I don't buy the whole excuse that you can earn points in game, because they make it so insanely tedious to earn a reasonable amount of points through gameplay that nobody in their right mind would do it. Using DDO as an example (LOTRO's points will be very similar), if you complete all of the free quests available in the game, it will earn you 150 points. That's the max you can earn with one character. It's enough to buy a handful of potions and not much else. A set of 6 premium quests costs about 300-500 points. You can repeat the process over and over again with alt characters, earning 150points on each character for completing all of the quests (it's somewhere around 70 quests) but it's obviously not worth it to anyone who isn't flat broke and grossly addicted to the game or maybe just psychotic. I don't count in-game earning like this because it's unrealistic to expect any player to play the game this way.
Yeah, you are right it is somewhat of a grind to unlock it all, but it is still possible. Strangely enough though, your post pretty much contradicts all the hate and misconceptions a lot of anti-F2P people say. Things like F2P players just want to buy their way through the came as fast as possible, or that everything should be earned through gameplay, not with your wallet. Yet here we have DDO, which offers you the chance to play the game for free, and earn your way through the game over time rather than buying it all for instant gratification... and that doesn't please the anti-F2P crowd either.
My argument against F2P isn't usually one of the "Pay 2 Win" variety, but I do understand the complaint and having the OPTION to play through the content and earn your way through gameplay does not solve it. To those players, the achievement of earning the best endgame sword is sullied by the fact that there are a hundred players who bought the same sword or better months ago for 500 points. As long as some spoiled rich kid can buy up the best gear and consumables and go crazy in PvP owning everyone simply because his weekly allowance is more than the average gamer's yearly salary, it's still a big problem for average MMO gamers, especially for those who like PvP.
Fortunately, game developers seem to finally be recognizing this (at least Turbine is). There's no powerful gear to be bought for DDO, and they've promised the same for LOTRO. I don't care about XP potions and other little boosts like that, so as long as developers keep the $100 "I Win" sword off of the item mall, it's all good.
Originally posted by scuubeedoo It's actually Demos/Trials we are talking about that instead of time limits, have gameplay limits.
Originally posted by Ceridith The proper term that is slowly starting to be used is "Free to Try". It much more accurately sums up the scheme without giving it an uncredible positive twist.
That's a good point about them being demos/trials, and I like this phrase "Free to Try" -- that's a lot more accurate I think.
" How long will we keep using the phrase "Free 2 Play"? "
Until it's not free2play maybe? The term is used because in essence, the games are free 2 play. Meaning you can download the game free, register free and login and play the basic game for free. Hence the term F2P. A cash shop dosn't change this term one bit. Now playing a game means logging in and being able to do the basics of the game. People always try to change the term to Pay2Play or Pay2Win or w/e because they feel that cash shops force them in some manner to enjoy the game to it's fullest. But the term doesn't apply to enjoying the full game, just playing the base game. So there you go, anything else?
The proper term that is slowly starting to be used is "Free to Try". It much more accurately sums up the scheme without giving it an uncredible positive twist.
The issue is moreso to do with item malls and other such RMT being added to games... which seems to span some subscription based games. It's making a complicated mess out of trying to label things by lumping them into a general category.
We need to start refering to MMOs as Subscription based and Item mall based.
i.e.
Sub with RMT.
Non-Sub with RMT.
Sub only.
etc.
You make a good point, and i think there should be a clearer distinction between the types of games too. Ill agree to a point with some people, that there are SOME F2P games that really are nothing but Pay 2 Win, but it is no longer true in all cases. There are various models out now, not all of them are P2W, and a few of them (besides the obvious DDO and LOTRO hybrid) do offer ingame players just as much of a chance to buy stuff as people with $. 2 of the main examples I always point to are Rohan and Runes of Magic (though I heard it has changed now and you cant sell on AH for diamonds, unfortunately so the game has kind of become P2W). Rohan has an extra feature added to their cash shop that allows players to buy & sell ingame items (as well as complete characters) directly for cash shop credits.
Anyway, as I mentioned, there are several models out there now as the "F2P" genre has expanded ove rthe past few years, problem is getting any company to actually refer to them as the more true descriptions rather than F2P. They certainly wont call their game Pay 2 Win, or Pay 2 Compete or anything like that, cause nobody will even try the game unless they decide ahead of time theyve got extra $ to burn.
Many of these companies will only ever refer to their games as what they think appeals the most to players, not what they truly are. Would kind of be nice if there was some sort of regulation on that, similar to how the ESRB ratings work, where a game is labeled based on what type of content is in the game and cash shops, rather than being simply sub vs rmt/f2p
At this point, most of us with at least two brain cells to rub together are perfectly aware that "Free to Play!" actually means you won't enjoy the game unless you're a paying customer, and also that you won't beat the other guy in PvP unless you spend more money on item mall merchandise than he does. We all know "Free to Try!" or "Free to Start!" would be far more accurate descriptions.
In a way, though, the slightly dishonest F2P label has become a double-edged sword for developers of F2P games. Among informed gamers, "F2P" is now associated with games of inferior quality, slimy milking techniques (giving players tiny inventory spaces they must pay to upgrade, or making combat unbearable without potions that cost $$, for example), and obese teenage shyguys with Mommy's Mastercard at their disposal curb-stomping nabs with a $500 +20 longsword of Chee-Tos from the item mall.
I actually play a (very expensive, if you want to win) "F2P" game, but it's a text MUD. These old MUDs don't use cheap milking techniques, they're high-quality games (at least, they are if you enjoy MUDs), and they can still be immensely enjoyable if you never pay a dime, as long as you don't expect to compete at the highest levels of PvP combat. They're totally up-front and friendly about this, instead of being shady and seedy like many of the F2P graphical MMORPGs.
And that's the real problem with F2P graphical MMORPGs, as I see it: They often use cheap milking techniques, they're usually of poor quality, and you will literally suffer and be miserable just playing on a day-to-day basis unless you pay. That's why we, as gamers, resent the term "F2P," I think.
But to sum up, who cares? Let them use "F2P." We all know what it means: There's a 95% chance this game will be a piece of ****. It helps us know what to stay away from. If they called them something other than F2P, it wouldn't matter. They'd still be sucky and shady games.
Currently Playing: EVE Online Retired From: UO, FFXI, AO, SWG, Ryzom, GW, WoW, WAR
I am going with Pay 2 Win from now on. F2P is a scam.
I've long been a fan of the phrase "pay 2 win" too; but I don't think it's accurate in the case of DDO, or the proposed LOTRO model.
Those two are very much based around selling chunks of content, rather than selling power. If you don't want to call them "free 2 play", I'd suggest "user pays" as an alternative phrase. The amount you spend depends on the rate at which you consume content, as opposed to the traditional subscription model where it's totally flat regardless of how heavily or lightly you "use" the facilities.
I am going with Pay 2 Win from now on. F2P is a scam.
I've long been a fan of the phrase "pay 2 win" too; but I don't think it's accurate in the case of DDO, or the proposed LOTRO model.
Those two are very much based around selling chunks of content, rather than selling power. If you don't want to call them "free 2 play", I'd suggest "user pays" as an alternative phrase. The amount you spend depends on the rate at which you consume content, as opposed to the traditional subscription model where it's totally flat regardless of how heavily or lightly you "use" the facilities.
If you're playing an MMO to win it, you're doing it wrong.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
It's more of a no sub to play with a pay for extended content. In LOTRO case, you can grind 30 levels for free to level 50. If you want the next 15 levels you have to pay. So it is a pay for content with a free login for exploration and grind system.
How many people long for that "past, simpler, and better world," I wonder, without ever recognizing the truth that perhaps it was they who were simpler and better, and not the world about them? R.A.Salvatore
In my opinion "Pay to Win" is a bit too exaggerated, for the majority of the items available in a cash shop. There are indeed those that give an exclusive advantage or those that can be used to acquire in-game currency, but those aren't the norm for non-"Asian grinders".
Better definitions would be Pay to Achieve or Pay to Not Play (kind of redundant, because if you are paying to achieve, you are paying to avoid playing...), P2NP being the most appropriate in my opinion, you'll be paying for stuff that will either make your gaming more efficient, reducing the time required for tasks or will serve for customization purposes, which impresses me even more as those would be great opportunities to offer gameplay content different from the basic combat combat combat featured in theme parks, through the form of "mini games" or crafting. But I guess paying for it works better.
And DDO/LOTRO are just freemium MMOs, as differently from the Asian Grinders, you need to pay to be able unlock level caps and locked areas/features/quests (monster play, anyone? carrying more than 2 gold, anyone?).
I'd rather favor the term P2W because thats what F2P is all about.
Or if you want to keep the word "free" in there you can use F2L.
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own. -- Herman Melville
PR words to lure more players peroid. Soon there will be another PR set of words.....its all marketing and thats what makes MMOs make the world go round
There's a lot of misinformation in this thread. Semantics aside, some F2P games are indeed FREE, as long as you're willing to put in the time (ie grind). DDO is one of them. All the purchasable content in DDO can be 'bought' through points earned simply by playing the game. If you grind out enough points, you can buy it all. DDO is not alone in this.
Pay to Win: while some F2P games sell items that offer huge advantages, most of them offer items of convenience, or minor advantages. Often these advantages only apply to PvE.
I also think the term is misleading, sometimes up to the point of outright scam. I don't want to throw mud, but after reading the details I have my doubts LOTRO really is free to play. Much of the game's content is still for real money only. A game like Perfect World might be free to play, since you only buy fluff, more or less. But having VIP quests and high levels to pay for as in LOTRO surely is NOT free to play!
Comments
[quote]Originally posted by kaiser3282
My argument against F2P isn't usually one of the "Pay 2 Win" variety, but I do understand the complaint and having the OPTION to play through the content and earn your way through gameplay does not solve it. To those players, the achievement of earning the best endgame sword is sullied by the fact that there are a hundred players who bought the same sword or better months ago for 500 points. As long as some spoiled rich kid can buy up the best gear and consumables and go crazy in PvP owning everyone simply because his weekly allowance is more than the average gamer's yearly salary, it's still a big problem for average MMO gamers, especially for those who like PvP.
Fortunately, game developers seem to finally be recognizing this (at least Turbine is). There's no powerful gear to be bought for DDO, and they've promised the same for LOTRO. I don't care about XP potions and other little boosts like that, so as long as developers keep the $100 "I Win" sword off of the item mall, it's all good.
That's a good point about them being demos/trials, and I like this phrase "Free to Try" -- that's a lot more accurate I think.
I am going with Pay 2 Win from now on. F2P is a scam.
I like the term F2P because I know when they put that on a game I should avoid it at all costs.
That will be the day when I turn away from this style of gaming and never look back.
I like to pay my fee once a month and not have to worry about being hounded for my credit card or money while I'm immersing myself in the game world
" How long will we keep using the phrase "Free 2 Play"? "
Until it's not free2play maybe? The term is used because in essence, the games are free 2 play. Meaning you can download the game free, register free and login and play the basic game for free. Hence the term F2P. A cash shop dosn't change this term one bit. Now playing a game means logging in and being able to do the basics of the game. People always try to change the term to Pay2Play or Pay2Win or w/e because they feel that cash shops force them in some manner to enjoy the game to it's fullest. But the term doesn't apply to enjoying the full game, just playing the base game. So there you go, anything else?
You make a good point, and i think there should be a clearer distinction between the types of games too. Ill agree to a point with some people, that there are SOME F2P games that really are nothing but Pay 2 Win, but it is no longer true in all cases. There are various models out now, not all of them are P2W, and a few of them (besides the obvious DDO and LOTRO hybrid) do offer ingame players just as much of a chance to buy stuff as people with $. 2 of the main examples I always point to are Rohan and Runes of Magic (though I heard it has changed now and you cant sell on AH for diamonds, unfortunately so the game has kind of become P2W). Rohan has an extra feature added to their cash shop that allows players to buy & sell ingame items (as well as complete characters) directly for cash shop credits.
Anyway, as I mentioned, there are several models out there now as the "F2P" genre has expanded ove rthe past few years, problem is getting any company to actually refer to them as the more true descriptions rather than F2P. They certainly wont call their game Pay 2 Win, or Pay 2 Compete or anything like that, cause nobody will even try the game unless they decide ahead of time theyve got extra $ to burn.
Many of these companies will only ever refer to their games as what they think appeals the most to players, not what they truly are. Would kind of be nice if there was some sort of regulation on that, similar to how the ESRB ratings work, where a game is labeled based on what type of content is in the game and cash shops, rather than being simply sub vs rmt/f2p
Definitely, very clever way to put it indeed.
At this point, most of us with at least two brain cells to rub together are perfectly aware that "Free to Play!" actually means you won't enjoy the game unless you're a paying customer, and also that you won't beat the other guy in PvP unless you spend more money on item mall merchandise than he does. We all know "Free to Try!" or "Free to Start!" would be far more accurate descriptions.
In a way, though, the slightly dishonest F2P label has become a double-edged sword for developers of F2P games. Among informed gamers, "F2P" is now associated with games of inferior quality, slimy milking techniques (giving players tiny inventory spaces they must pay to upgrade, or making combat unbearable without potions that cost $$, for example), and obese teenage shyguys with Mommy's Mastercard at their disposal curb-stomping nabs with a $500 +20 longsword of Chee-Tos from the item mall.
I actually play a (very expensive, if you want to win) "F2P" game, but it's a text MUD. These old MUDs don't use cheap milking techniques, they're high-quality games (at least, they are if you enjoy MUDs), and they can still be immensely enjoyable if you never pay a dime, as long as you don't expect to compete at the highest levels of PvP combat. They're totally up-front and friendly about this, instead of being shady and seedy like many of the F2P graphical MMORPGs.
And that's the real problem with F2P graphical MMORPGs, as I see it: They often use cheap milking techniques, they're usually of poor quality, and you will literally suffer and be miserable just playing on a day-to-day basis unless you pay. That's why we, as gamers, resent the term "F2P," I think.
But to sum up, who cares? Let them use "F2P." We all know what it means: There's a 95% chance this game will be a piece of ****. It helps us know what to stay away from. If they called them something other than F2P, it wouldn't matter. They'd still be sucky and shady games.
Currently Playing: EVE Online
Retired From: UO, FFXI, AO, SWG, Ryzom, GW, WoW, WAR
I've long been a fan of the phrase "pay 2 win" too; but I don't think it's accurate in the case of DDO, or the proposed LOTRO model.
Those two are very much based around selling chunks of content, rather than selling power. If you don't want to call them "free 2 play", I'd suggest "user pays" as an alternative phrase. The amount you spend depends on the rate at which you consume content, as opposed to the traditional subscription model where it's totally flat regardless of how heavily or lightly you "use" the facilities.
If you're playing an MMO to win it, you're doing it wrong.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
How many people long for that "past, simpler, and better world," I wonder, without ever recognizing the truth that perhaps it was they who were simpler and better, and not the world about them?
R.A.Salvatore
In my opinion "Pay to Win" is a bit too exaggerated, for the majority of the items available in a cash shop. There are indeed those that give an exclusive advantage or those that can be used to acquire in-game currency, but those aren't the norm for non-"Asian grinders".
Better definitions would be Pay to Achieve or Pay to Not Play (kind of redundant, because if you are paying to achieve, you are paying to avoid playing...), P2NP being the most appropriate in my opinion, you'll be paying for stuff that will either make your gaming more efficient, reducing the time required for tasks or will serve for customization purposes, which impresses me even more as those would be great opportunities to offer gameplay content different from the basic combat combat combat featured in theme parks, through the form of "mini games" or crafting. But I guess paying for it works better.
And DDO/LOTRO are just freemium MMOs, as differently from the Asian Grinders, you need to pay to be able unlock level caps and locked areas/features/quests (monster play, anyone? carrying more than 2 gold, anyone?).
And what should we call all the P2P games with cash shops (like WoW, Aion and EQ2 etc)?
P2PAP2W?
Pay to play AND pay to win?
If WoW = The Beatles
and WAR = Led Zeppelin
Then LotrO = Pink Floyd
Or if you want to keep the word "free" in there you can use F2L.
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own.
-- Herman Melville
Any thing with a "free trial" can be considered "Free to play"
So the phrase is meaningless now days.
-Azure Prower
http://www.youtube.com/AzurePrower
PR words to lure more players peroid. Soon there will be another PR set of words.....its all marketing and thats what makes MMOs make the world go round
There's a lot of misinformation in this thread. Semantics aside, some F2P games are indeed FREE, as long as you're willing to put in the time (ie grind). DDO is one of them. All the purchasable content in DDO can be 'bought' through points earned simply by playing the game. If you grind out enough points, you can buy it all. DDO is not alone in this.
Pay to Win: while some F2P games sell items that offer huge advantages, most of them offer items of convenience, or minor advantages. Often these advantages only apply to PvE.
Some games are truly Free 2 Play.
I also think the term is misleading, sometimes up to the point of outright scam. I don't want to throw mud, but after reading the details I have my doubts LOTRO really is free to play. Much of the game's content is still for real money only. A game like Perfect World might be free to play, since you only buy fluff, more or less. But having VIP quests and high levels to pay for as in LOTRO surely is NOT free to play!