Trending Games | Guild Wars 2 | Star Citizen | Warhammer 40K: Eternal Crusade | Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,920,474 Users Online:0
Games:760  Posts:6,311,690
Above and Beyond Technologies | Official Site
MMORPG | Genre:Sci-Fi | Status:Development  (est.rel 2015)  | Pub:Above and Beyond Technologies
Distribution: | Retail Price:n/a | Monthly Fee:n/a
System Req: PC | Out of date info? Let us know!

The Repopulation Forum » General Discussion » Free to Play, why?

8 Pages First « 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 » Search
150 posts found
  nilden

Hard Core Member

Joined: 4/26/05
Posts: 993

6/24/13 3:44:59 PM#101
Originally posted by NamelessC
F2p or P2p, a good game will be a good game, a bad game will be a bad game. Stop this F2p vs P2p things, i am sick of hearing it.

The thing is it's not just good or bad you have generic moderate middle of the road stuff that isn't junk but also isn't top shelf that all goes free2play. Even F2P can be Marvel Heroes, cash grab, blatant milking with a founders price tag of $260 USD, limited bag space, bank space, gold limits, store ads on every loading screen. I'm sorry but not having an in-game real money store makes for a much better experience IMHO. Let's not delude ourselves and call EVE or WOW subscription models only because they sell mounts for $20 and the monocle for $70 thing.

Look here's the skinny: Almost every MMORPG has a cash shop there's no escaping it now.

I can only fondly remember the days when MMO's didn't have cash shops.

How to post links.
LoveMinecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer

  Mkilbride

Spotlight Poster

Joined: 9/01/07
Posts: 639

6/24/13 5:33:14 PM#102
Originally posted by Grahor

The vast majority of players aren't really interested in community, immersion or devotion to any one game. Players like me, who just want to have fun, without pressure, without commitment. You know, "players" - people playing games, not living in them.

 

I'm not going to play another P2P, ever. So if any company wants my money, it's B2P or F2P.

 

Apparently, a lot of them do want my money.

Everything that is wrong with the modern MMO is right here. 

Help get Camelot Unchained made, a old-school MMORPG, with no hand holding!

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/13861848/camelot-unchained

  User Deleted
6/25/13 12:17:21 PM#103
Originally posted by Mkilbride
Originally posted by Grahor

The vast majority of players aren't really interested in community, immersion or devotion to any one game. Players like me, who just want to have fun, without pressure, without commitment. You know, "players" - people playing games, not living in them.

 

I'm not going to play another P2P, ever. So if any company wants my money, it's B2P or F2P.

 

Apparently, a lot of them do want my money.

Everything that is wrong with the modern MMO is right here. 

+1

that guy is the downfall of good mmorpgs in one post.

  kakasaki

Novice Member

Joined: 6/11/06
Posts: 1263

"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!"

6/25/13 12:22:19 PM#104
Originally posted by BrownAle
Originally posted by Mkilbride
Originally posted by Grahor

The vast majority of players aren't really interested in community, immersion or devotion to any one game. Players like me, who just want to have fun, without pressure, without commitment. You know, "players" - people playing games, not living in them.

 

I'm not going to play another P2P, ever. So if any company wants my money, it's B2P or F2P.

 

Apparently, a lot of them do want my money.

Everything that is wrong with the modern MMO is right here. 

+1

that guy is the downfall of good mmorpgs in one post.

Opinions on your part of course. The sad truth is F2P seems to be the way of the future. Just as communities and sense of a living world have been disappearing from MMOs way before F2P became prevalent. Casual players seem to be the majority right now so developers cater to them.

A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true...

  Wizardry

Elite Member

Joined: 8/27/04
Posts: 7000

Perhaps tomorrow will be better.

6/25/13 12:26:18 PM#105
Originally posted by Giddian
Originally posted by GwapoJosh
F2p is the only thing I hate about The Ropop..  It is a game that will need a great community and f2p brings so much trash.

Having money to pay for a Sub does not mean they aren't trash.

On allot of the MMO's I play on are sub based and have an overabundance of trash.

 

I think this is a poor argument. 80%-90% of the FTP MMO's out their are Garbage. Not all of them. I think they should be judge on an individual Basis.

In those cases it is probably the pvp aspect that brings out the others bad apples in a game.I usually try not to read chat ever in a game ,it is seldom good for the game,usually players spamming nonsense or spamming their wares in chat because ,well i guess they figure their wares are too good for the AH and everyone should know it.

When FFXI had no trial and most of the new breed of gamer were in WOW, it was the most amazing community ever.I watched chat all the time back then and it was a lot of people trying to help each other.

The obvious answer to Why,is that F2p is a model the developer believes is in his/her best interest.Do not believe any PR guy that tells you they are going f2p for YOUR benefit,actually a good idea to stay away from that game,it says they like to feed you BS.EVERY single choice a developer makes is for their own benefit,they would never stay in business if they listen to  millions of separate people and their individual wants/needs.

http://www.youtube.com/user/Napolianboo#p/u/15/rCYLLQCNc1w
Samoan Diamond

  safgril

Novice Member

Joined: 3/28/13
Posts: 7

6/25/13 9:59:03 PM#106
Originally posted by reaperuk
Originally posted by Foomerang

Hey jc, you guys ever kick around the idea of releasing this game on PlayStation network? This pc mmo crowd grows more finicky by the day ;)

I think you were saying that tongue in cheek but I did play Defiance for several months earlier this year. That had PS3, XBox360 and PC versions, which because of the console companies policies had to have separate servers for each platform. That must have had a severe impact on running costs for a start. Then of course, the game had to have numerous compromises to run on all three platforms. That resulted in a poor GUI, a poor text and voice chat system etc. etc. That's my only experience of an mmo running on multiple platforms but it had lots of problems caused by that.

Regarding P2P versus F2P, I think all this nostalgia for the "Golden days" of P2P mmo's is a case of "rose tinted glasses" distorting people views.

Back in 2004, I was the mayor of a metropolis in SWG. I kept adding accounts until I had five in total. I had all the important characters the city needed under my control: Mayor, Architect, Guild Leader, Master Doc, even a Master Entertainer in the cantina running a looping macro almost 24 hrs per day  via my backup PC. At the time, it seemed normal, when I look back now, I must have been crazy to take a game that seriously. The interesting thing is a number of people have claimed in this thread that P2P makes for better communities. Well, most people I came across in SWG were fine but there were some notorious exceptions. One person was famous on the Farstar server for parking his Bantha on the ticket inspector at Coronet starport so nobody could see him. Another pair went out of there way to ruin any community events being organised. These people basically played the game to grief and were happy to pay $15 per month to do so.

A while after leaving SWG, I tried WoW, a P2P game. Well that is still the worst community I have ever come across. The public chat channel was full of morons, the were griefers around every corner it seemed. I only lasted around six weeks in that game before I'd had enough. LotRO became my main game for many years after and was a total contrast to WoW.  I have a lifetime sub for that, which made it B2P in effect. LotRO has always been known for its great community and when it went F2P (or freemium more accurately) there was a big surge in player numbers but the quality of the players didn't go down as far as I could see.

I've played lots of other games in recent years. Most had a sub to start with but I, along with nearly everyone else, played for a month or two until max level and then quit. I think every single one of them has gone F2P or B2P since. It should be clear to everyone by now that the P2P model is history but this site seems to have many deniers burying their heads like ostriches, while trying to avoid the obvious.

The only viable long term options for games companies going forward are B2P or F2P. If big budget titles like Rift, SWTOR and TSW can't make a monthly sub stick, a small indie publisher won't be able to either.

 

 

Rose tinted glasses huh?  WOW, but there was never games before SWG huh?  SWG brought it a small amount of masses by a poorly run MMO... it had the BEST concept that never delivered then a company that just took a huge elephant you know what and stuck it into the player base like it was for fun.  Yeah i wouldnt use SWG as a great example of a great game.  You had games like daoc, Asheron's call which had pvp and pve... had great communities... and when you had a loud mouth in the crowd... literally were ridiculed off the game.  Pay to play had great customer service.  I can remember when one guy was ruining the game for a small group of people and customer service was contacted.. IN GAME..  the guy came in and warned the player.  If he continued he would be banned for a short period.  That is a game with pay to play.  It is services that made the money worth it.  IN GAME events ran by game masters in some of the older games that made the pay to play model worth it.  Huge storylines that involved you and the world your character lived in.  A lot of the games today are just plain dead worlds with crappy AI.. same story line from point a to point b... and so on.  

 

These companies are basically taking your money, anyway that can at super low quality service and gaming as possible.  Their events now consist of stupid little quests that give you little immersion or thought behind it.  I remember going to a live event in Asheron's Call where Asheron fought his nemesis.  And there was this big storyline of quests that followed it with some nice stuff if you completed it.  Everybody gathered to watch Asheron win.  but of course you didnt know what was going ot happen but he did win as his nemisis escaped.  Either way, taht was quality gaming with some nice quests that werent just go here and kill 10 rabbits.  

 

These kind of games got you addicted.  teh community was different back then.  Yes WOW brought in the masses of people into the MMO gaming.  And they were the big reason that all these otehr companies only saw $$$ rather then any quality being attached to it.  They figured just copy what WOW did.  WOW rode its popularity on its famous RTS games.  Heck even in China they still play Warcraft 3.  Whats even funnier they even have a TV show that shows 2 guys playing Warcraft 3.  China also has about 3x the amount of servers then the north american servers.  So yeah i can see why so many wanted to copy WOW.  

But problem is, when you start giving less quality like that, the crowd playing those games dont care much anymore either.  When you have a quality game with quality service and quality devs... the players find it worthwhile to pay for a game.  And your loyal fanbase literally fight for the game.  ONE thing that will always give a loyal fanbase is when the developers listen to its customers and is communicative.  One being... NEVER NERF... Only improve the weaker classes.  Nerfing is a failed concept.  

Bottom line is.. if the game is quality.. pay to play is a very good concept and pays for good live events, customer service, and a good community who are there to play because they paid for it.    Too often free players dont care about the game they play.  You still have a good following like all other games.  TO me, MY OPINION, that ruins the game for me.  

  dreadlordnaf

Novice Member

Joined: 12/11/12
Posts: 61

6/27/13 12:17:07 PM#107
Originally posted by Betaguy
Originally posted by dreadlordnaf

It is 2013 people, I'm surprised the F2p model still has its doubters.  F2p doesnt mean it is pay2win as the dev responding has already pointed out.

Many people will not pay a dollar to pay a game, so if it's subscription-only the company gets zero dollars from them which hurts the overall game.  But if you offer optional services like bigger bank slots, cosmetics etc, then certain whale gamers will gladly spend 100 bucks+ on this type of stuff.    Those things make your gaming experience more convenient and unique, but they dont affect things like PVE or PVP.    In essence you have a smaller number of gamers subsidizing those who dont want to pay anything.  But if this choice of deciding to pay is optional and self selecting then why not?  The people who pay get custom features and those are f2p get a free game.  In the end both parties win since without the payers the game would shut down, but without the f2pers there would be a smaller and less vibrant server population, something that is critical in games with player driven economics and in-depth crafting. 

 

 

 

I have yet to play a free to play MMO that is better than a pay to play mmo. I been playing 15+ years and played every single one to date on both sides of the fence... just saying...

Well your one sentence post which doesn't go into any details about the points I made or which p2p and f2p MMO's you played and why you thought certain ones were better obviously makes your point crystal clear....  

  dreadlordnaf

Novice Member

Joined: 12/11/12
Posts: 61

6/27/13 12:20:19 PM#108
Originally posted by coretex666
Originally posted by dreadlordnaf

It is 2013 people, I'm surprised the F2p model still has its doubters.  F2p doesnt mean it is pay2win as the dev responding has already pointed out.

Many people will not pay a dollar to pay a game, so if it's subscription-only the company gets zero dollars from them which hurts the overall game.  But if you offer optional services like bigger bank slots, cosmetics etc, then certain whale gamers will gladly spend 100 bucks+ on this type of stuff.    Those things make your gaming experience more convenient and unique, but they dont affect things like PVE or PVP.    In essence you have a smaller number of gamers subsidizing those who dont want to pay anything.  But if this choice of deciding to pay is optional and self selecting then why not?  The people who pay get custom features and those are f2p get a free game.  In the end both parties win since without the payers the game would shut down, but without the f2pers there would be a smaller and less vibrant server population, something that is critical in games with player driven economics and in-depth crafting. 

 

 

 

They do affect the gameplay. Or at least for me, they completely ruin immersion.

Why would I want to buy bigger bag with RL money? I want to craft it or fight for it inside game world and rather pay subscription which is just charged from my account in the most subtle way imaginable.

F2P and its omnipresent cashshop ruin my gameplay. I want Repopulation P2P rather than F2P.

It is my subjective opinion. I realize that some people do not mind being confronted with cash shops and real money transactions in their MMOs if they are in return allowed to play game for free. I realize it, but I dont understand it.

Perhaps you don't understand basic economics.  If a game can't get enough critical mass to make money on a subscription method only they can either: 1) go f2p with the graduated payment options this entails; or 2) go broke and cease operating their game.

It seems most people here who dislike f2p would rather the games do not exist at all.  A classic case of "my way or no way" mentality.  

  codifier

Novice Member

Joined: 4/14/12
Posts: 49

6/27/13 12:22:10 PM#109
No matter how much people hates F2P model, F2P is the next generation these days. Deal with it.
  safgril

Novice Member

Joined: 3/28/13
Posts: 7

6/27/13 1:31:49 PM#110
Originally posted by dreadlordnaf
Originally posted by coretex666
Originally posted by dreadlordnaf

It is 2013 people, I'm surprised the F2p model still has its doubters.  F2p doesnt mean it is pay2win as the dev responding has already pointed out.

Many people will not pay a dollar to pay a game, so if it's subscription-only the company gets zero dollars from them which hurts the overall game.  But if you offer optional services like bigger bank slots, cosmetics etc, then certain whale gamers will gladly spend 100 bucks+ on this type of stuff.    Those things make your gaming experience more convenient and unique, but they dont affect things like PVE or PVP.    In essence you have a smaller number of gamers subsidizing those who dont want to pay anything.  But if this choice of deciding to pay is optional and self selecting then why not?  The people who pay get custom features and those are f2p get a free game.  In the end both parties win since without the payers the game would shut down, but without the f2pers there would be a smaller and less vibrant server population, something that is critical in games with player driven economics and in-depth crafting. 

 

 

 

They do affect the gameplay. Or at least for me, they completely ruin immersion.

Why would I want to buy bigger bag with RL money? I want to craft it or fight for it inside game world and rather pay subscription which is just charged from my account in the most subtle way imaginable.

F2P and its omnipresent cashshop ruin my gameplay. I want Repopulation P2P rather than F2P.

It is my subjective opinion. I realize that some people do not mind being confronted with cash shops and real money transactions in their MMOs if they are in return allowed to play game for free. I realize it, but I dont understand it.

Perhaps you don't understand basic economics.  If a game can't get enough critical mass to make money on a subscription method only they can either: 1) go f2p with the graduated payment options this entails; or 2) go broke and cease operating their game.

It seems most people here who dislike f2p would rather the games do not exist at all.  A classic case of "my way or no way" mentality.  

it doesnt require that much money nowadays to keep a game running.  200k to 300k is more then enough to make money off a game.  It use to be a great game with those numbers.  Problem is companies see that as a failure when you put it up to a company like Blizzard.  Thats like saying the mom and pop store that makes money is not good because they arent like Walmart.  Its just wrong thinking.  

  safgril

Novice Member

Joined: 3/28/13
Posts: 7

6/27/13 1:34:31 PM#111
Originally posted by codifier
No matter how much people hates F2P model, F2P is the next generation these days. Deal with it.

funny thing.. same thing was said about sandbox.  Look whats happening.. sandbox games are making a comeback.  EQ Next is goign to be a sandbox... this game repopulation is a sandbox.  So yeah.. i wouldnt follow by your example.  I have heard all the arguments about Theme Park games being the "next generation" these days and need to deal with it.  

So no we dont have to deal with it.  Enough of us fought for  sandbox games and its back.  Now on to the next crusade.  A quality p2p.

  kakasaki

Novice Member

Joined: 6/11/06
Posts: 1263

"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!"

6/27/13 1:43:28 PM#112
Originally posted by safgril
Originally posted by codifier
No matter how much people hates F2P model, F2P is the next generation these days. Deal with it.

funny thing.. same thing was said about sandbox.  Look whats happening.. sandbox games are making a comeback.  EQ Next is goign to be a sandbox... this game repopulation is a sandbox.  So yeah.. i wouldnt follow by your example.  I have heard all the arguments about Theme Park games being the "next generation" these days and need to deal with it.  

So no we dont have to deal with it.  Enough of us fought for  sandbox games and its back.  Now on to the next crusade.  A quality p2p.

Errr, short of EvE name me one truly successful pure sandbox MMO out there? I mean, the closes we have is a bunch of sandpark type games and a bunch of games that haven't released yet...

A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true...

  Slampig

Hard Core Member

Joined: 12/29/03
Posts: 2405

Whatever you do, do NOT speak ill of Asheron's Call 2...

6/27/13 1:44:59 PM#113

Why ask why? Try Bud Dry, ZOING!

 

That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!

  safgril

Novice Member

Joined: 3/28/13
Posts: 7

6/27/13 2:19:53 PM#114
Originally posted by kakasaki
Originally posted by safgril
Originally posted by codifier
No matter how much people hates F2P model, F2P is the next generation these days. Deal with it.

funny thing.. same thing was said about sandbox.  Look whats happening.. sandbox games are making a comeback.  EQ Next is goign to be a sandbox... this game repopulation is a sandbox.  So yeah.. i wouldnt follow by your example.  I have heard all the arguments about Theme Park games being the "next generation" these days and need to deal with it.  

So no we dont have to deal with it.  Enough of us fought for  sandbox games and its back.  Now on to the next crusade.  A quality p2p.

Errr, short of EvE name me one truly successful pure sandbox MMO out there? I mean, the closes we have is a bunch of sandpark type games and a bunch of games that haven't released yet...

why are you saying sandpark games.. there is no such thing... because of the invention of theme park games by EQ and WOW doesnt mean that sandbox games didnt have quests.  thats like a saying poop doesnt stink.  Sandbox have very good quests.  its just an open world with anything you want to do... from questing to hunting to crafting etc.  theme park games put you on a rail and with not many other choices available.  

 

Asheron's Call was a great game and still exists today.  Some will tell you UO was a great game till trammel or somethign along those lines.  DAOC took a different spin from the traditional sandbox and made it more pvp centric.  Shadowbane was good except that it took them so long to make the game that the graphics outdated itself before it even released.  But that was more of a hardcore sandbox.  SWG could of been great, but again SOE's shortcomings killed it.  They stopped their live events taht were ACTs 1, 2 and 3... and geared all their time into making Jedi.  But they fell short on the questing as well.  

Problem is.. WOW came into the scene in 2004 and that was the end of the sandbox era.  It literally killed it off.  So there wasnt many years for sandboxes to really continue on.  Most companies only wanted Money to copy WOW.  

 

  Isane

Novice Member

Joined: 5/24/06
Posts: 2698

"Some do , Some don''t , Others just cry"

Jean Sali

8/18/13 4:20:32 AM#115
Originally posted by GwapoJosh
F2p is the only thing I hate about The Ropop..  It is a game that will need a great community and f2p brings so much trash.

Damn , and this was looking great if it isn't sub based it's not worth playing.

I was looking forward to all the crafting but now this will just turn into a cess pit of time syncs, forcing you to buy speed ups for crafting. Degrading also fits a micro transaction hell.

I just hope they offer a subscription option where you get everything. And its a level playing field  I just can't afford the micro transaction piece it just end up costing a fortune.

 

________________________________________________________
SWTOR and COS games that could deliver !!

  Everket

Apprentice Member

Joined: 3/22/11
Posts: 228

9/23/13 9:21:44 PM#116
Originally posted by Isane
Originally posted by GwapoJosh
F2p is the only thing I hate about The Ropop..  It is a game that will need a great community and f2p brings so much trash.

Damn , and this was looking great if it isn't sub based it's not worth playing.

I was looking forward to all the crafting but now this will just turn into a cess pit of time syncs, forcing you to buy speed ups for crafting. Degrading also fits a micro transaction hell.

I just hope they offer a subscription option where you get everything. And its a level playing field  I just can't afford the micro transaction piece it just end up costing a fortune.

 

Could be, but maybe save your conclusion until you have some evidence? Just a thought.

  SpottyGekko

Elite Member

Joined: 9/26/04
Posts: 3170

10/03/13 12:52:51 PM#117

This thread is very entertaining :D

 

It's quite funny to read some of the earlier posts in the first 1/3 of the thread. So many people wisely pronouncing that "a subscription model is no longer viable in this day and age" and "all the major upcoming releases will be F2P"...

The future was so clear back in April, eh ?

  Burntvet

Hard Core Member

Joined: 11/16/07
Posts: 2800

10/03/13 3:15:59 PM#118

If they want a lower barrier to entry, sell the game for $20 with a $5 sub, if they think $60/$15 is the problem.

I just can't see F2P w/ cash shop working well for this type of game.

 

This game is often cited as a spiritual successor to old time SWG, and that game would have been totally changed had it been run as a F2P.

And the fact that F2P games are overrun with bots, hackers, spammers, and D-bag players of every stripe AND in F2P games they can not be gotten rid of, even temporarily is a big minus. At least with a sub/client game, they'd have to buy that again after a ban.

 

Anyway, my interest has fallen a lot since the F2P announcement, and it is frankly a large hurdle to overcome, both to get me to play, and in terms of making a good sandbox/open world type game.

 

  JC-Smith

Hard Core Member

Joined: 5/02/11
Posts: 358

10/03/13 10:15:14 PM#119
And the fact that F2P games are overrun with bots, hackers, spammers, and D-bag players of every stripe AND in F2P games they can not be gotten rid of, even temporarily is a big minus. At least with a sub/client game, they'd have to buy that again after a ban.

 

Not sure how much F2P gaming you've done in recent years, but while those things really plagued the early games, I don't see much if any difference between F2P and P2P as far as community is concerned these days. There are automated forms of spam protection now.  In the early titles you had starter areas filled with nonstop spam and spam emails. That's seldom the case in modern F2P titles.

Bots are a problem in each, because it generally takes longer to find a bot, and for gold farming companies they will gladly pay the price of another subscription. If a game has just launched, chances are it will be F2P within a year, and your just out of a box price. If it has been out a while, then there is likely a form of free trial which you can upgrade with a subscription. Bots though are about detection.

What you are left with is the random griefer. The person who just creates a new account to run around being a jerk, and then is willing to create a new one after being banned and do it again. You can't prevent that, but you can minimize the damage they can do. This type of player is always a newbie character, which concentrates their hunting locations to a small number of areas. Players don't do this sort of thing with characters they have been developing for weeks or months, generally. Because getting your character banned after playing them for a month is a loss of time that can't be recouped. If you monitor the newbie areas for problem children, minimize the damage they can do, and ban offenders, those types of players will move on. 

The notion that players will be less friendly because a game is F2P though is a fallacy. Players have been acting less friendly in F2P and P2P games as the games became more soloable. The less you rely on your fellow player, the easier it is to be a jerk. There's less repercussions. Where in an older school game (which were all P2P simply because that's what there was at the time) players were generally nicer, because they needed one another. If they lost their corpse, they may need help dragging it out. If they wanted to progress, they needed a group. That doesn't change in an F2P game, if your a jerk, sure you can create a new account, but then your losing all the time you put in to that character. And nobody likes to waste their time.

I've played many F2P titles over the years, and many of the concerns that players raise, are of things that you almost never see any more.

Lowering the price to $20 with a $5 sub, just lowers your profit margin, it isn't going to significantly increase your exposure. If players were going to pay $20, they'd pay $50. If they were willing to pay a subscription, I doubt the difference between $5-15 makes much of a difference to most players, unless they were finding many other titles offering the same thing. You still have the problem of getting players to try your game, and of retaining them in the months following a new subscription games launch (when some players are going to cancel one subscription when they start the next).

Free trials are helpful, but as I said on page 1, free players are also a valuable part of your community. The bulk of them are worthy additions to the community. F2P detractors will point to the 1% of bad seeds as a means of representing the F2P community, but the bulk of F2P players are players on a budget, kids who don't have a credit card, or someone who was on the fence as to whether or not a game was worth paying for. Some of those players can be converted into paying customers, and those who don't, so long as they are playing within the EULA, are still good additions to a game. They might be friends, family members, or groupmates of paying customers, and having them playing keeps the other players happy. MMOs are about massive numbers of players, it's more fun to play in a game that has a healthy population. And how many P2P games still have that?

When a game is F2P, you remove the barrier of entry and your essentially saying, "This is our game. If you like it feel free to pay, if not move on, risk free." If players don't enjoy your game, it doesn't cost them a penny. That will get large number of players to play your game, and then its up to the developer to retain those players by putting out a good product. There are plenty of F2P titles out there, if players don't like your game they will move on quickly. There's no barrier of entry here though, at all. Just the time to download the game and register an account. If your confident that your game can retain players, this is the route to go. If your looking to quickly recoup a large investment budget, box sales make sense, when you know you can always go F2P down the road. The only barrier of entry right now with F2P titles, is the prejiduce that many players have against the notion of F2P not being willing to give a game a try, at all. That is however, far less than the barrier of entry created by a box or subscription price.

  Burntvet

Hard Core Member

Joined: 11/16/07
Posts: 2800

10/03/13 10:38:02 PM#120

To JC:

That's nice and all, but none of that stops a "bad" F2P player, whether that be Spammer/Bot/Hacker/whatever from coming right back on another free acct, immediately.

At least with a ban on a game requiring a new client or a new sub fee for an upgraded acct, that adds to the cost and nuisance for that player to come back. It is at least something.

With an F2P game, there is nothing. Any banned player can be right back.

 

And as to playing a recent F2P game, I have. AoW is or was overrun with spammers and bots, and that is a "modern" F2P game. So, I am not sure what you are saying, the spam I saw there was 10x worse than in the last 3 P2P MMOs I have played.

It was terrible in NWO as well.

 

One of the things cited about this game being F2P from launch was "barrier to entry". I do not agree that a $20 vs $60 client represent the same barrier to entry, nor a $5 vs $15 sub fee.  If initial cost is the perceived barrier to entry, lower the box price. If having a sub at all is a problem, that have a fee for the client and go the GW route. At least those can go some way to keep the community from tuning into a zoo. Or have payment with a game card, or a paypal acct, if having a CC is the issue in having a sub at any price.

And that is all not addressing the cash shop in a sandbox game issue, which is hard for me to swallow.  And if it is, it is because I have never seen a single cash shop implemented well, let alone in a game where sandbox play and player economy are supposed to be big elements.

 

So, like many, I am at best skeptical and at worse moderately pessimistic, and with the recent track record of F2P games these last few years, I don't think that is an unreasonable attitude to take.

 

8 Pages First « 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 » Search