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.
What Gdemami appeared to be arguing was that objective truth could be determined by subjective popularity. That if X number of people happen to believe that something is good, then it becomes an objective fact that that thing is good. This theory is not logical.
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 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.
Shit is not what people generally want, free or not. So I hope that you that saying is different in your country Also, anyone who doesn't want everything for free (I am restricting myself to financial context, not something like effort) is a liar. Keep in mind that there is a difference between wanting and expecting. You seem to be confused about that.
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.
What Gdemami appeared to be arguing was that objective truth could be determined by subjective popularity. That if X number of people happen to believe that something is good, then it becomes an objective fact that that thing is good. This theory is not logical.
It becomes an objective fact that that thing is perceived as good. It will still be an opinion. It just becomes a fact that it is generally perceived as true. Lot of urban and scientific myths can be used as example. This still does not make those myths true. No matter how many people believe it is true.
Well, if there is one thing that comes back consistently in the F2P vs P2P debate, that's the arrogance and ignorance of P2P players (most of them at least).
- None of them have ever played a F2P game ("This is shit")
- None of them can even name a single F2P game with a P2W cash shop ("They are all bad")
- They don't even realise that a majority of P2P are so bad that even "them" (the P2P community) stopped supporting them financially a long time ago (if those P2P games did not become F2P themselves), the point being that bad games isn't a problem exclusive to F2P even when no cash shop is involved
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.
Yet, non-"elite" players are limited in what they can do (sending money through the mail, etc). And where can I buy that razorback mount or whatever it is called?
You're not playing the complete game if you're not paying.
The aren't necessarily wrong, but they may be cheap, 13 years old, and change games every month.
And thus, you have one shallow, disposable, bland MMO after another, that try to rape as much money from you in the cash shopas possible, in a month, because that is how long most "F2P" players stay with a game.
And these gamers play MMOs like console fodder: they blast through everything and then quit in the shortest time possible, which is not what MMOs are all about.
So, you have disposable players, playing disposable games, made by companies that don't give a crap about "quality gaming".
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.
A straw man argument is a fallacy too, and framing the argument against F2P as you did is most certainly a straw man. As far as Aoshi's argument goes, I can only guess that the early deleted response was something on the lines of that a certain population of a European country was wrong at some point. Just because a large group of people believe a thing does not make that thing right. Aoshi's argument is predicated on a fallacy, I think it's ad populum or some crap. His argument is illogical, and can be cast aside. If he would care to restate his argument logically, then I'm sure many would be happy to debate him. As it is now, there is only room to discuss whether his argument is logical or not.
Richard is right. F2P is immensly popular. There are many people who choose to play F2P games. However, this is also a default arguement. Let me explain.
Some of you may have heard of Cow Clicker. This is a game that was made, as a parody to show how inane facebook games were. However, much to the disgust of the creator... it was actually popular. You can see the numbers here:
This clearly shows that despite the attempt to create a very 'unfun' game, there were a lot of people that desired to play it... and do so regularly.
The basic reality is that one mans garbage is another mans treasure. The internet is very vast, and it is composed of all types of people. Many of them like F2P, many of them hate it. The real question is this... why does it matter what others like?
Ever think that it is because they are not gamers just like there is no such thing as a casual MMO player. They all fail unless you only judge success by money, with that you would say SWTOR was a success. Since money has no meaning you can't use it to measure success.
While 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.
A straw man argument is a fallacy too, and framing the argument against F2P as you did is most certainly a straw man. As far as Aoshi's argument goes, I can only guess that the early deleted response was something on the lines of that a certain population of a European country was wrong at some point. Just because a large group of people believe a thing does not make that thing right. Aoshi's argument is predicated on a fallacy, I think it's ad populum or some crap. His argument is illogical, and can be cast aside. If he would care to restate his argument logically, then I'm sure many would be happy to debate him. As it is now, there is only room to discuss whether his argument is logical or not.
More rational arguments against F2P exist, but the people arguing against it are rarely seen using them. Usually it's just largely inarticulate nerd rage, sometimes combined with parroting of arguments they then prove they don't even understand when confronted.
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.
Richard is right. F2P is immensly popular. There are many people who choose to play F2P games. However, this is also a default arguement. Let me explain.
Some of you may have heard of Cow Clicker. This is a game that was made, as a parody to show how inane facebook games were. However, much to the disgust of the creator... it was actually popular. You can see the numbers here:
This clearly shows that despite the attempt to create a very 'unfun' game, there were a lot of people that desired to play it... and do so regularly.
The basic reality is that one mans garbage is another mans treasure. The internet is very vast, and it is composed of all types of people. Many of them like F2P, many of them hate it. The real question is this... why does it matter what others like?
Why does it matter what others like? Good question. But Richard Aihoshi seems to have a vendetta against p2p games, and the people who enjoy them. Hence, this column.
Originally posted by Agent_Joseph F2P mmo games are designed for peoples without RL or peopoles who can spend 100+ $ monthly in game cash shops
So narrow-minded. I guess p2p's can't take a stupid amount of time investment. For that matter why do you or anyone care what others spend their money on. Don't like a certain cash shop model then don't support it. Simple. As far as what people are willing to spend on a game is of no concern to you,ever. If they enjoy something then it's not your place to tell them how freaking wrong and messed up they are. They aren't effecting anyone's life or hurting others. So what does this type of comment make you?
The west has some of the most spoiled self-righteous consumers out there. Did you see the list that was put up awhile back of the 2013 top earning cash shops? Did you see what was crushing everything else? Not beating, crushing. In case you missed it, Enjoy.
Why does it matter what others like? Good question. But Richard Aihoshi seems to have a vendetta against p2p games, and the people who enjoy them. Hence, this column.
I'm not so sure it's a personal vendetta as much as it's a change in direction for the site. It seems over the last year or so that the quality of an artical is being decided on how many posted comments it gets. If that's the case it would explain why so many of the writers here troll the forums posting stories ideas they pulled from what ever " hot topic of the week" they happen to find. Whenever a thread seems to go 20+ pages a story just happens to get written on the exact same topic.
F2P is just the easy bait topic and why so many of the write about it.
You sort of have to expect it in a world run by accountants.
Why does it matter what others like? Good question. But Richard Aihoshi seems to have a vendetta against p2p games, and the people who enjoy them. Hence, this column.
I'm not so sure it's a personal vendetta as much as it's a change in direction for the site. It seems over the last year or so that the quality of an artical is being decided on how many posted comments it gets. If that's the case it would explain why so many of the writers here troll the forums posting stories ideas they pulled from what ever " hot topic of the week" they happen to find. Whenever a thread seems to go 20+ pages a story just happens to get written on the exact same topic.
F2P is just the easy bait topic and why so many of the write about it.
You sort of have to expect it in a world run by accountants.
Not really them though. The community on this site has always ridiculed people who like f2p's. If one listened to the posters on this site. SWTOR was all but dead. Come to find out that couldn't be further from the truth. .
This seems to be the answers given the most around here.
1. I think Pizza is the best tasting food in the world, and since millions of other people eat it around the world every month, I must be correct.
2. No, I think Chop Suey is the best tasting food in the world, and since millions of other people eat it around the world every month, you are wrong!
Yet the correct answer is.
3. Hey, I think my favorite food is the best for me but it doesn't mean what you like isn't correct for you.
Seriously guys, its personal based opinions when it comes to gaming, there is no "wrong".
I had to laugh at this reply. But it's true. Is it a sad thing that that we have to preface and qualify our opinions in such a way, before we post them, so people who don't agree with or don't like them can't try to misrepresent them and use them against us?
Think you would have a strong point if the trend on here was for people to completely trash others for not liking f2p's. This sites community has always been cash shop hostile. The irony is I bet a decent few complainers justify playing a p2p with cash shops because they only sell cosmetics. When before just the mention of a cash shop in a p2p was enough to turn people off. The new trend though is even more worrisome/ disturbing. Playing a f2p and bitching about others using the cash shop. I saw a few posts about it on here not to long ago. Actually saw it for the first time in WoT's last night. Was floored by the reasoning.
A guy completely lost it because someone was shooting gold ammo in a random match. Saying the most racist hateful crap I have seen in any game in awhile.. Just because someone used the cash shop..
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
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.
What Gdemami appeared to be arguing was that objective truth could be determined by subjective popularity. That if X number of people happen to believe that something is good, then it becomes an objective fact that that thing is good. This theory is not logical.
It becomes an objective fact that that thing is perceived as good. It will still be an opinion. It just becomes a fact that it is generally perceived as true. Lot of urban and scientific myths can be used as example. This still does not make those myths true. No matter how many people believe it is true.
Which in the end means there's no point in running in circles around the truth with word play.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
To be fair if you are going to have a realistic discussion about the f2p model you pretty much have to differentiate between the eastern and western markets.
They usually differ quite a bit in demographics, play style and commercial success. when people spout off about f2p sucks my guess is they are referring to the western market ones, witch honestly except for a few exceptions are kinda meh imho.
The payment model is a completely separate issue from game play sub games can suck and f2p games can rule the inverse is also true. Problem for the Western side is most use f2p as a crutch not just a payment model. Also to be fair most of todays western f2p mmo's probably aren't all that much worse than sub mmmos of today. The whole industry is un-inspiring. A lot of western f2p mmos just have that xtra perception of gotcha store gimmicks probably unfairly in many cases and if it was a good game to begin with probably not an issue. For a bad, lackluster, unbalanced and or boring game? pile on.
When the aggregate of western f2p titles consistently deliver the same general type, quantity, quality, and more or less price point per {unit of measure} regular content updates of a similar type sub. And more importantly if people have the general perception they do so. The perception will change faster, currently as far as I know all western mmo's with f2p options that do this are all hybrids not f2p
Why does it matter what others like? Good question. But Richard Aihoshi seems to have a vendetta against p2p games, and the people who enjoy them. Hence, this column.
I'm not so sure it's a personal vendetta as much as it's a change in direction for the site. It seems over the last year or so that the quality of an artical is being decided on how many posted comments it gets. If that's the case it would explain why so many of the writers here troll the forums posting stories ideas they pulled from what ever " hot topic of the week" they happen to find. Whenever a thread seems to go 20+ pages a story just happens to get written on the exact same topic.
F2P is just the easy bait topic and why so many of the write about it.
You sort of have to expect it in a world run by accountants.
To be fair, Richard has been writing articles in The Free Zone for years, and long before F2P gaming was a thing here in the West. It's only been recently, since F2P gaming has become more accepted, that his articles have even had positive comments. I can remember the amount of hatred that used to get posted in the comments for his articles back before the F2P craze. Since he's still here, in spite of the years of hate he had to put up with, I'd say Richard has earned the right to write about F2P gaming.
From what you say it does sound like he's earned that right It's too bad everyone else seems to use it like a tabloid topic.
Well, if there is one thing that comes back consistently in the F2P vs P2P debate, that's the arrogance and ignorance of P2P players (most of them at least).
- None of them have ever played a F2P game ("This is shit")
- None of them can even name a single F2P game with a P2W cash shop ("They are all bad")
- They don't even realise that a majority of P2P are so bad that even "them" (the P2P community) stopped supporting them financially a long time ago (if those P2P games did not become F2P themselves), the point being that bad games isn't a problem exclusive to F2P even when no cash shop is involved
Seriously? Most of the P2P are decent and have one thing that f2p doesn't have, content. Most of the f2p games out there are grindfests with little to do at end game because they keep jacking up the level limit so people have to buy more from the item shop. And yes I have tried a lot of them and I don't really know any that I would recommend to anyone. I do not put freemium games in the f2p pool, completely different, which Richard can't grasp.
Comments
What Gdemami appeared to be arguing was that objective truth could be determined by subjective popularity. That if X number of people happen to believe that something is good, then it becomes an objective fact that that thing is good. This theory is not logical.
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.
Shit is not what people generally want, free or not. So I hope that you that saying is different in your country
Also, anyone who doesn't want everything for free (I am restricting myself to financial context, not something like effort) is a liar. Keep in mind that there is a difference between wanting and expecting. You seem to be confused about that.
It becomes an objective fact that that thing is perceived as good. It will still be an opinion. It just becomes a fact that it is generally perceived as true. Lot of urban and scientific myths can be used as example. This still does not make those myths true. No matter how many people believe it is true.
Well, if there is one thing that comes back consistently in the F2P vs P2P debate, that's the arrogance and ignorance of P2P players (most of them at least).
- None of them have ever played a F2P game ("This is shit")
- None of them can even name a single F2P game with a P2W cash shop ("They are all bad")
- They don't even realise that a majority of P2P are so bad that even "them" (the P2P community) stopped supporting them financially a long time ago (if those P2P games did not become F2P themselves), the point being that bad games isn't a problem exclusive to F2P even when no cash shop is involved
Yet, non-"elite" players are limited in what they can do (sending money through the mail, etc). And where can I buy that razorback mount or whatever it is called?
You're not playing the complete game if you're not paying.
The aren't necessarily wrong, but they may be cheap, 13 years old, and change games every month.
And thus, you have one shallow, disposable, bland MMO after another, that try to rape as much money from you in the cash shopas possible, in a month, because that is how long most "F2P" players stay with a game.
And these gamers play MMOs like console fodder: they blast through everything and then quit in the shortest time possible, which is not what MMOs are all about.
So, you have disposable players, playing disposable games, made by companies that don't give a crap about "quality gaming".
"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.
A straw man argument is a fallacy too, and framing the argument against F2P as you did is most certainly a straw man.As far as Aoshi's argument goes, I can only guess that the early deleted response was something on the lines of that a certain population of a European country was wrong at some point. Just because a large group of people believe a thing does not make that thing right. Aoshi's argument is predicated on a fallacy, I think it's ad populum or some crap. His argument is illogical, and can be cast aside. If he would care to restate his argument logically, then I'm sure many would be happy to debate him. As it is now, there is only room to discuss whether his argument is logical or not.
Richard is right. F2P is immensly popular. There are many people who choose to play F2P games. However, this is also a default arguement. Let me explain.
Some of you may have heard of Cow Clicker. This is a game that was made, as a parody to show how inane facebook games were. However, much to the disgust of the creator... it was actually popular. You can see the numbers here:
http://www.appdata.com/apps/facebook/111596662223307
This clearly shows that despite the attempt to create a very 'unfun' game, there were a lot of people that desired to play it... and do so regularly.
The basic reality is that one mans garbage is another mans treasure. The internet is very vast, and it is composed of all types of people. Many of them like F2P, many of them hate it. The real question is this... why does it matter what others like?
More rational arguments against F2P exist, but the people arguing against it are rarely seen using them. Usually it's just largely inarticulate nerd rage, sometimes combined with parroting of arguments they then prove they don't even understand when confronted.
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.
Why does it matter what others like? Good question. But Richard Aihoshi seems to have a vendetta against p2p games, and the people who enjoy them. Hence, this column.
So narrow-minded. I guess p2p's can't take a stupid amount of time investment. For that matter why do you or anyone care what others spend their money on. Don't like a certain cash shop model then don't support it. Simple. As far as what people are willing to spend on a game is of no concern to you,ever. If they enjoy something then it's not your place to tell them how freaking wrong and messed up they are. They aren't effecting anyone's life or hurting others. So what does this type of comment make you?
The west has some of the most spoiled self-righteous consumers out there. Did you see the list that was put up awhile back of the 2013 top earning cash shops? Did you see what was crushing everything else? Not beating, crushing. In case you missed it, Enjoy.
I'm not so sure it's a personal vendetta as much as it's a change in direction for the site. It seems over the last year or so that the quality of an artical is being decided on how many posted comments it gets. If that's the case it would explain why so many of the writers here troll the forums posting stories ideas they pulled from what ever " hot topic of the week" they happen to find. Whenever a thread seems to go 20+ pages a story just happens to get written on the exact same topic.
F2P is just the easy bait topic and why so many of the write about it.
You sort of have to expect it in a world run by accountants.
Not really them though. The community on this site has always ridiculed people who like f2p's. If one listened to the posters on this site. SWTOR was all but dead. Come to find out that couldn't be further from the truth. .
This seems to be the answers given the most around here.
1. I think Pizza is the best tasting food in the world, and since millions of other people eat it around the world every month, I must be correct.
2. No, I think Chop Suey is the best tasting food in the world, and since millions of other people eat it around the world every month, you are wrong!
Yet the correct answer is.
3. Hey, I think my favorite food is the best for me but it doesn't mean what you like isn't correct for you.
Seriously guys, its personal based opinions when it comes to gaming, there is no "wrong".
I had to laugh at this reply. But it's true. Is it a sad thing that that we have to preface and qualify our opinions in such a way, before we post them, so people who don't agree with or don't like them can't try to misrepresent them and use them against us?
What makes so many F2P games so right?
See what I did thar boxxy!
Think you would have a strong point if the trend on here was for people to completely trash others for not liking f2p's. This sites community has always been cash shop hostile. The irony is I bet a decent few complainers justify playing a p2p with cash shops because they only sell cosmetics. When before just the mention of a cash shop in a p2p was enough to turn people off. The new trend though is even more worrisome/ disturbing. Playing a f2p and bitching about others using the cash shop. I saw a few posts about it on here not to long ago. Actually saw it for the first time in WoT's last night. Was floored by the reasoning.
A guy completely lost it because someone was shooting gold ammo in a random match. Saying the most racist hateful crap I have seen in any game in awhile.. Just because someone used the cash shop..
"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
They are right because they have embrased a gamers right to choose.
Which in the end means there's no point in running in circles around the truth with word play.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
To be fair if you are going to have a realistic discussion about the f2p model you pretty much have to differentiate between the eastern and western markets.
They usually differ quite a bit in demographics, play style and commercial success. when people spout off about f2p sucks my guess is they are referring to the western market ones, witch honestly except for a few exceptions are kinda meh imho.
The payment model is a completely separate issue from game play sub games can suck and f2p games can rule the inverse is also true. Problem for the Western side is most use f2p as a crutch not just a payment model. Also to be fair most of todays western f2p mmo's probably aren't all that much worse than sub mmmos of today. The whole industry is un-inspiring. A lot of western f2p mmos just have that xtra perception of gotcha store gimmicks probably unfairly in many cases and if it was a good game to begin with probably not an issue. For a bad, lackluster, unbalanced and or boring game? pile on.
When the aggregate of western f2p titles consistently deliver the same general type, quantity, quality, and more or less price point per {unit of measure} regular content updates of a similar type sub. And more importantly if people have the general perception they do so. The perception will change faster, currently as far as I know all western mmo's with f2p options that do this are all hybrids not f2p
From what you say it does sound like he's earned that right
It's too bad everyone else seems to use it like a tabloid topic.
Seriously? Most of the P2P are decent and have one thing that f2p doesn't have, content. Most of the f2p games out there are grindfests with little to do at end game because they keep jacking up the level limit so people have to buy more from the item shop. And yes I have tried a lot of them and I don't really know any that I would recommend to anyone. I do not put freemium games in the f2p pool, completely different, which Richard can't grasp.