[POLL] Are F2P players freeloaders or better payers?

askdaboss

There are lots of debates going about the Pay To Play and Free To Play models... But I still see a lot of hate against the F2P model (and for very understandable reasons too).

 

An argument we hear against the F2P model is that F2P games are in fact more expensive in the long run for the average player (as opposed to P2P where you will only be paying a set amount every month).

But proponents of the P2P model also say that F2P players are freeloaders.

 

There is definitely a contradiction here, as the average F2P player can either pay more or less than a P2P player.

So which is it?

cerulean2012

I think your poll is to narrow and should have more choices.  While some are freeloaders and some are good there is a whole range in-between.

Rydeson

Incomplete poll.. but ok.. 

     I"m no longer subscription player like I was for years..  I want the most bang for my buck and the games I'm seeing coming out now are short lived, minimal content with a price..  They are nothing more the money grabs by the corps and I have no respect or patience for that bs..  I'm now a newly created F2P player and will remain that way until a game comes out with substantial content deserving of a subscriptions..  Games today would be like paying cable TV and you see the same shows over and over and over, day after day...... Excuse me?   I don't think so.. 

moguy2

Missing other components to this poll. Was this an " I drank to much beer and thought this was a good idea " post?

 

I do that all the time too

eHug

Both is true.

There are players that are usually be taunted as content locust, they consume a bit of the content, then skip out before the end game starts. They don't want to socialize or beat a game, but just kill their boredom for a few hours without putting any effort into it, then move on to the next free thing. Kind of like switching through the tv channels because you got nothing else to do - and it's free.

And there are player that want to play the game for real - and those ofc have to pay for the content locusts, too.

cerulean2012

Originally posted by eHug

Both is true.

There are players that are usually be taunted as content locust, they consume a bit of the content, then skip out before the end game starts. They don't want to socialize or beat a game, but just kill their boredom for a few hours without putting any effort into it, then move on to the next free thing. Kind of like switching through the tv channels because you got nothing else to do - and it's free.

And there are player that want to play the game for real - and those ofc have to pay for the content locusts, too.

I have done that on some games.  Some that had to be bought and some that where ftp.  Why?  Because of different reasons, advertised and talked about by devs and game being different then what was talked about.  Game started out as promising but after hitting certain points it falls apart.  Just different things.

So I have played ftp, buy 2 play(GW1 & GW2) & sub games.  Some I have stuck with for years, some as little as a month.

Most of us that play mmos have jumped into one form time to time with the thought, this is great only to find a short time later we really didnt like it.

Hmm..guess went off-topic a bit...sorry.

Anyway, on some ftps & have spent some real money on.  On some I haven't spent a dime.  On some sub games I have spent money in the shop, on some I haven't.  Even with the buy 2 play games, some I have spent money, some not.

So yes at times I could be considered a freeloader and at times I am not.

askdaboss

Originally posted by cerulean2012
I think your poll is to narrow and should have more choices.  While some are freeloaders and some are good there is a whole range in-between.

From what I have seen, most posts I have read on these forums have made F2P players fall in one of these two categories.

The fact that the F2P model is sustainable would tend to prove that F2P players are in fact good payers (averaged over the number of players coming to play the game).

Jaedor

Agree that your poll is too narrow. I generally choose to sub when it is offered, but in a F2P game with a sub option, that means I may end up spending more money.

Agent_Joseph

f2p,p2p,b2p,p2w , I don't care if gameplay  is fun

Instigator-Jones

Originally posted by askdaboss

Originally posted by cerulean2012
I think your poll is to narrow and should have more choices.  While some are freeloaders and some are good there is a whole range in-between.

From what I have seen, most posts I have read on these forums have made F2P players fall in one of these two categories.

The fact that the F2P model is sustainable would tend to prove that F2P players are in fact good payers (averaged over the number of players coming to play the game).

With this logic, the only reason there COULD be more F2P players is that they simply out number the P2P players. So, "X" game is F2P and "Y" is P2P, they both have about the same percentage of GOOD players, but "X" game has a bigger population simply because it's F2P and therefore more GOOD players.

So, in other words, if you're just looking at numbers... Asking how many of anything, comparing high population to low population, is flawed. It would seem that posts like this are set up to generate a F2P/P2P flame war.

So, even more simply... considering this post... It's A Trap!

Evelknievel

I would say the freeloaders are simply freeloaders and don't pay chit and of course they are the ones that complain the most. They pretty much consume game play till they get bored and move onto the next f2p game.

The F2P players that actually buy items or time are victims of circumstance and end up paying more than a subscription cost per month.

I am one of them subscription players they don't mind a monthly cost if available on the game.

To me F2P games costs more if the gamer is really into the game and as one poster stated, some people just don't have the willpower to say no to virtual items.

Foobarx

All people want is B2P.  Just sell us the damn game and let us play it at OUR convenience.  If your game is good, we'll buy your expansion, if not, we won't.  

 

It's just plain stupid to pay a sub fee for a game that isn't worthy of playing 24/7 365 days a year.  Most games are worthy of the box price... not much more.

 

F2P just proves that even the DEVELOPERS know their game isn't worthy of a sub free.  The fact that some fools think buying some items in the cash shop is going to get them one step closer to the Publisher's Clearance House Million Dollar Prize Award doesn't mean that it is so.  If the game wasn't F2P... it would be a literal ghost town in a heart beat.  What does that tell you?  The game lacks, and lacks in a very big way.  Sell it as a B2P game, you get your money, we get our game.  Life goes on.

 

Rinse/repeat.

 

Welcome to 2014 and beyond.  This is just the way it is.

ryvendark

I've raided in top guilds, I've goofed off in casual guilds. I've paid box+sub in some games I've paid subs in free games, I've paid nothing in other free games.

There isn't any classification someone could try and put me into that I don't have lots of examples of expections to their rules. I'm sure just about every other gamer could say the same thing.

There is no such thing as a f2p player or a p2p player because each game is handled on a case by case situation. Just because someone says they'll never do something today doesn't mean tomorrow they wont change their mind. All gamers should like playing games and people need to stop trying to lable others to feel better about the choices they make.

nariusseldon

I thought it is pretty clear common knowledge. MOST f2p players free-ride, and there are some whales that pay a lot individually, and also some in-betweens.

 

rojoArcueid

like other posters said, your poll is too narrow.

There are a bunch of freeloaders, that is for sure, but there are also a lot of people who pay a decent amount here and there. And there are also the whales to keep those games alive, which are a minority. So not all F2P players are freeloaders, but in the end F2P mmos turn out to be more expensive than the subscription one for those who want to genuinely support it (not counting the whales).

 

Now the title of this thread asks who are the better players? payment model doesnt make a player better or worse than others. There are a lot of terrible players on both sides of the spectrum just as there are a lot good people on both sides.

 

The real question should be, who are the better companies? the ones who try to milk every cent from us regardless of payment model, or the ones who respect their customers and try to earn their money by offering a good service to them? I personally dont support (nor care about) the company that wants to take my money but dont give a crap about offering me a good service and product. It is business, the good stuff gets my money.

Sevala

Poll is terrible.

Although. I do hate the f2p cash grab business models now that are sub-par games at best.

Also, I do think most f2p players end up just being content locusts and move on, attention spans of a gold fish, its like an entire generational version of ADHD that has struck the MMO genre.

Kyleran

The only folks that annoy me are those who think they are gracing us with their presence and don't feel they should pay anything to play a MMORPG, regardless of payment model.

Those are real "freeloaders" in my book and yes, I am critical of them.

 

nariusseldon

Originally posted by Kyleran

The only folks that annoy me are those who think they are gracing us with their presence and don't feel they should pay anything to play a MMORPG, regardless of payment model.

Those are real "freeloaders" in my book and yes, I am critical of them.

 

Why bother? If devs .. owners ... of the games don't mind freeloaders, and let them free-load. Why do you care?

mmoguy43

Really no way to know but to guess or say both are valid.

IMO 3x more people will be willing to drop only 5 bucks on a game and play whenever than to be committed to a game for that month or longer period of time for $15. So it is even.

Arclan

I voted the last option. I can't call F2P players freeloaders since a lot of them pay way more $ than I paid for my subscription games.

Nasa

If i recall correctly most studies show that only 5-10% pay in F2P games. They are called whales (also in casinos), as they spend a lot of mony and actually pay for all.

That is why the poll is too narrow

CommoX

Originally posted by Foobarx

All people want is B2P.  Just sell us the damn game and let us play it at OUR convenience.  If your game is good, we'll buy your expansion, if not, we won't.  

 This is the way most computer games were before MMOs and DLC - I agree with this statement in part. Make a good game, sell it, make an expansion. Don't DLC me to death. Would this method work on an MMO platform? Maybe. Don't expect content updates at regular intervals, major fixes or tweaks etc to the game. You'll have to wait for the next expansion. That's roughly what I imagine our piddly $15 goes towards preventing. Waiting for things. - Wait, you feel that should be fixed for free? Devs don't think so, that was a major change, for the better, or worse. Not something that was broke and needed to be fixed. I think the sub model is fine. There are those who like it and those who don't.

It's just plain stupid to pay a sub fee for a game that isn't worthy of playing 24/7 365 days a year.  Most games are worthy of the box price... not much more.

 This is where I have issues with today's MMOs and those crying for F2P B2P and a lot of things in between. An MMO is supposed to be a living world that a player is a part of. These worlds need constant attention from both it's creators and players. Thus making the sub fee an acceptable part of being part of said world. MMOs fail to do this more recently. When was the last time you felt like you were somewhere else? Felt like you were your character? Felt like your choices mattered? I know some of this comes off as RPG ish, but are not most MMOs, MMORPGs? No matter how many quests I read, how much lore I track down, outside sources I delve into, some of today's games are no longer a story you can get involved with. This needs to change in order to make the MMO strong again. I understand and accept that I am playing a part in someone else's story, be it large or small. Stop making one million hero's with the exact same story line. -Save us %t , you're our only hope-

F2P just proves that even the DEVELOPERS know their game isn't worthy of a sub free.  The fact that some fools think buying some items in the cash shop is going to get them one step closer to the Publisher's Clearance House Million Dollar Prize Award doesn't mean that it is so.  If the game wasn't F2P... it would be a literal ghost town in a heart beat.  What does that tell you?  The game lacks, and lacks in a very big way.  Sell it as a B2P game, you get your money, we get our game.  Life goes on.

This, so much this. Should many of these games be B2P? Sure. Would I want to play them? Not really. As I mentioned about an MMORPG should be a massive living world. Most are currently a main town or a lobby where you gather your group, go do your task and head back to your lobby to rinse and repeat. Make a world. Make it worth being in and you can rest assured your game will be worth the box price plus the monthly fee. 

Rinse/repeat.

 In the end, he is not wrong. Make these games worth the fees you're asking. The rest, give us the box fee and try to make your extra content worth the time/money. Hell, half these so called MMOs today are just glorified single player games.

Welcome to 2014 and beyond.  This is just the way it is.

 

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Stammerer

Originally posted by askdaboss

There are lots of debates going about the Pay To Play and Free To Play models... But I still see a lot of hate against the F2P model (and for very understandable reasons too).

 

An argument we hear against the F2P model is that F2P games are in fact more expensive in the long run for the average player (as opposed to P2P where you will only be paying a set amount every month).

But proponents of the P2P model also say that F2P players are freeloaders.

 

There is definitely a contradiction here, as the average F2P player can either pay more or less than a P2P player.

So which is it?

It depends upon the individual.  Some F2Players are freeloaders and others spend a lot.... 

How are you supposed to pick any one of those options? 

Theocritus

I think we have a winner for the worst thread of the year contest.

Stammerer

Originally posted by Robokapp

Originally posted by Stammerer

Originally posted by askdaboss

There are lots of debates going about the Pay To Play and Free To Play models... But I still see a lot of hate against the F2P model (and for very understandable reasons too).

 

An argument we hear against the F2P model is that F2P games are in fact more expensive in the long run for the average player (as opposed to P2P where you will only be paying a set amount every month).

But proponents of the P2P model also say that F2P players are freeloaders.

 

There is definitely a contradiction here, as the average F2P player can either pay more or less than a P2P player.

So which is it?

It depends upon the individual.  Some F2Players are freeloaders and others spend a lot.... 

How are you supposed to pick any one of those options? 

divide total revenue by total unique users.

Well, then it depends upon the game, the playerbase and the F2P model amongst many other factors.