Some 1.9 info just slipped. Instant Adventures for lowbies

[Fencers]

And there are no complaints to be found in other games re: support?

Also you do realize Rift was plagued by major security breeches and account hacks at launch? Up till 2 or so months ago still had security breeches to the point of sending out an email advising players to change their account password? As a thank you they gave out a "Moneybags" trinket.

Shit happens. Hardly a rarity among P2P games.

[Edge-]

I never had an issue with support tickets from Nexon in Vindictus, Mabinogi or Dragon Nest. A ticket I sent in 4 weeks ago to Blizzard just got answered today [well, yesterday really]. Anecdotal evidence is, anecdotal.

I've had a ticket out for Nexon (Vindictus, had my account cleaned out somehow. Strange because thats the only one of my dozens of account for different game that got hit) for almost 3 months : /

CS is spotty in almost every game I've played, both subscription and F2P based. Sometimes you'll get an almost instant response, sometimes it will take forever. Sometimes the CSR will be awesome, sometimes they will be a moron.

[Trialtm]

So off topic its not even funny.

[Iechinok]

You see, Fencers, this is the flaw in your argument: Nexon has done next to nothing in terms of coding to fix many of the issues that have plagued it. Almost on a daily basis, you can see up to 10 or more hacked account threads pop up, where even the players that have been wary and have been playing for years are victims. This isn't a recent problem with Nexon; it's been this way for several years.

Trion actually did something about it, instead of focusing on a cash shop that helps virtually no one unless, of course, you happen to want to make your character more powerful.

Whether you like it or not, f2p may be successful, but it comes at an undeniable cost. Denying these things based on a rosy-tinted outlook won't make them suddenly go away. You just simply have to do a (very) small amount of research on it. It's widely known that Nexon makes sickening amounts of revenue from Maplestory alone, but the game suffers overall because of it. There have been far too many incidents that I can recount in Maplestory alone, where they've decided to update their cash shop, instead of fixing a major issue right away.

As for your basis for complaints with the other games, they have their own problems too. Take Vindictus, for instance. Not only do you get complaints about hacked accounts (albeit lower than Maplestory's), but you also get complaints of hacked and duplicated weapons or armor. This practice is common knowledge to Nexon. It's been going on for years, and Nexon has only *recently* made any effort whatsoever to stop it.

In fact, there was a crazy conspiracy theory going around because hackers were selling these hacked items for NX Cash, which was made possible by Nexon. I personally never really believed it, but since they seemed so oblivious to those hackers and 'dupers,' as they're called, it seemed almost plausible.

[Fencers]

You see, Fencers, this is the flaw in your argument: Nexon has done next to nothing in terms of coding to fix many of the issues that have plagued it.

Fairly certain this is unrelated to any argument I have ever made. Pretty nice strawman, however.

[Deleted]

I went to queue for EI IA this week, and freemarch popped up in the description, which was a bit strange and didnt think nothing of it til i saw this thread ^^

[Iechinok]

Fencers, it's entirely related to your point about Trion's security breach that was brought up as a result of one of my previous posts. My post illuminates a bit of perspective on it. That is no strawman, and I'd appreciate if you wouldn't throw around fallacies without just cause.

My point about f2p security on Nexon's part being done horribly, which you turned into a comparison with Trion's security breach, still stands. My point was that such problems are much more common with Nexon by 10x, possibly (and most likely) more. If anyone wanted to draw away from my main point, it would have been you, Fencers, by bringing up a security breach that happened in December. Also, in terms of security breaches, Korean Maplestory had one of the largest cyber-incursions in Korean history, and was acclaimed to be the second largest incursion. The hackers involved made off with 13.2 million players' information, including their Social Security Numbers, which are required to make Korean accounts. This happened in late November-early December 2011. I figured the topic of security breaches makes it valid enough for me to at least share that information.

I also did a bit of searching in the Rift forums. The latest thread that came up from the keyword 'hacked' died in February, after having been necro'd twice; it was necro'd once at the end of January, after ending at the beginning of January, and then again in February. Both times these necros resulted in idle conversation.

[Tarien]

Fairly certain this is unrelated to any argument I have ever made. Pretty nice strawman, however.

What arguments? You've made some fairly strong assertions about the direction of the MMO market which apparently is going to be all B2P and F2P within a few years, but not posted a single piece of evidence or even made a reasonable argument in support that considers why this would happen, or what the benefits and downsides are (as I did on page 2) for each payment method and why one outweighs the other.

Not being funny Fencers but you've spent more time making airy statements and borderline insults (like the one above) about other peoples posts/arguments without any sort of substantial rebuttal, do you really think that anything you have posted is actually constructing a convincing argument that B2P/F2P are models that will replace P2P?

If you have a constructive, informative argument to make, make it, as this is a sort of interesting thread if there is actual discussion. Otherwise let's all just stay on topic (which for those that have forgotten, is the probability of Instant Adventures for starter zones very soon).

[Fencers]

Fencers, it's entirely related to your point about Trion's security breach that was brought up as a result of one of my previous posts. My post illuminates a bit of perspective on it. That is no strawman, and I'd appreciate if you wouldn't throw around fallacies without just cause.

No, by definition that is a strawman argument.

All companies have their share of woes, Trion or Nexon not excepted. Accounts have been hacked in Nexon games, accounts have been hacked in Trion's game, accounts have been hacked in World of Warcraft, et cetera.

None of which is related to their business model. Merely anecdotal.

One of my guild mates had his WOW account hacked a few months ago [actual]... Blizzard focusing too much on the cash shop!

It's twaddle.

If you want to believe these sorts of things, so be it. I never make effort to convince others one way or another. We just have to see how the market shakes out.

What arguments? You've made some fairly strong assertions about the direction of the MMO market which apparently is going to be all B2P and F2P within a few years, but not posted a single piece of evidence or even made a reasonable argument in support that considers why this would happen, or what the benefits and downsides are (as I did on page 2) for each payment method and why one outweighs the other.

With respect, I think I said quite clearly why I think F2P/B2P is the future of the market. A little personal research would reveal trends. I am not going to list reams of articles in a thread. Get over it.

If others have a differing POV or argument, that's certainly fine. I am not particularly interested in changing their mind.

[Tarien]

No, by definition that is a strawman argument.

All companies have their share of woes, Trion or Nexon not excepted. Accounts have been hacked in Nexon games, accounts have been hacked in Trion's game, accounts have been hacked in World of Warcraft, et cetera.

None of which is related to their business model. Merely anecdotal.

Actually I think the point Iechinok is trying to make is that developers making F2P games are less inclined to care about their customers and fix things such as security issues, hacked accounts, bugs, etc. There is probably higher churn of customers, so if a customer is unhappy and leaves, it's not such a big deal as another player will replace them, there is little chance of revenue lost.

A developer with a subscription based game however needs happy players or they will cancel their subscriptions and it is harder to attract players when there is an initial outlay for the game + the subscription cost. Look at how Trion dealt with their most recent security issue, how well they compensated everyone including those unaffected.

With respect, I think I said quite clearly why I think F2P/B2P is the future of the market. A little personal research would reveal trends. I am not going to list reams of articles in a thread. Get over it.

No, you didn't. Also why would I be making your argument for you? If my own 'research' revealed such a trend, I would post to that effect, wouldn't I?

If others have a differing POV or argument, that's certainly fine. I am not particularly interested in changing their mind.

Then why post at all?

[Fencers]

Actually I think the point Iechinok is trying to make is that developers making F2P games are less inclined to care about their customers and fix things such as security issues, hacked accounts, bugs, etc. There is probably higher churn of customers, so if a customer is unhappy and leaves, it's not such a big deal as another player will replace them, there is little chance of revenue lost.

What is mostly being stated here is superstition or sour grapes. Security breeches happen regardless of business model and company. Volume of traffic is def. a factor.

Having a F2P or B2P model doesn't behold any company to the sins, real or perceived, of some other company. That is just outright nonsense. You wouldn't say Trion is bound to the former faults of Sony or boons of Blizzard by having a business model of P2P.

A developer with a subscription based game however needs happy players or they will cancel their subscriptions and it is harder to attract players when there is an initial outlay for the game + the subscription cost. Look at how Trion dealt with their most recent security issue, how well they compensated everyone including those unaffected.

Companies get your money on the billing cycle. They only need to create long grinds and constant carrots to chase. If they charged you for a year or 3 months, they have that money in hand. I see no + or - in this versus horizontal or vertical play.

Likewise, I don't see how spending development on creating weeks long WEs where players grind currencies for vanity items is a greater use of dev resources than adding a $10 mount to the CS. P2P games need to create heavy time investment cycles- that's the only reason we have rep grinds, currency grinds, crafting grinds, planarite grinds, grind, grind, grind.

Trion could just as easily offer that Nebula mount in a CS alongside in-game means just as GW2 cash shop behaves. Or have vanity items ala Blizzard. Game time currency ala Tera or Eve. Hybrid subs and f2p access such as Everquest, LOTRO or DDO.

No, you didn't. Also why would I be making your argument for you? If my own 'research' revealed such a trend, I would post to that effect, wouldn't I?

So you didn't read the first post I made in this thread re: lower barriers of entry or any of the others? I clearly stated why I believe F2P/B2P is a more accessible model.

Then why post at all?

I have to be interested in changing your mind to post? Absurd.

I'm not going to dredge up links and graphs for some guy on the forum going, "LOL Maple Story!" either.

[Iechinok]

Considering that Maplestory's one of the largest f2p in the world, I feel it's a great example. After all, it's too large for other f2p companies to *not* look at, whether to learn from Nexon's success or shortcomings with the game.

As for my above points, I thank Tarien for being able to understand what I meant.

Also, there still was no strawman fallacy on my part. I completely acknowledged that p2p can have their woes, as you put it, and even pointed out *when* that incident occurred, and even went through the further effort of showing that no such thing has occurred of that nature within post records on those forums since the threads died originally. My entire point was that a major f2p company makes so little effort in comparison to basically *any* p2p company out there to keep their customers happy, or their accounts safe for that matter.

The most you hear of people *still* receiving compensation these days is due to the fact that people quit before the breach due to some factor or another, and are recently returning and wanting to take advantage of the 3 days game time for changing a password, as well as get the Moneybags trinket.

As for p2p having to have time sinks for their games... I'd rather have some sort of time sink for me to use some of my time in than have them waste time on issues involving a cash shop over some bug or glitch that they could be fixing.

[Fencers]

Considering that Maplestory's one of the largest f2p in the world, I feel it's a great example. After all, it's too large for other f2p companies to *not* look at, whether to learn from Nexon's success or shortcomings with the game.

I was being sorta cheeky there. Kinda unfair to you. But it tickled me so, I went with it.

However, what I take issue with is the premise F2P model inherently means poor customer service or/& lack of security. That someone got hacked in Maple Story, Vindictus or World of Warcraft or Rift is possible regardless of business model.

[Iechinok]

This is true, but how common it is happens to be a huge factor. The fact that f2p is so accessible, while being a strength to bring in new players, hampers against it in most aspects, because hackers can simply make a new account and continue what they were doing, with little loss. There are *some* exceptions to this, though. While Korean Maplestory did receive a huge hit, it's worth mentioning that they're usually hack-free due to the requirement of a social security number to make an account.

One of the major shortcomings with Maplestory's cash shop is that they obsess over it, when there are so many bugs and glitches in their game. They've even turned toward a casino-style cash shop with their Potential system... It's pretty sickening, actually. Recently they saw their mistake, and made a more accessible system with Nebulites in terms of characters giving themselves upgrades to their gear. Of course, there's still Cash Shop material for nebulites, but it's at least not as horrid as their Potential items (Miracle Cubes, Hyper Cubes, etc.). This is a bit off-topic, but there are some crazy things that happen with those players. Addiction's a scary thing, and some of the minority actually dish out $1000 every so often, just for the purpose of those potential cubes... It's pretty crazy.

I haven't been in the forums long, and I'm already enjoying my time here, heheh.

[Tarien]

However, what I take issue with is the premise F2P model inherently means poor customer service or/& lack of security. That someone got hacked in Maple Story, Vindictus or World of Warcraft or Rift is possible regardless of business model.

What is mostly being stated here is superstition or sour grapes. Security breeches happen regardless of business model and company. Volume of traffic is def. a factor.

We're not arguing about whether the payment model affects the level of hacking going on (though I am sure I could make an argument), we're arguing how developers deal with security breaches and customer service in general depending on their payment model. F2P generally have a worse reputation than P2P, for a number of factors, some beyond the developers control such as volume of complaints, others are more to do with the financial impact of a larger customer service base (which brings us back around to, F2P = in it for the quick money).

Having a F2P or B2P model doesn't behold any company to the sins, real or perceived, of some other company. That is just outright nonsense. You wouldn't say Trion is bound to the former faults of Sony or boons of Blizzard by having a business model of P2P.

Of course not, but because payment models affect your companies goals it definitely affects every other aspect of how you run the company, including customer services. Fairly simple logic, complete lack of annoying phrasing.

Companies get your money on the billing cycle. They only need to create long grinds and constant carrots to chase. If they charged you for a year or 3 months, they have that money in hand. I see no + or - in this versus horizontal or vertical play.

The difference is that in a P2P game we expect something for that money, we have long term (ie next patch(es)) expectations and the developer has to work to fulfil those if they want to see more payments. In a F2P game once they have their money there is no expectation from the players, or less of an expectation. Sure they expect new content, but not to the same degree people playing a subscription game do.

Likewise, I don't see how spending development on creating weeks long WEs where players grind currencies for vanity items is a greater use of dev resources than adding a $10 mount to the CS. P2P games need to create heavy time investment cycles- that's the only reason we have rep grinds, currency grinds, crafting grinds, planarite grinds, grind, grind, grind.

Trion could just as easily offer that Nebula mount in a CS alongside in-game means just as GW2 cash shop behaves. Or have vanity items ala Blizzard. Game time currency ala Tera or Eve. Hybrid subs and f2p access such as Everquest, LOTRO or DDO.

Some people will call it a grind, others will call it Earning Your Way (or even having fun *gasp*). It's the nature of an MMO, if stuff is too easy to get people get bored and leave, time sinks are essential and a reflection of how things work in real life. If you're too lazy to earn something then sure, go buy your way to prettiness and success in some F2P/B2P/P2W game but I fail to see how making desirable items difficult to obtain is a valid criticism.

So you didn't read the first post I made in this thread re: lower barriers of entry or any of the others? I clearly stated why I believe F2P/B2P is a more accessible model.

That post was about as useful as a wet noodle at putting out fires. Two lines of "if RIFT was F2P/B2P there would be more players playing" does not an argument make.

I'm not going to dredge up links and graphs for some guy on the forum going, "LOL Maple Story!" either.

I don't expect what you don't have, don't worry

I have to be interested in changing your mind to post? Absurd.

Why else would you post if not to influence the thinking of others in some way? I only post to inform, correct, or influence people, under any one of those circumstances I am looking to change what people think or know. The only exception being that if I agree with everything being posted, either I post my agreement or I don't post at all.

[Fencers]

We're not arguing about whether the payment model affects the level of hacking going on (though I am sure I could make an argument), we're arguing how developers deal with security breaches and customer service in general depending on their payment model. F2P generally have a worse reputation than P2P, for a number of factors, some beyond the developers control such as volume of complaints, others are more to do with the financial impact of a larger customer service base (which brings us back around to, F2P = in it for the quick money).

Reputation? I dunno. I think it is mostly a forum myth. I been playing F2P MMOs in greater number than P2P and have yet to have an issue. Of course, issues can occur for others. I don't doubt others have had their woes with a F2P or two.

It happens.

Of course not, but because payment models affect your companies goals it definitely affects every other aspect of how you run the company, including customer services. Fairly simple logic, complete lack of annoying phrasing.

The difference is that in a P2P game we expect something for that money, we have long term (ie next patch(es)) expectations and the developer has to work to fulfill those if they want to see more payments. In a F2P game once they have their money there is no expectation from the players, or less of an expectation. Sure they expect new content, but not to the same degree people playing a subscription game do.

Yeeaaa, sorry. I think a lot of this is fantasy of what gamers and developers like to believe & sell P2P as being.

That monthly fee often doesn't guarantee me any greater influx of content over a F2P. A lot of which is daily quest grind/gear cycle busy work which I am now paying monthly for the privilege of "earning" by way of daily tasks.

Trion does a far better job than any company I seen to date in bringing meaning content to their game. Though Rift lacks in no way from filler "content" as any other P2P. In the macro sense, I am as likely to wait months for an update for my $15/mo sub in any given P2P as in a F2P.

Some people will call it a grind, others will call it Earning Your Way (or even having fun *gasp*). It's the nature of an MMO, if stuff is too easy to get people get bored and leave, time sinks are essential and a reflection of how things work in real life. If you're too lazy to earn something then sure, go buy your way to prettiness and success in some F2P/B2P/P2W game but I fail to see how making desirable items difficult to obtain is a valid criticism.

Oh hell, no. I don't put any respect toward the "earning it" notion. And I will say rather openly I do not respect most gaming sub-culture's ideas on how/why games operate.

I don't really have a lot of regard for gamers or fans, by and large.

I don't expect what you don't have, don't worry

Someone already linked an article on sub based games. Still not interested in hitting up Google.com to change your mind on business models. Simply am not going to spend any amount of time on that whatsoever. Do your own reading.

Why else would you post if not to influence the thinking of others in some way? I only post to inform, correct, or influence people, under any one of those circumstances I am looking to change what people think or know.

I post on things which interests me. Changing your mind on something is not ever a desire.

[Tarien]

Someone already linked an article on sub based games. Still not interested in hitting up Google.com to change your mind on business models. Simply am not going to spend any amount of time on that whatsoever. Do your own reading.

Well I am going to stop replying because not only is it clear that what you are posting is simply your own opinion, there is nothing factual nor even logical or rational to be found in your posts to lend any weight to them. Despite claiming you have no interest in changing anyone's mind and that you don't have time to do their reading for them, you seem to have plenty of time to post long winded, empty responses.

[Azuri]

I wasn't the mod that closed this thread but it has steered way off topic several times and doesn't appear to going back on topic any time soon.