Free 2 Play - What's it to you?

I wouldn't have understood the enjoyment people got out of MMO's without F2P. I started playing Star Trek Online and have really enjoyed it, I am now considering going into one of the subscription MMO's because of it. I haven't spent any money on the game yet I haven't felt as if it's hindered me in anyway. So for getting people interested into a genre of game I think it's great.

@whyareyoucrouchingspock said:

@jakob187 said:

Games like Tribes Ascend get it WRONG, where they allow the users to buy an advantage with real money. Sure, if people have the money to blow, you can't fault the company for offering the option. However, it means that someone just starting out could get everything they want right off the bat and just wreck on people in some cases. This does not equal up to "fun" when it comes to the game. It's infuriating, and you more often than not decide to quit playing rather than continue with it.

I disagree. Not everyone has dozens of hours to spend playing a video game. People work. Have children, wifes and other stuff to do. Paying with money instead of time seems incredibly fair.

For a someone with the time, they can simply grind and not pay a dime is they so feel.

1. After the Raid and Pillage patch came out, that is absolutely wrong. The weapons that came in that specific pack were incredibly overpowered, giving anyone that paid money a massive advantage over anyone who didn't. By all means, there are videos upon videos out there of people complaining about how Hi-Rez has done the same thing with Tribes Ascend that they did with Global Agenda: they've given the advantage to anyone who is willing to buy it. While I understand that hearing those words is a weird argument ("the company is giving an advantage to people who give them money, wah"), there has to be a precedent set somewhere, and I feel that games like League of Legends and Super Monday Night Combat are setting that standard incredibly high.

2. I work at a gaming center and I've seen the massive negative reaction to Tribes Ascend (to the point that we uninstalled it from all 40 of our computers and informed our iGames providers to take us off the list for any promotional materials for the game. I loved that it was "Tribes" as it felt exactly the way I had hoped it to. I just won't support a game that handles itself that way.

3. This whole excuse of "some people don't have the time" is nonsense. I work at a place where I see people every day that have kids & wives (some that also come in and play, some that don't), full time jobs, etc...and yet they all still find the time to play games of League of Legends and not spend real money. It's about balancing time. The owner of this store works 80 hours a week, has two kids and a wife, AND runs this business...and he still gets at least 8-10 hours a week in on League of Legends. He's never spent a single penny of real money on it. He's currently sitting on 102k IP (which is enough to virtually buy every champ in the game). Moreover...

4. People not having time to grind is the reason why XP boosts and in-game currency boosts are offered with real money. This should be the only thing available for real money that affects overall gameplay elements rather than vanity stuff.

So I'm sorry. I just can't agree with that at all.

@SeriouslyNow said:

@Sergio said:

@SeriouslyNow: I think those used to be games that weren't F2P. MMOs that started off with subscriber fees were already as balanced as the developers had in mind. When they shift to the F2P model, they generally just limit some of the things you'd normally get. I'm more referring to games such as Tiny Tower that became very boring to me unless I shelled out for their microtransactions so I can play continuously.

Firefall and Tribes : Ascend were certainly designed with F2P in mind and they do it right. Many other games will. And Tiny Tower?? Seriously? That's not an MMO. That's single player game made for rubes by a company who no interest in their customers.

F2P isn't exclusive to MMOs. It's any game that is essentially free and derives its revenue either through selling in-game items, whether it's a special hero, or game currency used to unlock other things, or through in-game ads. Like I said, I agree with the OP on most F2P games, in particular, the ones that are designed to be unbalanced to either force you to spend an inordinate amount of time or money compared to a more balanced game.

@Sergio said:

@SeriouslyNow said:

@Sergio said:

@SeriouslyNow: I think those used to be games that weren't F2P. MMOs that started off with subscriber fees were already as balanced as the developers had in mind. When they shift to the F2P model, they generally just limit some of the things you'd normally get. I'm more referring to games such as Tiny Tower that became very boring to me unless I shelled out for their microtransactions so I can play continuously.

Firefall and Tribes : Ascend were certainly designed with F2P in mind and they do it right. Many other games will. And Tiny Tower?? Seriously? That's not an MMO. That's single player game made for rubes by a company who no interest in their customers.

F2P isn't exclusive to MMOs. It's any game that is essentially free and derives its revenue either through selling in-game items, whether it's a special hero, or game currency used to unlock other things, or through in-game ads. Like I said, I agree with the OP on most F2P games, in particular, the ones that are designed to be unbalanced to either force you to spend an inordinate amount of time or money compared to a more balanced game.

Tiny Tower is a particularly well known offender. That was really my point. You can't complain about the F2P model when you bed down with one of its most well known and highly criticised whores. ;)

@jakob187: How people choose to spend their money isn't really up to you to decide. If you and your playmates don't want to spend money because you concentrate all your time on one game then that's up to you, many people like to spread their time between lots of different experience and some even just want to go for a ride rather than work a virtual slog. Support it or not, it's happening. Like it or not, it's happening and while you're happy not to spend money, many others are and they're the ones paying the bills. You could argue that you're providing population which in turns brings more people in and so you're important too and that's true, but a game with a huge audience and no cash flow is dead so ultimately, like it or not, you should appreciate the people who pay for your fun :) At least a little more than you seem to.

I don't like F2P, but I will try Hawken when it comes out because I love mech games.

Awful pricing structures mostly. 25 fucking dollars for a fucking costume in SMNC? That's more than that entire fucking game is worth. Until yesterday it had two maps for Christ's sake.

Personally I don't understand all the hate for F2P games. Tribes: ascend, Blacklight: retribution, Super Monday Night Combat, League Of Legends, World Of Tanks, Microsoft Flight, etc etc etc 
 
These are all great games that use a F2P model and don't fuck over the player while doing so. Just because some games decide to exploit the model doesn't mean it's bad, it's exactly the same for normal retail and iOs games.

Hey whatever I was playing Free to Play games before they were cool, I never had the money for World of Warcraft so I spent my time playing Runescape. You laugh but I had a great deal of fun playing Runescape, I have spent hundreds of hours playing and whenever I have an itch to play an MMo I will play that. I will say that Runescape offers a great deal of content for nothing, so if your looking for a free game go and play that.

Oh and then there was Club Penguin, free games rocked.

Runes of Magic was pretty damn fun when I played it, but I haven't for a long time.

So was Runescape for a time, but I haven't played very many other F2P games that interested me much.

Edit: So I guess, "Can be fun, usually doesn't interest me."?

TF2, DCUO, Tribes Ascend are all F2P and they all seem to be doing extremely well.

I can more understand people paying a one time fee for something in an MMO, than I can people who pay $15 a month for a game they already payed $60 for.

I prefer monthly subscription. With a free to play model, impulsive people can spend hundreds of dollars a month on a single game, witch really sucks for them, there spouse and children’s.

League of Legends is all I have to say

something to play for a weekend then never touch again.

at least thats every F2P game ive ever played

@AlexW00d said:

@BBQBram said:

@AlexW00d said:

@BBQBram said:

I don't play F2P games because I like good games. That's also exactly why I don't have any fears about social gaming, appstores or F2P stuff destroying core gaming; never gonna happen.

Because TF2 and Tribes Ascend and Dota 2 are all bad games? And LoL, that's f2p right?

There are good f2p games, just like there are bad full price games.

Agreed, but not bothering with them has worked out fine so far. There's definitely a lot more FarmVille-esque addictive shovelware out there than those admittedly quality games you mentioned, who more often than not seem to go F2P halfway during development because of a fear of failure or at the tipping point of sales like Team Fortress 2, where it made sense to go F2P to get a double whammy out of it, profits wise.

Shitty retail games I tend to ignore as well, it's just that F2P isn't even on my radar. But it's a pet peeve as well; I hate the idea of constant in-game microtransactions to get the "complete experience", especially in those cases the OP was talking about where it's not even a fair or balanced game without paying for power or resources.

I tend to blurt out high horse statements to see who actually cares to read the thread instead of immediately posting, it often results in actual discussion which is much preferred to five pages of one-liner opinions no-one reads.

Everything you say I agree with to be honest, except I don't ignore f2p games. Most of them are shitty absolutely, but most retail games tend to be shitty. I dunno. If a game is of interest to me, I won't ignore it solely because of f2p, but I will probably be more cautious.

I also have the collector's spirit which doesn't care for games that are more like services instead of products I can own and display on my shelf. Nonsensical I know, but that's the way it is.

League of Legends handles its model extremely well. Spending money gives you no real in-game advantage and you have to grind out your runes like anybody else (notwithstanding purchasing an IP boost to make that grinding easier). Where they get you is on champions and skins basically, as all of the more awesome newer champions cost far more in-game currency than the ones that have been around since launch and thus require far more time spent to earn.

And of course, there's the conspiracy that they make their new champions slightly overpowered when they are released as an incentive for people to buy them. Considering how many times I've seen Varus, the most recent and undoubtedly kinda OP character, I think it may be true.

Tribes: Ascend is the most fun I've had in an FPS since UT2k4 and Path of Exile is shaping out to be great, I have no problem with the model. I hope the PoE devs find success without resorting to the pay-to-win methods they so proudly claim to loathe.

There's a right and a wrong way of doing everything, I don't see why anyone should outright dismiss f2p games.

League of Legends is a good free to play game, besides that I don't really care for them because I know they are just going to lock me out of content that will ruin the experience but won't be good enough to actually get me to pay for it