Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
General: Wood: What's in a Name?
Stradden
Managing EditorMember CommonPosts: 6,696
MMORPG.com's Jon Wood writes this article examining the usefulness of the term Free to Play when referring to games with items shops.
After reading some of the comments brought on by our Best Free to Play MMO of 2009 Editor's Choice Award, I got to thinking about the term Free to Play. You see, on a daily basis I read about people complaining about the intrusion of the free to play genre into a land that was once the sole territory of subscription based MMOs.
As with most things on this grand old internet of ours, some of the arguments against F2P games are well thought out and presented while others are stream of consciousness rants. It's just the nature of the beast. Still, there's one argument that pops up over and over again every time that this is debated. I've brought it up before, because I think that it's a complaint that's based on a miscommunication and easily fixed. Simply put, the term Free to Play has to go. The argument, so it goes, is that these games aren't free as the name of the business model might indicate, but rather require players to spend money over time in the inevitable item shop that is available to players. This inevitably opens up the floodgates of people complaining about the "false advertising" that's being committed and the tirade against the "greedy" companies that dare to charge for their products.
Read Wood: What's in a Name?
Cheers,
Jon Wood
Managing Editor
MMORPG.com
Comments
Its real simple
FREE TO PLAY
It means its free to play. You dont need to pay anything to play this game.
You do however pay for other things. That are optional
Its like if a cinema would advertise Free movie. But than charge people for sitting chairs. Still if you can stand for entire two and half hour , you can watch the film for free.
Hehe ya, it's almost worthwhile to beat around the bush when explaining your game's financial methods these days. Any subscription model gets put up in a ladder against others based on the monthly costs vs the illusion that a game must meet or beat it's competition within the same price range, while being immediately referred to as inferior if they aim lower than 15$. As for F2P games, I think it's almost impossible to market them to western gamers these days, and it very well could be the misnomer of it being "completely free" being blown out of proportion. The only truely F2P game would have to make all of it's money through sponsors and advertising, and that's another can of worms that players are not likely to deal with for a free-and-clear gaming experience. Personally, I kind of liked how AO had animated ad's in-game with audio, it suits the sci-fi setting, but to some people it was the ultimate of disgraces to their very honor... yet I still don't remember any of these folks spending a dime.
Perhaps there is really no pleasing certain crowds with a free *anything*, as any kind of hitch gets spun into something similar to cold war propaganda. Maybe we all have to accept a future of western gaming demanding monthly subs to deter what most players will inevitably view as a scam otherwise. Tough, unresolvable situation imo - like trying to reconsile a pair of long-since jilted lovers.
Writer / Musician / Game Designer
Now Playing: Skyrim, Wurm Online, Tropico 4
Waiting On: GW2, TSW, Archeage, The Rapture
I'm with the Lobotomist on this one. The name is rather accurate. The games are free to play and your purchase options are just those: options. You're not required to shop in the item mall, but it does make the game a whole hell of a lot easier.
I wouldn't count the entire west out of the F2P market. As a working, 20-something, American, I find it hard to justify paying $15 a month when I only log into an MMO for 4-6 hours a week. There is a certain appeal to the casual gamer for a title whose financial requirements scale with my free time.
but they dont and they charge extra no free to play is just that free but when most f2p's you need to pay for the extras because of the fact that you cant fully enjoy the game without them this isnt always the case as lots of f2p's have stuff thats cosmetic but alot of them arent cosmetic only
We should all start calling every non-subscription game (not just MMOs) Free-to-Play.
Yeah, because entry costs aside they're all 100% free, and no extra spending options.
This way the word would be finally dismissed from the game marketing industry, if everyone says their game is free to play, it loses the point.
They don't even bother adding the infamous asterisk " * " in their ads, that always means there are restrictions involved, and in this environment it would mean an uneven field - those that pay will evolve faster, those that pay will have better chances, those that pay will look better, etc.
I think you hit the nail on the head.
You can't really call a micro-transaction game "free to play", when there's obvious benefits to cash supply. They're just Micro-Transaction to Play (M2P?).
Companies who produce games are looking for profit, and those are looking for the nickel and dime markets out there. The subscription market is being flooded in with new members all the time. And those games have a certain requirement to hold interest. If you can't compete with the big names, don't expect a long term success or return on investment.
Then there's the smaller companies, some make a name for themselves in the Pay to Play market (CCP and Icarus Studios are the ones that stand out right now), but there's also those who are in it for whatever reason. There are lots of Micro models out there along side the true Free to Play games. Shouldn't there be a true distinction to those games who were developed for the enjoyment of people with no cost or upkeep (be it MUD or Graphical)?
I think we should definitely work on getting a distinction out there.
Pay to Play - P2P
Free to Play - F2P
Micro-Transaction - (M2P or whatever connotation is given)
Dear me, I don't know whats worse this column or the "Top 5 PvP MMO's" column that has WoW and War on the list.
Free to Play as another stated is FREE to PLAY. Theres no buying the game, theres no subscription fee and everything on the item mall is optional. If you don't pay you can still play.
Then you have B2P which is Buy to Play such as Guild Wars. You Buy it and then you Play it. Theres no subscription fee but you do have to make that initial purchase. If you don't buy the game you can't play the game, but theres no monthly fee.
Then there are P2P's or Pay to Plays. You buy the game and pay a subscription fee, hence PAY to PLAY. You don't Pay then you don't play.
Now considering my 12 year old grasps this concept easily.... I don't know what to say about this columnist.
I highlighted the word "enjoy" because this is purely a person-to-person thing. If you can't enjoy the pacing at which you advance compared to players throwing money down, then this stems more from hidden feeling of jealously and resentment towards others far more than it's an argument over ethics and principles. It's like a class field trip to a candy store where everyone without the money to buy good candy are offered lesser kinds for free, only to turn it down until they are given what those that do pay would get. You know, I've had pets all my life and whether cat or dog - they all seem to figure that what I am giving the other pets is X times better than what I am giving them, so they fight over the same food they are handed out, with no difference in what is on their plate beyond that everyone else seems to enjoy whats in it more than they are.
Writer / Musician / Game Designer
Now Playing: Skyrim, Wurm Online, Tropico 4
Waiting On: GW2, TSW, Archeage, The Rapture
See i do not believe in OPTIONAL either.Anything that the developer deemed WORTHY to spend time/money and effort to develop and put into the game is obviously something the players want.The developer is not going to make some sort of content on the premise that nobody will want it.So it is already in the design of the game and is removed for the sheer sake of grabbing money.
When you release a game ,EVERY single piece of content is PART of that game,if you are calling it a FREE to play game,then ALL of that content should be FREE,there is no argument here ,no debating it.
If your premise in the game design is to make money from a cash shop,then the game should be called a cash shop or item mall game,it should NOT be called a Free to play game.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
While the term F2P is strongly misleading in that for an average player to really enjoy most of them they will have to purchase items from the shop to remain competitive or complete the content in a reasonable length of time.
Never the less, there are players who never spend a cent on these game, particularly if they don't play them very often or for very long, so they are ultimately F2P by definition.
In fact, pulling statistics out of the air, I thought I read once that most F2P providers only get about 20% of the people who sign up for them to ever buy anything, and only about 5 or 10% go hardcore and spend lots of cash regularly with them.
So overall, they are indeed, F2P
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Then what about Pay to play MMOs with microtransactions like WoW or Champions?
I think the only problem with calling your game F2p is that alot of people think that F2P=Cheap korean grinder (even thou one of the largest P2P is a cheap korean grinder
)
I like the word Freemium but since most people wont understand what it means it doesnt have a purpose to say it when marketing.
Free to play MMOs like DDO are really free to play but you can pay extra depending on how you play the game and how much you are willing to spend. I think the $15 /month as only option is going to be gone in a couple of years. The industry needs to realize that the players want flexibility since everyone have a different playstyle. The other option is to go B2P like GW.
If WoW = The Beatles
and WAR = Led Zeppelin
Then LotrO = Pink Floyd
I agree with you, but if you define it like that WAR is also a free to play game
. If you're happy staying in tier1.
I can't really get behind the columnist on this one, as much as I normally enjoy Mr. Wood's articles. F2P, or Free to Play, is catchy, it's accurate, and honestly, I think most of us don't take every little thing that literally anymore. We know we can get in and see what a F2P game is all about, and if we start to enjoy it, we're inevitably going to have to pay something to get the most out of that game. I'm fine with that, as most F2P games don't have that "special something" that justifies the expense, but at least I got to find that out for myself, rather than paying $40-50 for a month's worth of time for a game I hate in a week.
I agree with you, but if you define it like that WAR is also a free to play game
. If you're happy staying in tier1.
Also any game with a trial could also be considered free to play, after all if you keep creating new trial accounts as one expires, you could never have to pay to play. Restrictions? Well, item malls and premium areas are also a restriction of what you can access for free, subscriber-exclusive content is the same.
Now even World of Warcraft is free to play, it's just a matter of stretching the concept to contain more than item malls, which is the reason I believe it's easier for EVERY game in the market to be called free to play than the item mall revenue-based games to stop using this utopia of a term.
The percentage regularly mentioned is about 10-15%. That's the number i have in my notes from 2009's Business In Gaming Conference at MIT. Any dev would be very happy to see 20%.
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
"The argument, so it goes, is that these games aren't free as the name of the business model might indicate, but rather require players to spend money over time in the inevitable item shop that is available to players." - Jon Wood
Jon, what percentage of F2P games require that players spend money in the item shop? Could you name a few?
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
I agree with you, but if you define it like that WAR is also a free to play game
. If you're happy staying in tier1.
Also any game with a trial could also be considered free to play, after all if you keep creating new trial accounts as one expires, you could never have to pay to play. Restrictions? Well, item malls and premium areas are also a restriction of what you can access for free, subscriber-exclusive content is the same.
Now even World of Warcraft is free to play, it's just a matter of stretching the concept to contain more than item malls, which is the reason I believe it's easier for EVERY game in the market to be called free to play than the item mall revenue-based games to stop using this utopia of a term.
The problem with free trials being called free to plays is this. You have a very limited amount of time or are very limited on what you can do. Free to plays for the most part tend to give you full access, and the item malls tend to rely on perks rather than essential items.
No with a free trial if you decide you like the game you must now purchase the game first. Then it's a garuntee that each month your going to be spending 15 dollars or so. An expansion comes out, your paying for that as well.
Free to plays tend to be free up front. Theres no initial purchase of the game required. Expansions come in the form of patches and are free. You can go through the entire game and never spend a dime. You can spend 15 dollars every 3 months, you could spend 2 dollars a month.
You choose to buy or not to buy, you choose how much your paying if you decide to pay anything. You have access to everything the game has to offer with the exception of some perk and fluff items on the item mall. You do not "Need" any of that to play the game, but those items can help or they can enhance your experience. But they are not required to play.
Some deviate from this such as DDO which has declared it'self a free to play while in actuality it is a pay to play with an extended limited free trial. You can still get the "Premium Account" which is there way of saying "We're still pay to play" while maintaining the whole f2p tag.
So while some do deviate it isn't the norm for free to plays.
NO YOU ARE WRONG
F2P means it doesnt have a subscription.
a DDL game can have a price, and still be F2P. Just look at Guild Wars for example.
NO YOU ARE WRONG
F2P means it doesnt have a subscription.
a DDL game can have a price, and still be F2P. Just look at Guild Wars for example.
Guild Wars is commonly referred to as a B2P or Buy to Play. All you do is buy the initial game and subsequent expansions.
I totally agree with the op I think he calls it out exactly as it is. Why not call a duck a duck even if you try to dress it up like chicken you'll still know what it is when it quacks.
I think a lot of the posters are totally overeacting to the article thinking it's some sort of attack on the type of game they like to play I just see it as a call to label the microtransaction games what they are. It seems to me that a lot of the stark defenders of the "ftp" games are saying that the game developers put in all time,effort and expense to create these games and do it soley for charity and when someone states that they put in item shops or whatever to try to generate some revenue for themselves they jump on their soapboxes and scream "I don't pay anything"
Well that's all fine and good but if no one buys anything from the item shops or whatever then the game will go belly up as much as if in a subscription game the amount of subscribers drift below a certain level.
Zzzz.... arguing over the term Free to Play...
If a game is free to play, it's just that. Free to play. You can play the whole thing for free, for as long as you want. There shouldn't be restrictions in a free to play game - i.e. certain areas being blocked off, certain levels unattainable, etc.
Guild Wars and all of the expansions are Buy to play. You can play the whole thing, no restrictions on time or area access, etc. etc. - but you have to pay for the initial thing. You have bought it. The game is now yours. I myself bought Guild Wars a few years ago, I haven't paid a cent since I bought it, and I could still go and log in right now if I so desired.
If a game is playable for an unlimited amount of time, but there are certain restrictions to players not on a subscription, it is considered "Freemium". Runescape is probably the oldest example of a successful game based on this model. Players can play for an unlimited amount of time, but have a limit on things that they can do, and places they can go. You could spend a year or two skilling up all of your abilities you think you'll need in the future, and then start Paying to Play to be a premium member of the game, which would save many players many dollars, but I think most people just play for a while and then decide if they really want to pay or not.
Then you have the purely Pay to Play games. If you have bought the game, good for you, do you have a credit card or a game time card to register now? These games require that you have a working subscription, and usually require an initial payment as well. The initial purchase of the game normally gives you a free month (so whenever you see those $50 price tags, think of it as a $35 purchase, with a $15 month subscription attached). This free month was the thing people were talking about with Aion, saying it was totally going to fail after the first month of release (which it would appear it hasn't).
Going back to the term Free to Play, imagine a theme park where you could go in the place for free. Cool. There are rides everywhere, roller coasters, luge rides, various centrifugal-force based rides that spin at speeds fast enough for you to turn upside down (I miss the Gravitron... later Vortex... now a laser-tag centre), hell, even the tea cups.
Then you see people walking around that have drinks and food (mana/health potions at an item mall), you see people eating churros. You realise that you're a little hungry... but the sign at the front said free to enter. You think about it for a moment and realise that perhaps these bits of food are, gasp, a form of revenue! Looking around further you see people on the rides wearing SOUVENIER SHIRTS (vanity items)!
And, sometimes, you can see younger kids wearing booster shoes (exp potions) that they bought right here, getting onto rides that require that you be taller (higher level raids/dungeons/encounters)! Not that you won't be tall enough later... (grinding without exp potions) but it's so unfair that these other people get to ride them first.
In some more extreme cases, you could imagine that you could buy drugs or something that make the whole experience that much better (buying swords/armour with absurd stat bonuses - usually these items are reserved for PVP-centric F2P games, Windslayer comes to mind)
But the point of this theme park is that you can go on all the rides. It doesn't stop you doing any of that - but there are things you can buy that would probably make the experience that much better.
Anyway, there's a big ol' rant for people to read or not.
I am playing EVE and it's alright... level V skills are a bit much.
You all need to learn to spell.
Funny because it seems posters in this thread are saying call a duck a duck and quit trying to change the meaning of a duck lol. I for one prefer pay to plays or buy to plays. I'm not overly fond of free to plays. Thanks to pay to plays incorporating free to play business models into there own though lately I've become more open to trying them hence why I'm currently beta testing Allods.
Now heres the deal with those item malls. A f2p must have items to entice you but not items you must have in order to play. Most free to plays do this fairly well. Some don't. And after looking around a good bit today it seems the previous posters were correct when they said only 10-20% of players actually buy items off of item malls in most free to plays. So in most free to plays 80-90% of your player base is indeed playing the game for free.
If a pay to play had 80-90% of it's player base playing for free would it still thrive? No lol.
So see... there is a key difference between a free to play and a pay to play. You don't have to admit it, you just have to accept it lol.
But as I said, I don't mind calling a duck a duck, but your not going to change the meaning of duck on me lol.
A more accurate term would be to call them Free to Install but that isn't as catchy or marketable as Free to Play.
Awsome analogy!
Thanks, I specialise in analogies. If there were a job for it, I'd be working it.
I am playing EVE and it's alright... level V skills are a bit much.
You all need to learn to spell.