A f2p mmo that is NOT p2w ... that is all we (= I and assuming everyone else) want :(

[Wildmoon]

I like old b2p the most.

[Deleted]

Turbine games, Allods Online, and Runes of Magic all allow you to earn cash shop currency by playing. It's slow, but you never have to pay a dime if you don't want to. And--for what it's worth--League of Legends is not an MMORPG, which is what I assume you're looking for when you say "MMO", which gives them more flexibility.

I have played just turbine game, but I can tell you the "you don't have to pay a dime" is hardly the truth. Yes you can obtain the currency by playing. BUT there is a limit to it. There is finite amount of lotro points you can get via playing, it is about 6k points. These 6k points won't help you get even 20% of what is in store. And btw it takes abnormal time to even get those 6k points, more reasonable expectation is to get around 4k points by playing.

The difference with LOL is, in LOL you are getting store currency nonstop, there is no limit how much you can get by playing.

tl:dr In LOL you can get everything for free, in lotro not.

[Agent Mercury]

Uh it really isn't that hard to find. Most people will cry foul over the smallest thing like XP Boost but since you use LoL I see you are ok with that. I play quite a few and even though they may have Utility like in GW2 with Rezzes/Potions etc. It isn't P2W by any means.

[jakeic]

i personally hate all f2p games, the f2p model is not consumer friendly. f2p promotes half-assery in balancing and presentation(through withholding of the games story, features, or levels), as well as preys upon people by separating them from the value of their money.

any "shop" that sells items that allow you to skip over part of the game in a competitive environment is pay-to-win. games have three general characteristics...rules, challenges, and an end. any purchase of an item that either changes the rules or removes some of the challenge has given any purchaser of that item a short cut to the end, by paying to reach the end quicker you have paid to win.

[insmek]

I have played just turbine game, but I can tell you the "you don't have to pay a dime" is hardly the truth. Yes you can obtain the currency by playing. BUT there is a limit to it. There is finite amount of lotro points you can get via playing, it is about 6k points. These 6k points won't help you get even 20% of what is in store. And btw it takes abnormal time to even get those 6k points, more reasonable expectation is to get around 4k points by playing.

Well, it seems that we're each about half right. Based on a little bit more research, LotRO specifically would require most players to "buy into" the game roughly halfway into the level grind, or else you totally run out of quests. Once you reach the endgame, it also seems that it's entirely possible to be viable without any further monetary commitment, short of upgrades of convenience--and a one-time upgrade to what they call "Premium" seems to open most of those convenience options to you. So that makes it almost like a weird Guild Wars model, where there is a price to play but after that there's no further monetary commitment necessary.

Clever.

[Edge-]

i personally hate all f2p games, the f2p model is not consumer friendly. f2p promotes half-assery in balancing and presentation(through withholding of the games story, features, or levels), as well as preys upon people by separating them from the value of their money.

any "shop" that sells items that allow you to skip over part of the game in a competitive environment is pay-to-win. games have three general characteristics...rules, challenges, and an end. any purchase of an item that either changes the rules or removes some of the challenge has given any purchaser of that item a short cut to the end, by paying to reach the end quicker you have paid to win.

Except the F2P model is actually super consumer friendly. If the game is not good, people won't play it. If they don't play it, they don't buy anything from the cash shop. If they don't buy anything from the cash shop, the company loses money and shuts down. F2P developers have an absolute interest in keeping their games as high quality as possible and ensuring player retention through good gameplay/content. There have been plenty of terrible F2P games that HAVE shut down because they were very poorly made and nobody played them, so nobody used the cash shop.

Good thing the majority of the major F2P games don't sell power or anything that "changes the rules or removes some challenge". Paying to level faster with experience boosts is hardly pay to win. That's like saying everyone that uses heirloom gear in WoW is cheating because they are leveling faster than those who don't use it. Considering how inconsequential leveling is as a core aspect of the game in a game like WoW (that's primarily focused on max level content) you don't really "win" over someone else by leveling faster than them.

[Dilbon]

One might say all games with a cash shop are pay to win, but the definition of winning varies. Personally I really don't care what they sell.

[Sj]

One might say all games with a cash shop are pay to win, but the definition of winning varies. Personally I really don't care what they sell.

TSW has a cash shop. It only sells clothing and other cosmetic stuff, like pets and titles. Pretty sure Tera's cash shop only sells mounts and outfits, too.

[Fwishy]

Ragnarok online.

[Deleted]

They will make whatever format is proving to generate the most income. The fact is the only reason they still put purchaseable buffs, or shortcuts in is because people still buy them.

I'm pretty sure the Devs of this world know exactly what we as consumers would 'prefer', (hell if we're being given the choice I'd like all of mine to be Free to play 100% thanks) but the fact is not including some P2W items in their store loses them income. They would have to be stupid or really, really want to flop to not include some options like that.

I like Guild Wars 2's approach of no sub and swearing on the Bible that all future microtransactions will be cosmetic or metagame services (name change etc), what I don't like is the fact that instead of no sub, they are charging you £20 extra up front as retail. We may as well be comitting to sub for several months straight. Naughty tbh.

[Dilbon]

TSW has a cash shop. It only sells clothing and other cosmetic stuff, like pets and titles. Pretty sure Tera's cash shop only sells mounts and outfits, too.

Looking cooler than others = winning

[dizzzave]

The truth is for F2P games, there has to be a powerful motivation to use the cash shop. If the cash shop is just full of things that don't really matter, then players won't use it enough to cover overhead (server costs, etc.).

[Xcitement]

I actually prefer P2P instead of F2P since it, usually, isn't. P2P avoids the risk of P2W much better than F2P.

I agree with Robin here. So much so that I may go play EvE Online or... ~shudder~ Go back to WoW.

[Aristor]

Guild Wars 2 comes to mind $50 one time (Just like you would buy a game like Skyrim or Diablo 3 once and play it forever) for the amount of content of a game like WoW. GW1 was named the best value in gaming, and GW2 is even bigger.

[Zenotetsuken]

Over a month. So let's factor in a 50% lose chance over a month.
Is 35.52 hours.
Or 46.25 straight if I didn't mess it up.

I have yet to see someone only play 1 hour a day.

It's a grind no matter how you take it. Who would wait a month just to get one champion just to have another spawn in the midst.

The thing is that if a F2P game is doing it's job properly then the 900 point one (or w/e, been a long time since I played LoL) that is VERY VERY easy and fast to get is just as viable as the 6700 one, so choosing the 6700 one is merely a choice with no direct benefit besides being something different.
Not saying that it works like that always, but that is why LoL especially isn't and shouldn't be considered P2W. It is your choice to buy the most expensive champion, and with it you are choosing to invest the time into getting it. They design their system on the assumption that the vast majority of players won't pay cash to get a champion, so they sell outfits for all their champions that do nothing but make you more unique.
That goes for all well designed F2P games. You should never have an advantage over someone simply because you paid cash for something that they either A) Couldn't acquire by playing the F2P model, or B) They made it so restrictively time consuming to compete that you cannot realistically do it without paying.

If a game were to release a Sword of Awesome (500 dps) for $5, and a Sword of Kick-Ass (500 dps) that you have to do a quest chain, pay x amount of in-game currency, and farm up some difficult mats to craft; It would be a personal choice if you were to decide that the time spent farming wasn't worth it to you.
If however they released a Sword of Coolstuff (500 dps) as the only alternative to the $5 one that would take you 1000 tear drops (that drop 1 per run) off some boss in an instance to craft a gem that begins the quest like the Sword of Kick-Ass one then that would be classified as P2W IMO, due to being specifically designed to be so time consuming that no one would do it.

As others have said, I MUCH prefer a P2P method to F2P, because P2P games shouldn't really be selling anything in their cash-shops that would be an impact on yours or other player's experience of the game. I would much rather just buy a game like GW2 and have everything available to me that will affect my game experience than play a F2P game that I need to keep throwing small amounts of money at in order to have the same experience.

F2P should really only be a demo like WoW's Free Unlimited Trial IMO. Shows you the game world, how the combat feels, the mechanics, and let's you decide if you want to play or not.

---------- Post added 2012-08-05 at 01:02 AM ----------

what I don't like is the fact that instead of no sub, they are charging you £20 extra up front as retail.

Where do you see that? I bought my copy for $44, that is about $16 LESS than a AAA new release title at retail.

[Edge-]

F2P should really only be a demo like WoW's Free Unlimited Trial IMO. Shows you the game world, how the combat feels, the mechanics, and let's you decide if you want to play or not.

Trials like that are HORRIBLE for showing you how the game really is though. WoW or Rift at 20 is NOTHING like it is at max level. Sure you get some of the basics, but there is so much that you will have no idea about by being capped at that low level. If anything, I think TERA did it the best with their streaming trial that gives you a mid level character. Gives you much more of a fell for how the game will play at high(er) levels compared to WoW or Rifts trials.

[Jeina]

I have played just turbine game, but I can tell you the "you don't have to pay a dime" is hardly the truth. Yes you can obtain the currency by playing. BUT there is a limit to it. There is finite amount of lotro points you can get via playing, it is about 6k points. These 6k points won't help you get even 20% of what is in store. And btw it takes abnormal time to even get those 6k points, more reasonable expectation is to get around 4k points by playing.

The difference with LOL is, in LOL you are getting store currency nonstop, there is no limit how much you can get by playing.

tl:dr In LOL you can get everything for free, in lotro not.

Actually, with LOTRO, you just create multiple characters on the same account across various servers and grind out all the TP you can, then you either purchase quest packs to grind more, or you delete and start over with other characters to grind out more TP. If you were patient, you could grind out enough TP to purchase all content available.

[Zenotetsuken]

Trials like that are HORRIBLE for showing you how the game really is though. WoW or Rift at 20 is NOTHING like it is at max level. Sure you get some of the basics, but there is so much that you will have no idea about by being capped at that low level. If anything, I think TERA did it the best with their streaming trial that gives you a mid level character. Gives you much more of a fell for how the game will play at high(er) levels compared to WoW or Rifts trials.

meh IDK, I know if I am interested in a game in the first 20 levels or not. I just meant in general though that a trial or extended demo like that is better to me than a fully F2P game that has some of the best parts ripped out and sold in the shop as premium content, but you don't realize how important they are until you get to the point where they become important. I would much rather have the full game to a certain level (obviously with some restrictions to help stop gold spammers and whatnot) to tell me if the game is worth buying, or subbing to.
A game's controls are a big deciding factor for me, if I can't enjoy how combat feels I can't enjoy the game.

[Pickynerd]

Only reason people think F2P = P2W is because that is how it was originally delivered. A lot has changed since then, but if you don't know, you believe it as you do.

The world is flat.

[WillFeral]

It doesnt matter what format of a game you are playing if you want to win you can pay to get whatever you want,take World of Warcraft for example:Want the best gear in the game and clear all the content? Just pay a guild to carry you through w/e you want.Want a high rating in arena and if you are willing to pay the amount you can get Gladiator as well,just pay some r1's to carry to w/e rating you want or work out a deal with some people and win/trade.

Regardless of what game you mention you can pay and get w/e you want.