people might take a Black N White Tv for free,doesn't mean it is is any good by now day standards.
Also numbers can be skewed by as much as 500% or even more because the majority will hop from free game to free game,it does not mean they are supporting them.Look no further than SOE all access,just because someone might pop into each game on a whim to check it out,doesn't mean they will stay and enjoy it.
Matter of fact there is no proof that gamer's are enjoying any of these f2p games,they might just be quick hold overs or just checking them out and quitting in the first hour or so.
I can point to and show the example of one the earlier sub+cash shop games Wiz 101.I would bet it has one of the lowest retention rates in gaming.So if players are willing to invest a bit and still not hang around,what does it say for the games where players invest nothing ?
There has only been 2 f2p games that held my interest a long time,one didn't cost a cent "Silkroad" and ROM did cost me some money so hardly can it is FREE,but of course 99%of these games are not free by any stretch of the imagination.
FREE means you can play the game "AS INTENDED" for FREE !.If not the case then youare NOT playing "the game",you are playing a version of the game designed for cash shop which of course would NOT be FREE.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Originally posted by CazNeerg Originally posted by iridescenceWhile extreme it does illustrate the point that "Lots of people do this so it must be good" is a logical fallacy.:)And of course not all F2P games are bad but they have the reputation they do because of the way a lot of them are.
"Lots of people do this so it must be good" is a fallacy, sure, but it's no more illogical than "my friends and I don't like this so it must be bad" which is essentially the root of anti-F2P sentiment.
It is no fallacy.
Good or bad are subjective terms based on consensus, therefore more people saying same thing makes the thing more true.
If the games were truly free, they wouldn't exist.
Can they be played for "free", sure. But you're not playing the whole game at that point, and the game will have virtual 'end caps' everywhere trying to entice you into spending more than a sub, otherwise, they'd be sub based...
I think you're looking at this idea from the wrong point of view. The questions isn't are F2P games good, the question is are they good enough to justify the payment methods. Players look at P2P games in the same way - is this worth my money? When you have to spend money to even try out a game, then you're going to have higher standards. When you can get in for free, it's a lot easier to get players in the door. People like free stuff, it's that simple.
Once they're in the door, you have the standard MMORPG stuff to get them hooked and having fun, which is far easier to do when they don't have to pay anything. In a P2P game, they're constantly wondering if this is worth the cash they've already invested - but F2P games don't need to do that. Once they're in and enjoying themselves - and have invested enough time that they don't want to just quit and feel it was wasted - cash shop items are suddenly quite appealing to them because it's a choice the player is making as an additional bonus, but not a required payement to keep playing - whether it be a cool new costume, or something to help them level or gear up easier.
So the reason you see so many players in F2P games is simply the lack of any barrier to entry. If it's free to try out, game companies have a much easier time of getting players in the game so they can show off how awesome their game is. P2P companies either have to rely on free (limited and short) trials, or other ways to convince a gamer that something they have never played is worth a $50 upfront box price plus $15 in subs. The latter has to keep working to make that cost worth it, the F2P company doesn't - as long as they can get players hooked enough to make a few cash shop purchases every few months, they're good to go, and the many non-paying players help to make the communities bustling.
If the games were truly free, they wouldn't exist.
Can they be played for "free", sure. But you're not playing the whole game at that point, and the game will have virtual 'end caps' everywhere trying to entice you into spending more than a sub, otherwise, they'd be sub based...
No this is not true. There are F2P games with good models that let you play the entire game for absolutely free with no limits. TERA is one of them. Beyond that, everything on TERA's store is sellable in game, so if you're good at making gold, you can just buy it off the broker.
Good or bad are subjective terms based on consensus, therefore more people saying same thing makes the thing more true.
You're a little confused here. If something is subjective, then "true" is a word that doesn't apply. Truth and falsity only exist in the realm of facts, what we are dealing with here are opinions. It can be true that X number of people dislike something, the amount of dislike which exists is a matter of fact, but X number of people disliking something meaning that thing is "bad" is pure opinion, and has nothing to do with truth.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
Let's try a different tack. If the gamers and having fun and the games are profitable and sustainable on that revenue, how can they be wrong? How can it be anything other than, "It works for them." More so, what does it matter if others don't find it fun and enjoyable?
I've actually somewhat softened my stance on Cash Shops recently. I still don't like them. But I'll play them if the overall experience is worth it. And I think that might be along the lines of what you are saying here. If it works.
For me, (While not technically F2P, it's model after B2P is similar enough) GW2 is working. It's got its issues. And the cash shop is at the heart of some of my issues. But it's not enough to completely deter me from enjoying the rest of the experience...or even buying gems for that matter. I will support a game I am enjoying and for now, GW2 is the game. It works for me.
Originally posted by Torvaldr So you're saying that morality is not only subjective, but democratic? That would fly in the face of the human sacrifice argument above and would actually support the author's claim because F2P gamers outnumber P2P gamers by a factor of about 8 to 1. That would mean F2P is good and P2P is bad. But those are both horrible arguments. Truth isn't subjective, but this isn't about truth.Preferences are subjective, and this isn't a moral issue. The mass preference doesn't make a game good or bad, just popular or unpopular. There are many people who would argue that WoW isn't a good game and they don't like it, however millions of others would disagree and for them WoW is a good game. It meets their needs and provides entertainment. That doesn't mean it's a good or bad game, but it is good for those who like that stuff. The same is true for F2P games and that I think is the author's argument.Different cultures and demographics like different things.
Moral is what community consider moral. It is subjective - what one finds moral the other may find immoral. Same goes for preference or what is considered good game.
Preference is defined by masses therefore good game is determined by masses.
Originally posted by CazNeerg You're a little confused here. If something is subjective, then "true" is a word that doesn't apply. Truth and falsity only exist in the realm of facts, what we are dealing with here are opinions. It can be true that X number of people dislike something, the amount of dislike which exists is a matter of fact, but X number of people disliking something meaning that thing is "bad" is pure opinion, and has nothing to do with truth.
Logical truth applies to any set of axioms - axioms defining good or bad.
Well, there are those F2P players who don't have the money or don't want to spend it, to play a subscription game.
And then there are those F2P players, who spend that much money in the game, that they can faceroll through it and kill every opponent with one button click.
Combine both and you got the majority of MMORPG players.
There's no right or wrong but it's common sense that if it's free more people will be at least trying it. So of course there will always be more ftp gamers. Also, you can count the number of sub games on one hand compared to the plethora of ftp games out there.
Whats Free in F2P games? They have Cash Shops that are just god awfull. You either pay to win, or play half a game in most cases.
I cant imagine ANY company making a game where they do it to be a good guy and give out free entertainment. Any company making games will be after profits. Some way to bring in that cash.
They are no free to play games. They need to make cash somehow. Cash Shops is the way to do it.
I have tried a few of these F2P games, and you really cant do much in them with out the use of the cash shop.
Logical truth applies to any set of axioms - axioms defining good or bad.
I really hope that if you ever took a logic class, the teacher didn't give you a passing grade. Truth is not determined by popular opinion. Something is either true, or it isn't. Water is wet. Fire is hot. These are true statements. Water is dry. Fire is cold. These are false statements. Pizza is good. Yogurt is bad. These are not true or false statements, they are just statements of preference. "Bob thinks Pizza is good" would be a true statement, if Bob does in fact think that, but that does not render "Pizza is good" true, no matter how many people agree with Bob.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
Originally posted by Senadina Yes, large groups of people can be wrong. And have been throughout history. But I'm not allowed to be political here, so I can't enumerate the many examples.
You are talking about science. There is no science in business plans.
The only thing bad about F2P are the P2W cash shops. Those F2P titles where at start it's all fun and games being free and all, but down the road it starts getting rough and you get blown by those that are paying to win the game, so it forces you to either P2W or go to another game. And not because millions are playing F2P means the market is doing great, if I give you a free car compared to buying one at 10K$, you'd be pretty dumb to pay 10K$. For fun, make WoW F2P for a year, I promise 95% of the games listed here will go bankrupt. Most F2P titles listed on this site are between 2K ~ 15K player base at peek hours. Besides Maple Story and a few (rare) others that are in the millions. Anyway, the F2P world can thank Maple Story, since without it, it would be a dead business model.
Just a piece of advice, download about 20 random F2P titles and look for yourself on how the population is doing in those 20 titles. Come back to me once you do. I've done pretty much every title on this site and some others that aren't even listed here. And I can tell you that for the most part, you guys at MMORPG.com have a lot of dead MMO's listed on your site. Most are under 1K at peek hours, a few are barely reaching 10K. WoW, LoTro, Maple Story, EVE, GW1 & 2, FF11 & 14, EverQuest series, SW:tor, and a few others I'm forgetting are well beyond 75K at peek hours. Take all the titles listed on this site and combine the population, you won't even reach half of Canada's population. Which is pretty sucky for a business being runned for over 20 years now. To say Justin Bieber has a bigger fan base then the whole MMO population. So in the end be it F2P, P2P, P2W, it doesn't really matter. If you really like a game and want to be the best at it, you'll do whatever it takes even if it means putting 1K$ a year on a cash shop.
The only thing bad about F2P are the P2W cash shops. Those F2P titles where at start it's all fun and games being free and all, but down the road it starts getting rough and you get blown by those that are paying to win the game, so it forces you to either P2W or go to another game. And not because millions are playing F2P means the market is doing great, if I give you a free car compared to buying one at 10K$, you'd be pretty dumb to pay 10K$. For fun, make WoW F2P for a year, I promise 95% of the games listed here will go bankrupt. Most F2P titles listed on this site are between 2K ~ 15K player base at peek hours. Besides Maple Story and a few (rare) others that are in the millions. Anyway, the F2P world can thank Maple Story, since without it, it would be a dead business model.
Just a piece of advice, download about 20 random F2P titles and look for yourself on how the population is doing in those 20 titles. Come back to me once you do. I've done pretty much every title on this site and some others that aren't even listed here. And I can tell you that for the most part, you guys at MMORPG.com have a lot of dead MMO's listed on your site. Most are under 1K at peek hours, a few are barely reaching 10K. WoW, LoTro, Maple Story, EVE, GW1 & 2, FF11 & 14, EverQuest series, SW:tor, and a few others I'm forgetting are well beyond 75K at peek hours. Take all the titles listed on this site and combine the population, you won't even reach half of Canada's population. Which is pretty sucky for a business being runned for over 20 years now. To say Justin Bieber has a bigger fan base then the whole MMO population. So in the end be it F2P, P2P, P2W, it doesn't really matter. If you really like a game and want to be the best at it, you'll do whatever it takes even if it means putting 1K$ a year on a cash shop.
Not for nothing, but sometimes I wonder what's worse. shops that sell items that give statistical advantages or other shops that try to come up with other ways to encourage players to buy things. Just because a cash shop isn't considered by popular opinion to be P2W, doesn't mean its impact on the game will translate to an overall better experience for you. Sometimes RNG factors and in game economic factors are more frustrating than that "whale" running around in flashy gear.
There are many people posting on these forums that are disappointed in the current/upcoming MMORPG's. It is only expected that they try to find a reason why those MMORPG's are not up to their standards. F2P is just one on the many obvious reasons you could suspect. There is no way to (dis)prove how much effect the current f2p trend has on MMORPG quality.
But what I find more important is (and what many on these forums seem to forget) that there are way more MMORPG players that don't bother posting on this website, or about MMORPG's at all. They just chose a game to play, MMORPG or not. And they play it because it is fun and not because it has a specific payment model. I am convinced that this group is in the majority. And that it exists in both F2P and P2P MMORPG's.
Logical truth applies to any set of axioms - axioms defining good or bad.
I really hope that if you ever took a logic class, the teacher didn't give you a passing grade. Truth is not determined by popular opinion. Something is either true, or it isn't. Water is wet. Fire is hot. These are true statements. Water is dry. Fire is cold. These are false statements. Pizza is good. Yogurt is bad. These are not true or false statements, they are just statements of preference. "Bob thinks Pizza is good" would be a true statement, if Bob does in fact think that, but that does not render "Pizza is good" true, no matter how many people agree with Bob.
The problem here is that it's probabilistic rather than absolute. As more people say something is "good", the more probable it is that the next person will consider the thing "good". NewEgg's rating system is an example of this. As more people rate a product as being good, the more likely it is that the people buying the product in the future will be satisfied with that product and will think the product is "good". A "good" product is one with a high probability of being accepted as "good" by people who don't yet have the product. There may still be people who do not like the product, but that doesn't change the probability that future consumers will be happy with the product.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
It is not wise to take those people seriously who wants everything for free. there is a saying in my country : "give shit for free and people will happily eat it", f2p gamers are just that.
Boobs are LIFE, Boobs are LOVE, Boobs are JUSTICE, Boobs are mankind's HOPES and DREAMS. People who complain about boobs have lost their humanity.
The only thing bad about F2P are the P2W cash shops. Those F2P titles where at start it's all fun and games being free and all, but down the road it starts getting rough and you get blown by those that are paying to win the game, so it forces you to either P2W or go to another game. And not because millions are playing F2P means the market is doing great, if I give you a free car compared to buying one at 10K$, you'd be pretty dumb to pay 10K$. For fun, make WoW F2P for a year, I promise 95% of the games listed here will go bankrupt. Most F2P titles listed on this site are between 2K ~ 15K player base at peek hours. Besides Maple Story and a few (rare) others that are in the millions. Anyway, the F2P world can thank Maple Story, since without it, it would be a dead business model.
Just a piece of advice, download about 20 random F2P titles and look for yourself on how the population is doing in those 20 titles. Come back to me once you do. I've done pretty much every title on this site and some others that aren't even listed here. And I can tell you that for the most part, you guys at MMORPG.com have a lot of dead MMO's listed on your site. Most are under 1K at peek hours, a few are barely reaching 10K. WoW, LoTro, Maple Story, EVE, GW1 & 2, FF11 & 14, EverQuest series, SW:tor, and a few others I'm forgetting are well beyond 75K at peek hours. Take all the titles listed on this site and combine the population, you won't even reach half of Canada's population. Which is pretty sucky for a business being runned for over 20 years now. To say Justin Bieber has a bigger fan base then the whole MMO population. So in the end be it F2P, P2P, P2W, it doesn't really matter. If you really like a game and want to be the best at it, you'll do whatever it takes even if it means putting 1K$ a year on a cash shop.
I agree with this.... I think?
I've played waaaaaaay too many F2P games for waaaaaaaay too many hours. 9 times out of 10 you get a pile of doo doo. Once and a while, though, you get a gem. That being said, you could make the same statement for subscription games. I've played my fair share of subscription games and apart from the overwhelming feeling that I "need" to play it because I'm paying for it, there are few that offer much in the way of redeeming values.
Honestly, I don't even know that the ratio of good to ungood F2P games is any, or much, different than the ratio of Sub games. Reason being, that sub games are horribly difficult to maintain as the sole revenue source. So, that's where the hybrid comes in, which actually escalates the quality of F2P games as a whole.
Look at the F2P titles we now have:
Rift
SWTOR
EQ2
TERA
AOC
Aion
Lineage
Nothin' wrong with that. I can't say that I really see absolute crap coming out like I used to when they were launching a new Anime-based MMO every week, so that's a positive. Unfortunately, the mobile space seems to take up the slack on that responsibility.
Logical truth applies to any set of axioms - axioms defining good or bad.
I really hope that if you ever took a logic class, the teacher didn't give you a passing grade. Truth is not determined by popular opinion. Something is either true, or it isn't. Water is wet. Fire is hot. These are true statements. Water is dry. Fire is cold. These are false statements. Pizza is good. Yogurt is bad. These are not true or false statements, they are just statements of preference. "Bob thinks Pizza is good" would be a true statement, if Bob does in fact think that, but that does not render "Pizza is good" true, no matter how many people agree with Bob.
The problem here is that it's probabilistic rather than absolute. As more people say something is "good", the more probable it is that the next person will consider the thing "good". NewEgg's rating system is an example of this. As more people rate a product as being good, the more likely it is that the people buying the product in the future will be satisfied with that product and will think the product is "good". A "good" product is one with a high probability of being accepted as "good" by people who don't yet have the product. There may still be people who do not like the product, but that doesn't change the probability that future consumers will be happy with the product.
We can also throw relativity into the mix. Fire is hot....compared to what? A candle burns at roughly 800 Degrees F where the Sun's core is 15M Kelvin.
Originally posted by jesteralways It is not wise to take those people seriously who wants everything for free. there is a saying in my country : "give shit for free and people will happily eat it", f2p gamers are just that.
Opposed to vacuum sealing shit and selling it for $1000 as "Limited Edition" and people will happily eat it? Come on..... at least TRY! If you're going to try to sell sub games as being higher quality, you'll need to stay out of the shallow end.
PRIME example, walk by any "Coach" purse store. Put some barriers to entry outside your store, tell people that there are only limited supplies, and make them wait to get in and you can charge JUST about whatever you want.
Comments
people might take a Black N White Tv for free,doesn't mean it is is any good by now day standards.
Also numbers can be skewed by as much as 500% or even more because the majority will hop from free game to free game,it does not mean they are supporting them.Look no further than SOE all access,just because someone might pop into each game on a whim to check it out,doesn't mean they will stay and enjoy it.
Matter of fact there is no proof that gamer's are enjoying any of these f2p games,they might just be quick hold overs or just checking them out and quitting in the first hour or so.
I can point to and show the example of one the earlier sub+cash shop games Wiz 101.I would bet it has one of the lowest retention rates in gaming.So if players are willing to invest a bit and still not hang around,what does it say for the games where players invest nothing ?
There has only been 2 f2p games that held my interest a long time,one didn't cost a cent "Silkroad" and ROM did cost me some money so hardly can it is FREE,but of course 99%of these games are not free by any stretch of the imagination.
FREE means you can play the game "AS INTENDED" for FREE !.If not the case then youare NOT playing "the game",you are playing a version of the game designed for cash shop which of course would NOT be FREE.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I have no problem with anyone playing a F2P game. If they're enjoying themselves, more power to them.
Just don't expect me to join them. My likes and dislikes are different to theirs.
It is no fallacy.
Good or bad are subjective terms based on consensus, therefore more people saying same thing makes the thing more true.
If the games were truly free, they wouldn't exist.
Can they be played for "free", sure. But you're not playing the whole game at that point, and the game will have virtual 'end caps' everywhere trying to entice you into spending more than a sub, otherwise, they'd be sub based...
I think you're looking at this idea from the wrong point of view. The questions isn't are F2P games good, the question is are they good enough to justify the payment methods. Players look at P2P games in the same way - is this worth my money? When you have to spend money to even try out a game, then you're going to have higher standards. When you can get in for free, it's a lot easier to get players in the door. People like free stuff, it's that simple.
Once they're in the door, you have the standard MMORPG stuff to get them hooked and having fun, which is far easier to do when they don't have to pay anything. In a P2P game, they're constantly wondering if this is worth the cash they've already invested - but F2P games don't need to do that. Once they're in and enjoying themselves - and have invested enough time that they don't want to just quit and feel it was wasted - cash shop items are suddenly quite appealing to them because it's a choice the player is making as an additional bonus, but not a required payement to keep playing - whether it be a cool new costume, or something to help them level or gear up easier.
So the reason you see so many players in F2P games is simply the lack of any barrier to entry. If it's free to try out, game companies have a much easier time of getting players in the game so they can show off how awesome their game is. P2P companies either have to rely on free (limited and short) trials, or other ways to convince a gamer that something they have never played is worth a $50 upfront box price plus $15 in subs. The latter has to keep working to make that cost worth it, the F2P company doesn't - as long as they can get players hooked enough to make a few cash shop purchases every few months, they're good to go, and the many non-paying players help to make the communities bustling.
No this is not true. There are F2P games with good models that let you play the entire game for absolutely free with no limits. TERA is one of them. Beyond that, everything on TERA's store is sellable in game, so if you're good at making gold, you can just buy it off the broker.
You're a little confused here. If something is subjective, then "true" is a word that doesn't apply. Truth and falsity only exist in the realm of facts, what we are dealing with here are opinions. It can be true that X number of people dislike something, the amount of dislike which exists is a matter of fact, but X number of people disliking something meaning that thing is "bad" is pure opinion, and has nothing to do with truth.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.
I've actually somewhat softened my stance on Cash Shops recently. I still don't like them. But I'll play them if the overall experience is worth it. And I think that might be along the lines of what you are saying here. If it works.
For me, (While not technically F2P, it's model after B2P is similar enough) GW2 is working. It's got its issues. And the cash shop is at the heart of some of my issues. But it's not enough to completely deter me from enjoying the rest of the experience...or even buying gems for that matter. I will support a game I am enjoying and for now, GW2 is the game. It works for me.
Moral is what community consider moral. It is subjective - what one finds moral the other may find immoral. Same goes for preference or what is considered good game.
Preference is defined by masses therefore good game is determined by masses.
Logical truth applies to any set of axioms - axioms defining good or bad.
Well, there are those F2P players who don't have the money or don't want to spend it, to play a subscription game.
And then there are those F2P players, who spend that much money in the game, that they can faceroll through it and kill every opponent with one button click.
Combine both and you got the majority of MMORPG players.
That doesn't make F2P any better.
Let's play Fallen Earth (blind, 300 episodes)
Let's play Guild Wars 2 (blind, 45 episodes)
Whats Free in F2P games? They have Cash Shops that are just god awfull. You either pay to win, or play half a game in most cases.
I cant imagine ANY company making a game where they do it to be a good guy and give out free entertainment. Any company making games will be after profits. Some way to bring in that cash.
They are no free to play games. They need to make cash somehow. Cash Shops is the way to do it.
I have tried a few of these F2P games, and you really cant do much in them with out the use of the cash shop.
I really hope that if you ever took a logic class, the teacher didn't give you a passing grade. Truth is not determined by popular opinion. Something is either true, or it isn't. Water is wet. Fire is hot. These are true statements. Water is dry. Fire is cold. These are false statements. Pizza is good. Yogurt is bad. These are not true or false statements, they are just statements of preference. "Bob thinks Pizza is good" would be a true statement, if Bob does in fact think that, but that does not render "Pizza is good" true, no matter how many people agree with Bob.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.
You are talking about science. There is no science in business plans.
The only thing bad about F2P are the P2W cash shops. Those F2P titles where at start it's all fun and games being free and all, but down the road it starts getting rough and you get blown by those that are paying to win the game, so it forces you to either P2W or go to another game. And not because millions are playing F2P means the market is doing great, if I give you a free car compared to buying one at 10K$, you'd be pretty dumb to pay 10K$. For fun, make WoW F2P for a year, I promise 95% of the games listed here will go bankrupt. Most F2P titles listed on this site are between 2K ~ 15K player base at peek hours. Besides Maple Story and a few (rare) others that are in the millions. Anyway, the F2P world can thank Maple Story, since without it, it would be a dead business model.
Just a piece of advice, download about 20 random F2P titles and look for yourself on how the population is doing in those 20 titles. Come back to me once you do. I've done pretty much every title on this site and some others that aren't even listed here. And I can tell you that for the most part, you guys at MMORPG.com have a lot of dead MMO's listed on your site. Most are under 1K at peek hours, a few are barely reaching 10K. WoW, LoTro, Maple Story, EVE, GW1 & 2, FF11 & 14, EverQuest series, SW:tor, and a few others I'm forgetting are well beyond 75K at peek hours. Take all the titles listed on this site and combine the population, you won't even reach half of Canada's population. Which is pretty sucky for a business being runned for over 20 years now. To say Justin Bieber has a bigger fan base then the whole MMO population. So in the end be it F2P, P2P, P2W, it doesn't really matter. If you really like a game and want to be the best at it, you'll do whatever it takes even if it means putting 1K$ a year on a cash shop.
Not for nothing, but sometimes I wonder what's worse. shops that sell items that give statistical advantages or other shops that try to come up with other ways to encourage players to buy things. Just because a cash shop isn't considered by popular opinion to be P2W, doesn't mean its impact on the game will translate to an overall better experience for you. Sometimes RNG factors and in game economic factors are more frustrating than that "whale" running around in flashy gear.
There are many people posting on these forums that are disappointed in the current/upcoming MMORPG's. It is only expected that they try to find a reason why those MMORPG's are not up to their standards. F2P is just one on the many obvious reasons you could suspect. There is no way to (dis)prove how much effect the current f2p trend has on MMORPG quality.
But what I find more important is (and what many on these forums seem to forget) that there are way more MMORPG players that don't bother posting on this website, or about MMORPG's at all. They just chose a game to play, MMORPG or not. And they play it because it is fun and not because it has a specific payment model. I am convinced that this group is in the majority. And that it exists in both F2P and P2P MMORPG's.
The problem here is that it's probabilistic rather than absolute. As more people say something is "good", the more probable it is that the next person will consider the thing "good". NewEgg's rating system is an example of this. As more people rate a product as being good, the more likely it is that the people buying the product in the future will be satisfied with that product and will think the product is "good". A "good" product is one with a high probability of being accepted as "good" by people who don't yet have the product. There may still be people who do not like the product, but that doesn't change the probability that future consumers will be happy with the product.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Boobs are LIFE, Boobs are LOVE, Boobs are JUSTICE, Boobs are mankind's HOPES and DREAMS. People who complain about boobs have lost their humanity.
I agree with this.... I think?
I've played waaaaaaay too many F2P games for waaaaaaaay too many hours. 9 times out of 10 you get a pile of doo doo. Once and a while, though, you get a gem. That being said, you could make the same statement for subscription games. I've played my fair share of subscription games and apart from the overwhelming feeling that I "need" to play it because I'm paying for it, there are few that offer much in the way of redeeming values.
Honestly, I don't even know that the ratio of good to ungood
F2P games is any, or much, different than the ratio of Sub games. Reason being, that sub games are horribly difficult to maintain as the sole revenue source. So, that's where the hybrid comes in, which actually escalates the quality of F2P games as a whole.
Look at the F2P titles we now have:
Rift
SWTOR
EQ2
TERA
AOC
Aion
Lineage
Nothin' wrong with that. I can't say that I really see absolute crap coming out like I used to when they were launching a new Anime-based MMO every week, so that's a positive. Unfortunately, the mobile space seems to take up the slack on that responsibility.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
We can also throw relativity into the mix. Fire is hot....compared to what? A candle burns at roughly 800 Degrees F where the Sun's core is 15M Kelvin.
Opposed to vacuum sealing shit and selling it for $1000 as "Limited Edition" and people will happily eat it? Come on..... at least TRY! If you're going to try to sell sub games as being higher quality, you'll need to stay out of the shallow end.
PRIME example, walk by any "Coach" purse store. Put some barriers to entry outside your store, tell people that there are only limited supplies, and make them wait to get in and you can charge JUST about whatever you want.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------