2917

I really don’t understand how anyone prefers being constantly solicited for cash and being treated as either an idiot, for overpaying for content, or as a pauper, for having crap compared to everyone else. That shit is more expensive unless you’re willing to accept compromises and less content, and encourages the design of wretched timesinks and constant discouragement to incent you to break out your wallet constantly. Paying for features and content is the worst thing to ever happen to gaming.

2918

I don’t think it will be a binary choice going forward for MMOs. Even now games with subscriptions still offer F2P-style in-game stores, and many F2P games offer subscription options. The cat’s out of the bag on the in-game store business model.

2919

I understand why publishers are happy to take hundreds and thousands, or even tens of thousands, of dollars from gamers who previously only paid $60/game (plus up to $15 /month while playing an online service) but it’s not something I’ll ever support, because it results in game experiences that are undesirable for me (timesinks, frustration by design, tedium, player advantages based upon money spent) and it creates a virtual world in which any immersion is constantly disrupted by real-world solicitation for cash. For the same reason I’d rather pay HBO a monthly fee than pay cable companies for network TV with commercials.

At least to date it’s been pretty easy to avoid games that constantly solicit cash, since the only MMOs I’ve been interested in have eschewed that model, and ios/mobile games with that payment model look wretched to me. Lord of the Rings Online is the only game that’s remained on my shelf, uninstalled, which I might have otherwise played if they didn’t adopt that payment model.

2920

The idea that the only two possible business models for a game of this sort are full box price plus subscription fee (and always $15 a month, for that matter) and full on Zynga-esque F2P cash-grab does not bear up to examination. Both of those models suck for very different reasons. Fortunately, there’s actually a wide spectrum of possibilities and I personally play at least four different games that have found a variety of acceptable approaches, such as GW2’s full box price plus entirely optional store that only sells cosmetics and minor conveniences, TSW’s similar approach with cheaper up front price but paid content releases, Path of Exile’s completely cosmetic cash store (and optional stash tabs), and Marvel Heroes’ “everything that’s in any way gameplay affecting either drops or can be bought with in-game currency or both”. None of these games are designed around timesinks, frustration, tedium or player advantages for money spent (well, they might have timesinks, frustration and tedium but only in the sense that any game that’s not perfectly tuned for your precise gameplay preferences might). And none of them make me feel guilty for spending a paid month without playing or raise a fiscal and psychological barrier between me and resuming play when I do feel like doing it.

And paying for content is the business model of the entire industry, or it was up until somebody got the bright idea of charging for time instead.

2921

Some of those same things can be said for subscription games. See skill gain in EVE, daily quest and associated reputation grind in other games, etc. All designed to stretch out dem subscription dollars. And to make it worse, I find I’m often paying $15/mo just for the privilege of having access to the game I already shelled out $60 for!

I’m not going to say that F2P can’t be implemented in shitty and predatory ways, but I think as I don’t bother with mobile games, I’ve avoided a lot of the shit that has helped form people’s negative perceptions of the business model. In my case, I’ve gotten far more for my money via F2P games than I ever have a subscription service. Let’s see, I played World of Warcraft for about 3 years or so, from release to a ways past Burning Crusade, then an encore for Cataclysm (buying WotLK when I came back). My quick back-of-the-envelope math tells me that cost me around $700.

Meanwhile, Steam tells me I have about 400 hours in Path of Exile, a game which I’ve never purchased a box, never been hounded to shell out money for. I have purchased in-game currency but that was merely a way to support the devs. It’s a great game, and I’m happy to pay for a game that I enjoy, especially once that’s received multiple expansions and far more frequent content updates that WoW ever did. Path of Exile is kind of the cream of the crop when it comes to generous F2P systems, though, since pretty much the only thing you can buy besides additional stash space (of which they provide you ample amounts of, unless you play heavily) are cosmetics. So here’s another F2P game I play: Warframe.

Warframe certainly isn’t nearly as generous as PoE is, I’m not a huge fan of the model but I still prefer it over a sub. To play at the high end, you really need to install an Orokin catalyst/cell into your equipment (market cost would be around $2). These are permanent and can sometimes be found in-game, but if you’re playing around with a bunch of different weapons and warframes, you’re probably going to have to buy some (or farm items and trade them to players for in-game currency). What I did is after I’d sunk quite a bit of time into the game, I spent $50 to “buy” the game, which came with a big stack of in-game currency. I spent an additional $20 recently when I came back to the game after being absent for a while, during which time weekly or bi-weekly updates were continuously being rolled out, as well as 5+ major updates which added new tilesets, game systems, etc. I have over 400 hours in this game as well, but I’ve yet to run out of currency. If this were a standard subscription game, that amount of money would have only covered the initial 30 days and a single subscribed month, yet I’ve played off and on for a year and a half or so.

So… I guess the point I’m trying to make in a round-about and rambling way is that I just don’t get the righteous fury that people get when it comes to the F2P business model. I don’t think there’s anything inherently bad/wrong with the model itself, although I have obviously seen game developers roll out some extremely shitty F2P systems! As a consumer, though, I’ve just always avoided those and instead patronized those who I felt treated their customers fairly, weren’t obnoxious about in-game transactions, and provided great product support.

In all the F2P games I’m playing, I feel like I’ve gotten far more bang for my buck in terms of game support and development than I ever have for a subscription game. If I bought $15/mo worth of in-game currency in these games I’d have more money that I’d know what to do with. I’m not opposed to paying a subscription for something, but I better get my money’s worth out of it and not just access to the game server. The fact that the majority of subscription-based games have the gall to charge for expansion packs is what I think people should really be getting upset about.

2922

Saying F2P is crap and ruins gaming is being totally narrow minded. It’s all about how the system is implemented.

2923

I would say that subscription games don’t so much have their hand out requesting cash as buried firmly in my wallet. I’m not sure why the latter is meant to be preferable.

2924

Comes down to the business model influencing design.

Subscription-based games simply want you to keep playing. That can be both positive and negative. One way to retain customers is to entertain them, to offer a great product. Another is to addict them, to subject them to long grinds, to stretch out content well past the point it’s enjoyable. That’s why you might fight your way through the same dungeon 100 times in a row in a game like WoW.

B2P/F2P-based games want your money. This also can be positive or negative. Guild Wars 2 offer cosmetic and minor boosts in their item shop, and (this year) relies upon returning players paying for story chapters. Pretty positive. Negative, well, do I really need to explain how toxic and exploitative a F2P game can be?

2925

It comes down to people being short sighted and not able to calculate the ongoing costs involved.

2926

Pretty sure they all want our money. :) I do understand what you’re getting at, I’m just playing with words. What often makes the potential for subscription games worse for me is that their mechanism to extract cash from my wallet is time, and that’s the most valuable commodity I have.

I completely agree with you, though, it all comes down to how much of an impact the business model has on the design. I think it was during the development of DOTA2 that one of the Valve people said something along the lines of “We just make a fun game, then we figure out how we’re going to monetize it later”. I think that’s the correct approach to take. At the end of the day, I don’t care if you’re subscription based, F2P, or some mix of the two. All that matters to me is that the game is good enough to justify whatever business model they choose to implement.

2927

If it were a matter of which model were cheaper and nonsub-model purchases were actually required, that might be what it would come down to. In actual point of fact that isn’t necessarily the issue (it certainly isn’t for me), and those purchases are almost entirely optional. For games where paying for something besides content can reasonably be considered required, you’re probably better off not playing in the first place.

2928

Anyone else get “data load failure” all the time? What a piece of shit.

2930

I get it multiple times a play session after redownloading the client a couple of times so the redownloading/reinstalling is a red herring. No addons or anything.

2931

I’m sort of amazed that nobody else has done what CoH/CoV (my favorite MMO ever, darn shame it is gone) did – for each month you were subscribed you earned “veteran rewards” like neat costume options and such. It didn’t have to be a continuous subscription either, just the sum total of all of the months you ever subscribed.

2932

A bunch of other MMOs have done that, actually, if not in that precise style. TSW, for example, rewards veteran points each month that you can spend on various veteran-specific goodies.

2933

Oh my god. The quest hubs and story progression combined with the scenery and characters combine for mind-numbingly boring questing that make me miss Amalur. Man, if there’s anything that makes the generic and bland Amalur seem full of character by comparison, it’s ESO.

2934

So why are you still playing if you hate it this much?

2935

Sucking up to director-level boss at work.

2936

Thats great, because its pretty awesome to read your running commentary on the game.

2937

I respectfully disagree. Both Amalur and ESO quest are on the good side. If you want boring quest, try SWTOR.

From ESO I like the delivery, and that they don’t ask you to kill 20 “Angry Mercenaries”. Sometimes is 2 or 3, but often they invent some other excuses.

Amalur had a interesting lore, but if you are not one that are interested in lore, you would miss that part. Its like being blind to the blue colour (blueblind) and not understanding Picasso blue period because all canvas look empty to you.