Richard Aihoshi: F2P Isn't A Dirty Word
For some "free to play" is a dirty word. In this week's column, Aihoshi explains why he doesn't believe that is fair.
Knee jerking in unison is one of the reactions I'm used to seeing when I talk about the free to play MMOG category in a manner that isn't derogatory. So it came as no surprise that some of the posts in the discussion following my column last week were like that. You may know the kind from seeing them there or elsewhere. They basically say F2Ps suck while providing no real basis to support simultaneously tarring hundreds of diverse titles with the same proverbial brush. Some say they've tried a couple, but others...
These people are, of course, entitled to have and to express opinions that diverge from my own. Indeed, I've taken part in many sessions that were highly enjoyable because they involved looking into and even vigorously debating differing points of view. But I've never truly understood the kind of knee-jerk reactions that often happen in the F2P area, and that do nothing to promote constructive, thoughtful, interesting exchanges. So, I'd like to set a couple of things straight about some of the ways people react.
One is that when I point out what I consider positive things about the F2P category, express optimism about specific titles or state that certain ones have caught my interest, it doesn't constitute an attack on subscription games, never mind the entire fee-based business model. Because of this, I just don't understand why some people react in a way that seems so defensive.
Me: "There are more interesting F2P titles out there all the time."
Self-Appointed Defender of Subscription: "F2Ps suck."
Well, that's quite a sweeping statement, even after you take into account that I've somewhat stereotyped it for effect. So, since it is my column, I thought I'd look into it a little further - in a purely hypothetical way, of course.
Me: "Have you tried them?"
SADS: "Yeah. They suck"
"You tried all of them? And they all suck?"
"I tried enough to know they suck."
"How many is enough?"
"They suck."
"How many have you played?"
"They suck."
"How much did you play them?"
"Not long. They sucked."
I'm sure you get the idea. SADS made a pretentious pronouncement on a topic about which he or she has limited knowledge. What I don't understand is why anyone would do that, especially to defend something I never attacked.
Another reaction I'd like to address is the misconception some people have that F2P is the coming thing. Implicit in this is the assumption subscription is the current thing. Well, that's simply not true. While the fee-based model isn't about to disappear any time soon, there isn't a shred of doubt that globally, more people play F2Ps. Lots more.
SADS: "Yeah, okay. But they're all in China."
No, they're not. It's pretty difficult to find market numbers for North America that I'd be willing to quote with real confidence. However, here's something else I can say with absolute certainty. There are millions of F2P players in this region. I don't know if they outnumber their subscription counterparts, but neither am I willing to I rule out such a possibility. What's more, if they don't now, I expect they will before too much longer.
And what if they were all in China? Do players there somehow count for less? Numerically, it's the world's largest market by far, and if it's not already the leader in terms of overall revenue, it's catching up very quickly.
The third thing I want to state explicitly is that I don't believe F2P is the be-all and end-all. It's just a revenue model, neither superior nor inferior on its own right. It happens to be working very well in the MMO space at this time, well enough to have taken the leadership rank in the global market away from subscription. But that's not to say something else won't come along to supplant it. I don't see anything right now that looks like an especially good candidate, but other approaches are being used. An example is free to try, where only certain areas are available to all, or non-paying players have a much lower level cap.
And the last sub-topic for this week is that I've never said anyone has to try F2Ps. If you're happy paying monthly fees and don't wish to consider the large majority of games because they use a different revenue scheme, that's clearly your prerogative. Actually, I suggest you don't even look at them unless you can do so with an open mind. Just remember that by auto-eliminating them from consideration, you might just be doing yourself a disservice by missing something that you'd enjoy for years.
More The Free Zone Features:
More Columns:
More Features:
He is the former Editor of RPG Vault and his column, focusing on free to play MMOs, appears on MMORPG.com every Monday.
I want to first say I really thought that column was horribly written.
You are a hypocrite sir, you flamed on people who don't like f2p games just because they don't like them, and offered no context as to why they don't like the games.
I'm sorry Richard, but a game where you download, play for free, but NEED to pay to catch up with the rest of the community via items malls...well sir that's NOT a f2p game, its a rip off of deep, complex MMO's.
They are encouraging charging you for an inferior product, yet they label it as f2p.
these f2p games offer very little depth compared to all p2p games, yet the f2p games still make encourage you to spend money of either vanity items, XP boosts ect.
So MR. Richard, give me one "f2p" title that doesnt involve item malls or linear gameplay. Come on I dare ya.
Edit: And dont even start with your articles argument on how "I havent played many f2p games"
I assure you I have played literally just about all of em granted Hello Kitty Online and Freaky Creatures.
Irony.
It is safe to say F2P games are the majority, however many here, in error, would say that some F2p games are not MMO's, such as NA largest, club penguin, or habbo hotel.
They are confuse MMO's with MMORPG's.
You also tend to find more innovation, and diversity in game play in F2p games.
That was a great article, that will fall on deaf ears on this site.
I never said they wernt MMO's, of course thats your only argument? That I said something I in fact did not?
NAME A F2P TITLE, I DARE YOU, WITHOUT ITEM MALLS, AND WITH DEPTH - EDIT: Excuse me....INNOVATION
remember bloodworth you have to NAME one...no atlantica doesnt count cause thats pure item mall
Meh, most of them do suck. And being so, it has gained the stigma of all of them sucking as well. However, I have found a couple good ones out of the bunch. Most of these would have probably been a lot better had I been younger with no job looking for free games.
When you get older, you will realize that nothing in life is free and these things won't be such an ire-inducing issue for you.
I cant believe i just read the post. IF YOU LABEL SOMETHING FREE TO PLAY THEN MAKE IT FREE
IF ITS NOT FREE DON'T LABEL IT AS SUCH
this has nothing to do with age, you know nothing about who I am or what I do, and your trying to stray away from the point of my post.
I was about to say "atlantica", but if that's a 'pure mall' game for you, im ok with this
That's your opinion, mine is different
In my opinion the only F2P game worth my spit is... yeah, Atlantica
Im not playing it though... combat system bored me.
Also, F2P is a broken model... again, imo. It kills both pvp and newcoming carebears at one time.
Regards
Nice strawman argument there. It might help if the author were to address the actual argument of why the "free to lose"/item mall games get such negative reactions from so many players.
If you get an e-mail from someone claiming to have $10 million US in Sierra Leone and wanting your help to get it out of the country and promising you a substantial portion of it, do you have to follow through to know it's a scam? If you follow through on a few such e-mails and get scammed, do you then know that the next such spam e-mail you get is also a scam, or do you have to try that one, too?
The reason why a game being completely free gives it such a bad reputation is simple economic reality. Companies that make games in pursuit of a profit aren't charities that merely want to give you a good game to play. They're trying to make money, and they have to get money from you somehow. The question is how they get money from you, and it's best if their source of revenue is obvious.
For a subscription game, they get substantial revenue from everyone who plays, so they have no need to nickel and dime you for additional revenue. (That may not stop SOE from doing so, but I digress.) If you have to buy a box before you can play the game, as with most single-player games, then again, the revenue source is obvious, and there's no need to worry that they'll try to impose additional charges on you later.
There can even be some genuinely free games where the "revenue" source is still obvious. A flash game that some geek coded by himself in his free time doesn't have enormous expenses to meet, and a bit of advertising on the site with the game, or even having the game distributed for free by other sites, could well meet the game's expenses. Some games are themselves advertisements, most commonly cheaply done things on a corporate web site where the premise of the game is that the corporations products are really wonderful. Occasionally there can even be larger budget such advertising games, such as America's Army, which was basically an advertisement for the United States Armed Forces. NASA is apparently working on such a game, too.
But when one gets to a game that advertises itself as free to play, but clearly cost quite a lot of money to develop, one has to be quite naive to think that the company isn't going to try very hard to get revenue out of you somehow. If they say that their revenue source is an item mall, but you don't have to actually buy anything from it, alarm bells should go off that they're probably at best being intentionally deceptive. If buying items from an item mall doesn't give any gameplay advantage, most players won't, and the company will get virtually no revenue. A company can't allow that, and will have to give large gameplay advantages for buying things from the item mall.
And the economic situation is worse than that when one considers who is playing those games. The author says that millions of people in "this region" play various "free to lose"/item mall games. I'm not entirely sure what "this region" means, but even if it means the United States only, I find the claim quite believable. Many of the people who play those games do so because they can't afford to play anything else. Perhaps they are kids who can't afford $15/month for a game subscription, or whose parents won't allow them to use a credit card online. If the reason they're playing an item mall game is that they can't pay a subscription, then they won't be able to buy anything from the item mall, either. A company making a "free to lose"/item mall game thus gets no revenue from a large fraction of its players.
The company thus needs to get a lot of revenue to pay for the game, and needs to get it from a relatively small fraction of the playerbase. The company thus usually needs to get quite a lot of revenue from the relative handful of players who do pay. The only way to do that is to make it so that further payments give further gameplay advantages up to a pretty high threshold--much higher than the $15/month of a typical subscription game. That means that either the "free to play" game is actually quite expensive, and far more so than a normal subscription game, or else that it's "free to lose" as I've been repeatedly saying here, as you'll be at a big gameplay disadvantage as compared to those who do pay a lot of money.
Indeed, economic reality dictates that if a "free to play"/item mall game has an item mall that doesn't really unbalance anything and doesn't get the company much revenue, they'll probably have to make the item mall more unbalancing in order to get more revenue in the future. Losing money in the first few months after launch while attracting players, only to try to make it up later with a more unbalancing item mall, is quite a plausible business strategy, and indeed, has been done on quite a number of occasions.
Could there be exceptions? While there could, if a company were making its marketing strategy one of telling players, we're not like those other "free to lose"/item mall games, and you can't gain any further gameplay advantage beyond $X/month, why wouldn't they display that prominently? A lot of the item mall games won't even tell you what's in their item mall until you get into the game, for about the same reasons as the stereotypical drug dealer saying, "Try it. You'll like it. The first one is on me."
And so, a challenge to the author: if you want anyone to believe that there are genuinely free to play item mall games that have considerable development costs, aren't in themselves more an advertisement than a game, and don't really mean "free to lose" unless you buy quite a bit from the item mall, then name one. Just one. It should be one that's been out for quite a while, so as to rule out the "lose money at first, but add a lot more to the item mall to make it up later" model.
I wasn't talking to you, the irony was you did just as he said you would. "F2P suck". The sentence you are upset about, also, was not about you, but the confusion of most in thinking that games like habbo hotell, or club penguin are not MMO's.
Nothing in life is free bub, so most F2P games have an "al cart" system. So finding a Free to play game, that doesn't use one, is quite a stupid thing to ask.
While F2P games in the past have been lacking in quality, its very hard to say, with games like RoM and many, MANY others that this is the case now. There are quite a number of F2P games with depth and quality. Not to mention lots of fun, and, if you are a responsible person, can end up being cheaper than a subscription based one, then again, sure YOU (you, yourself, *your name here*, the person in the mirror) can spend more, but, that's not their fault, no one is forcing you, for whatever reason, that was your choice.
I have been getting quite a bit of enjoyment out of some of the newer F2P titles, and good bang for my infrequent buck.
But keep hateing though.
When you get older, you will realize that nothing in life is free and these things won't be such an ire-inducing issue for you.
umm i think that the question is a good one, after all this is an article about f2p mmo games not really sucking,so the fact that your quoting another person and pointing out that they are not "grown up" seems silly after all what do we post here after an article telling us that f2p games dont suck,..there are a few that are pretty entertaining, perfect world is a good game,but most try to lure you in with the hopes of a game that is not p2p and then you have to atually pay for the good stuff, or to get the good stuf easier,and if the game is worth it i will pay more for stuff,hell i just dropped 30 bucks this month on CoX and there booster cosume packs, and if you think about it there are just as many horible horible P2P games out there, but at least when you have a f2p game you dont have to pay to know it sucks, you just dl it and you know right away,so no harm no foul,ummm well i am sure you can glean some wisdom from that or you could think its just a bunch of bull pucks, hehe, but my point was, you shouldnt put people down for asking the exact question that the article is about.
So, i supose every one is being "Scamed" by free trials too. I wonder how many of you realise how many things in this world, are the F2P model, under a diffrent name.
If a company says up front, the game has a free trial for two weeks or a couple starting areas or whatever, and then after that you'll have to pay, that's being perfectly honest and there's nothing wrong with that. If a company advertises a game as being completely free to play and then after you play a bit says, the free trial is over and now you'll have to pay, then that's fraudulent.
If a company says up front, the game has a free trial for two weeks or a couple starting areas or whatever, and then after that you'll have to pay, that's being perfectly honest and there's nothing wrong with that. If a company advertises a game as being completely free to play and then after you play a bit says, the free trial is over and now you'll have to pay, then that's fraudulent.
The argument is really about semantics and how much people pay attention to the "to play" part of "free to play."
Fact is, technically speaking, these games are "free to play." You don't have to buy a box (remember, term was coined when free to download sub games hadn't really been invented yet) and can play instantly without charge. Theoretically, you can play a lot of these games forever without paying. Only a certain percetange of players in any F2P game actually use the item mall.
That said, the term has always bothered me a bit too, but fact is, free games don't exist and if they did, they'd be horrible quality. These games are expensive to develop and expensive to maintain, so expecting truly free is absurd. Now to damn the whole genre because you don't like the industry standard term to describe them is a bit unfair.
I am going to call you on this... and you are not going to like it....
Let me name 3 Games.....
Eve
Everquest 2
World of Warcraft
Free to play is a marketing term, and as such has nothing to do with item malls (which is microtransactions). All three of these games offer free options, and as such just as much free to play as any game with an item mall.
Once you are paying to play, it doesnt matter how you pay (item mall, subscription, etc), the game is no longer free for you. The free option is only for those that dont pay.... and pretty much every competitive game has that today.... and so can be called Free to Play.
P.S. The next time you see a store with a Buy One, Get One Free sale, you should go protest that the second one isnt free, and that they are taking advantage of people by saying so.
Here is an easy way to shut up all the naysayers: Give us a single example of a F2P that doesnt suck.
Not saying there isnt a place for F2P, but I have yet to see a single game I would want to play. Thats all. You get what you pay for.
"suck" is subjective. There are lots of good F2P games, SOTNW, Wizard 101, Free relms, Rom...... List goes on.
Blood, every agme you mentioned is P2P or F2P item mall....still waiting
I am going to call you on this... and you are not going to like it....
Let me name 3 Games.....
Eve
Everquest 2
World of Warcraft
Free to play is a marketing term, and as such has nothing to do with item malls (which is microtransactions). All three of these games offer free options, and as such just as much free to play as any game with an item mall.
Once you are paying to play, it doesnt matter how you pay (item mall, subscription, etc), the game is no longer free for you. The free option is only for those that dont pay.... and pretty much every competitive game has that today.... and so can be called Free to Play.
P.S. The next time you see a store with a Buy One, Get One Free sale, you should go protest that the second one isnt free, and that they are taking advantage of people by saying so.
I don't understand what you are saying...Eve, WoW and EQ2 are subscription games, not F2P.
I don't understand what you are saying...Eve, WoW and EQ2 are subscription games, not F2P.
Only in north America. Every where else, they use a different model. Eve in the NA, also lets you buy credits.
The argument is really about semantics and how much people pay attention to the "to play" part of "free to play."
Fact is, technically speaking, these games are "free to play." You don't have to buy a box (remember, term was coined when free to download sub games hadn't really been invented yet) and can play instantly without charge. Theoretically, you can play a lot of these games forever without paying. Only a certain percetange of players in any F2P game actually use the item mall.
That said, the term has always bothered me a bit too, but fact is, free games don't exist and if they did, they'd be horrible quality. These games are expensive to develop and expensive to maintain, so expecting truly free is absurd. Now to damn the whole genre because you don't like the industry standard term to describe them is a bit unfair.
Good argument, I understand what your saying.
Topic of the thread is F2P games, or rather games that do not require subscription. You asking for a 100% free game. They don't exist.This may be your point, but your point is stupid.
Wizard101 has a free trial, but is not a free game. You can only play about 40% of the first world (out of five) before paying, and the first world is by far the shortest.
I understand what everyones saying, my only point is that these "f2p" games advertise as such, yet have a deep underlying system of getting lots of money. Since I have played every MMO, I can tell you that most "f2p" games dont allow you access to the most cruical elemts of the games for advancement. And I just feel that the quality of the gameplay is lacking in 90% of "f2p" titles I've played...
Everyone has great points, I just feel the "f2p" industry is weak at the moment, even great 2d "f2p" games I have played dont really allow you to advance much furthur without a sub.
Wizard101 has a free trial, but is not a free game. You can only play about 40% of the first world (out of five) before paying, and the first world is by far the shortest.
Oh, right. True, i think i paid them, like 1.50$ to open up a new zone WHEN I GOT TO THAT POINT. heh.. Fits me great, i pay for more content. When i get to it.
Its quite true though that under a subscription model: "You are over charging 50% of your player base, and undercharging the other 50%". F2P, or micro transaction games, break this.
See, i think thoes that are getting undercharged in a subscription model feel F2P games are too expensive, simply because now they are are paying their share, while those that have always been over charged under a subscription, are finally paying for only what they use.
There is an MMO out there that's free to play and no items malls. Guild wars will forever be free to play without items malls. Anarchy online doesn't have any items malls either unless they added them after I quite playing. Guild wars also has plenty of depth to it.
What games do you like? Have you tried RoM? It has quite a few of the features of many traditional P2P games, and there's quite a bit you can do in it without ever having to pay a dime. It definitely represents a step forward for the F2P genre, although it will probably attract the same amount of haters and detractors as most other games out there.
Since you make reference to a percentage, what percentage of P2P games have you found lacking? Many people who try to knock F2P generally as a genre use arguments that would apply equally well to P2P.
There is an MMO out there that's free to play and no items malls. Guild wars will forever be free to play without items malls. Anarchy online doesn't have any items malls either unless they added them after I quite playing. Guild wars also has plenty of depth to it.
You listed guild wars? Yes, while a good deal. to get anything new you have to shell out 60$.
IMHO, I see the free vs. pay argument as more of a social issue.
From the time we are born (especially in the U.S.), we are socialized to think that "bigger" and "more expensive" is better.
There is a multitude of generic products on the market that are less expensive, but the majority of people still buy the name-brand. Even the term 'generic' has a certain stigma attached to it. The grocery store doesn't market generic items in the same way as the name-brand stuff. We are lead to believe that it's less effective just by the way it's presented to us.
I challenge anyone reading this to look at two products, one you pay for and one that's free, and HONESTLY say their first reaction isn't to assume the free (or cheaper) product is of lower quality. If you can, then you are better than most people, but I suspect there are very few of you.
I guess I see this because the last few MMOs I purchased were so abysmal that I've gotten to the point that I refuse to pay for MMOs any longer. I still play GW because I purchased it a long time ago and there is no monthly fee and LOTRO because I started playing on day one and I purchased a lifetime sub. If I had to pay a monthly fee for either of them, I wouldn't play. They are just not that good, IMO.
I think that the number of good free MMOs is just as high as the number of good pay MMOs and I'd rather sift through them without shelling out my hard earned cash until I find something I like. But that's just me.
I think of FtP games more as "pay as much s you feel like paying" rather than trully free.
I was pretty skeptical of them until recently, haveing tried some pretty terrible ones a few years back. About the only one I really enjoyed much was Shot Online, and even that got stale quickly (a golf MMO can only hold my attention so long).
However the good press that Wizard 101 finally tempted me to get my feet wet again, and I'm glad that I did. You have the option to unlock everything with a small sub, or buy permanent access to zones as you go (it runs about a dollar or two per zone you want to unlock). I went the latter route and I'd guess I've spent about ten bucks in the last two months buying new zones. The combat system has quite a bit of depth to it at higher levels. It's a very nice change of pace from the nearly identical turn based combat systems that so many other MMOs use. Since getting my feet wet in Wizard 101, I've tried out a few other modern FtP MMOs and been impressed at how much the quality of the better ones has improved from what I remember a few years back.
But really, if you are convinced that FtP MMOs are "teh suk" and always will be nothing anyone else writes is going to change your mind. All that really matters is whether an MMO is fun, and "fun" is subjective. WoW bores the hell out of me, it's gotten way too easy (to my tastes) with recent updates. However millions of other peaple think it's the most fun MMO on the market. None of us is "right or wrong," we just have different tastes.
I just don't like the fairly standard F2P model of item malls. Most all of those games have a progression such that it is highly desirable to purchase certain items for gameplay via the mall. Add to that things such as multiple content "boxes" you purchase where you have a certain percentage chance to get the item(s) you want and it's very easy to spend $200-300 or more in a week trying to get items that facilitate gameplay.
In one week you just spent more than what you would for an entire year (roughly 12 months * $15= $180) for your typical P2P game. In your typical P2P game you have access to all of those desirable items and have only to put in the time and effort, and possibly grab a few people to help you, to achieve them.
Based on that, I don't think I'd have much interest in playing something that I know I'm not going to be content playing because they have designed the gameplay to enhance the appeal of the items in the item mall. If this still comes off as a "F2P suck" answer, well, sorry. Seems like a very legitimate reason to me. Oh, and yes, I've played a couple of them, lol.
Wow, that's again, YOUR CHOICE. Is there something about video games that removes common money Sense from people?
Your blaming developers, because people are dumb? Looks to me like they gave that person just what they wanted.
It's not just the quality of the coding and quest lines and so forth that determines whether a game is fun to play. The business model has a big impact, too. It's not fun to lose because someone else paid more to buy from the item mall than you. It's not so fun to win just because you bought more from the item mall than someone else, either, though I guess it at least beats losing for the opposite reason. Winning and losing should depend primarily on what the player does in the game, not on how much he paid.
Even looking back at some of the best games ever made, if they had used the "free to lose"/item mall approach, I probably wouldn't have liked them. About the only reason I have to say "probably" rather than "definitely" there is that I'm not sure what that business model would mean for a single player offline game. There are almost certainly games that do use the "free to lose"/item mall business model that I'd have liked if they used a straight subscription model.
This is by far the worst written article on MMORPG I have seen over all the years I have been a member for. :(
You know what? I actually like the idea of winning because you pay more money. Why? Because in that arena I'm very competitive, I'd say I can afford to shell out enough to keep me in the top third of the competitive tier.
Contrast that with most standard MMORPG's that reward players who have lots of free time on their hands to play. Time is a precious commodity for me and I can never put in enough time to bring myself out of the bottom third tier.
So for me, paying to win is a feasible model. Understandable that some folks might not want to compete in the manner, but for me, it works out well.
EVEs another great game for me. My training happens even when I'm logged off, and if I need ISK, I can buy what I want to fill the gaps that my lack of farming time might leave. (hasn't really been a problem once I got past the starting 6 months or so)
Back on topic. I tried a number of free to play games. (lets say 10 or). I didn't like them. I felt they were either simplistic rip-offs that used the Lineage 2 engine, or badly translated, and poorly implemented.
Then I found Runes of Magic, and changed my mind completely about the model. Finally I found a quality game in the "F2P" genre. (but boy, is F2P truly a misnomer in that game)
Never the less, I grouped with 2 players (level 33 or so) that had not spent a cent on the game, so it is possible to do so.(but they've been living w/o a mount, which I find to be their real accomplishment, because the game sucks w/o a mount)
A game where winning and losing is strictly based on how much free time you have isn't fun either. I'm aware that a lot of MMORPGs go that route, both subscription and otherwise, and I don't like those games, either.
Let me start off by saying that I do admire the fact that you, Richard Aihoshi, are willing to intelligently debate this subject. I do understand that there are a lot of subscription players with the attitude you described in your column, and I am sure you understand that not all of us subscription MMORPG players have the same attitude. While I do not agree with the free to play business model, I do not feel that all free to play games are the bane of the industry.
One of the first subjects you covered in your column was how many players make broad and sweeping generalizations about the revenue model as a whole, and attack the developers and games for making "suck-y" games. While I do not feel that all free to play games "suck", I will say that there are a lot of free to play games that mimic eachother, and often have only minute differences in gameplay experiences. There is a severe lack of innovation, in my opinion, with games that subscribe to that business model. Even if the game is free to play, there is no excuse for a lack of quality; it is just accepted by free to play gamers because they are not paying subscription fees.
However, when most subscription MMORPG players state that free to play games "suck", I think the general consensus is that people do not agree with the revenue model. The game relies on microtransactions, or "cash shops", to remain profitable. Often as a way to incentivise purchasing items for a character, these microtransactions sacrifice the integrity of the legitimacy of a character's progression, namely by providing items that give these paying players an edge over non-paying players. It turns into a battle of dollars, and thus becomes not a game of who plays better, but who spends more money to beef up their character.
It is not that subscription MMORPG players are against the practice of microtransactions in a game, it is that it is far too reminiscent of real money trading, or gold selling, which has plagued subscription MMORPGs for many years. It is often that subscription MMORPG players associate spending extra money on a game with cheating, and that is essentially why the free to play model is often demeaned within those circles.
The challenge free to play games face today is trying to separate themselves from the stigma of real money trading, and trying to display that while they may be free to play, the game quality is not sacrificed to provide that revenue model. It is going to take a phenomenal title to help break that stigma, and a bastion of hope for that revenue model is The Old Republic. When these titles begin distancing themselves from the current notions held by a large section of the gaming community, you will see a lot less resistance and uproar when a game does decide to use that revenue model.
As a side note, I have written a column on my own fan site regarding my personal opinion on the two revenue models, which you can find here: www.globalagendamc.com/forums/showthread.php.
Finally, I'd like to say thank you to you, Richard, for providing an outlet for a healthy discussion on the subject.
Disagreeing with someone's topic doesn't make it poorly written. If you have any technical complaints about the writing, feel free to send them over. From a purely written point of view, I don't see what you have to complain about.
You listed guild wars? Yes, while a good deal. to get anything new you have to shell out 60$.
That's no different than buying an expasion pack and the price goes down just like any other expansion, I've seen one for 20 dollars in stores. You have to buy expansion packs when you play subscription based games as well. The only difference is that with guild wars you don't pay a subscription fee.
Disagreeing with someone's topic doesn't make it poorly written. If you have any technical complaints about the writing, feel free to send them over. From a purely written point of view, I don't see what you have to complain about.
While I wouldn't call it the worst article I've seen, the whole thing is one lengthy logical fallacy. It goes after a couple of absurd strawman arguments that aren't what people commonly say, and then criticizes players for not liking a business model without ever considering the reasons why players don't like the business model.
"suck" is subjective.
If it's so subjective then why does he bring it up at all? He was implicitly asking for an opinion. Dont ask for an opinion if you dont want to hear it.
I've never seen a F2P game I thought was as appealing as most P2P games. That may change eventually (not holding my breath, but anything is possible), but right now they all look pretty ameturish compared to the P2P stuff to me. Thats my "subjective" opinion. And it appears I'm not alone.
However, when most subscription MMORPG players state that free to play games "suck", I think the general consensus is that people do not agree with the revenue model. The game relies on microtransactions, or "cash shops", to remain profitable. Often as a way to incentivise purchasing items for a character, these microtransactions sacrifice the integrity of the legitimacy of a character's progression, namely by providing items that give these paying players an edge over non-paying players.
That too, although the lower quality/support is the main problem I have with F2P personally. But yeah, I dont like the idea of being able to "buy" victory or advancement. Kinda defeats the whole point of playing doesnt it?
Disagreeing with someone's topic doesn't make it poorly written. If you have any technical complaints about the writing, feel free to send them over. From a purely written point of view, I don't see what you have to complain about.
This is true, but I believe it's quite obvious that writing Diry instead of Dirty and then writing a sentence like this.
Many people "free to play" is a dirty word.
Which says enough for me, it's poorly written english. Please.. read it and patch it up. :)
I am just giving my opinion, plain and simple.
source: http://www.mmorpg.com/newsRoom.cfm/read/13712/utm_campaign/MMORPG%20News%20Alert%20Email/utm_source/MMORPG/utm_medium/email
OH NOZ! a typo, this invalidates EVERYTHING he said!
What I replied to has nothing to do with what he said, seems you have nothing better to do then flame people. Without even knowing what I am talking about in the first place.
It's funny.
That's pretty much one of the main reasons I don't play F2P games. Poor English spelling and grammar.
You only get whatever enjoyment you get from a F2P game be it using items to help advance your toon or just the knowledge that you reached the end game with no items from the mall. As is truely stated in various posts it's not totally free to play, it does cost you something in the end, which sometimes is a big headache.
Any game> watching TV
All games are worthy, whether they are free to play or not. If people have fun in those games- it doesn't matte if it costs $15 a month or it's free.
I pay for LoTRO and my brother pays for WoW. My daughter plays Neopets for free and my friend Becky ( a Veterinarien, no less!) plays Gaia for free. All 4 of us have fun in our respective games. It's all good. Any game beats watching TV every night:)
This is true, but I believe it's quite obvious that writing Diry instead of Dirty and then writing a sentence like this.
Many people "free to play" is a dirty word.
Which says enough for me, it's poorly written english. Please.. read it and patch it up. :)
I am just giving my opinion, plain and simple.
source: http://www.mmorpg.com/newsRoom.cfm/read/13712/utm_campaign/MMORPG%20News%20Alert%20Email/utm_source/MMORPG/utm_medium/email
Oh the news item, that is far from his fault. I must have rushed through it, both typos were exclusively mine. Neither of those typos appear in the actual article, apologies.
This is true, but I believe it's quite obvious that writing Diry instead of Dirty and then writing a sentence like this.
Many people "free to play" is a dirty word.
Which says enough for me, it's poorly written english. Please.. read it and patch it up. :)
I am just giving my opinion, plain and simple.
source: http://www.mmorpg.com/newsRoom.cfm/read/13712/utm_campaign/MMORPG%20News%20Alert%20Email/utm_source/MMORPG/utm_medium/email
Oh the news item, that is far from his fault. I must have rushed through it, both typos were exclusively mine. Neither of those typos appear in the actual article, apologies.
So you were slacking..tsk..tsk..tsk.
Oh the news item, that is far from his fault. I must have rushed through it, both typos were exclusively mine. Neither of those typos appear in the actual article, apologies.
So you were slacking..tsk..tsk..tsk.
I prefer the term "Mondays" to "slacking" :)
What I replied to has nothing to do with what he said, seems you have nothing better to do then flame people. Without even knowing what I am talking about in the first place.
Your saying a few typos make this the "worst article ever". I was just matching your extremes. you also, need to read more MMORPG.com articles.
Disagreeing with someone's topic doesn't make it poorly written. If you have any technical complaints about the writing, feel free to send them over. From a purely written point of view, I don't see what you have to complain about.
I'm a writer by profession and many times when someone disagrees with what I've written, I get the "you are a bad writer" comment.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, criticize.
back on topic..
i like f2p, yes most of them are poor quality but you noly wasted some time playing no money.
and i still have not found a p2p game to get my attention. and i bought WAR for £35 and only played for 20 hours max :S
the truth is F2P suit's my life style (my current MMO of choice is RF:online) i only play now and again due to work / college and i don't feel scammed out of money (which i would if i played a F2P)
@Quizzicle
@ Player_420
First off let me say that Quizzical’s post was fantastic.
That being said, I disagree with a couple of things, to a point. You both assume that every player is trying to catch up to or beat the community in terms of prestige. Lets face it, this is true for a large amount of players, including myself, but it is not true for all; especially players new to an mmorpg, which are the vast majority or F2p players.
You are essentially saying the object of the game is a competition for everyone is to kill monster A, get item B and gain Level C before the other player does. This constitutes “winning”. Since item malls give players who spend money an advantage over the players who choose to spend nothing i.e. “play for free”, the players who play free “play to lose”. Well…
@quizzical
By your logic ALL mmorpg games are “play to lose” because the advantage you give to spending money in an item mall is no different than the advantage of time. Players who have more time to play can also kill monster A, get item B and gain Level C faster than people who can’t play as much. An age-old bone of contention with mmorpgs and sadly your logic reveals this to be true, as has been known forever.
Consider players X, Y and Z who want to compete for prestige. Players X and Y like most of us do not have a lot of time to play. Z has no life and plays 22 hours a week. It is frustrating for players X and Y to watch player Z rocket ahead of them (age old bone of contention). Enter the item mall. As if the time issue was not enough, now player X, who does not have much money either, has to watch player Y rocket ahead of him because now Y can spend money on double xp cards in the item mall. To make matters worse for player X, he has to watch player Z rocket ahead even further since he has time to play AND money to spend. Y can compete with money, Z can compete with money and time, X who was ok with the handful of players who played 22 hours a week, now has to deal with the item mall as well. If he wants to compete for prestige and spends no money or excessive amounts of time, he essentially “plays to lose”. I agree with you in context to the play to compete for prestige, measuring everything you do against other players in the game.
@Quizzicle
@ Player_420
Here is where I disagree, to a point ;p
While part of a traditional mmorpgs mechanic is the de facto competition for prestige gained by out leveling those around you or having the coolest gear/clothes etc, success at this mechanic is not required to actually play the game. Either way, as a player I can still kill monster A, get item B and gain Level C, and enjoy doing it. Just because I can’t do it as easily as those who buy items (or spend more time playing) doesn’t mean I lose.
Granted, for those without money or time to burn, the sale of a double-xp card or more powerful items in an item mall is a direct disadvantage to those who compete for prestige in this way, as are the sale of “cool” clothes and pets, but still these items are not necessary to actually play and enjoy combat and other aspects of the game such as exploration, socializing with friends etc. This is proven by the amount of players who do play F2p mmorpgs and don’t use the malls. Ultimately, you can use the item mall or not, or play 10 minutes a week or 100 hours, but you can still play them game, and enjoy it; it just depends on your expectations and play style.
For example, I played Maplestory until about level 30 with my character. I absolutely loved the retro console-game play style and the look and feel of the world. I found it quite immersive and enjoyable. In addition, these games have a real charm to them. It was enough to keep me playing for a while. I scanned the item mall and there were many items I could have used or would have liked to own, but since I could play without them and I had no cash to burn, I chose not to purchase anything. Players who did buy these items were of course, way ahead of me in terms of prestige, level, and consuming content but I didn’t care and I still had fun. For a while…
Why I quit
I did not play the game looking for complexity; I wanted fun. Despite its charm, what chased me away was the endless, painful and mind numbing grind-the hallmark of F2p mmorpgs like Maplestory, Angels Online (PAIN) and a multitude of others. Players new to mmos and the “grind” mechanic might stick around for a long time, especially if they invest any money in their character. Experienced players like myself who have played many P2p mmorpgs have different expectations in terms of what we can expect to get for our valuable time spent grinding. In P2p, we have access to everything in the game, essentially the more we grind the more we get. Not so in F2p.
“Free”
F2p games are theoretically “free” to attract a multitude of players in the hopes of snaring the portion of those players who compete hard for prestige at any cost, knowing that their competitive nature will have them spending money in the item malls. The players who do not play make up the bulk of ‘society” and they are the ones the elite show off too and feel better than. Any player concerned with prestige will think about shopping at the mall, some will spend a little to compete, some will spend a lot, some will quit and be angry, justifiably criticizing the game, based on their expectations, as “free to lose”.
Finally, addressing the original point of the OP.
Since you don’t “need” to purchase items to play, technically it’s “free to play”. This doesn’t mean all F2p mmorpg games suck, but that they are different, some good some bad. It means that while offering many enjoyable experiences to their own communities, paying or otherwise, they offer significantly less when it comes to the expectations of a seasoned P2p mmorpg player. They offer less and even offend those that compete for prestige (which I would venture to say comprises the majority on these forums) and multiply the age old problem of time with the addition of item malls. Similar to why P2p mmorpgs try to shut down gold sales. This can translate into hatred and the review that “they all suck” very easily. On a forum overwhelmingly populated by traditional P2p players of mmorpg games what did you expect?
It must be noted that F2p games attract a lot of new players which is very important for the industry since many will go on to try other games when they leave. I would venture to say they are good for the growth of the industry.
Now, with all that being said, I believe someone saying they all “suck”, although a little strong or uncouth, is a fair extrapolation of what the average player from this site looking for a game that will meet or exceed their expectations will ultimately experience after playing one. LOL
I used Maplestory as an example because its one of the most successful of the F2p models and Nexon is the expert in micro payment models, working and innovating them since around 1992.
If anyone cares, I think this is the best review ever of Maplestory and I think sums up most F2p mmorpgs in general in terms of what they offer.
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/229576/Maplestory-Korean-grind-festReview.html
P.S. I assume that the OP first language is not English. If people who generalize their criticisms into the form of “it sucks” bothers you enough to post a rebuttal, then I highly suggest you get someone to check your articles for grammar mistakes. Otherwise, you will be pulling out your hair out, as everyone who disagrees with you will begin their posts by attacking your writing skills.
Dev
The goal is not simply to level the fastest or gain the most prestige. As I said elsewhere in this thread, I don't like games that are basically a contest of who has the most free time. Anyone who is impressed by your spending a lot of money on a game or having a lot of free time isn't worth impressing.
Rather, what I want is for a game to provide interesting challenges. If I set out to kill some mobs to do a quest, the question is how hard is it to kill the mobs. If it's all but undoable without buying stuff from the item mall, then buying the stuff from the item mall is essentially mandatory. Likewise, if it's all but undoable without spending a bunch of time grinding levels, then grinding levels is mandatory, and that's game-breaking.
If a game has PvP, the advantages of levels or item malls are far more important. PvP doesn't become interesting until everyone is essentially at the level cap with perfect gear. In some games, that never happens. In an item mall game, that probably requires you to buy a ton of stuff from the item mall. If one can't avoid PvP in those games, that destroys the game.
If a game caps the amount that you can spend to make your character stronger at a reasonably low level (as a subscription game typically does), then it's not a contest of whoever pays the most wins. Liikewise, if a game caps how long you can advance your character (e.g., by letting you reach the level cap and so forth quickly), then it's not a contest of who has the most free time.
If a "free to play"/item mall game were to say that you could spend $20/month and get all the possible advantages from the item mall at that price, I'd consider playing it. But with the game getting $0 from most of its players, the typical model requires them to get a lot more than that from the handful of players who do pay.
Its a fair point, i enjoy mmo's of all kinds if people dont like free to play mmos thats ok. u will always get haters thats what some people are like. i think f2p is popular an a good place to start mmo'ing, so go for it if anyone wants to get into it. i dont think that collum post was really called for but then again i would be pretty pissed if someone called what i was exploring shit then i would probably write something similar.
Do any of you realize how flawed the argument of "it isn't free to play, I have to spend money on item malls! the marketing is a lie!" is?
YOU ARE NOT REQUIRED TO USE THE ITEM MALLS. You WANT to, because by doing so it allowed you to skip a large amount of tedium. Stop confusing wants with needs.
I have yet to see a F2P game that isn't free to play.
This is true, but I believe it's quite obvious that writing Diry instead of Dirty and then writing a sentence like this.
Many people "free to play" is a dirty word.
Which says enough for me, it's poorly written english. Please.. read it and patch it up. :)
I am just giving my opinion, plain and simple.
source: http://www.mmorpg.com/newsRoom.cfm/read/13712/utm_campaign/MMORPG%20News%20Alert%20Email/utm_source/MMORPG/utm_medium/email
Oh the news item, that is far from his fault. I must have rushed through it, both typos were exclusively mine. Neither of those typos appear in the actual article, apologies.
Sorry, I was actually talking about you. I think I should have included my source right away.
And still you have one more mistake in your post.
> To many people "free to play" is a dirty word.
To many people believe "free to play" is a dirty word.
...
As for the guy responding with, "they suck" I personally think he needs to have a sock put into his mouth, either give valueable input to the matter or do not say anything at all. Not all of the F2P games suck actually, nor do all of them have bad spelling in them. There are definitely quality F2P games out there.
Your saying a few typos make this the "worst article ever". I was just matching your extremes. you also, need to read more MMORPG.com articles.
As a writer, I can tell you that the mark of a "good" writer is not in his/her spelling, but in the ability to remember to run spell check.
My main issue with F2P games is that they su..uhm, they don't seem to be on par with subscription based games when it comes to quality of gameplay and funfactor. They are mostly grindathons with average mobs, very little variety and ai in mobs and hardly any deep and unique environments that roleplayers can enjoy. I've tried many of them, and i'd say the exception sort of is guild wars though that is not a completely free to play game as you still have to buy the game boxes (you can pick up the whole series for about 60 dollars now though.
The last free to play games i tried where atlantica online and runes of magic. I couldnt get into the combat system of Atlantica Online, it just wasn't fun to me, and runes of magic just felt like a cheap rip off from WoW. We invest more then money in these games, we also invest a lot of time (time we could use to make money for example) and to invest a lot of time in a game that literally feels like a poor man's WoW is a lot of waste in my opinion.
What I lack from this article on MMORPG.COM is examples. If F2P games aren't so bad, okay fine, but what are these F2P games that aren't so bad you speak of? Because if there is one out there that can really compete with subscription games then I'd really like to know.
Furthermore, I really put questionmarks at these claims that millions of people are playing these F2P games. The thing I've noticed with a couple of these games is they advertise their game as being huge successes, they literally advertise claiming to have over 1 million subscriptions, but then you log in only to find 2-3 servers at max. When you log into WoW europe you can see more then 40 servers many of them heavy population, and then you don't even count the spanish, english, french and russian wow servers. I'm pretty sure that in the west, WoW alone has more players then all free to play games combined. In the far-east it might be different.
I would love to find a good F2P game that I enjoyed. I have tried quite a few, but they have all been disappointing (possibly because I don't like anime models).
I don't understand what you are saying...Eve, WoW and EQ2 are subscription games, not F2P.
Only in north America. Every where else, they use a different model. Eve in the NA, also lets you buy credits.
Not really. WoW is also subscription based in Europe, Russia, South Korea, Australia and New Sealand. The only region where WoW uses a different model is China.
Only in north America. Every where else, they use a different model. Eve in the NA, also lets you buy credits.
Not really. WoW is also subscription based in Europe, Russia, South Korea, Australia and New Sealand. The only region where WoW uses a different model is China.
And even then it's pay by the minute/hour. Hardly FTP.
I have the same problem, I am a anime fan but many games use anime graphics as an excuse to use low polygone count models and that just looks bad.
But that is not the problem, really. The problem is that all F2P games (unless you count Guildwars as a F2P game) are very shallow and boring. I care about gameplay and it is her the F2P games are generally a lot worse.
Games like Perfect world, Runes of magic and Sword of the new world looks nice but they are not fun, at least not in the long run. The better P2P games are fun for months or even years, and until F2P games can deliver that I stay with P2P.
Item malls dont bother me really, the ones that moan are the ones that have no money, but then again i only currently play the monthly subscription games becouse all the F2P so to say ive tried which is around probally 90% of the current ones have shite graphics which is why they are so quick to market, usually around 4 weeks production lol, the korean game style of stand there and whack 10,000 creatures to level, and no content what so ever which to me sounds as much fun as pulling my own teeth out with pliers.
The article itself offered very little explanation as to why F2P was a viable alternative to subscription based games, anyone with a keyboard can contrust an argument of equal strength. Giving a single generic example of an hypothetical situation (an extreme one at that) to illustrate your point is just as simple-minded as the fictional protagonist who claims all F2P games suck.
And what if they were all in China? Do players there somehow count for less? Numerically, it's the world's largest market by far, and if it's not already the leader in terms of overall revenue, it's catching up very quickly.
Let's face it, the Asian market is nothing like it's NA/EU equivalent. F2P grindfests are released all the time, many don't make it to this part of the world because quite frankly, they're not up to the much higher standards we expect from our games. It's a totally different mindset, one which doesn't translate extremely well to European/American markets. Aion is a fairly good representation of this, I wouldn't pay to play an unfinished, bug-ridden game and I don't know many people who would. I understand it is doing just fine over there though.
As for F2P games themselves, you get what you pay for, which in this case is nothing. That means lower quality goods, poor support, etc, etc. Many (not all) F2P games do lack the depth associated with P2P, mostly because they are developed by independant companies that lack the manpower to dedicate the required time and effort to providing a top quality product. To make up for the lack of this, you'd expect (or demand) gameplay to exceed the norm to compensate and let's face it, very few meet the required standards to compete with their bigger P2P rivals. Those that have genuinely original ideas are often let down by a multitude of sins in other departments that generally see them ending up as just another game on the growing list found here.
Generally, F2P games lack that undefinable characteristic that makes a "good game." I understand this is most likely down to personal preference, but the mass of F2P games I've tried have all been missing that certain something that sinks it's hooks in and leaves you yearning for more. I'm sure there is a large market for F2P, but I doubt it will ever rival subscription based games that large companies can sink vast amounts of cash into. It would take a minor miracle (or an act of God) to make an F2P game that could seriously compete with the giants of P2P.
This poster just pretty much owned the author in every shape form and fashion. I really have nothing to add to this because this person pretty much said it all. In other words /agree
Wow, that's again, YOUR CHOICE. Is there something about video games that removes common money Sense from people?
Your blaming developers, because people are dumb? Looks to me like they gave that person just what they wanted.
If you'd get off your own defensive kick and actually read what I wrote (instead of cherry-picking that why don't you quote the whole thing so that it can be read in the way I meant it), and also put out of your mind our past disagreements in another thread, you'd see that I was speaking solely for moi. Not anyone else. I gave the reason why I don't won't play them. I'd offer that there is something about forums that removes reading comprehension...
I'm pretty sure I didn't "blame" anyone. They decided to make their game that way (F2P) and I'm deciding not to play it because I see the, in my eyes, trick. Playing on the impulse buying habits of your typical human being and their ego to be better than the next guy. As for the example I gave, which came from Atlantica Online, no, they didn't give the person what they wanted. That person never got the item from the random box they bought and were complaining about it on the forums. Personally, I don't care. I see the system for what it is and didn't buy Item Mall crap, though I did go have a look to verify the items there and see what impact they had on gameplay. That impact was significant enough to sucker people who already don't have fiscal control of their real lives to continue it in their virtual lives.
All that said, I have not attacked nor proclaimed your precious F2P games "suck". You can continue to feel good about playing them. Carry on.
I play Voyage Century. F2P with Item mall.
I love the game although many will say "it sucks". It hasn't cost me one cent and probably never will and I have been playing close to a year now. Now that really sucks!
No I am not an uber top level player and probably never will be. Does this bother me? No because I am having fun! For free!
And personally it doesn't bother me one bit that the "F2P's suck!" crowd doesn't like them. I think it makes for a much better community ingame because more people are playing for fun (it's free) rather than playing because they paid $50 bucks plus subscription for a game they hate and now feel they have to play to get their money's worth, all while telling everyone else how much their P2P game "Sucks".
PS: you can also trade ingame money for item mall goodies and thus still be Uber without having to pay. Thank god some people do pay though otherwise we wouldn't have this great F2P game!
There's no reason to even have this arguement based on the fact that you're (the OP) trying to reason with ignorance. To provide a horrible example, this task is similar to trying to put out a fire with olive oil or alcohol. The more you become infuriated, the more you try to convey, and persuade these ignorant, incessantly moronic, skull heads, the more you provide pleasure for such fools. You, and you're hypothetical opponent (which may comprise more than half of the world) are not striving for similar goals--in fact your goals have no relavence. While you try to win an argument with reason and logic for the perferred product of a sound conclusion, you're opponent is trying to win with juvenile tactics--such as, "Dude....you're mom...lolomfgNewb"-- for the purpose of frustrating you. I ask, why bother? You can't change ignorance with reason or logic. You can't convey ideas and perspective to someone who is not willing to even contemplate such things. Let the morons rant about how F2P games suck. They are not persuading anyone of sound mind to think differently of the genre, they're only leading their knuckle-head friends off the perverbial cliff anyways. Besides, would you even what such idiocracy manifested in human form to contribute to the F2P communities? If you start a lemonade stand, why invite big, fat, booger-eating Charlie smash the un-officail concession stand to tiny, little bits?
I can see people are taking too seriously P2P and F2P models as a whole, but I believe these models cannot be treated as a whole anymore.
Most F2P criticism are about:
- The lies of being free while it is actually Free to play, they never said it was free to be competitive, it is a marketing (which many people consider to be evil, tricky, devil contract, etc) strategy;
- About Item Malls, which may trick you in spending more money than you would ever believe you could be able to - it's an endless possibility and game updates will be directed in that way;
- About lower quality. And that is why they created this genre, which merely stands for "endless trial" as your trial for that game is not bound in time, but rather in content or competitivity in the game, as the game was full of great Pay to Play games and there has always been the crowd that wants to play for free as long as they want, the chance of these lower budget games to stand up against the current juggernauts was low. Unfortunately this opened doors to even lower quality/budget games which have created a horrible impression of the F2P genre.
Well i can tend to agree with most of the content that the writers here put out,i can't agree this time.
F2P has one VERY large black mark and that is allowing RMT to flourish untouched because they can make limitless accounts.Also it seems that F2P = low budget operation so you will also get low budget anti cheat as we all know of as "GAME GUARD".A totally useless pile of trash and EVERYONE knows it does NOT work,so why do these F2P developers keep using it?because they are low budget,and the game is always low budget as well.
Many would argue GW is good,i would agree for a single player,instance game it is alright,but it should not be i nthe MMO genre and it is not quite free as you have to buy the game and expansions.
Back to the F2P scheme of things,i ask myself why would a game allow thousands/millions of freebie users to utilize their bandwidth?All these RMT botters do not support the game,so the game gets no money from these RMT's.Well i know it sounds skeptic but i believe they have their hands tied into the RMT,i am not sure how involved but they are most definitely get some kinfd of kick back or are directly running these operations themselves,outside of the main operation of course.This allows them to make real life money that is not taxed under any government and is put directly into their pockets.This way they can actually claim their operation as a loss of profit and sit on the beach in Maui,sipping Pina Coladas.
There is yet another problem that botting creates,besides ruining the game economy,it allows players to vault above all others while not even at their PC.This is huge if the game involves open PVP or there is strict competition for elite high level bosses.The solution of charging for subscriptions is a start ,but the developer still has to free the game of any botting and use a working anti-cheat and so far i have not see na F2P utilize any of it.Even worse the RMT botters using illegal software link 3/4/5/6/7 players together,so they can follow each other around the game and heal and wipe anything in their path.
This poster just pretty much owned the author in every shape form and fashion. I really have nothing to add to this because this person pretty much said it all. In other words /agree
This doesn't say it all. There is no logically necessity between method of payment and game quality having to be directly related, if they are related at all. If hypothetical game "A" can be good, and be free, then--no thing if this is ACTUALLY possible, not if you DON"T LIKE IT-- method of payment is not a NECESSARY aspect for game quality.
This post only talks about "scams," and other such hodge-podge. Ever played Warhammer Online? They billed me outright, but they most certainly were not donating that money to charity. Oh, and the game sucked...but it was a P2P game...uh, oh. I have a different opinion. I might as well put on my ignorant cap, because that's the only way to win an argument.
If hypothetical "scam" can-- remember possibly, this isn't a question of preference--exist as a P2P game, then you're theory that all F2P games is illogical, because the quality of being a "scam" is not necessary to the category of F2P games.
Exercise a little open-mindedness and perspective before you declare your viewpoint supreme.
My biggest issue with the entire idea of a F2P "column" is still the "who cares" factor.
I'm not interested in playing them for a variety of reasons much more defined than "they suck". They tend to be horrid clones in a genre already lacking in diversity. The graphics tend to be exceptionally poor and very "old tech". The gameplay tends to be even more of a repetitve grindfest than most Sub-based MMOs. They tend to lack any real story or writing. Oh yeah, I also dislike the microtransaction payment method for anything, to me it's like having to buy every individual nut, screw, spring, washer and widget to get a fishing pole...and then having to pay for the fish too.
So, I'm not (edit doh!) interested in the games, so I certainly don't want to see a column devoted to the sort of fluff press coverage this site gives to most up and coming/new games. I certainly don't want to debate the ins and outs of playing one of the games. So what's left? A fairly boring academic debate of the "merits" and details of various business models...yawn.
I read this site for info on games I might be interested in playing....and that's subscription based MMOs....
(and when surfing the anime porn gets boring, so I can argue with some of you!)
I'm with Kyleran. If I ever play a fun, engaging F2P(item mall) game. I won't hesitate to buy my way to a more enjoyable time. I have no moral quandaries when it comes to playing video games. Its my hobby, and I don't mind spending money on a fun game.
The only problem I have is I've never played a fun, engaging F2P game.
I dont think there should even be an argument about this semantic nonsense, can't we just leave that aside and discuss the issues that really matter? Like how much enjoyment are we getting out of f2p games when they're free and how much enjoyment are we getting when we pay 14.95US in itemmall purchases a month? Are the levels of enjoyment competative? If I decided to go crazy and spend 45 dollars a month on itemmall purchases how much is my enjoyment of the game going to grow? Will it be 3X or just slightly? OR will it be more?
Guild Wars is not a MMO, it is a Cooperative Online RPG, it merely ended up being considered one because of its unique genre. Guild Wars 2, however, will be.
I am still seeing a lot of lack of understanding of what Free to Play means....
Free to play means that you do not HAVE to pay, in order to play. It doesnt guarantee that the experience will be the same for both paying and non paying customers.
Let me give an example, yahoo mail. They offer free email, and many people use it... but they also offer yahoo mail plus. This offers more storage and many additional options. People who pay more get more. That doesnt make their normal service any less free.
So, now that this is clear, lets look at some free to play games:
FreeRealms
This is a NEW F2P game... with a monthly fee.
FusionFall
This is another New F2P game... with a monthly fee.
These are clear examples that free does not mean an item mall (it means no charges). They clearly market the game as free, but are based on monthly fees.
Next we can compare this to a classic P2P game... that has a F2P option:
Eve Online
This game does not require any payment upfront. This game sells monthly game cards for in game money. This combination allows players to play without ever paying a dime.
Then we have games like EQ and EQ2...
Both of these charge for the game, and charge a monthly fee, and have an item mall. They are clearly pay to play.
So, it is clear that there are many state of the art, innovative games that are free to play, and that there are also old and not so state of the art pay to play games.... so making generalizations does not help anyone.
You mean its not an MMORPG. MMO is a blanket designation for games that are massive, multiplayer, and online. There is MMORPG, MMOFPS, MMORTS, MMOCOG (Guild Wars), and probably a dozen more I can't think of right now.
1) Your twenty years old and claiming to have played, Quote," I have played EVERY MMO " and you want us to belive you? -' yer sure mate, what ever you say "
2) Oh and a F2P without an item shop, that isn't linear, hmm let me think, how about," Shadowbane " it's F2P, pretty sure it has no itemshop and isn't linear, but you can tell us all, since your playing it.
Oh the news item, that is far from his fault. I must have rushed through it, both typos were exclusively mine. Neither of those typos appear in the actual article, apologies.
Sorry, I was actually talking about you. I think I should have included my source right away.
And still you have one more mistake in your post.
> To many people "free to play" is a dirty word.
To many people believe "free to play" is a dirty word.
...
As for the guy responding with, "they suck" I personally think he needs to have a sock put into his mouth, either give valueable input to the matter or do not say anything at all. Not all of the F2P games suck actually, nor do all of them have bad spelling in them. There are definitely quality F2P games out there.
Not to continue the writing debate, but my original sentence that you are pointing out is perfectly fine, although you could make an argument for a comma after people, I suppose. Your sentence would work if it was "too," but doesn't make sense as written.
Anyway, yes, I admit my news item was rushed and had some typos, both of which are now fixed. I sincerely appreciate you pointing them out. Annoying when I make them, but they need to be caught. We spend time proof reading the articles, but no one proof reads the news item stubs pointing to the articles. I'll pay closer attention in the future.
But this has nothing to do with Richard, his article or the points he made. So citing my inability to write a sentence before my first coffee isn't a valid counter argument to what he wrote.
I played Guild Wars and personally consider it a MMO. I also consider it a "F2P" game, although you do have to initially spring for the box. The reason I consider it F2P is because other MMOs require a monthly fee to continue playing, while GW does not. In the truest sense of the phrase, it is NOT a F2P. But in the spirit of the MMO genre, it is.
I've played 2Moons, Archlord, Shaiya, and Perfect World (stopped there). Hated 2Moons and Shaiya, but liked Archlord and Perfect World. The problem with those two games though, was that after level40, you understand why it was a F2P game.
I got up to around 45 on both, then hit a wall. The Archlord wall wasn't nearly as bad, but the Perfect World wall was insane. To keep leveling at a "normal" rate, you had to buy healing/mana glyphs and they would run out in a day or two, or on good days.. a few hours. I never actually bought them from the cash shop, as other people used to buy them then sell them for in-game gold. I bought 4 and after that, I stopped playing. Why? The players were charging too much game gold for me to farm daily.
Although you can keep playing for free, you simply cannot keep up a progressive rate of exp without farming. The quests after a certain level are mainly repeatables, that you burn out on. Imagine WoW's TBC dailies, but at level 35 you start and then that's the bulk of your daily questing. This is because on design, they didn't have enough money to put in tons of quests, so the content suffered. There is usually never an expansion (least when I played) so the content is always stale.
If I had to play any F2P game that meets the criteria of what one is, I'd probably play Archlord again. Just about everything you needed to level was free; tons of excellent armor, socket gems, and other items dropped very regularly and I never got close to buying anything. You can sell the items in there and actually MAKE very good gold, enabling you to buy anything you would need from the Auction House. Not once did I feel the game was too hard that I had to spend real money.
Where Archlord fell down, was lack of content as you moved up, which is the F2P curse. Same few zones, same mobs. That part got boring and the exp bar crept WAY out after awhile. Just too much grinding. I'd never go near Perfect World; it's the classic bait/switch (unless you were a Werefox perhaps).
For the unlucky few, time is more valuable than a $15 monthly sub.
To enjoy F2P, you need to find the one. The OP in his 2 articles have clearly told us he spent time going thru the many F2Ps in the market. Problem is, it takes a bit of downloading and configuration to set up a new game, and most likely than not, you will be uninstalling it soon. It is not unknown that some F2Ps uninstallers leave behind something in your harddisk. That is an added unpleasant feature of F2Ps. You have to know what your are installing, and how to remove them all.
It is also noted that many games simply make it unplayable after some levels if you choose not to pay. While paying is not a bad or unethical thing in itself, uncertainly as to how much I need to pay to maintain gamability, is a less than desirable features. In WoW, say, its $15, period. That is simple mathematics, for a consumer. Whether I play 24/7, or an hour a week, is my choice.
Multiple expansions is another issue I hate. EQ killed itself with endless boxes. A major expansion every 2 years is good, and $50 every 2 years, with really good content, is justified. But $50 every half a year? Come on. EQ really alienates me with both sub and endless new boxes. GWs, with its many boxes, is not appealing either. Even tho its free to play, the box sets ends up just as costly.
free to play games HAVE to be inferior to Pay to pay games. Pay to play games have more money to make a game, and don't have to try to find ways to make the player spend money in the cash shop.
However, I have one exception, that is Air Rivals/ACE online, a game which is an incredibly unique skill based mmo, and, other than competitive guild wars, has the most player skill required in combat (atleast until jumpgae evolution comes out). Of course there is a large amount of grind here though.
Atlantica and a small handful of others also fall into the category of "f2p that has features no p2p has" but I don't think any of them have the draw of Air rivals (epicly large wars and skill based combat).
However, all the other f2p's suck, they are all the same game with new mobs and a different char creator. They are horrible, and revolve around players attacking monsters that get progressively more impossible to kill, until they are completely impossible without buying from the cash shop. Once you do, you can level more, go to new areas, and level again! wHOOOO!11!!!1
That's the biggest line of bullshit I've read in a long time. Where exactly do you get your information?
very well thought out post. i agree with alot of these points you addressed, and thought long and hard about them as they were the same issues that bothered me when finding and playing a F2P MMO. in fact one P2P MMo that turned to F2P MMO under my nose was SOTNW as i already spent $10 for the pre order. go figure. was kind of upset to say the least. but this is what F2P's do. its no different than a P2P except they have a different payment model( which tends to cost more in the long run compared to a Flat rate subscription model MMo)
k first of all u should know y FTP sux, its BECUS they are free!
Haven't u learn that NE product worth having or trying WILL NEVER BE FREE!
they are free BECUS they sux, they don't sux JUST BECUS THEY ARE FREE!
if they did not sux they would not be free!
And its OBVIOUS y f2p have more players, its becus there are MORE POOR PEOPLE in the world (especially china!) than there are people with money to pay for a good game!
No F2P is not a dirty word.
Technically it is either a dirty concept, or they are three dirty words.
I think 80% of the people here are missing the point.
Free to play means just that. You don't pay for the game and you don't pay a sub. You pay nothing unless you choose to pay. As soon as you start paying it becomes a P2P but that is your choice. So don't call them scams. And don't exagerrate saying you have to spend hundreds or thousands. Thats crap too. You can if you want but that choice is yours.
Now tell me, how many people actually play a game to the top levels? Lots I'm sure but not everyone. And most of the money you spend is only to cut down on the amount of grinding time.
So unless you really want to get to the "endgame" and do it as quickly as possible then yes, you might have to spend a few dollars.
Doesn't that make more sense than paying upfront and finding out you wished you hadn't spent that money??
IMO there is a lot of good gaming to be had absolutely free and I like that. And if you also like it and want to spend some money to make it better, what is wrong with that??
Anyway it doesn't matter, its all personal taste, but I really hate the way players these days seem to generalize everything and lump certain types of games under the "that Sucks" category.
Cause that really sucks, people.
What makes you think that the Western market has higher standards than the Asian one ? I mean, other than obvious biais. I'd be curious to see a study on this topic.
Yeah, it's not like the western market is full of bug-ridden unfinished games :) Oh wait.. isn't it what 90% of users from this site complain about ? :)
For the unlucky few, time is more valuable than a $15 monthly sub.
To enjoy F2P, you need to find the one. The OP in his 2 articles have clearly told us he spent time going thru the many F2Ps in the market. Problem is, it takes a bit of downloading and configuration to set up a new game, and most likely than not, you will be uninstalling it soon. It is not unknown that some F2Ps uninstallers leave behind something in your harddisk. That is an added unpleasant feature of F2Ps. You have to know what your are installing, and how to remove them all.
It is also noted that many games simply make it unplayable after some levels if you choose not to pay. While paying is not a bad or unethical thing in itself, uncertainly as to how much I need to pay to maintain gamability, is a less than desirable features. In WoW, say, its $15, period. That is simple mathematics, for a consumer. Whether I play 24/7, or an hour a week, is my choice.
Multiple expansions is another issue I hate. EQ killed itself with endless boxes. A major expansion every 2 years is good, and $50 every 2 years, with really good content, is justified. But $50 every half a year? Come on. EQ really alienates me with both sub and endless new boxes. GWs, with its many boxes, is not appealing either. Even tho its free to play, the box sets ends up just as costly.
i gotta disagree with u on the timing of expansions. although I work I have enough time to almost all the expansion content whether its on my free time, with my family that plays with me, or when i want to just relax, and guild chat or talk on global. for me I cant stand waiting 2 years bouncing around on the same content for 2years, that what pissed me off and bores me to death with WOW, not enough content, yeah granted there is little mini content patches, e.g. 3.1 uldaur, but by themselves they aren't much.
for me EQ2 did it good, i loved the content, every 6 months I pay $30-40 every 6 months. but i did it smart id buy the entire package that came with it if i could, you gotta figure initially theyd have e.g ROK Rise of kunark by itself, but I eventually bought the entire set, why? cause I had the original Discs, EOF, and ROK, and then i said fugg it, might as well upgrade, so next time i install its faster on DVD's, and think about it, you update faster, and its an easier process to patch. Your never paying more than $40 for everything. Never had pay more than $40 for entire package+ expansions. only when I initially bought the game did I spend $50+
I been playing for over 1460+ days since nov 2004 off and on.I have every expansion and almost every adventure pack e.g. split paw saga, blood chronicles etc, minus TSO (the shadow oddessey) broke for now lol bills and rent come first. :P but anyhoo, i can understand your perspective on overkill on content, but for me i dont agree, for me its a god send, im never really doing the same thing twice, im always progressing, leveling, getting new epic gear, defeating new raid bosses, going to new lands. I find it fun, engaging. this is why I always go back to EQ2. you'll never get this level of content in any F2P MMO. but thats just me.
List of good f2p games:
runescape
UO private server
That is it.
Which is sad cause their not good games at all.
We won't mention companies such as IGG, Aeria Games and the like. Their a joke. Their games based on an item mall and built from that You'd have to be really poor or really stupid to want anything to do with them.
List of P2P games not neccisarily good ones but the best f2p games is crappier than the worst p2p games
WAR
WoW
AoC
And then we got the ex p2p games which are basicly a better version of f2p but later on have an item shop introduced because it wasn't quite up to scratch to regular p2p
Perfect World
ROSE online
All of these games i'd stay away from and as you can see the list of P2P games are although not good games make for alot longer lasting and more popular experience. Going f2p for awhile and then going back to p2p gives you a new apreciation on p2p gaming.
When you get older, you will realize that nothing in life is free and these things won't be such an ire-inducing issue for you.
Lol ... was about to post same as LynxJSA. And most important, f2p are actually not f2p. This is (not by mistake!) misleading .... there is ALLWAYS price to be payed. I.e. when playing "free" Rappelz at the end of the month I have spent 2 times as I would for any MMORPG out there that have subscription. Yes, yes, .... you do not need actually to buy ingame items ... but usually is like purchasing a car and then manually pushing it on streets.
First of all,Let me qualify this post by saying I have played many games on both sides of this discussion, both F2P & P2P. I thought his article was very well written. He was flaming no one, just stating an opinion and telling people to not sell F2P short before giving each F2P game at least a look.
I think it was an unbiased report that hopes to open minds on both sides of the discussion. There are F2P players out there who won't even consider touching a P2P game and vice versus, no matter what. You kow what? there are going to be flamers on both sides of this issue,no matter what. Persoanlly I agreeed with everything he said.
I have played Guild wars,WOW Tabula Rasa,EQ & EQII,Warhammer Online as well a many other P2P games and they each have a lot to offer in their own rights. On the other hand I have played many great F2P games as well Shot Online,Albatross18,Cabal Online,Rappelz,RF Online,Requiem,Perfect World, PristonTale I & II, 12skys & 9dragons(both of which suck IMO),and the list goes on & on. Many now are using the "Item Mall" style of earning revenue. I will be the first to tell you from 1st hand experience that some use this feature very poorly,meaning that in some you cannot compete with those making "Item Mall" purchases or you cannot really progress effectively without making those purchases. What I mean to say is in some F2P games you are "forced" to make purchases in a subliminal way if you want to even really enjoy the game.
All I am saying is there are pros & cons to both sides of this issue, and as he stated in his report,don;t sell either short without at least trying them, and if someone chooses one over the other doesn't mean they "suck". Let each of us have our own opinion and respect it.
montee
Planeshift is F2P and has no item mall. However the catch is content updates are about once a year if that..
F2P means you are allowed to play the game at no charge. It is your choosing if you want to buy items from the mall. it is not required of anyone to buy from the mall. Mostly people who enjoy the game enough, want an edge up, or are impatient buy from the item malls.
Planeshift is F2P and has no item mall. However the catch is content updates are about once a year if that..
F2P means you are allowed to play the game at no charge. It is your choosing if you want to buy items from the mall. it is not required of anyone to buy from the mall. Mostly people who enjoy the game enough, want an edge up, or are impatient buy from the item malls.
Planeshift is more an open source project than a commercial game.
F2P is a dirty word...
An F2P game may be decent or even good to some people, but the marketing system is absolutely horrible, always. Even if the game may be good the payment method completely ruins it.
F2P games are NOT free if you want some sort of enjoyable playing experience. Most of them are designed so that you basically need to pay to play on somewhat even conditions with other players. If you don't pay up you will be left behind and won't be able to fight anyone in an even match.
And when you've finally had enough and decide to pay to be able to compete, you find yourself paying much more than you would have if the game had a subsciption. Once you've started paying for it it will suck money from you.
And all the while the games future will be more than uncertain, since there won't be a steady income for the game and content expansions may never come.
Things that for me, make F2P a curse word:
- games that claim to be free, but actually attempt to change you money for even the most basic gameplay elements. One F2P game i tried actually expected you to go through the game with a 12 slot inventory (or pay for more bags). I did some rough calculations and i figure if id buy the same amount of bag, as i had in Wow (from my 4 slot bags, to 16, 18, 24 + the bags i keep in the bank), i would have spent the same amount of money that it took to buy WoW and both of its expansions.
- people who think that just cause its free, they can abuse it. In P2P games, if your caugth cheating your have to spend money to get new account. In F2P you dont, so that seems like a good excuse for alot of people to cheat/abuse/harass.
In addition i have yet to find a F2P game that suits me. Most of them offer no structure. What i mean by that is in most F2P's i personally get lost at some point. In most of the P2P's i have tried i have found the game directs me in the right way. In wow for example, its quite clear, that once you ave finished in Mulgore, you go quest in Barrens or when your finished with UBRS, you can try MC and after that you can go to BWL (lol so old reference).
Those are big issues for many. Basically, you get what you pay for.
F2P is really not such a bad model imo. Although not a MMPORG or any form thereof KUMA\War was one of the first F2P games I ever played that was fantastic for an FPS style game. There is ingame advertising and alot of advertising on the site, however there is no such thing as an item mall (for those of you screaming show one F2P game that doesnt have a mall).
Now I myself prefer the sub games myself, because I feel all people have a more even playing field, and after playing many of the different F2P games currently on the market I still feel they have much to offer, they just arent for me. I do admit however that I do occasionaly indulge in the F2P games merely for the difference. One thing I have realised is that many of the companies that offer these varieties actually stay on top of mechanics and listen to the customer base and truly attempt to make the game cleaner. What I mean by that is; many games I play spend months upon months with broken mechanics, bugs and all to often a mailbox full of spam mail from gold sellers. The producers of F2P's seem to be more consistent with bug fixes and making certain that their game plays cleaner and with less issues than the typical Sub based games. Also its nice that I am not IG and recieving tells or mail every 10 -20 minutes about "Huge sale! Buy gold for---------" in F2P games we dont have to deal with that. The other thing I will say is this; I have personally had this debate with several of my peers whom also look upon the F2P model with disdain. They also support the Gold sellers in nearly every MMO they play. So I ask; why is it so different to buy digital gold , platinum or whatever for Your games than buying items from an item mall. either way your paying to gain an advantage over others. The difference is , you wont get banned in an F2P game for buying, where in a sub based game you take a chance every time you do buy. How much do you really like those characters you worked so hard to build. Are you seriously ready to start over again?
i gotta disagree with u on the timing of expansions. although I work I have enough time to almost all the expansion content whether its on my free time, with my family that plays with me, or when i want to just relax, and guild chat or talk on global. for me I cant stand waiting 2 years bouncing around on the same content for 2years, that what pissed me off and bores me to death with WOW, not enough content, yeah granted there is little mini content patches, e.g. 3.1 uldaur, but by themselves they aren't much.
for me EQ2 did it good, i loved the content, every 6 months I pay $30-40 every 6 months. but i did it smart id buy the entire package that came with it if i could, you gotta figure initially theyd have e.g ROK Rise of kunark by itself, but I eventually bought the entire set, why? cause I had the original Discs, EOF, and ROK, and then i said fugg it, might as well upgrade, so next time i install its faster on DVD's, and think about it, you update faster, and its an easier process to patch. Your never paying more than $40 for everything. Never had pay more than $40 for entire package+ expansions. only when I initially bought the game did I spend $50+
I been playing for over 1460+ days since nov 2004 off and on.I have every expansion and almost every adventure pack e.g. split paw saga, blood chronicles etc, minus TSO (the shadow oddessey) broke for now lol bills and rent come first. :P but anyhoo, i can understand your perspective on overkill on content, but for me i dont agree, for me its a god send, im never really doing the same thing twice, im always progressing, leveling, getting new epic gear, defeating new raid bosses, going to new lands. I find it fun, engaging. this is why I always go back to EQ2. you'll never get this level of content in any F2P MMO. but thats just me.
I am the unlucky few, I do not have long stretch of hours online for gaming.
I can chat here, because on and off I am distracted. If I go afk in a game, I will die soloing or be kicked in a group. That is why I sometimes hop online here to read. I can go afk there, alt-tab out and not be killed/kicked.
So it does take me 2 years to go thru most of the content. Oh yes, I do not go online first thing when I got spare time. Its more like last resort, like 1 hour before bed, when weather is bad, or when there is no one around to interact with in life.
I have come to enjoy a few F2P games in the past but have found many to lack the proper support a P2P game has. One of which is Silkroad... I have tried to log in to this game off and on for the last 2 years and have yet to do so because the servers (Troy, in my case) are always overloaded when I have time to try, but if I were to purchase something like a Gold Membership from their Item Mall, that will allow me to log in whenever I want... hmm... so it's an F2P game if you have enough time on your hands to repeat the log in process for hours.
Another I have played is Voyage Century Online... I have played since Beta, and to be honest, the game has never left Beta because it is still so full of bugs that it had while still officially in Beta. The game is fun, for what it is , and I have enjoyed playing it for a few years. Then there comes a point, once you get a little higher in your leveling and you arrive at a point when things become a bit more competitive. Item Mall... the true bane of this game. Voyage Century is purely an Item Mall driven game to the degree that, that will be the only updates you will see. New items, events involving these items, etc., that's it... becoming a Pay-to-win game attracting the oddest gamer type I have ever witnessed: the ego-maniacal, god-complexed freak that truly takes a game to heart and soul where every action against that player becomes a personal offense, LOL!
Well... these have been my experiences as well as my opinions. I'm sure there are many folks that would disagree with me and/or love these games that I have mentioned. But, they are no longer for me... ;-)
If you'd get off your own defensive kick and actually read what I wrote (instead of cherry-picking that why don't you quote the whole thing so that it can be read in the way I meant it), and also put out of your mind our past disagreements in another thread, you'd see that I was speaking solely for moi. Not anyone else. I gave the reason why I don't won't play them. I'd offer that there is something about forums that removes reading comprehension...
I'm pretty sure I didn't "blame" anyone. They decided to make their game that way (F2P) and I'm deciding not to play it because I see the, in my eyes, trick. Playing on the impulse buying habits of your typical human being and their ego to be better than the next guy. As for the example I gave, which came from Atlantica Online, no, they didn't give the person what they wanted. That person never got the item from the random box they bought and were complaining about it on the forums. Personally, I don't care. I see the system for what it is and didn't buy Item Mall crap, though I did go have a look to verify the items there and see what impact they had on gameplay. That impact was significant enough to sucker people who already don't have fiscal control of their real lives to continue it in their virtual lives.
All that said, I have not attacked nor proclaimed your precious F2P games "suck". You can continue to feel good about playing them. Carry on.
First, don't even know who you are. Second, "you" was not meant as YOU. Third, blame perhaps was not the right world, how about "hold responsible".
Its fine if that's your opinion, however, if you end up spending 200$ in a week, yeah, you got what you asked for, they played the random box game, payed for it even.
That's like saying "Bob and tom are scamers, i played a game of poker with them, and lost money". I think the term is: Rube.
Quoted in full for this response owns the original article. MMORPG.com should remove the article by Richard Aihoshi which does little more than insult a large portion of MMORPG.com readers and replace it with this one.
If you'd get off your own defensive kick and actually read what I wrote (instead of cherry-picking that why don't you quote the whole thing so that it can be read in the way I meant it), and also put out of your mind our past disagreements in another thread, you'd see that I was speaking solely for moi. Not anyone else. I gave the reason why I don't won't play them. I'd offer that there is something about forums that removes reading comprehension...
I'm pretty sure I didn't "blame" anyone. They decided to make their game that way (F2P) and I'm deciding not to play it because I see the, in my eyes, trick. Playing on the impulse buying habits of your typical human being and their ego to be better than the next guy. As for the example I gave, which came from Atlantica Online, no, they didn't give the person what they wanted. That person never got the item from the random box they bought and were complaining about it on the forums. Personally, I don't care. I see the system for what it is and didn't buy Item Mall crap, though I did go have a look to verify the items there and see what impact they had on gameplay. That impact was significant enough to sucker people who already don't have fiscal control of their real lives to continue it in their virtual lives.
All that said, I have not attacked nor proclaimed your precious F2P games "suck". You can continue to feel good about playing them. Carry on.
First, don't even know who you are. Second, "you" was not meant as YOU. Third, blame perhaps was not the right world, how about "hold responsible".
Its fine if that's your opinion, however, if you end up spending 200$ in a week, yeah, you got what you asked for, they played the random box game, payed for it even.
That's like saying "Bob and tom are scamers, i played a game of poker with them, and lost money". I think the term is: Rube.
Wow, if you can't remember who you debate with 2-3 pages worth less than a week ago, then you must either really pick alot of arguments with people or your memory is terrible. Ginseng, it helps.
Anyway, why wouldn't I hold them responsible for their game. They made it. They made the rules. They knew their plan was to play on fiscal irresponsible people. I never judged them evil, like you're trying to make out. That said, I don't have to like the practice. I can see it for what it is and make the statement in a discussion about said games and bring it to the attention of others who may not have thought about it in such terms. If those companies don't want people talking about such things then they need to change their model. Plain and simple. It's like saying the sky is blue, or the grass is green. It is what it is.
And I'll take your "you end up spending $200 in a week" as a general "you" as if you understood what I wrote you'd know that I was talking about the AO forums (which you can visit and read for yourself should you not believe me) and I believe I also stated that personally I really didn't care on an individual level that these folks were too stupid to figure out what was being done to them.
Meh, i was making the point, i don't do grudges, we disagreed, you didn't run off with my wife. :)
Also, i think i said: "Looks to me like they gave that person just what they wanted."
Let's not lose sight of what the author's original point was. He wasn't merely claiming that F2P games are a good choice for some players, even if other players ought to dismiss them out of hand. They are a good choice for some players: those who cannot pay, those who have a lot of money and not much free time and want "winning" to be based on the former, and perhaps those who like very heavy grinding and don't care if they're competitive.
The author's claim was that all MMORPG players ought to seriously consider playing some "free to lose"/item mall games, and that it is not fair to simply dismiss them out of hand. That is a far stronger claim, and one that is much easier to refute. Even the pro-F2P people here haven't taken much interest in defending that claim.
Meh, i was making the point, i don't do grudges, we disagreed, you didn't run off with my wife. :)
Also, i think i said: "Looks to me like they gave that person just what they wanted."
I didn't expect you to hold a grudge, I just wanted to be remembered so I can feel special, lol! And if I ran off with your wife, you wouldn't be my first worry. My wife would because I know exactly what she'd do to me. You'd come in second place.
Well, I'd still disagree that they gave the person what they wanted. They gave them a chance at what they wanted, sure. I guess that's another part I personally have issue with. In a P2P I'm guaranteed to get what I want with an investment of time. In situations like the above, it's an investment of money. While I have no issue paying $15, $30 or $45 a month for accounts...wait, even better. I prefer paying those amounts and all the virtual item I want and will never touch than paying $200-$300 for a single virtual item I will never touch.
No, I admit I had fun playing Atlantica Online up until the point where having a mount became a heavily preferred position due to the bonuses they offered. At that point I stopped playing. *shrug*
My main issue with F2P games is that they su..uhm, they don't seem to be on par with subscription based games when it comes to quality of gameplay and funfactor. They are mostly grindathons with average mobs, very little variety and ai in mobs and hardly any deep and unique environments that roleplayers can enjoy.
This.
Item malls dont bother me really, the ones that moan are the ones that have no money
I have money. Thats why I play P2P games. My "moaning" is due to lack of content, depth and support. If you have to spend a fortune in the item malls to compete in them, whats the point?
I love the game although many will say "it sucks". It hasn't cost me one cent and probably never will and I have been playing close to a year now.
Maybe your standards are just a lot lower than everyone else's. Maybe the crapulent content and support doesnt bother you. If so, thats great. F2P has its place, but it sucks compared to P2P when it comes to quality, content and support. Thats all I'm saying.
And when people say F2P "sucks", I think thats what they mean. It sucks relative to P2P...if I had no money, I would probably play F2P games. Well, in theory at least. Hopefully it'll never come to that.
"Free" isnt always good enough. You can play Tetris for free too.
I think it makes for a much better community ingame because more people are playing for fun (it's free)
Um, no, not everyone is playing for free. Some of them are purchasing advancement by buying crap at the item malls.
The author's claim was that all MMORPG players ought to seriously consider playing some "free to lose"/item mall games, and that it is not fair to simply dismiss them out of hand.
In agree that was his point. But I dont agree with his point. He didnt give me a reason to change my opinion of F2P. After listening to his argument, I still think F2P sucks.
In my relatively short life, I've been kicked in the nuts probably less than a dozen times. I admit I don't have a lot of experience with being kicked in the nuts. But if somebody were to tell me that getting kicked in the nuts can be a wonderful experience, I'd politely ask that person to stay the hell away from me before I call the goddamn police. He could be an enlightened guru who has learned to transcend the pain and find ecstasy, or he could be a lucky person who stumbled upon the right combination of shoe type and kicking speed, but he's probably just batshit insane.
I've also played maybe less than a dozen F2P MMORPGs. They all sucked. While I won't outright deny the possibility that fun F2P MMOs may exist, I haven't found any and I don't feel like digging through more crappy games just because somebody says there might be a good one out there somewhere. How many F2P games to I have to play before I get to the good ones? If every one I've tried so far has sucked, why should I keep looking?
To Richard: be aware that many of the people that say that they have tried a few have indeed tried maybe 2-5. Evenm then, they have not experienced enough of them in all the ways there are to experience them like using the cash shops (if it applies) or by feeling out all areas of the game.
Of course, I don't have to hear an entire body of work by a musician to know I don't like his/her music, (as someone pointed out) but we are not talking about a single artist here, we are talking about an entire genre.
I used to meet people that say they hate "country music" or "hip hop." Usually this opinion is based on a few songs or artists.
Also keep in mind that you might be hearing from just a few people and letting it get to you a bit, even though I do it myself all the time. While we are having these discussions (I'm sure you know this much better than me) millions of players (Nexon alone has claimed they have 2 million US players) are simply playing their game.
Anyway, I'm glad to say that I think these arguments will all fade within a few years. F2P is not going anywhere.
Beau
The sad fact of the matter is that many of the things people dislike F2P games for ( poor quality, liner game, nothing to do, endless grind ) is also a problem with P2P. I actually wish more of the games I've played over the years would have been F2P so that I wouldn't have been stuck shelling out cash for a retail box or wasting my time with a 7 day free trial that doesn't give you a good look at the game. Oh, I'm sorry, grinding linear gameplay in a P2P game means that you're a hardcore player. Hell, I wish WoW had an item mall just so that I could have just bought that last piece of my armor set instead of having to go through yet another mindless instance run to pray to get a chance at rolling on it.
Seriously.
The only difference between P2P and F2P is that one grants you more of a reason to bitch about it because you're actually paying for the game. If you ask me, half the P2P games out there should just go the F2P route, especially the older ones that still try to get $15 out of you a month when they're 3+ years out of date with no real major content expansions. Poor client stability, poor gameplay, sub-par graphics... I could be describing any number of F2P or P2P games. What's it matter if you pay for it or not when you're still getting a terrible game?
Actualy with most f2p's its like this :
sheeps play for free , a sheep wanna become a wolf needs to pay (and way more as ina p2p )
Free to play is a LIE
It's misleading to think ANY company would spend cash on developing a game and not try to make a profit. I will never play into this format because it's dishonest right off the bat.
I would much rather a game company be open up front and honest with me.
These are some good points.
I recently also tried a few free trials of P2P games (I was looking for a new game to sink my money in) and found that most of the trial systems were horrible. To mention a few:
LOTRO would not let you try the crafting system. To produce anything worthwhile you need materials from other crafts, but are unable to get those because trial player can not trade, mail or use auction house.
In WAR you get some idea of how the RvR works, but can only test a limited amount of PvE content because of level and area restrictions.
Housing, mails, auctions, LFG - these seem to be the most common features to be restricted for trial users. For me these feature would matter alot on my decision about paying for a game.
In most F2P it is easier to get a good overview of the game before you are "asked" to spend any real money / to make any real commitment.
However so far, i have yet to try a F2P game that would lure me to grind past the first few weeks. I'm sure a large portion of the F2P games i have tried actually havea fun end/mid-level gameplay, but most of the time the low-level game just isnt inspireing enough to make me want to reach the higher levels.
Please list the F2P game you have played and those that you played and ripped you off, also how they ripped you off?
sure P2P games are fun and enjoyable. Their playerbase, content and community are (most of the time) heaps better than F2P ones. But I agree though, you cannot judge F2P MMOs when you have only played like what? 1 or 2, 2 hours apiece? That's just not right.
And so what if it's F2P? If you actually searched hard enough, I'm pretty sure you could find some pretty unique games in the market. The reason some people continue to play F2P games is that once in a while, a unique gem quietly slides into the MMO scene, let's say Atlantica Online with its turn-based battle system, or maybe Shin Megami Tensei: Imagine's (though I wished it was hosted by someone else) demon partner system, and much more.
Another thing that comes into question is the item malls. The companies/hosters aren't lying to their audience when they bold the words "FREE TO PLAY" next to their games. It is the gamers CHOICE to spend his/her money on the items to make the game more enjoyable.
Last of all, I want to address free trials, most wouldn't consider them F2P, however if you actually searched hard enough, you could find some indie or underground P2P MMOs that offer something special. I only brought this up because I'm still playing Wurm Online till this date - free.
I can name a few i have played.The "GAME" it self is ok fun,but the F2P part of it offers problems to these games,that is where the problem lies.I liked playing SRO,i thought it was fun and i don't even like PVP games.I liked playing Shaiya by Aeria games,but it gets boring after a while as IMO all games do.Last Chaos also by Aeria is also a decent game with a fair bit more content than Shaiya.
F2p offers the chance for ANYONE to play that normally could not,i like that idea,but it also encourages massive cheating and botting,because it is free,you have nothing to lose.Now if you had to pay for a game box and a monthly fee,then all of a sudden get banned for cheating or botting,that would strike a nail in the coffin.
Oh god, people are complaining again because they cant have everything for free.
I thought the article was well done. Thank You.
This is another stereotype of F2P games.
Now, do the games have some botting/cheating/gold sellers yelling in chat...and do some of them have massive cheating and botting? Of course.
Now, tick off how many North American, non-F2P games that you have played. Probably 5-10. ( I have played them all, along with many many many F2P games) When you compare the number of F2P games that have almost no "mass botting" to the number of non-F2P games that DO, you will see that the percentage of F2P games that have it is actually less.
I would challenge anyone that has these ideas to look outside of the few examples of a spammer in chat, and also to look at the examples (as in Runes of Magic, in example) of games that have wonderful tools to simply ignore the spammers.
What is the largest NA non-F2P game out there? WoW.
Now, ask yourself if they (Blizzard) has had many, many, many issues with gold spammers/scammers/botters. Of course they have.
Beau Turkey
Sad to see these types write. I didn't bother to go through the majority of the topic since it's mostly repeating one side or the other anyway and when people think a little about it they know it too.
Rant on!!
1st off all you're entitled to your opinion but as all others it's subjective.
2nd you have not played every mmo out there you don't have enough time in your whole life time even if you tried all for just 1 minute.
3rd claiming so means you're defently lying and have no idea about the huge mass off mmo out there.
4th most mmo's aren't even listed on this site.
5th F2P is indeed free to play for those who chooses too doesn't mean they're not entitled to make money on people who really wants that uber item or speed ahead. Still you have to option to entirely play it for free and can enjoy it.
6th you're currently a WoW player, I mean seriously do you really think everyone think the game you think is the best is good?
7th As for subscription type model they also have a mall.. all of you who play these knows it.. it's just a different type of mall setup.
8th subscription games has a high amount "blackmarket" traders. A good chunck of people still buy characters or uber items for real money in these games as well, so buhuuu F2P made it so they sell this themselves for a fixed price. Makes it less chance that you get scammed by someone on ebay.
9th your statement is like all tomato soups taste bad while the bean soup which you like is the best. Unfortunatly not everyone likes your bean soup or maybe not tomato soup. All though you can find tons of varieties of same soup. Depends on the chef preparing it.
I don't defend either types of models but as the author wrote since you say it suck before trying it you don't have any clue what you're missing. There is a huge variety of good games from all models if you just take the time to actually try them out.
5-10mins playing is not even worth mentioning you have tried because you haven't yeah sure you downloaded and created a character and tried one battle but that's all you manage in 10mins that is not enough to say a game sucks.
Sadly a majority on this site who write: "this is bad and this suck" is the same they don't dare to leave a game they probably invested so much money in by subscribing for years and probably also bought stuff from ebay as well. It's more like an investment and now they're trying their best to cling to it. Nothing lasts forever.
I play the games I like to play not because people dislike or like it doesn't matter I'm willing to try any games that look/sounds good.
No one forces people to buy things they don't like and the argument that F2P only way to become uber is to waste tons of money... well hellooooo you do it on subscription as well people just fail to realize it.
Play the game you like and you're free to say I didn't like that game but saying all sucks because you only like one type of game eg. WoW is just silly.
Rant off
Btw a great article by the author
Lastly for all it is worth I've played lots of subscription games as well as F2P models and I don't have the urge to become the most uber person on my server or world because there is always someone with more money than me. :)
So I choose to try out F2P games to save money and if I find a F2P that is really good yeah I might buy something on their malls because I feel they deserve my support. So far I'm too stingy for that. :)
I have no problem with the F2P model....In fact the more options we have the better.
exactly the more options the better.. everyone should be happy that there is so many options and choices. :)
12sky2 eu just went ob a week ago or so, and i havent seen anything in the game i cant do
the guys that use the item mall when it comes out will just be able to do it better/faster/easier
but thats ok...theres already people in the game doing much better then me because they played cb and knew what to do and play more hours then me
so its not going to matter either way ..the game has wars based on your level range..so as long as i level and enjoy my character then being the best doesnt matter to me
and for the "best" guys on each faction they have a big burden of being the best and staying the best unless they want to fall off..while i can just enjoy myself as i please
this whole best thing is silly..theres always going to be someone who plays 15+ hours a day and uses the item mall and maybe even cheats to be "the best"
if the item mall just totally ruins the whole game then i would say its bad for that game but if i just have to work longer to get the same things then thats fine imo
and yes im from NA and i far prefer group based grind games over quest based and i dont like instances but maybe im on low part of NA population on that one....
Agree being best in an mmo is like I said gonna cost you a lot of money no matter what game you play. So rushing to become the best is unfortunatly a lot of peoples goal rather than to have fun and enjoy the game. And as you point out sadly many cheats to attain the positions as number uno.. so unless you're prepared to spend lots of money and/or cheat you won't become best in a mmo. :)
I personally like to lvl slowly and appriciate it being hard to obtain the best stuff. :)
I would like to read the whole post but i'm at work with not enough time.
That said aren't you all jus arguing over the name Free To Play. I agree this is a false name why not call it what it is a MTG
Micro Transaction Game.
I would like to see and hear about MTGs and weather there are any good ones out there. I do doubt that there are any.
But if I can have someone else write an article about MTGs and which ones might be good great! Then I won't waste time trying the bad ones myself.
Laters
Rather than putting this in terms of "F2P games suck", I'll address my viewpoint a bit differently.
I will not play any game that allows someone an advantage simply because they're willing to spend more RL money on buying things within the game. When you play WoW or EQ or LotR Online, all subscribers have access to the same rules, items, classes, etc. The only exception to this are expansions, but everyone who stays current on the latest expansion is, again, at the same competitive level (this, BTW, is why I get annoyed when a company releases expansions too frequently).
F2P games that have a item malls provide players with an advantage in exchange for RL cash. I believe that is inherently unfair. Furthermore, in some instances, you *have* to buy items in order to ensure your character remains viable as he progresses in the game: you hit a level where the non-store bought equipment just isn't cutting it.
I'm not talking about a gaming company's business model per se. Obviously, they want to make money. But for me, if I'm playing a game, then it should be fair to all who are playing it, not about who has a lot of money to throw around in RL.
Thus, I think games that have item malls are inherently unfair. I wont play them. I wont even install them on my computer. I don't care how well they're made or how enticing they may be. And, if I find a P2P game using similar methods, I'll treat it the same way.
Did i miss something here or should i just say it for most people that want FULL game play from the word go. "F2P Games "SUCK" and that is all there is to know about them:
Lets re title them to FREE TO PLAY TILL YOU HAVE TO PAY!
This is another stereotype of F2P games.
Now, do the games have some botting/cheating/gold sellers yelling in chat...and do some of them have massive cheating and botting? Of course.
Now, tick off how many North American, non-F2P games that you have played. Probably 5-10. ( I have played them all, along with many many many F2P games) When you compare the number of F2P games that have almost no "mass botting" to the number of non-F2P games that DO, you will see that the percentage of F2P games that have it is actually less.
I would challenge anyone that has these ideas to look outside of the few examples of a spammer in chat, and also to look at the examples (as in Runes of Magic, in example) of games that have wonderful tools to simply ignore the spammers.
What is the largest NA non-F2P game out there? WoW.
Now, ask yourself if they (Blizzard) has had many, many, many issues with gold spammers/scammers/botters. Of course they have.
Beau Turkey
That's pretty much how I feel about it. There are great game that are free to play, but there's also bad ones (Though I do truly love one of the worst, Knight Online). Botters and gold-spammers is no reason to not play a MMO, because if you did, you wouldn't play any of them, because they all have them.
Very untrue statement sadly.. And totally blind for the truth.
F2P it's true many good items cannot be gained through playing the game and hence you have the "option" to buy it on the mall. Still it's available ingame to buy because those who buy it on the mall might want to earn some good money on it.
If you're dedicated and play a lot you will affort it.
So it's available ingame but only by buying it from another player at a high cost ofcourse but still available.
People seemingly think they are so clearsighted. Subscription games gives equal right and chance to obtain all type of items ingame as the rest.
However those items that is epic, legendary, unique etc.. is not in abundance and hence not available for everyone unless you actually play for a long period of time your chances increases to get it or is just lucky.
So the item is not easily available just the illusion to get you to subscribe for months to try to get the items. :)
And now to the irony. A good chunk of people playing sub games actually buys items, gold and everything else for real cash.
You might close your eyes for it but ebay was threatened by lawsuits from all subscirpiton games because of people breaking ccp, soe and blizzards rules.. these are the ones that is most frequently has items sold in western market on net.
(note some of sub games allows you to buy money from them if you buy from them "legally" at least in their own eyes. :)
20th january 2007 ebay started to enforce this to get rid of people selling ingame stuff. Everything could be bought.
After ebay started with this the sellers just started their own sites or found alternatives.
It can always be argued in any direction but you're just trying to defend one over the other you don't care wether or not it's a good game or not. F2P, Sub or others.. you have invested so much time and money into sub so there is no turning back now is it?
I would say I'm the lucky one since I'm not bound to any games. I have subscribed on many top titles of the west and tried a bunch of F2P games.
In the end it really depend on what type of gamer we are and what we're looking for.
If you're the type that tend to stick with one game and have lots of time to play then you can call it an investment and play it as long as your heart desires then sub might be the best option
If you're a causual player like me than doesn't have all the time in the world I think F2P model is the right thing. You can play as long as you want or have the time to.
And again variety is not a bad thing is a good thing I don't know why people all the time have to say F2P is bad it isn't I've played lots of good games from many business model types and there is good and bad in all the models as well.
Actually they are free. No one is forcing you to pay. I play Requiem a F2P MMORPG with an Item Mall which also has Premium subscriptions if you wish, but my point is that I am lvl 65 with the cap being 71 and never payed a dime. You can play F2P games without paying and still have fun.
My 2 cents, pls flame on ;)
Sorry to burst your "imaginary" bubble, but yes.....F2P is a VERY dirty word. You won't be changing many minds to make it your crazy no-work-for-money grand scheme.
F2P will ALWAYS BE DIRTY.
Its funny how narrow minded ppl really are. Ive played virtually all the mmos out there starting
with UO. I recently tried RoM and have found its actually a pretty good game. I also know ppl
in there who havnt spent a dime in game on anything, mounts, equipment, etc and have top
of the line gear. It just takes longer as they get it harvesting, crafting etc. For those ppl that
want things given to them on a silver platter its not going to happen in the F2p game unless
your willing to spend money but for ppl to say you HAVE to spend money to be the best, top
of the line, etc they either havnt played the game or at least havnt played it long enough or
just dont have a clue.
So far Ive liked RoM granted it doesnt have as much in it as WoW, EQ2 etc but its still a
pretty good game and for it being a FREE game, yes its free if you choose to keep it free,
then I think its a very good game. Now they might change things in the future to make it
alot worse than it is now but atm its pretty good.
Bottom line is to have fun with any type of game your playing and Im having fun in RoM. Nuf said.
I might not be the auther, but this statement really annoyed me... i agree with everything you said, but i think the best saying for this article is this "You get what you paid for"
Yes, i'm one of the people who can't afford a P2P at the moment, but that didnt stop me from playing 9Dragons for years, sure the game is loaded with ads and the item mall can make you a god, but it's the way they've implimented it that i enjoy most... the ad's only showed up while map loading or in a coma (ok the new ad bar system is a pain, but there are ways of removing it ;) )
The item mall, can make you a god, but u have to pay quiet it bit, but what i like is the cheap little items that players can purchase for less than a $1, that can make your life so much easier without the huge cost.
Sure a lvl50 loaded with item mall goodies may seem like a god, but lets put him against my absultly free of charge lvl111 and we'll see who wins ^_^
Ps. i've been playing 9Dragons for years, but only ever spent $20 and that was for the summer vacation with my friends
Yes there are many F2P games that force you to pay if you want to play better BUT answer me this:
Yes there is the cash shop or whatever you call it, if you like a game so much even if it's F2P don't you think by buying some items from cash shop is contributing to improving the game?
enough said.
*applauds madly, whistling and cheering* Awesome article!!
While I can't be assed to read all the feeling-stepped-on-toes replies this article is bound to produce, I had to applaud you just the same. This tendency to simply spew some unbased, unfocused negativity in some general direction because it's the popular thing in the in-crowd you're hanging with is taking over in way too many areas.
Just loved this article. Thank you!
I'm glad to see from the very 1st post that many site readers here
have called this guy on such an ignorant article.
The fundamental reason F2P sucks is that there is no such thing, F2P is a lie!
And there aren't many people raised in America who don't know an AD Scam when they see it.
Sry sir, you'll have to do a lot better arguing F2P doesn't suck, like addressing the obvious reason they do!
Granted, literally one 'gets' to play... but that's like saying eating a travel size bag of fritos is 'having a meal', pul-leeze.
just realized, this is my 1st post here.
woot!
What's up?
So you obviously fall into the "others..." category. Welcome to MMORPG. You'll fit right in.