Dangers of F2P

[RoninaThorstone]

Which differs from my original point how? I mean if you can show me where the theoretical idea of getting all the "content" from the gem store through just grinding for gold becomes a reasonable expectation then I'll change my stance and agree that GW2's currency conversion offers a reality of "everybody winning" instead of promising an undelivered gaming utopia in this regard.

GW2s currency exchange seems reasonable to me. I don't see how they could make it more "reasonable" other than bending over backward to placate people who won't be happy no matter what they get.

[noahjam326]

I'd love to know the MMO where I could purchase access to everything the game has to offer without a commitment beyond the initial purchase..

You're looking for a single player game. Based on reading your responses you're looking for an MMO with no cash shop what-so-ever regardless of what's inside. Which I find unreasonable. Defiance, The Secret World, and GW2 are all buy-to-play games with optional cash shops. If you find experience boosts to be unacceptable then you will never find the game you're asking for, because you're demanding that companies never make money after the game's release. An MMO needs a constant stream of income to develop new content, that's what keeps the MMO alive for years to come. The MMO you're looking for would never get any new content, expansions, or patches.

[Deleted]

GW2s currency exchange seems reasonable to me. I don't see how they could make it more "reasonable" other than bending over backward to placate people who won't be happy no matter what they get.

Note, I didn't say GW2 didn't have a reasonable currency exchange, but that the currency exchange does not offer a reasonable expectation of acquiring all the content from the gem store which isn't found in-game solely through grinding for gold. Those gems getting traded for gold haven't been plucked out of thin air and have been bought by someone else at some point. I have no axe to grind with GW2 nor it's cash shop and I don't wish to further derail the thread speaking of one specific example when my original point of ANY game seeking to extend further financial commitment beyond the initial "box purchase" has made conscious game design decisions with their business model in mind whether it a sub, F"P cash shop or a B2P game with a cash shop incorporating a currency exchange and any preference to a particular business model is a personal one devoid of any inherent value relating to purity of game design.

---------- Post added 2013-06-30 at 04:41 PM ----------

You're looking for a single player game. Based on reading your responses you're looking for an MMO with no cash shop what-so-ever regardless of what's inside. Which I find unreasonable. Defiance, The Secret World, and GW2 are all buy-to-play games with optional cash shops. If you find experience boosts to be unacceptable then you will never find the game you're asking for, because you're demanding that companies never make money after the game's release. An MMO needs a constant stream of income to develop new content, that's what keeps the MMO alive for years to come. The MMO you're looking for would never get any new content, expansions, or patches.

I don't expect such a game but thanks for ripping one of quotes out of context. I have never argued that a MMO shouldn't seek to sustain itself with a source of revenue beyond the initial box price. I don't find experience boosts to be unacceptable, but you will find someone else in this thread doesn't like them.

[Edge-]

There are different F2P games. Problem is, most of them are exploitative.

Out of curiosity, which F2P games run exploitative models? I have no love for the models EQ2/SWTOR run, but it would be a stretch to call them exploitative. Annoying as hell and not friendly to F2P players at all, but far from exploitative.

I think the only two TRUE F2P games I know of is Dota 2 and HoN, since all heroes became free. In these games you truly can never ever buy anything to help you play the game, EVER. Even LoL forces you to grind for champions, and you basically can't keep up and have to pay up for boosters or champions.

IIRC HoN uses the same model as League does nowadays unless you purchased the game when there was a box price. I seem to remember that pissing off a good chunk of the community when the transition happened.

In LoL though, you can absolutely purchase all the champions without ever paying for them. My brother had that for quite some time before his account got banned (he was way too verbally abusive in game) and I have a few friends that have done so as well. Now with Riot slowing down the rate that they release champs, it's even easier. And that game sells nothing that helps you "play" the game. Experience boosts or IP boosts, sure, but neither gives you an advantage during gameplay.

I'm not sure if you consider experience boosts and "advantage" (considering leveling is never the primary gameplay element of a MMO), but Aion, Lineage 2, Rift, Tera, and other MMO's provide 100% of the in-game content for free. Yes, you can buy cosmetics, convenience purchased, inventory unlocks, new classes etc. but the gameplay itself isn't put behind a paywall in any of these games, nor do the boosts you buy confer any power that can't be acquired in-game.

And whenever you can get at least something to boost your play - it can go downstream pretty fast. Soon you'll find that you are either way forced into paying.

Do you know of any MMO's where this has happened? Primarily thinking Western ones, but I can't think of any that sold any convenience purchases that became "mandatory".

IMHO, the only GOOD way of making an F2P game is by allowing one to buy the game and never have to put up with this crap. So you have three options:
- play for free and suffer
- do microtransactions and avoid suffering
- buy the game and pay the sub and do not be affected by microtransaction shit

Or play for free and not suffer? Or do microtransactions and enjoy yourself? Or buy the game and pay the sub and still have microtransactions?

I've heard that SMITE was doing (or planning on doing that) - a Moba game where you can either buy it full and have all champions unlocked forever, or play it F2P and buy champions for ingame gold or cash.

Correct. You can currently pay in-game currency or money for heroes, pay money for skins etc. or pay a lump sum to unlock everything (kinda like buying a boxed copy of the game). Hi-Rez did this with Tribes: Ascend too.

[Angella]

Interestingly all this stuff is sitting in the behavioral economics literature. Monetization of F2P games is just an application of a much wider trend in cognitive understanding.

---------- Post added 2013-06-30 at 04:09 PM ----------

Out of curiosity, which F2P games run exploitative models? I have no love for the models EQ2/SWTOR run, but it would be a stretch to call them exploitative. Annoying as hell and not friendly to F2P players at all, but far from exploitative.

Yeah SWTOR is fine. I stick to the subscription model and don't need to pay a cent so there is an upper bound of monetization of $15/month.

[Yriel]

I find it interesting that, if the article is true, that people who spend money are actually disadvantaged by the game to get them to spend more.
I never thought about that, i always thought that they would be privileged but if you think about it, it makes sense from a business standpoint. But it really doesn't make F2P more sympathetic to me...

[SodiumChloride]

Dead Space 3.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthi...-of-its-games/

That's just EA being an arse. Charging people upfront in addition to micro transaction tricks.

This is the kind of thing that needs to stop. I buy a game as a piece of entertainment, if I like it, I buy the next one by the same people hoping it would be just as good. The game's "job" is to entertain, no BS "coercive monitization" lurking somewhere in its design.

The problem with a great number of F2P games, is that they don't have the upfront payment to offset development cost and rely exclusively on micro transactions to fund themselves. It's in my opinion, for them to be financially successful, at least some "coercive monitization" will be used.

[Rennadrel]

Free to play online games can be very successful if done right. Consumers these days are the types who want to try before buying. Dropping 60 dollars on a game isn't an easy investment for some people, free to play with premium purchases gives people a reason to play a game and choose whether or not they want to invest. Last I heard, PGI made something like 15 million in profits from MechWarrior Online and it's still in beta, just because of how their free to play model works.

[SodiumChloride]

So because something can go bad, we need to be seriously concerned? That's kinda not really reasonable. Traditional models for MMO's (P2P) have gone "bad" at different points in different games, and traditional retail/DLC models have gone "bad" as well. Should we be seriously concerned about hem as well?

Gone bad as in become a terrible un-fun game and I unsubscribe. Sure. That's life.

Gone bad as in become a manipulative game designed to subtly suck people's wallets dry. Can't agree with that.

What? I'm horribly confused as to what you're even trying to say. Who's driving what knife into whom? What's the knife?

Who is accepting the tactics described in the article? I think I've been pretty clear that I don't approve of the monetization tactics of mobile F2P games, and most mobile games in general. So what are you even trying to say?

You said the console/PC market is different, that people there aren't willing to tolerate the type of dirty tricks frequently used in F2P games. Effectively it's these "intolerant" people who keep companies "honest" and prevent them from fully driving the "monitization at all cost" knife all the way in.

[RoninaThorstone]

Gone bad as in become a terrible un-fun game and I unsubscribe. Sure. That's life.

Gone bad as in become a manipulative game designed to subtly suck people's wallets dry. Can't agree with that.

And so, what? Should we ban casinos and lottery tickets?

[Dabrix32]

I consider free to play meaning its actually free to play

Tera, Rift, and GW2 fit that. You can play the game fully without having to pay a sub fee.

SWToR on the other hand is most definitely NOT free to play unless things have changed this year. When I tried playing their so called "free" model I couldnt pvp as much as I wanted, do dungeons or raids as often as I wanted, use all of my companions to do crewskills, or get full exp unless I paid for a sub. Thats hardly free. If you cant play the full game without paying for a sub then its not free its just a demo.

[RoninaThorstone]

SWToR on the other hand is most definitely NOT free to play unless things have changed this year. When I tried playing their so called "free" model I couldnt pvp as much as I wanted, do dungeons or raids as often as I wanted, use all of my companions to do crewskills, or get full exp unless I paid for a sub. Thats hardly free. If you cant play the full game without paying for a sub then its not free its just a demo.

It has changed.
Raid/PvP passes are 80k credits which is a few dailies. All unlocks are cheap as dirt now.

[Jtbrig7390]

It has changed.
Raid/PvP passes are 80k credits which is a few dailies. All unlocks are cheap as dirt now.

Even still you should not be forced to grind ingame currency to do raids or pvp. I personally feel that SWTOR gets away with a lot because of its name and if SWG was still around they couldn't pull off some of the things they do.

To me Rift has the most perfect f2p setup so far.

[RoninaThorstone]

Even still you should not be forced to grind ingame currency to do raids or pvp. I personally feel that SWTOR gets away with a lot because of its name and if SWG was still around they couldn't pull off some of the things they do.

To me Rift has the most perfect f2p setup so far.

You're not being forced.
You are given an option between paying money and grinding... Like all F2P games.

[SodiumChloride]

And so, what? Should we ban casinos and lottery tickets?

You know ... ideally ...

[Mormolyce]

I can't see how anyone could be legitimately pissed off about a game not being free. Obviously they're going to need money at some point. If you get away with playing it completely free that means they're making all their money off someone else.

---------- Post added 2013-07-02 at 03:06 AM ----------

I consider free to play meaning its actually free to play

Tera, Rift, and GW2 fit that. You can play the game fully without having to pay a sub fee.

SWToR on the other hand is most definitely NOT free to play unless things have changed this year. When I tried playing their so called "free" model I couldnt pvp as much as I wanted, do dungeons or raids as often as I wanted, use all of my companions to do crewskills, or get full exp unless I paid for a sub. Thats hardly free. If you cant play the full game without paying for a sub then its not free its just a demo.

Yeah SWTOR is a pay to play game that has released an extended free trial, basically.

Not hating on it, I think it's a perfectly fine model. But it's misleading to call it F2P IMO.

[Jtbrig7390]

You're not being forced.
You are given an option between paying money and grinding... Like all F2P games.

You are forced to grind the ingame currency if you don't give them $$$$ because there is no other way to gain the content and even then its only a pass to do it for a few days.

Its a illusion of choice and to me ways not worth it when I can get all or dam near cost to all content in other mmo's for free perfect example is rift. If SWTOR did a Rift/Terra/TSW Model I would play it but all its pay walls "whether they have changed or not" showed me all EA/Bioware care's for is my money.

I mostly play F2p games right now and many show that they can be done right even Neverwinter's setup is better then SWTOR so there is no reason for me to play SWTOR unless its because I want to play in the Star Wars Universe therefor that shows they think they can get away with the crap because of the name.

Like many have said and I have said time and time again SWTOR isn't F2p its a P2p with a extended trial.

[Edge-]

Gone bad as in become a terrible un-fun game and I unsubscribe. Sure. That's life.

Gone bad as in become a manipulative game designed to subtly suck people's wallets dry. Can't agree with that.

I'd argue that the prices that WoW charges for its character services, which are in addition to the already "premium" subscription that they charge, is manipulative and designed to suck peoples wallets dry nowadays. At the time they were implemented, maybe they justified that price but they haven't justified that price for quite some time. Couple that with the giant account services sale right before the announcement of virtual realms and that's kinda shady.

Which F2P MMO's have become manipulative and tried to subtly suck peoples wallets dry with super sketchy features? Again, the two worst examples for current Western F2P MMO's (SWTOR and EQ2) don't fall into the category at all.

You said the console/PC market is different, that people there aren't willing to tolerate the type of dirty tricks frequently used in F2P games. Effectively it's these "intolerant" people who keep companies "honest" and prevent them from fully driving the "monitization at all cost" knife all the way in.

Ah, but you were saying it was because of "haters" like you. It's not because of "haters" at all, it's because the PC/console market is far more established and while they're not super educated about the gaming industry on the whole, are still far more discriminating in their tastes compared to the average mobile gamer.

There are already established modes of play, established models, acceptable practices. Straying wildly from those sets off red flags like a motherfucker. Those don't exist in the mobile/social space. That's new territory which is why you see a lot of similarities between mobile and the early gaming industry (around the early Atari days). We'll see mobile games improve over time as well as mobile gamers become more familiar with the games they play and the practices in them and are exposed to more games, and more games of high(er) quality.

[Snow-Tiger]

There has only ever been 1 F2P game in my lifetime that I had to stop because it ended up being a "buy to be good" game. That game was Fiesta. My little sister had me play with her one day, and we ended up playing together for a month or so. Granted, we didn't get terribly far so I may be unaware of other methods of obtaining these items, but in the cash shop there is +20% damage dealt and 20% damage taken reduced "charms" that last for an hour - then there's 3% defense and 3% m-def charms that last for like a month or something. I saw all the low level characters running around the dungeons decked out in these charms and it was just overwhelming how much more powerful they were. Being able to buy a flat out power boost, making you that much stronger than someone else, was just a turn off. If it were a permanent boost, it wouldn't have been so bad, but since it's an item that is consumed it meant you have to continually put in the money or lose the power. This was a couple years ago, though.

That's about as bad as it gets for F2P experiences for me, though even that was not trickery. It's just a flat out system where people that drop money are clearly far more powerful than those that play free. Nothing secret or sketchy about it. I can't think of a single F2P game that involved sketchy/tricky systems to get my money.

[Yakshamash]

I'm too poor to play F2P games, so I stick with P2P.