MMOs: Is it time for the subscription-based model to go away?

[Sharuko]

I honestly doubt any gaming company got "free cash" around, and I doubt they do f2p out of goodwill. Blizzard will go f2p with Heartstone, heroes of storm and titan for completely different reasons, and it's not because of goodwill or that they plan on losing cash and profit tbh, did you really think otherwise?:P

Activision Blizzard had a lot of free cash lying around, I don't know how much of that is true anymore after they bought themselves out from Vivendi, but they had one of the the highest free cash margins of almost any company.

http://www.sfgate.com/business/fool/...ng-4370339.php

Not in terms of goodwill, I mean willing to take the risk of making a $150 million dollar game and going F2P. Blizzard can take a risk because they can assume their product will be successful financially because of their large build in fan base. If Hearthstone was made by a different company, I don't think it would have been even close to being as popular as it is.

- - - Updated - - -

This is exactly what I said earlier

Missed that, but agreed 100%.

[Vankrys]

some of you misunderstood the topic i believe.

the question is not "is it time for F2P based model?"

the question is " MMOs: Is it time for the subscription-based model to go away?"


i undestand reservation reguarding pure F2P model, but surely there is more option than pure subscrition model and pure F2P model.
What i hate with wow model, is the complete loss of access to my character if i don't pay the fee. It's like my character is held hostage.

I prefer the SWTOR model. If i wanna do serious PVP/PVE, i sub, if i just want to continue to play occasionally and keep in touch with game friend, i rever to F2P and still able to connect. Also like that i can purchase most unlock (number of character, operation pass etc...) with credit.

A buy once, play forever i like too, kinda like starcraft 2, fifa, guild wars 2.

So, as much as i am looking forward to TESO (loved skyrim to death), i don't want to have to pay a sub just to play with my avatar. I loved the skyrim model, my avatar is here for me to continue adventuring, even 2 years down the road.

[Edge-]

I did not talked about you specifically, but in any new MMO I see, 90% of the people(here, on massively, other mmo sites) say "I like it a lot, but I will not pay 13 dollar for it and I will wait for it to go f2p" and this usually is followed by hate comments and ironic comments like "the next swtor, call me in 6 months when it goes f2p".

I agree that most comments made like that are troll comments. However, there are actually a lot of legitimate points that can be made. I made the, "I'll wait till it goes F2P" comment about TSW, and was half correct (went B2P), just as I made it about Tera after unsubbing. Some people troll away and hate on everything, but there are strong arguments for even ESO or WildStar possibly going F2P within a year.

As for EQNL/EQN it is not out yet, all we know for it is some happy developer tell us how awesome their game is, as is the case for all MMOs last years. SInce when quality of a product is measured by their developer comments before even the game release?

Based on fansites...since pretty much forever : P

And the titan Business model is only rumor. The game has almost been abandoned and we may not see it before 2017-2018 and we are unsure about its business model...so I think is not valid to count it among the "quality games that launched as f2p".

No, it got brought back to the drawing board for a retooling of core elements. They pulled off people like scripters, artists, etc. who work on the game after the foundation has been laid, but kept on core designers and engineers. And I'm not claiming with certainty that it will be F2P, however why would the president of Blizzard say this

“We’re in the process of selecting a new direction for the project and re-envisioning what we want the game to be,” Morhaime said. “While we can’t talk about the details yet, it is unlikely to be a subscription-based MMORPG.“

if it was going to be subscription based? It's some reasonably strong evidence as to which business model it will be (F2P/B2P)

One side effect is that you won't see a lot of companies invest 150+ million dollars in F2P MMOs, B2P yeah, but F2P is too risky. I can see the Blizzard's of the world doing it because they have free cash lying around, but no one else. We will see MMOs with Neverwinter type production value MMOs, but we won't see the SWTOR's, WildStar and ESO's anymore.

If we never have another SWTOR, I think that will be a good thing. Can't speak for ESO or WildStar though, as we don't know how either will fare.

However, all the big publishers need is to see a big budget F2P game launched and be profitable, and then they'll follow suit. It's the same with subscription based MMO's. People saw what UO and EQ1 did, and started investing in some MMO's. Then you had Blizzard blow things up with WoW, and all of a sudden everyone wants in on the bandwagon. I'm not saying we need another WoW-level success, but having a F2P game do very well for itself and show that, "Hey, big budget games launched with a F2P model can be very profitable!" would create the interest from publishers.

[papajohn4]

I agree that most comments made like that are troll comments. However, there are actually a lot of legitimate points that can be made. I made the, "I'll wait till it goes F2P" comment about TSW, and was half correct (went B2P), just as I made it about Tera after unsubbing. Some people troll away and hate on everything, but there are strong arguments for even ESO or WildStar possibly going F2P within a year.

The only legitimate point I see is that the game is not good enough to justify a subscription, which comes down to my opinion about f2p games. There are not only haters and trolls btw, there are people who purposefully boycotaz games to force them on f2p. I could name few forumers but that would result to infract my comment. For example look at Wildstar megathread. There are specific people that write from page 1 and say how awesome this game is and how is their next awesome game, the game they were expecting so long... They also "attack" to people who have different opinion and say that the game is mediocre or bad. And then Wildstar announce their business model and the same people who praise the game for 100+ pages say that they will not gonna buy it and they will wait for it to go f2p!

I mean come one..is 13 dollar, a meal with a coca colla, a visit to a movie, ffs(I am not rich, I take 800 euro per month and have to rent a room, eat,pay the bills, e.t.c.). You will not support(not you specific) your awesome game, you will not play it immediately and you will hope to fail and go f2p? I am not hyped about Wildstar at all, but I will buy it/play it when it comes and hope to surprise me. Same for ESO. From the other hand, I don't like at all TSW and did not played it even when turned into B2P.

Also wanna say that B2P is not the same as F2P. In b2p there is an entry barrier and company plan to sell lot of boxes, so there is a guaranteed income for the company in order to plan their investment. And shops on B2P games are usually much better from F2P.

No, it got brought back to the drawing board for a retooling of core elements. They pulled off people like scripters, artists, etc. who work on the game after the foundation has been laid, but kept on core designers and engineers. And I'm not claiming with certainty that it will be F2P, however why would the president of Blizzard say this

Maybe it is going to be B2P, or Pay per Hour(I think this how it is in Asia), who knows Also I think there is a special situation here. Blizzard already have 1 subscription game that is also very very successful. Why to push out a second one and compete with their self? They would lose many subs from wow. Maybe the will offer a Battle.net sub that will include both games? anyway, I guess we have to wait and see...

[Edge-]

And then Wildstar announce their business model and the same people who praise the game for 100+ pages say that they will not gonna buy it and they will wait for it to go f2p!

I think WildStar looks great, and I've praised the game for it. However, from what I've seen I don't think it's worth a subscription. The same thing happened to me with TSW. Loved the concept of the game and wanted to play it, but didn't feel it was worth the subscription. I was under the impression that WildStar would have some form of B2P model given Carbines early statements about a "model we've never seen" and a "hybrid model" etc.

I'm one of those people who will wait it out to see how it does, and if it goes B2P/F2P will gladly jump in and play the game. I'm not boycotting it or anything because I want it to go F2P/B2P, I just don't feel it's worth a sub. There are plenty of others who share the same opinion.

I mean come one..is 13 dollar, a meal with a coca colla, a visit to a movie, ffs(I am not rich, I take 800 euro per month and have to rent a room, eat,pay the bills, e.t.c.).

It's all about the maximization of self interest. I might be able to really enjoy that meal with a coke compared to whatever I have sitting around in my kitchen. I might not be able to get enough additional enjoyment out of the $15 a month I spend on it compared to the enjoyment I could get in a game that I don't have to pay $15 a month to play. It has nothing to do with how expensive the subscription it, but rather what is being delivered by it compared to what you can get elsewhere for free or for less.

Also wanna say that B2P is not the same as F2P. In b2p there is an entry barrier and company plan to sell lot of boxes, so there is a guaranteed income for the company in order to plan their investment. And shops on B2P games are usually much better from F2P.

Considering we only have 3 B2P games out right now (GW1, GW2, and TSW), we don't really have too huge of a pool to compare to the dozens and dozens of F2P cash shops. B2P games do have the initial box price barrier, but it's a very low one because it's a one time fee, the same fee that all P2P MMO's have too. However box sales are hardly what B2P games rely on, the cash shop is what drives longterm revenue and success for the game, just as it does in F2P games. I think on average, the higher quality F2P games have cash shops that are pretty similar in terms of structure to what you find in GW2 or TSW. That's just me though.

Maybe it is going to be B2P, or Pay per Hour(I think this how it is in Asia), who knows

I mentioned it could be B2P as well : P

And pay per hour...yeah but no. The last pay per hour game I can think of in the West was Neverwinter Nights, and that was 2 bucks an hour. There's no way that business model is being revived in the West. I can't think of another mainstream service that uses anything like that.

Blizzard already have 1 subscription game that is also very very successful. Why to push out a second one and compete with their self?

The simple fact that it's another MMO means its in competition with WoW on a certain level. The only way to mitigate how competitive the two are is to make is a dramatically different style of game in a very different genre. F2P and P2P games are in direct competition with each other in trying to get peoples time and money, business models don't change that competition.

Maybe the will offer a Battle.net sub that will include both games?

Possibly, something akin to SoE's Station Pass (which is a fantastic deal if you play more than one of their games).

[Eroginous]

I think WildStar looks great, and I've praised the game for it.

It looks great, as in the art design is great, but I'm not sure it's going to win me over in the combat/game play department.

I haven't had a chance to play it yet, but I can definitely say I won't be buying the game before I get a chance to try it.

[papajohn4]

It's all about the maximization of self interest. I might be able to really enjoy that meal with a coke compared to whatever I have sitting around in my kitchen. I might not be able to get enough additional enjoyment out of the $15 a month I spend on it compared to the enjoyment I could get in a game that I don't have to pay $15 a month to play. It has nothing to do with how expensive the subscription it, but rather what is being delivered by it compared to what you can get elsewhere for free or for less.

That make sense. Since you have no fundamental problems with the f2p games (I have for example, I try to avoid them for my reasons), then your strategy makes sense.

Considering we only have 3 B2P games out right now (GW1, GW2, and TSW), we don't really have too huge of a pool to compare to the dozens and dozens of F2P cash shops. B2P games do have the initial box price barrier, but it's a very low one because it's a one time fee, the same fee that all P2P MMO's have too. However box sales are hardly what B2P games rely on, the cash shop is what drives longterm revenue and success for the game, just as it does in F2P games. I think on average, the higher quality F2P games have cash shops that are pretty similar in terms of structure to what you find in GW2 or TSW. That's just me though.

I think the difference is huge(my opinion). Having to maintain server for 100 people and all of them have payed you 50 euro at least is huge difference from having to maintain servers for 200 people and hope that the 10-20 that will spend will put in the game enough to cover the rest...not to speak about the production cost that need to be recovered. And you still have the game shop as b2p without being desparate to make all the money from it and start selling things that may not be welcomed(hotbars for example...). so yes, I think the difference is pretty important for the developers

I mentioned it could be B2P as well : P

I probably missed it then

And pay per hour...yeah but no. The last pay per hour game I can think of in the West was Neverwinter Nights, and that was 2 bucks an hour. There's no way that business model is being revived in the West. I can't think of another mainstream service that uses anything like that.

Yea 2 bucks per hour is way too much..I really don't know how this payment model settled on the East...but I am also not fan of it, I just named it as an existed business model

The simple fact that it's another MMO means its in competition with WoW on a certain level. The only way to mitigate how competitive the two are is to make is a dramatically different style of game in a very different genre. F2P and P2P games are in direct competition with each other in trying to get peoples time and money, business models don't change that competition.

Because you can have a subscription running to one game and play the other for free. Sure, I don't say there is zero competition, but I think the competition is low. I don't think that wow subscribers does not play at least 1-2 f2p games at the same time, because well they are free...but I doubt many of them will play wow and Final Fantasy at the same time. Same goes to players of FF..they may also play some f2p, but not wow. There are some rare occasions that some people may indeed play both FF and wow (me for example ).

Possibly, something akin to SoE's Station Pass (which is a fantastic deal if you play more than one of their games).

I wasn't aware of it to be honest, but yes I bet it is fantastic Who knows, maybe in the future we see something even more advanced...like "playstation Plus" program for MMOs! You pay a yearly subscription and enjoy a group of MMOs with no in-game shops, or with shops with truly "only vanity" items.

[Deleted]

Im fine with paying a monthly sub, and that comes from some1 playing like 6-7 hours a week at most, who has been subbed for years. Surely better than p2w or paying for every patch as for an expansion...no ty.

[Edge-]

I think the difference is huge(my opinion). Having to maintain server for 100 people and all of them have payed you 50 euro at least is huge difference from having to maintain servers for 200 people and hope that the 10-20 that will spend will put in the game enough to cover the rest...not to speak about the production cost that need to be recovered.

The box sales help, but they really don't do much in terms of longterm revenue as they're a one time purchase. The cash shop is what keeps the B2P/F2P games going in the long term. for both TSW and GW2, the cash shop purchases (and DLC for TSW) are far more important than box sales. Don't underestimate how much people spend in cash shops, because even if a comparatively small number pay compared to those that don't, they still spend a decent chunk of change.

And you still have the game shop as b2p without being desparate to make all the money from it and start selling things that may not be welcomed(hotbars for example...). so yes, I think the difference is pretty important for the developers

It's actually not that different. Cash shops in both F2P and B2P games are approached more or less the same. Yes, we all know SWTOR has a horrible F2P model that locks out basic features of the game unless you pay them, but it's hardly indicative of most modern F2P models. Check out DCUO, Rift, Aion and Tera if you want some of the decent cash shop models in modern F2P games.

Yea 2 bucks per hour is way too much..I really don't know how this payment model settled on the East...but I am also not fan of it, I just named it as an existed business model

Yeah, I'd love to know how it came about over there as well. I don't know nearly as much as I'd like about MMO's in the Asian markets, it's hard to find good information about it in the West.

Because you can have a subscription running to one game and play the other for free. Sure, I don't say there is zero competition, but I think the competition is low.

It's lower than it would be with a second subscription MMO, but it's still there. Both games are competing for player time, and if players are spending more time in the F2P game, then the time they spend in the P2P becomes "more expensive", in that they're getting less bang for their buck. There is an absolute point where people will cancel a P2P game if they aren't playing it enough, so that's where the competition comes in.

I don't think that wow subscribers does not play at least 1-2 f2p games at the same time, because well they are free...but I doubt many of them will play wow and Final Fantasy at the same time.

I'd be quite curious as to how many actually do play other F2P MMO's simultaneously. I know anecdotally, very few people I played WoW with played other MMO's at all, much less with any regularity. The time commitments were just too much for them to split time between multiple MMO's (I know I had that issue for a while, and still do to a certain extent).

I wasn't aware of it to be honest, but yes I bet it is fantastic Who knows, maybe in the future we see something even more advanced...like "playstation Plus" program for MMOs! You pay a yearly subscription and enjoy a group of MMOs with no in-game shops, or with shops with truly "only vanity" items.

No in-game shops? That's never happening. Hell, with the current generation of consoles (specifically Xbox One atm) we're seeing cash shops creeping into non-MMO's in a big way already. They're far too lucrative for companies to ignore. Vanity only shops, maybe, but I'd be surprised to see cash shops limited to just that.

Im fine with paying a monthly sub, and that comes from some1 playing like 6-7 hours a week at most, who has been subbed for years. Surely better than p2w or paying for every patch as for an expansion...no ty.

I agree it's better than a P2W game. But it's nice that there aren't really any big name Western F2P MMO's that are P2W : D

And as for paying for every patch, the only games I can think of that charge for non-expansion patches are DCUO and TSW, both of which equate out to paying less than $15 a month if you want the patches (and nothing if you subscribe to the game, as the patches come with the subscription).

[Deleted]

I think both models are bad but I still prefer sub based MMOs because I simply cant stand cash shops and micro transactions. Not only because of what they stand for but they usually warp the game around them because obviously developers want you to buy things from there so they try to make it visible, needed and as mandatory as they can get away with even if they try to avoid pay to win. Not only that but they kill immersion too.

Subscription on the other hand "forces" you to log in daily and for more hours than you might want to because it feels like youre wasting your money if you take breaks and keep it running.

I think a yearly sub(for a reasonably price) might work better though.. or subscription for longer periods or possibly something completely different even.

[RoninaThorstone]

There are specific people that write from page 1 and say how awesome this game is and how is their next awesome game, the game they were expecting so long... They also "attack" to people who have different opinion and say that the game is mediocre or bad. And then Wildstar announce their business model and the same people who praise the game for 100+ pages say that they will not gonna buy it and they will wait for it to go f2p!

By making it as simple as "good" or "bad" you are glossing it over to the point where it's meaningless.

I was far more lukewarm about the game, you mean wildstar I assume, compared to others.

In fact, I think I know who you are talking about and since he is my friend, I will lay out both our frustrations and why it can be both a good game and not fit a subscription model.

I think wildstar is a decent game. It has okay combat and pretty good PVE and fantastic crafting. It's questing, lore presentation, and vertical design with a focus on 40 man raiding being the top end game is pretty terrible. It all averages out to be a pretty good game (not the best, not the worst).

The problem.

They are going to do content cycles that will probably take a few months with the hopes that boss mechanic variability will keep things fresh between the time when they release a raid and finish developing the next one. This, in my opinion, is not conducive to a subscription model for so, so many reasons. First of all, you are taking 90% of your players money and investing it into content that only 10% of your players do. That's fucked up. Some argue that they will develop small group, solo, and smaller raid content along side of their 40 man raids but in order for the content to resemble the demographic breakdown they would have to do something like 2 20 man raids, 5 dungeons, and 12 max level ship hands for every 40 man raid. That won't be happening. Worse, the game is proud of how grindy it is. If I am paying for TIME playing, renting, in a game, I will not be spending it on an unpleasant grind. I did that before, when the MMO market wasn't very competitive, and I find that there are many more ways to play MMOs now and all are more fun than unpleasant grinds (pleasant grinds are the ones where everything you do adds up toward your goal and you have diversity in what you can do rather than having to go do a specific task like killing pirates or collecting silk). I could keep going on and on about how wildstar doesn't fit a subscription model but I don't want to detract from the subscription model topic.

If you are only going to come out with content aimed at a niche demographic every few months, then you shouldn't be asking for a subscription. You should either be F2P or B2P because otherwise you are just leeching the majority of your player base.

[papajohn4]

snip

I think you are asking way too much for 13 euro per month. You want the perfect game, that will release new major content every month and I don't know what else...while of course it is your money and only you have the right to value your money for what they worth and what they don't, I just want you to think your other entertainment activities (football match, Cinema, going out with friends for a beer, e.t.c.) see how much they cost and how many hours of entertainment they offer you and then you may find that you are asking way too much things from a game to justify the 13 euro/40+ hours of entertainment. Wildstar thread was just an example, the same happen for every game...I don't even remember myself the name of the people doing what I said, but I remember there were few. But as I said, is your money and is your decision.

I'd be quite curious as to how many actually do play other F2P MMO's simultaneously. I know anecdotally, very few people I played WoW with played other MMO's at all, much less with any regularity. The time commitments were just too much for them to split time between multiple MMO's (I know I had that issue for a while, and still do to a certain extent).

They are probably hardcore players that don't have time for the rest My anecdotal experience is the exact opposite though..all I know they are playing a second game, but sadly we all have a different second game...and I think this is what keeps in wow after all, because is the only game that we are all together...1 of my friends play Path of Exile regularly, me and another 1 we play FF. Other play lotro (and now after we seen Hobbit, he is going back to lotro for good now hehe) and our GM is playing swtor regularly...But truth is that we are not a "Hardcore" guild and we don't Aim very high...we just do a mix of flex/normal raiding and some bg

[Barnabas]

I don't think the subscription model should go away but if the cost per month was lowered I wouldn't complain. Regardless I rather just sub if I want to play an mmo. My experience with f2p mmos is that every company comes up with some kind of obstacle if you don't sub or spend money in their shop. So what's the point in not subscribing? So I end up with some broken experience somehow? No thanks.

[Vankrys]

I think you are asking way too much for 13 euro per month.

13€ a month is 39€ in three month, so about 1 full AAA game (GTA V was 38€ on amazon pre order).
Do you or should you get the equivalent of 4 GTA V games content in a year?

[papajohn4]

13€ a month is 39€ in three month, so about 1 full AAA game (GTA V was 38€ on amazon pre order).
Do you or should you get the equivalent of 4 GTA V games content in a year?

Will you play GTA as many hours as you play the MMO for 3 months? 100+ hours?If yes then 38 euro for GTA is well worth the money but doesn't mean that the MMO you play for 3 months doesn't worth it. And if you ask me, I prefer to pay 38 in three months for my favorite MMO that will play 100+ hours than buy a single player game that I will play alone and will not even play it for so many hours...There are few, very few single player games than can offer lot of hours of entertainment...

But the one does not contradict to the other. If you think that you will play the single player game enough hours so to make up for the money it costs then it is fine. I don't see how this makes the MMO subscription not valuable. You can also say, 3 visits to the movies with pop corn and a coca cola is 1 GTA, and numerous other comparisons...What this means? That you should not go to see a movie because you can buy GTA? Or Movies should be free to see on cinema? Movies does not worth their money?

You need to value each thing separate. And if you have to chose x instead of y because we don't have unlimited money, doesn't mean y is less valuable than x nor that x should be free because you chose y...I would take 3 months of a sub MMO any time instead of a single player game, so with your logic I must expect all single player games to be free or maybe I should pirate them in order "to administer justice"

[Remilia]

Will you play GTA as many hours as you play the MMO for 3 months? 100+ hours?If yes then 38 euro for GTA is well worth the money but doesn't mean that the MMO you play for 3 months doesn't worth it. And if you ask me, I prefer to pay 38 in three months for my favorite MMO that will play 100+ hours than buy a single player game that I will play alone and will not even play it for so many hours...There are few, very few single player games than can offer lot of hours of entertainment...

But the one does not contradict to the other. If you think that you will play the single player game enough hours so to make up for the money it costs then it is fine. I don't see how this makes the MMO subscription not valuable. You can also say, 3 visits to the movies with pop corn and a coca cola is 1 GTA, and numerous other comparisons...What this means? That you should not go to see a movie because you can buy GTA? Or Movies should be free to see on cinema? Movies does not worth their money?

You need to value each thing separate. And if you have to chose x instead of y because we don't have unlimited money, doesn't mean y is less valuable than x nor that x should be free because you chose y...I would take 3 months of a sub MMO any time instead of a single player game, so with your logic I must expect all single player games to be free or maybe I should pirate them in order "to administer justice"

Well, the last time I played WoW, I've probably played 1 hour for every 6 hour afk.
Also how much you play shouldn't really be indicative of your enjoyment of said game, especially with time gated MMOs. I've played Atelier Totori for 100+ hours and I loved it, same with Persona 4. I've gained countless hours (afk) in WoW and I don't find it all that great.

I'd rather enjoy something more than go through a game and be bored by it or hate it just because it can potentially garner more time.

[papajohn4]

Well, the last time I played WoW, I've probably played 1 hour for every 6 hour afk.
Also how much you play shouldn't really be indicative of your enjoyment of said game, especially with time gated MMOs. I've played Atelier Totori for 100+ hours and I loved it, same with Persona 4. I've gained countless hours (afk) in WoW and I don't find it all that great.

I'd rather enjoy something more than go through a game and be bored by it or hate it just because it can potentially garner more time.

Well I admit that MMOs have mechanics to extend your play-time...daily/weekly caps e.t.c. But also many of those "time sinks" are not boring and add to immersion..I for example, like traveling in virtual worlds, either by foot or ground mount while others find traveling a boring time sink...

But anyway, if you find yourself don't play too much, or worst, doing boring tasks that MMOs have as time sinks, then I agree you shouldn't pay/play it. But this is indifferent with the business model...would you spent your time in such a game that you don't really enjoy just because it is free?or you would spend your time on something actually fun? Because this is where it comes in the end...If we have fun with something we pay for it..if not, we rather spend our time on something more fun...time is much more valuable than money, especially from 13 bucks a month...

[RoninaThorstone]

But this is indifferent with the business model...would you spent your time in such a game that you don't really enjoy just because it is free?or you would spend your time on something actually fun?

Because having a high ratio of boring tasks to fun tasks is far easier to swallow when you aren't being charged based off time.

It's like when arcade games were designed to kill players at specific spots by requiring your to jump with only a pixel of space between not making it to the next ledge and falling to your death or... you know, battletoads. At a certain point, time sink + paying for time = insulting. I would feel much more comfortable grinding out something in a F2P game or B2P game than a subscription game because I don't feel pressured to maximize every minute so I don't feel like I am wasting my subscription time. Some time sinks are just total BS like the zigzag flightpath between the city and TLI. They couldn't just put in a direct path or a portal? No, they wanted to you spend time watching a kite take the least direct route possible so you would burn time. I am not going to pay to watching a kite drunkenly wobble around the land.

F2P/B2P grinds = I am choosing to do this.
Sub grinds = I am paying to do this.

The latter is irritating when it's not fun (and it's less fun when you realize you are paying to do it)

[papajohn4]

Because having a high ratio of boring tasks to fun tasks is far easier to swallow when you aren't being charged based off time.

It's like when arcade games were designed to kill players at specific spots by requiring your to jump with only a pixel of space between not making it to the next ledge and falling to your death or... you know, battletoads. At a certain point, time sink + paying for time = insulting. I would feel much more comfortable grinding out something in a F2P game or B2P game than a subscription game because I don't feel pressured to maximize every minute so I don't feel like I am wasting my subscription time. Some time sinks are just total BS like the zigzag flightpath between the city and TLI. They couldn't just put in a direct path or a portal? No, they wanted to you spend time watching a kite take the least direct route possible so you would burn time. I am not going to pay to watching a kite drunkenly wobble around the land.

F2P/B2P grinds = I am choosing to do this.
Sub grinds = I am paying to do this.

The latter is irritating when it's not fun (and it's less fun when you realize you are paying to do it)

From my experience though, F2P games have more grinds and time sinks in order to make you buy the boosts that skip those grinds or makes them more tolerable. But really, I think the whole thing is very subjective...for example I never felt pressure to play every minute in a sub game because I have paid it...I may have a sub and play 3-4 times a week for 1-3 hours and still feel that the money I put is worth the entertainment I get

F2P/B2P grinds = I am choosing to do this.
Sub grinds = I am paying to do this.

It seems that in both scenarios though you don't enjoy the grinds...the difference still is that in one case you pay something you don't enjoy and in the other you do something you don't enjoy but is free...is not about choice..because you have also chosen the p2p game..no one hold a gun to you to pay the sub. The whole point is to play something you do enjoy and if it happens to be free then you got a perfect deal...

[RoninaThorstone]

the difference still is that in one case you pay something you don't enjoy and in the other you do something you don't enjoy but is free...

no one hold a gun to you to pay the sub.

Yep, I don't feel like paying for something I don't enjoy like boring grinds, dull combat, and countless other time sinks like dalies.

And I don't pay.

If they expect me to pay, it would have to be less time sinks and more action.

- - - Updated - - -

It seems that in both scenarios though you don't enjoy the grinds...

Btw, I do enjoy grinds when everything I do is working toward it.

IE: Thumping, ARES, dynamic events, instances, raid events all grant exp, AMP, and resources in firefall. I can do whatever I want to do in that game and I am working toward whatever goal I have. It doesn't feel like grinding because I am just playing the game, doing whatever I want, but it is still working toward large grind based goals.