Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
General: Reading Comprehension & F2P
SBFord
Former Associate EditorMember LegendaryPosts: 33,129
Using MMMORPG.com Managing Editor Jon Wood's recent column about reading comprehension and the soundbite generation, Richard Aihoshi takes it to the F2P space. Richard wants players to uses critical reading skills when it comes to the changing dynamics of online gaming and the free-to-play opportunities presenting themselves to players around the world. See if you agree and then let us know what you think on our forums!
Last Friday, Jon Wood's opinion piece entitled Reading Comprehension grabbed my attention somewhat more than usual since it seemed to connect with a couple of other things that had taken place recently. One was the preparation of my previous column, which dealt with the other side of the proverbial coin, writing about MMOGs. Among the tips I chose not to include was trying to be as clear as possible at all times, in part because there are people who seem all too willing, indeed eager, to misinterpret or ignore what they read when doing so serves their personal agendas. Being explicit doesn't stop them, but it's the best we can do.
Read more Reading Comprehension & F2P.
Comments
F2P is going to kill the world!!!
The internet remids me of that game you used to play in grade school wheyre they'd make you sit in a circle and tell the first person one thing and see what it turns into at the end. I think of that every time I see someone refer to f2p as pay to win. Who the hell would even play a game where the geek with the most money is the toughest person to beat? I guess if you don't understand something and don't take the time to think about it in a open mind sort of way then that's what you end up with, the circle game.
Ok so I read every word in this article and to be honest I think you wrote almost this exact same article before. That is sad on two counts. First is that this is an idea that was just used by Jon (who you give credit to) and as such is not an original piece on here, and second you already wrote much of it before. So I guess my question is, what was the point of it?
We all know you are 100% baffled by the fact that so many of us don't like F2P the way you do, and you also think it will essentially be the only form of MMO in a few years, so repeating that gains nothing. We also know you feel those of us who don't like F2P don't fully read your articles (the same way you ignore all the facts that we pose contrary to your points) so once again repeating it gains nothing.
I'm just confused on the purpose of having this article or taking the time to write it (again).
We get it. You love F2P. You are confused by those of us who don't like F2P and as such always insist we are not actually reading your articles or that we are just out to spread misinformation since we do not agree with you. Seriously, we get it.
Take heart, gentlemen, you have chosen the right field to write articles for. Imagine writing weekly articles in hopes of influencing whether people get access to edible food and clean water. Imagine writing articles decrying human rights violations like torture and murder.
And then imagine running up against just these issues both of your articles highlighted. And you would run into them, no matter how important the subject matter. People who have a set point of view on policy issues, and who never question it, and who ignore any point of view different from their own. People who don't read carefully, who don't attempt to understand what the writer is saying, and who, instead of disagreeing coherently and intelligently, make personal attacks against the author.
I won't say writing for this site is easy, I see how much hell posters give you columnists (as well as each other), but the worst that's going to happen because of it is what? Someone missing out on a f2p game that's actually done well because they'd rather go with their preconceived notions than actually read a positive review with an open mind, then go try the game themselves? A few less subs for a deserving game, a few more for an undeserving one?
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
~Albert Einstein
I've read this article twice now to make sure I fully understood what the writer was trying to say. It appears to be an exercise of condescension to those people in the community that have opposing opinions about the Free to Play MMORPG payment model.
He first comments on the "miscomprehension" (not a word as far as I know) of the Free to Play model by saying that people get overly emotionally negative. The people that think different than he does about a free to play model are apparently unable to control their negativity to the point of spreading misinformation. He then goes on to say that because of this spread of misinformation, readers basically fall into a trap where they are unable to pick out legitimate reasons why they dislike the payment model.
He goes on to say that many people in North America are only looking at the tip of the iceburg of the Free to Play model. He is basically saying in that paragraph that people are being willfully ignorant. He then attributes it to a higher amount of media coverage and advertising, implying that the opposition to Free to Play models are easily swayed and form their opinion based on popularity instead of facts.
The following paragraph is the icing on the cake. He uses Jon Wood's article to prove his point that people can't comprehend what they are reading. He then expects the reader to take a leap. He expects the reader to fall into his trap. If you don't agree with his position on the Free to Play model, then it is because you are not comprehending the argument. After all, look at all the comments that didn't comprehend Jon Wood.
For the record, I think the Free to Play model is fine.
Writer / Musician / Game Designer
Now Playing: Skyrim, Wurm Online, Tropico 4
Waiting On: GW2, TSW, Archeage, The Rapture
I really don't like the words "Free to Play" to me we should change that to "Free to Login". As in most of the games yes you can log in for free and then that's when you find you have to do something at some point to unlock some things.
If a game were free, now would they be able to pay their devs, the staff, and so on.
That is my only gripe about the words "free to play".
I would love to use LOTRO as in case in point. A lot of folks came back, and they sure did not read the faq, about how the free to play worked. The general forum was all full of folks complaining about why they had to unlock quests that had been open to them before, and various other questions.
I think many folks are like me they speed read through get the jest of things and move along.
I always enjoy getting the jest of things.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
~Albert Einstein
Seriously dude, we're not stupid just because we don't think F2P is the magic shot in the arm for MMOs. Most F2P games really suck. And games like LotRO and DDO were designed at a higher standard than nearly every F2P game. They are P2P games with a different pricing structure.
Please stop telling us that we're "missing the point." We're not. We honestly don't care how the game is paid for. We want good games. We might be more willing to TRY a F2P game than a P2P one, simply because of the upfront cost. I never played Darkfall, but I would have tried it longer if it were F2P. But that doesn't mean I would still be playing it, nor that I would have ever spent any money on it.
WE ARE NOT STUPID. We just disagree with you. Get off your soapbox and tell us something useful, instead of just harping over and over that you're enlightened about F2P and we're not.
You wanna know my objection to F2P? I like to raid. I like big, epic encounters that you barely win and that you need a lot of teamwork and skillful play to overcome. In a game where you can buy major buffs in a shop (which is true of most F2P games), you can't design a really solid raid encounter. Either it's tuned to expect you to have these buffs, in which case you're being milked for money, or it's tuned so you won't, in which case it becomes a matter of artificial difficulty, because you could just steamroll the encounter with these buffs. You can never get the satisfaction of actually being cutting edge without paying exorbitant fees. I'm sure that a competitive PvPer would feel the same way.
If you don't understand why a lot of people don't like F2P, then maybe it's not our reading comprehension that needs work. Maybe it's yours.
Important facts:
1. Free to Play games are poorly made.
2. Casuals are not all idiots, but idiots call themselves casuals.
3. Great solo and group content are not mutually exclusive, but they suffer when one is shoved into the mold of the other. The same is true of PvP and PvE.
4. Community is more important than you think.
Regarding F2P there is no mystery here. The main purpose of F2P and why it came into existance is to maximize profits. Altough that can be said, more or less, about any commercial product usually it means making a great product so people buy it.
However for F2P you can hear in the actual naming that the idea is not to make a great product but rather to make people pay as much as possible. It says "Free to Play" but in fact, due to many reasons, you will need to pay at some point, unless you are just trying the game out.
And, despite many people denying it, the more you pay the more power you actually get. Be it that your character levels faster or getting items that are otherwise hard to impossible to get. So F2P fosters the principle that it is not what you do that matters but rather how much you pay. And in any game, be it a computer game or not, destroys the spirit of gaming.
So I would say again that F2P is altogether bad and its purpose is not to create better and more enjoyable games but rather to maximize profits, fair play be damned.
My gaming blog
I don't mind F2P, don't mind it at all. The time it becomes a nuisence is when F2P becomes P2W (pay to win) - basically selling gear and 100% proc rates that nulls crafting if you have the wallet.
In the end every company is a business, it's not about the games anymore (write about this). How much money can we pull in by the end of the week, month, year. I'm not saying that is BAD because that is how businesses are but the MMO Gamer is quickly becoming just a consumer rather than a gamer, consume as much as the item mall as possible to deck out my character for no real gain. That's not fun.
Games are supposed to be fun, weither you fancy competition, role-playing, questing solo/ meeting new people, or just straight out grinding. What happend to this? F2P doesn't offer this because what's in it for them if they aren't making money off of you. There has to be a point where the game just "dies" or becomes too problematic without pushing into the item mall. Granted spend $10-$15 a month of a F2P game you enjoy to keep going, but when does it end? When you're paying $30-$50 a month?
The F2P market is there to make money, same thing with the P2P market. But too many F2P games go into P2W.
These F2P vs P2P newsletter things are getting pretty old. Stop adding fuel to the fire and giving people things to argue about and just realize that people have opinions. It's the same stupid crap over and over again. If you like P2P, super. If you like F2P, fantabulous. Just accept that not every single person on this planet will agree with you. It's people like this that are making it so you can't enjoy a game for what it is but for what the payment method is. Ironic that the site called MMORPG.com is posting such one-sided newsletters and trying to divide their community.
I signed up for this website to read updates on games, not to hear a bunch of babies cry about who's rattle is shinier.
But hey, I suppose you get more views for posting these, and in the end, that's all that matters.
"Among the tips I chose not to include was trying to be as clear as possible at all times, in part because there are people who seem all too willing, indeed eager, to misinterpret or ignore what they read when doing so serves their personal agendas."
I assume you include yourself first and foremost amongst those people, correct Aihoshi?
-Letting Derek Smart work on your game is like letting Osama bin Laden work in the White House. Something will burn.-
-And on the 8th day, man created God.-
prefixmis-
Definition of MIS-
1
a : badly : wrongly <misjudge> b : unfavorably <misesteem> c : in a suspicious manner <misdoubt>
2
: bad : wrong <misdeed>
3
: opposite or lack of <mistrust>
4
: not <misknow>
mis·act
mis·ad·dress
mis·ad·just
mis·ad·min·is·tra·tion
mis·ad·vise
mis·aim
mis·align
mis·align·ment
mis·al·lo·cate
mis·al·lo·ca·tion
mis·anal·y·sis
mis·ap·pli·ca·tion
mis·ap·ply
mis·ap·prais·al
mis·ar·tic·u·late
mis·as·sem·ble
mis·as·sump·tion
mis·at·trib·ute
mis·at·tri·bu·tion
mis·bal·ance
mis·be·have
mis·be·hav·er
mis·be·hav·ior
mis·bound
mis·but·ton
mis·cal·cu·late
mis·cal·cu·la·tion
mis·cap·tion
mis·cat·a·log
mis·chan·nel
mis·char·ac·ter·i·za·tion
mis·char·ac·ter·ize
mis·charge
mis·choice
mis·ci·ta·tion
mis·clas·si·fi·ca·tion
mis·clas·si·fy
mis·code
mis·com·pre·hen·sion
mis·com·pu·ta·tion
mis·com·pute
mis·con·ceive
mis·con·ceiv·er
mis·con·cep·tion
mis·con·nect
mis·con·nec·tion
mis·con·struc·tion
mis·con·strue
mis·copy
mis·cor·re·la·tion
mis·count
mis·cre·ate
mis·cre·a·tion
mis·cut
mis·date
mis·deem
mis·de·fine
mis·de·scribe
mis·de·scrip·tion
mis·de·vel·op
mis·di·ag·nose
mis·di·ag·no·sis
mis·dial
mis·dis·tri·bu·tion
mis·di·vi·sion
mis·draw
mis·ed·u·cate
mis·ed·u·ca·tion
mis·em·pha·sis
mis·em·pha·size
mis·em·ploy
mis·em·ploy·ment
mis·es·ti·mate
mis·es·ti·ma·tion
mis·eval·u·ate
mis·eval·u·a·tion
mis·feed
mis·field
mis·file
mis·fo·cus
mis·func·tion
mis·gauge
mis·gov·ern
mis·gov·ern·ment
mis·grade
mis·iden·ti·fi·ca·tion
mis·iden·ti·fy
mis·in·form
mis·in·for·ma·tion
mis·kick
mis·la·bel
mis·learn
mis·lo·cate
mis·lo·ca·tion
mis·man·age
mis·man·age·ment
mis·mark
mis·mar·riage
mis·match
mis·mate
mis·mea·sure
mis·mea·sure·ment
mis·or·der
mis·ori·ent
mis·ori·en·ta·tion
mis·pack·age
mis·per·ceive
mis·per·cep·tion
mis·plan
mis·po·si·tion
mis·print
mis·pro·gram
mis·quo·ta·tion
mis·quote
mis·reck·on
mis·rec·ol·lec·tion
mis·re·cord
mis·ref·er·ence
mis·reg·is·ter
mis·reg·is·tra·tion
mis·re·late
mis·re·mem·ber
mis·ren·der
mis·re·port
mis·route
mis·set
mis·shape
mis·shap·en
mis·shap·en·ly
mis·sort
mis·strike
mis·throw
mis·time
mis·ti·tle
mis·train
mis·tran·scribe
mis·tran·scrip·tion
mis·trans·late
mis·trans·la·tion
mis·truth
mis·tune
mis·type
mis·uti·li·za·tion
mis·vo·cal·i·za·tion
mis·write
You coulda just said "Yes, it's a word.".
-Letting Derek Smart work on your game is like letting Osama bin Laden work in the White House. Something will burn.-
-And on the 8th day, man created God.-
Well, now we know what "mis" means. Now if there was only an official word in the lexicon called miscomprehension somewhere.
Perhaps sticking to words that exist within a dictionary with a definition would help people comprehend what you are saying.
Edit: I found this online:
Miscomprehend: To get a wrong idea of or about; to misunderstand.
The word he uses is miscomprehension, not miscomprehend.
F2P games = crap... and unforunatly, like the sheep that the general public are, the more times they are told it's the greatest thing evah, they believe it. Marketing is not rocket science, it's based on the sound principle that people are stupid.
Truely sad times we live in.
Money corrupts all conversations it touches.
I agree with the others. I don't "miscomprehend" the concept of F2P, I get it just fine. Haven't run across a game that's been fun to me w/o spending lots of cash yet, but perhaps one day I'll find one.
For now, I'll stick with P2P models, others like Richard can enjoy their F2P (yeah, right, at least they could come up with a more accurate name like F2T (try) and go foward with that.
"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
Free to play where you have to pay for anything is NOT free to play.
Let's party like it is 1863!
This free to try label would probably confuse people, most will assume free to try means the usual free trial, i.e., a limited time period. Endless free trial would confuse them less, I suppose.
But in some games, you do get an awful lot of content under that free to play label. Anarchy Online's free portion qualifies as far more than a free trial. You get everything not expansion related, if I remember right. Which is 200 levels out of 220, again, if I remember right. Is that really just free to try?
This is coming from someone who dislikes most free to play models. I think Runes of Magic really is pay to win. I found Allods and Perfect World to be, 'if you don't buy bag space and xp-related stuff you will be very annoyed and inconvenienced and bored until you do buy something, or until you quit'.
I also dislike the gambling hook many f2p games insert, too. You pay real money, and there's a chance your item will be enhanced, but it might not be. Unfortunately, humans are easy to manipulate with tactics like these. It's just part of how we're wired.
But still, some, a very few, of these games really are free to play, in the sense that, if you really don't want to pay, a usable and enjoyable amount of content is still available to you.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
~Albert Einstein
*sigh* You should know when you've been proven wrong, One word: declension.
The act of miscomprehending something leads to a miscomprehension of something on the part of the miscomprehender.
Words that are created by prefixing with "mis" and "un" are generally not individually listed in the dictionary since it is sufficient to explain the meaning of the prefix and the correct metholodogy for prefixing; the validity of a word is thus to be deduced.
Miscomprehension is a valid usage.
(Knew my linguisitics degree would some in useful someday)
Tl;dr : if you wish to attack someone on lexical usage / grammar, ensure your comprehension of the facts is correct before breaking out the big guns.
On topic: Richard, I think the most important thing you left out last week (while writing about writing), and one which would have been better addressed this week was "tone", since that is where your work seems to fall short. It's the tone and not the content (or miscomprehension thereof) that seems to cause the most fuss in the responses to your pieces here.
Then they would of wanted a link...and sources...so I just saved myself the trouble XD
damned if you do, damned if you don't. hehe
These articles are getting insulting. Every one has a sentence or a paragraph taking a shot at people who are opposed, in general, to "F2P" games.
It's really simple: P2P game developers focus on making their games fun to get people to renew their subscriptions. F2P developers focus on making their game as painful as possible for people who don't use the item mall, paid special features, etc.
I'd rather play a game where the focus is on fun and not one where the focus is annoying me.
Maybe I would have more of an open mind if your column was at all balanced Richard and you presented an open objective PoV that didnt make you seem so much of an industry shill.
The fact that their isnt a comparable advocate for the P2P model on this site is a problem for me. You tell people to 'think for themselves', and then go on to only present half of the story according to your obvious agenda.
As for the 'comprehension' thing... I get the feeling that your the kind of guy that thinks that if someone disagrees with you tit's because they havent understood you, when it is probably just because they disagree with you. I guess it's easier for the ego to dismiss them as having low reading comprehension skills though.
I guess I will get another ban for saying this to you, but hey ho, go for it. Some things need to be said.