulled and crappy games released which needed stiching back together (Cryptic had this as well but their F2P games are really free to play, you can play completely free, get everything available in the game and even contribute to the developers indirectly by consuming the microtransaction points others bought thus feeding the demand and thus firing up those who want to trade for in-game currency with real cash to do it more often thus giving the devs more to work with).

  SpectralHunter

Apprentice Member

Joined: 7/14/05
Posts: 386

2/12/13 5:55:34 PM#42
Originally posted by Robokapp

developers are focusing on "how can we force inconvenience that can be circumvented by the cash shop" vs "how can we cause enjoyment for people who already pay and who we want to keep paying".

simple. there's no other reason they'd limit bag space for example.  ther's no technical limitation. They do it to inconvenience you on purpose.

I'm not going to pay someone who deicates his career to inconveniencing me.

I agree with you but I'll be devil's advocate with my reply.

Games with subs also create grinds, which is a form of inconvenience I guess, that forces to you pay using addictive methods (carrot on a stick) to stick around.

But then...F2P games have grinds too, so might as well get everything all at once...

Yeah, I'm not good at being devil's advocate.

  User Deleted
2/12/13 5:56:28 PM#43
Originally posted by DamonVile
 

Most real achiements can't be paid for. In a well desinged game this isn't an issue. The problem of course that isn't just limited to f2p is...well desinged games are rare.

 

I agree.   When achievements can be purchased, that drives the blurring.  Frankly this holds just as true for P2P with item shop as for F2P with item shop.

 

  Bladestrom

Hard Core Member

Joined: 4/04/11
Posts: 2732

2/12/13 5:56:48 PM#44
The €60 from gw2 is the cs venge.

rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW (9500 hrs on main mage)> oblivion > LOTR (480 Hunter) > Rift (230 hours mage) > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(850 elementalist)

Now playing GW2/vanilla wow

  Bladestrom

Hard Core Member

Joined: 4/04/11
Posts: 2732

2/12/13 6:00:55 PM#45
It boils down to one thing, how much do you pay divided by how much pleasure in hours you get. This applies to sub games, f2p, bad p2p.

rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW (9500 hrs on main mage)> oblivion > LOTR (480 Hunter) > Rift (230 hours mage) > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(850 elementalist)

Now playing GW2/vanilla wow

  Robokapp

Elite Member

Joined: 11/15/09
Posts: 4142

The only luck I had today was to have you as my opponent.

2/12/13 6:01:56 PM#46
Originally posted by SpectralHunter
Originally posted by Robokapp

developers are focusing on "how can we force inconvenience that can be circumvented by the cash shop" vs "how can we cause enjoyment for people who already pay and who we want to keep paying".

simple. there's no other reason they'd limit bag space for example.  ther's no technical limitation. They do it to inconvenience you on purpose.

I'm not going to pay someone who deicates his career to inconveniencing me.

I agree with you but I'll be devil's advocate with my reply.

Games with subs also create grinds, which is a form of inconvenience I guess, that forces to you pay using addictive methods (carrot on a stick) to stick around.

But then...F2P games have grinds too, so might as well get everything all at once...

Yeah, I'm not good at being devil's advocate.

well, grinding is the game most of the time.

 

if an mmo is a virtual world then you won't be in combat against epic foes 24/7. that's not anywhere near 'a believable virtual world'.

 

Let's pick EVE. A game where - even without RP - players 'live' in the gameworld. What do you do 90% of your time ? you go on with your daily life. trade, farm, rat, mine, craft, socialize... and only 10% is "epic call to arms to save our assets that those animals with human faces dared reinforce again".

 

"LIFE" in a virtual world will be...much like any real life...grindy. you develop a routine, goals, and you start working towards them. I mean that's the game. Otherwise what would you do ? if you pvp 24/7 then pvp becomes a grind. if you pve 24/7 then pve is a grind.

 

I think 'grind' itself is not a factor as MMOs are mostly about it. eliminating grind makes you stand in town waiting for queue to pop. Not a lot better.

  Aelious

Advanced Member

Joined: 9/27/11
Posts: 2258

World > Quest Progression

2/12/13 6:08:42 PM#47
Nothing is wrong with F2P, in every sense of the term you are getting what you pay for. It depends more on the player that the model. Are you okay not having everything others do? Are you willing to work around roadblocks and still enjoy the game? If so you will be kept very happy with the amount of F2P titles out there.

If speaking about big name F2P games it mearly casts a bigger net but with bigger holes. It's the hope that a bigger volume of players will bring in enough money to keep the lights on. If there seems to be slower content updates and more put into the cash shop what does that tell you? There are more minnows than whales and the company needs to pay the bills. It shouldn't be surprising and that doesn't make the company greedy.
  Dihoru

Elite Member

Joined: 1/11/06
Posts: 2326

2/12/13 6:10:34 PM#48
Originally posted by Robokapp
Originally posted by SpectralHunter
Originally posted by Robokapp

developers are focusing on "how can we force inconvenience that can be circumvented by the cash shop" vs "how can we cause enjoyment for people who already pay and who we want to keep paying".

simple. there's no other reason they'd limit bag space for example.  ther's no technical limitation. They do it to inconvenience you on purpose.

I'm not going to pay someone who deicates his career to inconveniencing me.

I agree with you but I'll be devil's advocate with my reply.

Games with subs also create grinds, which is a form of inconvenience I guess, that forces to you pay using addictive methods (carrot on a stick) to stick around.

But then...F2P games have grinds too, so might as well get everything all at once...

Yeah, I'm not good at being devil's advocate.

well, grinding is the game most of the time.

 

if an mmo is a virtual world then you won't be in combat against epic foes 24/7. that's not anywhere near 'a believable virtual world'.

 

Let's pick EVE. A game where - even without RP - players 'live' in the gameworld. What do you do 90% of your time ? you go on with your daily life. trade, farm, rat, mine, craft, socialize... and only 10% is "epic call to arms to save our assets that those animals with human faces dared reinforce again".

 

"LIFE" in a virtual world will be...much like any real life...grindy. you develop a routine, goals, and you start working towards them. I mean that's the game. Otherwise what would you do ? if you pvp 24/7 then pvp becomes a grind. if you pve 24/7 then pve is a grind.

 

I think 'grind' itself is not a factor as MMOs are mostly about it. eliminating grind makes you stand in town waiting for queue to pop. Not a lot better.

Problem is once you get closer to real life the more the grind itself goes away and the exploration/invention/self-determination aspect kicks in. I've been following Project Universe for a few weeks now and if that thing isn't a scam and manages to do even a 1/10th of the things it wants to do... christ almighty that would be the one game where grind never comes into it (as you spend half the time scratching your ass trying to invent something by examining things and seeing how they fit together in a useful way, imagine basically you could build a sling but from the same assets you could, by getting a solid piece of wood, craft a rudimentary flail).

  Loktofeit

Hard Core Member

Joined: 1/13/10
Posts: 11358

Currently playing EVE, SMITE, ESO, and Combat Arms

2/12/13 6:19:17 PM#49
Originally posted by 123443211234
Because f2p games tend to revolve around ways the devs can extract more money out of you rather than just focusing on creating a good game.

It's interesting reading a lot of the responses here, as there is no logic whatsoever to the comparisons.

The assumption above (presented as fact, as usual) is applied to F2P, as if no other developers in this massive market of chasing the next ding is designing their game, raids or gear to do the same but in the form of a monthly fee. It's as if F2P devs are businessmen using science and psychology to guide their work, while subscription devs are fellow gamers guided by passion, art and muses.

The other interesting thing is this if you asked many in the anti-F2P crowd if they stop playing a game once it's no longer enjoyable, they'd say yes, but every one of their talking points on the topic hinges on the fictional F2P gamer reaching something they don't like/enjoy and paying to bypass it or progress beyond it. The stance is either irrational or arrogant, being poorly thought through in the former, or a sense of being above or smarter than F2P gamers in the latter. This is the most interesting of the two, as it is a shared cognitive bias that feeds off of constant reaffirmation from the group. It's both crazy and beautiful at the same time.

 

 

 

 

  darkhalf357x

Hard Core Member

Joined: 1/25/12
Posts: 1041

I'm only playing the role chosen for me. Who you supposed to be?

 
OP  2/12/13 6:26:51 PM#50
Originally posted by KLECKO

F2p = hackers

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Didnt WoW get hacked when Stormwind was full of all dead NPCs?  My point is hacking is independent of F2P.  Same goes for the 'community' argument that F2P has a worse community than P2P.  I have met my fair share of bad apples and paid full price.

I can see this having perhaps a higher probability than say an AAA title, but I attribute that more to funding.  As F2P matures this should be reduced (my thought).

  Torvaldr

Elite Member

Joined: 6/10/09
Posts: 5164

Opportunist

2/12/13 6:30:57 PM#51
Originally posted by Robokapp

developers are focusing on "how can we force inconvenience that can be circumvented by the cash shop" vs "how can we cause enjoyment for people who already pay and who we want to keep paying".

simple. there's no other reason they'd limit bag space for example.  ther's no technical limitation. They do it to inconvenience you on purpose.

I'm not going to pay someone who deicates his career to inconveniencing me.

What about speed bumps, locks, and time constraints in sub-locked games?  How is that not imposing artificial limits, not technical limits, in order to squeeze more cash out of subscribers?

Every game needs to monetize.  Sub-free games often go for inventory or character slots.  Sub-locked games do that by artificially retarding your progress so you have to subscribe longer - raid and dungeon locks, limits on tokens gained per day, and similar tactics.

Different people don't mind paying differently is all I can figure.  I don't mind paying for those things, but I do hate renting access to a game and only being able to access that game if I continue to pay them.  I'm not going to pay someone to rent my game access anymore.  I see it mostly as a difference of perspective rather than one way is better or worse.

  darkhalf357x

Hard Core Member

Joined: 1/25/12
Posts: 1041

I'm only playing the role chosen for me. Who you supposed to be?

 
OP  2/12/13 6:38:25 PM#52

Great replies all!  Dont know where to respond first :-)  But wanted to add another wrinkle.

Do we see B2P (ala GW2) more viable than strict F2P?

I see B2P a highly probable model going forward and one I would support.  I had no issue paying a console price for GW2 and getting my 2-3 months fun out of it.  Especially since I can return back to the game whenever I want.

I dont know, subs to me were psychological to me as well.  When I pay 15/months I feel *obligated* to log on if for no other reason than to get my 'value' from the month.  Why waste the 53 cents/day? I mean if I can (easily) afford that - shouldnt I put it towards something I play more often?  This 'obligation' (again a construct of my own mind) takes away the fun of why I'm playing.

Take SWTOR for instance.  It was a fun game but got bored mid-game.  Quit my sub.  Game goes F2P and now I have a level 12 Bounty Hunter.  Those are the facts.  Now granted SWTOR implementation of F2P is annoying restrictive, but I feel if I play a game for free and Im enjoying it then I might as well pay for it.  But in this case I can pay for what *I* want to play.  I will probably never do an Operation ... so I simply wont play for it.  I want to try a flashpoint?  I can pay for one month.  Even with its convoluted structure the fact that I get to pick and choose what I play when allows me to enjoy the game my way.

TERA is another one I plan to give another chance, simply because its F2P.  If the game is not enjoyable (to me) the F2P conversion wont save it, but I believe I would probably enjoy it more the first time if there was no sub.

TSW too, but you get my point.  F2P not only allows you to 'test' a game out longer than a specified time frame, but as you explore what you actually enjoy you get to pay piecemeal.  

I agree with others, F2P as a model is good but it will come down to each IP's implementation.  Where I see the best as B2P.  Pay once and get everything (except expansions) for free.

Hard to see how a sub could beat that flexibility.

  darkhalf357x

Hard Core Member

Joined: 1/25/12
Posts: 1041

I'm only playing the role chosen for me. Who you supposed to be?

 
OP  2/12/13 6:41:07 PM#53
Originally posted by maplestone

When looking at a business model, just be careful to think carefully about what it is you are actually paying the developers to develop.  Are you buying a game or is the game just the bait?

Interesting argument.  Bait for what though?  

  darkhalf357x

Hard Core Member

Joined: 1/25/12
Posts: 1041

I'm only playing the role chosen for me. Who you supposed to be?

 
OP  2/12/13 6:42:50 PM#54
Originally posted by RefMinor

Because, the developers deliberately build a road filled with potholes and then sell you bags of rubble to fill in the holes.

I would rather the developers would develop the best game they can in terms of gameplay and then charge me a set fee to play it. That way if they want to succeed they are concentrating on improving the gameplay experience rather than producing a gimped version they can monetize.

I agree but thats not F2P as a model, thats F2P as a (bad) implementation - and they ARE out there.  This is where I see market forces taking over (i.e. - if the game is trying to cheat you to pay in a CS or whatever, we simply wont play/support the game).

We can't eliminate choice from the equation.

  Torvaldr

Elite Member

Joined: 6/10/09
Posts: 5164

Opportunist

2/12/13 6:46:00 PM#55
Originally posted by darkhalf357x

Great replies all!  Dont know where to respond first :-)  But wanted to add another wrinkle.

Do we see B2P (ala GW2) more viable than strict F2P?

I see B2P a highly probable model going forward and one I would support.  I had no issue paying a console price for GW2 and getting my 2-3 months fun out of it.  Especially since I can return back to the game whenever I want.

I dont know, subs to me were psychological to me as well.  When I pay 15/months I feel *obligated* to log on if for no other reason than to get my 'value' from the month.  Why waste the 53 cents/day? I mean if I can (easily) afford that - shouldnt I put it towards something I play more often?  This 'obligation' (again a construct of my own mind) takes away the fun of why I'm playing.

Take SWTOR for instance.  It was a fun game but got bored mid-game.  Quit my sub.  Game goes F2P and now I have a level 12 Bounty Hunter.  Those are the facts.  Now granted SWTOR implementation of F2P is annoying restrictive, but I feel if I play a game for free and Im enjoying it then I might as well pay for it.  But in this case I can pay for what *I* want to play.  I will probably never do an Operation ... so I simply wont play for it.  I want to try a flashpoint?  I can pay for one month.  Even with its convoluted structure the fact that I get to pick and choose what I play when allows me to enjoy the game my way.

TERA is another one I plan to give another chance, simply because its F2P.  If the game is not enjoyable (to me) the F2P conversion wont save it, but I believe I would probably enjoy it more the first time if there was no sub.

TSW too, but you get my point.  F2P not only allows you to 'test' a game out longer than a specified time frame, but as you explore what you actually enjoy you get to pay piecemeal.  

I agree with others, F2P as a model is good but it will come down to each IP's implementation.  Where I see the best as B2P.  Pay once and get everything (except expansions) for free.

Hard to see how a sub could beat that flexibility.

I don't really make much of a distinctio between B2P or F2P.  A game, for me, is either sub-free or sub-locked.  If it's sub-locked then it gets a pass, but just because a game is sub-free doesn't mean I like how it plays or how I'll have to pay.

  jtcgs

Advanced Member

Joined: 9/28/04
Posts: 1843

2/12/13 6:46:28 PM#56
Originally posted by Robokapp

developers are focusing on "how can we cause enjoyment that can be enhanced by the cash shop" vs "how can we force people to continue to be suckered out of money every month over a 14 year old lie".

I'm not going to pay someone who dedicates his career to deceiving me.

 Fixed that for you because the MMO world is waking up to the fact that bandwidth and server costs arent as high as it was 14 years ago and companies can make a ton of profits from cash shops. The lie is dieing as is the pay model. Deal with it.

“I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson

  Robokapp

Elite Member

Joined: 11/15/09
Posts: 4142

The only luck I had today was to have you as my opponent.

2/12/13 6:47:32 PM#57
Originally posted by Torvaldr
Originally posted by Robokapp

developers are focusing on "how can we force inconvenience that can be circumvented by the cash shop" vs "how can we cause enjoyment for people who already pay and who we want to keep paying".

simple. there's no other reason they'd limit bag space for example.  ther's no technical limitation. They do it to inconvenience you on purpose.

I'm not going to pay someone who deicates his career to inconveniencing me.

What about speed bumps, locks, and time constraints in sub-locked games?  How is that not imposing artificial limits, not technical limits, in order to squeeze more cash out of subscribers?

Perhpas - most liely - it is. However...it affects everyone equally.

 

not the rich one way an the peasants another. That's why it's more tolerable knowing every player is on equal ground in this sense.

 

 

  darkhalf357x

Hard Core Member

Joined: 1/25/12
Posts: 1041

I'm only playing the role chosen for me. Who you supposed to be?

 
OP  2/12/13 6:50:12 PM#58
Originally posted by Elfahiar

Had no problem with TERA before it went F2P, paid my sub and everything was smooth (at least for me) but now I have hard times to connect, lag kills my characters (when it takes 2 seconds for my warrior to evade attacks it makes the dynamic combat impossible, died many times because of this) but the worst: since F2P I always get launcher errors (right now "Error: 02112:0000 JSON parse error;") and when I finally manage to get into the game, chat is full of racism, porn etc. no moderators whatsoever...Sad really because it's a great game but F2P is hurting the experience...

I can see they take money from the cash shop and barely pay any game moderators, or get more stable servers...if it wasn't for TERA's universe (I'm a big fan) I'd have moved on, long time ago...it's worst in Europe (Gameforge should disappear from the face of the Earth)

But don't get me wrong. I love F2P's, huge Vindictus fan, enjoy C9, loved the Neverwinter beta and looking forward to it, but in the end if I had the option to choose, I'd prefer a sub that provides a more stable / complete experience. Just like I paid 1 year of Rift and never get any problems with it.

But when you really look at it - is it really F2P or is it the way En Masse implemented it.  

Lag can be fixed by increasing network throughput or server infrastructure.

Launcher errors can be fixed by quality control

Chat can be fixed by active moderation

It sounds like TERA didnt understand the best way to go F2P and went all in feet first and became overwhelmed.

F2P will always in my book come down to implementation.  Those who get the model/balance right are the ones that will succeed.  And to be fair these are tough questions to answer.  Its still new.

But notice how GW2 model works more holistically than a game that was built as P2P and *goes* F2P.

Design has a lot to do with it.

  User Deleted
2/12/13 6:51:27 PM#59
Originally posted by darkhalf357x

Great replies all!  Dont know where to respond first :-)  But wanted to add another wrinkle.

Do we see B2P (ala GW2) more viable than strict F2P?

 

No I do not see B2P + item shop as more viable than pure F2P, at least not from a player perspective.  I can play Aion for free, but GW2 is still $60 up front.  That doesn't give GW2 any advantage.

 

On the other hand, pure B2P (which is now all but extinct) had advantages due to not having to balance item shop purchases into combat and economic mechanisms.  This died out completely when MMO development budgets went through the roof.  At best a few Indies are still B2P.

 

  Robokapp

Elite Member

Joined: 11/15/09
Posts: 4142

The only luck I had today was to have you as my opponent.

2/12/13 6:53:05 PM#60
Originally posted by jtcgs
Originally posted by Robokapp

developers are focusing on "how can we cause enjoyment that can be enhanced by the cash shop" vs "how can we force people to continue to be suckered out of money every month over a 14 year old lie".

I'm not going to pay someone who dedicates his career to deceiving me.

 Fixed that for you because the MMO world is waking up to the fact that bandwidth and server costs arent as high as it was 14 years ago and companies can make a ton of profits from cash shops. The lie is dieing as is the pay model. Deal with it.

which part of this imbecilical post should i adress first?

 

"deal with it". what was the point of this? Did this have a point at all ?

"fixed that for you". You couldn't state your argument in a civilised manner, had to choose the hostile one, didn't you? Oh wait you posted the word "because". followed by nothing that'd justify it. soooo.

"Because". see above.

"the MMO world is waking up". Citation needed.

"bandwidth bla bla bla". what about the other costs ?surely hosting 1999 graphics today is cheaper, but developing 2009 era graphics is more expensive. where do they get the extra money from ?

"A ton of profit". profit is not measured by weight.

"the lie is dieing". your lack of proper grammar aside, lies aren't alive therefore can't die.

"as is the pay model". speculation. citation needed.

 

9 Pages « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 » Last Search