Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by -aLpHa-I do not think they (F2P MMO Developer/Publisher)have either the intention or the goal to actually provide a real entertainment service.
So? If a game is entertaining to me, i don particularly care if the devs did it for the money, or he wants to entertain me, or both.
The mmorpg scene is quite complex and it's easy to blame f2p for things that have nothing to do with the actual monetization model. Generalizing the problem does not help anyone. Yes, many earlier f2p games sucked as their devs were noobs in the field and in those cases there was no sense going p2p. Some also resort to referring to f2p as a death spiral with notions of "inevitability" of p2w.
As Grimnir above outlines, the problem is in part born out of greed. Devs want easy money in the beginning and put a sub. Then as people leave, they put in ftp and get more people. Eventually, when the stream of new and returning players dries up, there is a lot of pressure for the devs to expand monetization to include elements some consider p2w. That's the way it goes currently. The result is huge changes in playerbase and as a norm games have not much concern for long term play, which subs are supposed to represent.
Another part of the problem is that players have been trained to play through the game in a certain manner; one or two months and out. A huge cause for this is the sub. Another is that they are almost all wow-styled themeparks. Due to this, sandboxes face a rather steep uphill battle in maturing into what they thrive to be.
If you think about it, a more stable solution would be to start out with b2p/f2p and when the game matures and players get attached or leave, introduce a reasonable sub or other form of equal pay for profit and to ensure fairness. Imo the current standard is a total rip off considering the market: the competition and the possible amount of players a good game can gather.
There is no harm in a cash shop that does not affect gameplay. There are plenty of examples of those. If you seriously hate f2p, you should thrive to influence a change in the sub system that drives people into the alternatives. Equal pay is definitely a good aspect of it, but otherwise it's a bad system.
I'd say it's because of the side effects of the current games industry as a whole. Companies at this point are too afraid to try something new even if it would be fun, because a whole lot of the market is dominated by the ones who follow a similar formula. Anyone who tries anything new is therefore afraid that the game's going to flop for one reason or another, so they focus on making money in the short term with a cash shop or paid expansions or whatever. Of course they want to get as many people to buy as much as possible, so the game ends up becoming Pay to Win, at which point we all get on the forums and whine for a bit before seeing the next big game that's gonna run the circuit.
Originally posted by -aLpHa-I do not think they (F2P MMO Developer/Publisher)have either the intention or the goal to actually provide a real entertainment service.
So? If a game is entertaining to me, i don particularly care if the devs did it for the money, or he wants to entertain me, or both.
Good for you then.
I see it differently but that's life.
Of course.
It is your prerogative to ignore fun entertainment that is produced to make money.
The mmorpg scene is quite complex and it's easy to blame f2p for things that have nothing to do with the actual monetization model. Generalizing the problem does not help anyone. Yes, many earlier f2p games sucked as their devs were noobs in the field and in those cases there was no sense going p2p. Some also resort to referring to f2p as a death spiral with notions of "inevitability" of p2w.
As Grimnir above outlines, the problem is in part born out of greed. Devs want easy money in the beginning and put a sub. Then as people leave, they put in ftp and get more people. Eventually, when the stream of new and returning players dries up, there is a lot of pressure for the devs to expand monetization to include elements some consider p2w. That's the way it goes currently. The result is huge changes in playerbase and as a norm games have not much concern for long term play, which subs are supposed to represent
Another part of the problem is that players have been trained to play through the game in a certain manner; one or two months and out. A huge cause for this is the sub. Another is that they are almost all wow-styled themeparks. Due to this, sandboxes face a rather steep uphill battle in maturing into what they thrive to be.
If you think about it, a more stable solution would be to start out with b2p/f2p and when the game matures and players get attached or leave, introduce a reasonable sub or other form of equal pay for profit and to ensure fairness. Imo the current standard is a total rip off considering the market: the competition and the possible amount of players a good game can gather.
There is no harm in a cash shop that does not affect gameplay. There are plenty of examples of those. If you seriously hate f2p, you should thrive to influence a change in the sub system that drives people into the alternatives. Equal pay is definitely a good aspect of it, but otherwise it's a bad system.
Innovation lacks because those involved in the gaming industry have not been experiencing dire times, but now that becomes mor evident, which is a really good sign.
One of the most advanced technologies came to mankind when it was highly determined, desperate, urgent and motivated such as during World War II. We would not had the internet for example, not as soon as now without it.
There is no one to blame but those who are responsible for what they are making. It's easy to blame this and that, but reality it is there is a reason Walmart and China are one of the most dominant. They are aggressive and extremely competitive. They know people want great deals and they deliver that. Those who will need the $ most badly at the end will come up with one of the greatest MMO we will yet to see in the upcoming years.
We will be seeing many old players out of the industry for failing to adapt to the new waters and that will just open up the space and opportuniy for the better players to take over.
I believe today companies need to merge, work harder and take far greater risks to aim for great rewards. They must be bold and confident in themself. It is indeed challenging to take $ from veteran players like me and as more and more players age and become the same vets as time goes by more will be restraint of careless spending and get far greater quality games aimed for us.
All I know is I've done my shared part to push this genre forward by not buying anything new that was delivered to me after DCUO. If we want change, if we want greatness we must demand it. The technology is there it just takes the right people with the right minds and funds to deliver it and when its delivered I bet it will be FREE TO PLAY.
I don't hate F2P. I just prefer to sub. With the freemium (hybrid model) games out now, I can choose to sub to those games for added perks which I enjoy. Many games now can only survive by going F2P or freemium .
Long answer..It is a FAKE marketing gimmick to try and gain advantage over BETTER games that were charging subs.Other than EQ2 which was not originally a f2p game,i have yet to see a f2p game that is better than my top 5 sub games of all time being FFXI/FFXIV/Wow/Vanguard/EQ2.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Long answer..It is a FAKE marketing gimmick to try and gain advantage over BETTER games that were charging subs.Other than EQ2 which was not originally a f2p game,i have yet to see a f2p game that is better than my top 5 sub games of all time being FFXI/FFXIV/Wow/Vanguard/EQ2.
You just need to look deeper. I'm playing a F2P MMORPG atm even if I can easily afford to pay a sub for a P2P. That just shows how close the F2P games have come in terms of quality compared to the P2P. P2P are to blame too for their lowered quality compared to in the past.
Best example that F2P is the future is in Everquest Next.
Companies at this point are too afraid to try something new even if it would be fun
uh? There are lots of new things.
MOBA was new for a while.
Destiny type online system is new. So is Division. Watch Dog combining hacking & open city gameplay is new.
I was playing DoTA in 2005. its 9 years old. By comparison WoW is almost 10.
So DOTA is newer than WoW .. a new genre created after WoW. You made by point. Plus, DOTA is a mod ... strictly speaking the company that took risks is riot game, and LoL is the true commercial product.
Companies at this point are too afraid to try something new even if it would be fun
uh? There are lots of new things.
MOBA was new for a while.
Destiny type online system is new. So is Division. Watch Dog combining hacking & open city gameplay is new.
I was playing DoTA in 2005. its 9 years old. By comparison WoW is almost 10.
DoTA is actually far older than that. It was a map mod for Warcraft 3, which came before WoW if you remember, which basically single-handedly spawned the whole genre. People made so many DoTA maps with the Warcraft 3 map editor...hundreds of them...it was the success of that which made DoTA spawn out as a full independent game, as well as League of Legends.
I remember playing those old Warcraft 3 DoTA maps...wasn't very good at them mind you but they were fun at the time.
And another map mod from Warcraft 3 pretty much spawned the whole tower defense game genre too.
Long answer..It is a FAKE marketing gimmick to try and gain advantage over BETTER games that were charging subs.Other than EQ2 which was not originally a f2p game,i have yet to see a f2p game that is better than my top 5 sub games of all time being FFXI/FFXIV/Wow/Vanguard/EQ2.
You just need to look deeper. I'm playing a F2P MMORPG atm even if I can easily afford to pay a sub for a P2P. That just shows how close the F2P games have come in terms of quality compared to the P2P. P2P are to blame too for their lowered quality compared to in the past.
Best example that F2P is the future is in Everquest Next.
its hard to look deeper as most F2P games are actually very shallow
Everquest Next is not a proven game, so using it as an example is disingenuous, if your going to use an example of the future of F2P gaming then you need to use a game for an example, that not only currently exists, but is also in a released none beta form, because if something is the future of F2P gaming then by definition it must also be a successful example of the genre.
It doesn't however change the fact that the best and arguably the most successful AAA rated MMO's are almost entirely P2P. Though i will admit that GW2 although B2P is also a successful AAA rated MMO.
Originally posted by WizardryVERY simple answer is because f2p is NOT f2p.Long answer..It is a FAKE marketing gimmick to try and gain advantage over BETTER games that were charging subs.Other than EQ2 which was not originally a f2p game,i have yet to see a f2p game that is better than my top 5 sub games of all time being FFXI/FFXIV/Wow/Vanguard/EQ2.
I will give you credit for FFXI/FFXIV/WoW. These games are all P2P, and could be seen as good examples of a sucessful P2P game. However, EQ2 is now F2P (so it is a good example of F2P), and Vanguard is closing in a month (can not be seen as a good example, as it is going out of business).
The problem you are going to run into, is that it will be difficult to find more 'good' examples of P2P as you either increase the size of your list, or try to replace the games that fall off it. P2P has had a lot of 'bad' examples, which make it no different than F2P. This is because neither F2P nor P2P make the game better/worst. The monetization method may be a missmatch for the value offered, but it doesnt really change the game.
I don't hate f2p in 100% of it's forms, I think it is fine for LoL, but for mmorpgs, I can safely say I hate it for 90%+ on the conservative side.
I do not like convienience or power in a mmorpg shop. If they wanted to sell DLC/cosmetic, that is expansions, dungeons, or access to say go past the first 'x' levels, I am ok with that alternative. I would much rather have that.
If I had a mmorpg that I really liked, I would prefer it be sub based, or f2p with content/cosmetic (even content can be nickel and dimed, so they need to be reasonable, and not silly).
Originally posted by Agent_Josephf2p mmo's are too much expensive for peoples with real life jobs & live,we cant grind 12 hours every day ( play for free)
What are you taking about?
I played Marvel Heroes totally free. The story campaign took me only 30 hours to finish .. more or less like a SP game. I did it with 2 characters, and so the total play time on this game so far is less than 80 hours.
It is essentially a free fun SP game for me. What is the problem?
Somebody somewhere paid. I know you only care about yourself but it doesn't change the fact that other people exist. And they pay, and keep the game running.
So? His general statement "f2p mmo's are too much expensive for peoples with real life jobs & live,we cant grind 12 hours every day ( play for free)" is still wrong.
I am a person with a real life job. It is not too expensive to me, because it is free. And also free for a majority of players (see the discussion about whales, and how small a percentage they are).
Most people spend more on F2P games than P2P. I refuse to believe that a few magic Whales (poor deluded mentally ill idiots) support the game. You're fooling yourself.
There are a few mentally ill people. A large number of other idiots pay small amounts of money that are required to play the game. F2P games take advantage of the mentally ill.
F2P games are rigged against you. A while ago, I wrote a blog post about the number of ways that F2P programmers can rip you off. Apparently, it was little read. That's OK.
You can take advantage of others and not pay anything. As such, you won't weigh into those games like others do. You won't be playing even 25% of the content before you move on. That might be enough for you.
You can play the F2P games and pay into them. You will reach your lock in earlier and pay longer than a sub game, although you'll be paying much more than a P2P game.
Remember that the ONLY way that game makes money is if they force you to buy something. Don't believe the spiel about appearance only items. They can make sure that you will buy XP boosters or other fakery.
They can cheat their asses off and you won't know the difference.
AND the games are substandard. There are NO well made F2P games that were originally F2P. None.
If you believe the tales they're spinning, I feel sorry for you.
Not all P2P games are good either. But it depends on how you play.
There are many stats from many different companies all showing essentially the same thing. Most (the mode pay nothing) average ( mean) is a small amount and av few is as lot.
An average of $5 from 2 million is much much much better than $15 from 200k.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
This year I've only spent $15 (subbed for 1 month to WOW). The current B2P/P2P MMO's when compared with what can be played from the F2P MMO's (if one looks carefully and compares) there isn't significant difference. At the end this is when veteran experience comes in handy, being able to enjoy MMO's out there while saving $ in the process.
So, again F2P is so beneficial for us gamers even if the entire game is P2W. At the end if I know what I'm playing, what I'm receiving and for how long I intend to play the game, what purpuse, etc it's still a great deal. I do hope every year I'll be playing and PAYING for a MMO that's simply on another level with it's competitors, but I simply cannot see that now or in the last couple years so if I'll be playing a mediocre MMO at least I'll be playing it for free.
This year I've only spent $15 (subbed for 1 month to WOW). The current B2P/P2P MMO's when compared with what can be played from the F2P MMO's (if one looks carefully and compares) there isn't significant difference. At the end this is when veteran experience comes in handy, being able to enjoy MMO's out there while saving $ in the process.
So, again F2P is so beneficial for us gamers even if the entire game is P2W. At the end if I know what I'm playing, what I'm receiving and for how long I intend to play the game, what purpuse, etc it's still a great deal. I do hope every year I'll be playing and PAYING for a MMO that's simply on another level with it's competitors, but I simply cannot see that now or in the last couple years so if I'll be playing a mediocre MMO at least I'll be playing it for free.
Well, sounds like you are saying not much is out that is worth paying for, which for my tastes, I will agree with.
Comments
Not if you play PvE solo. There is no "winning".
Good for you then.
I see it differently but that's life.
Best thing about F2P games are their cash shops, seriously.
Proud MMORPG.com member since March 2004! Make PvE GREAT Again!
The mmorpg scene is quite complex and it's easy to blame f2p for things that have nothing to do with the actual monetization model. Generalizing the problem does not help anyone. Yes, many earlier f2p games sucked as their devs were noobs in the field and in those cases there was no sense going p2p. Some also resort to referring to f2p as a death spiral with notions of "inevitability" of p2w.
As Grimnir above outlines, the problem is in part born out of greed. Devs want easy money in the beginning and put a sub. Then as people leave, they put in ftp and get more people. Eventually, when the stream of new and returning players dries up, there is a lot of pressure for the devs to expand monetization to include elements some consider p2w. That's the way it goes currently. The result is huge changes in playerbase and as a norm games have not much concern for long term play, which subs are supposed to represent.
Another part of the problem is that players have been trained to play through the game in a certain manner; one or two months and out. A huge cause for this is the sub. Another is that they are almost all wow-styled themeparks. Due to this, sandboxes face a rather steep uphill battle in maturing into what they thrive to be.
If you think about it, a more stable solution would be to start out with b2p/f2p and when the game matures and players get attached or leave, introduce a reasonable sub or other form of equal pay for profit and to ensure fairness. Imo the current standard is a total rip off considering the market: the competition and the possible amount of players a good game can gather.
There is no harm in a cash shop that does not affect gameplay. There are plenty of examples of those. If you seriously hate f2p, you should thrive to influence a change in the sub system that drives people into the alternatives. Equal pay is definitely a good aspect of it, but otherwise it's a bad system.
Of course.
It is your prerogative to ignore fun entertainment that is produced to make money.
uh? There are lots of new things.
MOBA was new for a while.
Destiny type online system is new. So is Division. Watch Dog combining hacking & open city gameplay is new.
Innovation lacks because those involved in the gaming industry have not been experiencing dire times, but now that becomes mor evident, which is a really good sign.
One of the most advanced technologies came to mankind when it was highly determined, desperate, urgent and motivated such as during World War II. We would not had the internet for example, not as soon as now without it.
There is no one to blame but those who are responsible for what they are making. It's easy to blame this and that, but reality it is there is a reason Walmart and China are one of the most dominant. They are aggressive and extremely competitive. They know people want great deals and they deliver that. Those who will need the $ most badly at the end will come up with one of the greatest MMO we will yet to see in the upcoming years.
We will be seeing many old players out of the industry for failing to adapt to the new waters and that will just open up the space and opportuniy for the better players to take over.
I believe today companies need to merge, work harder and take far greater risks to aim for great rewards. They must be bold and confident in themself. It is indeed challenging to take $ from veteran players like me and as more and more players age and become the same vets as time goes by more will be restraint of careless spending and get far greater quality games aimed for us.
All I know is I've done my shared part to push this genre forward by not buying anything new that was delivered to me after DCUO. If we want change, if we want greatness we must demand it. The technology is there it just takes the right people with the right minds and funds to deliver it and when its delivered I bet it will be FREE TO PLAY.
p2w guy - Hey man where did you get that?
mmoRPG guy - Man, study this for 5 weeks, then meditated in a cave for 2 months.
p2w guy - That's awesome I'm about to go buy one now.
VERY simple answer is because f2p is NOT f2p.
Long answer..It is a FAKE marketing gimmick to try and gain advantage over BETTER games that were charging subs.Other than EQ2 which was not originally a f2p game,i have yet to see a f2p game that is better than my top 5 sub games of all time being FFXI/FFXIV/Wow/Vanguard/EQ2.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
You just need to look deeper. I'm playing a F2P MMORPG atm even if I can easily afford to pay a sub for a P2P. That just shows how close the F2P games have come in terms of quality compared to the P2P. P2P are to blame too for their lowered quality compared to in the past.
Best example that F2P is the future is in Everquest Next.
So DOTA is newer than WoW .. a new genre created after WoW. You made by point. Plus, DOTA is a mod ... strictly speaking the company that took risks is riot game, and LoL is the true commercial product.
DoTA is actually far older than that. It was a map mod for Warcraft 3, which came before WoW if you remember, which basically single-handedly spawned the whole genre. People made so many DoTA maps with the Warcraft 3 map editor...hundreds of them...it was the success of that which made DoTA spawn out as a full independent game, as well as League of Legends.
I remember playing those old Warcraft 3 DoTA maps...wasn't very good at them mind you but they were fun at the time.
And another map mod from Warcraft 3 pretty much spawned the whole tower defense game genre too.
Where's the any key?
its hard to look deeper as most F2P games are actually very shallow
Everquest Next is not a proven game, so using it as an example is disingenuous, if your going to use an example of the future of F2P gaming then you need to use a game for an example, that not only currently exists, but is also in a released none beta form, because if something is the future of F2P gaming then by definition it must also be a successful example of the genre.
It doesn't however change the fact that the best and arguably the most successful AAA rated MMO's are almost entirely P2P. Though i will admit that GW2 although B2P is also a successful AAA rated MMO.
I will give you credit for FFXI/FFXIV/WoW. These games are all P2P, and could be seen as good examples of a sucessful P2P game. However, EQ2 is now F2P (so it is a good example of F2P), and Vanguard is closing in a month (can not be seen as a good example, as it is going out of business).
The problem you are going to run into, is that it will be difficult to find more 'good' examples of P2P as you either increase the size of your list, or try to replace the games that fall off it. P2P has had a lot of 'bad' examples, which make it no different than F2P. This is because neither F2P nor P2P make the game better/worst. The monetization method may be a missmatch for the value offered, but it doesnt really change the game.
I don't hate f2p in 100% of it's forms, I think it is fine for LoL, but for mmorpgs, I can safely say I hate it for 90%+ on the conservative side.
I do not like convienience or power in a mmorpg shop. If they wanted to sell DLC/cosmetic, that is expansions, dungeons, or access to say go past the first 'x' levels, I am ok with that alternative. I would much rather have that.
If I had a mmorpg that I really liked, I would prefer it be sub based, or f2p with content/cosmetic (even content can be nickel and dimed, so they need to be reasonable, and not silly).
An average of $5 from 2 million is much much much better than $15 from 200k.
This year I've only spent $15 (subbed for 1 month to WOW). The current B2P/P2P MMO's when compared with what can be played from the F2P MMO's (if one looks carefully and compares) there isn't significant difference. At the end this is when veteran experience comes in handy, being able to enjoy MMO's out there while saving $ in the process.
So, again F2P is so beneficial for us gamers even if the entire game is P2W. At the end if I know what I'm playing, what I'm receiving and for how long I intend to play the game, what purpuse, etc it's still a great deal. I do hope every year I'll be playing and PAYING for a MMO that's simply on another level with it's competitors, but I simply cannot see that now or in the last couple years so if I'll be playing a mediocre MMO at least I'll be playing it for free.
Well, sounds like you are saying not much is out that is worth paying for, which for my tastes, I will agree with.
Yes. Why would i spend a lot of money when i can get a lot of the fun for free?