105 replies to this topic

[Adridos]

Argie, on 15 August 2012 - 06:37 AM, said:

Most of these comments come from shell shocked players from c&c franchise and age of empires.

The whole fear of the "pay2win" has really strong roots. But since League of Legends was brought up to light as -the- example on how to do a free 2 play game I think people need to update their fears to other things..

You know, AoE:O was made later than LoL. And it was made by Gas Powered Games, which had small chance of geting it P2W and yet, they managed it (probably M$, not their fault).

And now, when we are sure we will never see any normal C&C again....

[Ranger207]

My problem about the new C&C is EA's F2P model. "Money for us! Don't listen to the people who have bought past games, let's make it so everyone likes it!" If you try to make everyone like it, some people will hate it, some people will like it, and most people will say "Meh."

In BattleTech, I've got a feeling that EA would either be Lyran (for the money) or Cappie (for the "fail, everyone hates you").

[JFlash49]

Dr Killinger, on 15 August 2012 - 05:06 AM, said:

Have they been exposed to too many cheap pay-to-win iOS games?

Probably

[Adridos]

Ranger207, on 15 August 2012 - 07:24 AM, said:

In BattleTech, I've got a feeling that EA would either be Lyran (for the money) or Cappie (for the "fail, everyone hates you").

No, they are the WoB.

Come in, ruin it for everyone and not only in-universe, but also in real-life.
Every single franchise under those ******** turns into new Dark Age House Marik.

Edited by Adridos, 15 August 2012 - 07:41 AM.

[Drewsie]

tyrone dunkirk, on 15 August 2012 - 06:39 AM, said:

... I like Tribes Ascend...

I do too. I'm currently playing that as well as WoT, which I find to be very fun and am actually spending most of my gaming time playing it.
I have nothing against F2P games, but like others have stated I do enjoy having a hard copy of something for my collection.

[Arisaema]

Dr Killinger, on 15 August 2012 - 05:06 AM, said:

PC Gamer just reported on C&C Generals 2 being F2P:

http://www.pcgamer.c...-and-price-tag/

...and reading the comments, people are angry. Very angry. One even commented angrily towards MWO, without really substantiating his anger. Why are these people so against F2P? Granted, EA will probably make an absolute mess of the game, and even if they don't, it's incredibly fashionable to hate EA at the moment, so people will do everything they can to pull the game under.

Is the general gaming populace just not familiar enough with the F2P model yet? Have they been exposed to too many cheap pay-to-win iOS games?

Yes, the Pay to Win games are giving F2P a bad name now. There are some games where you have to spend real money to get anywhere and that is ******* people off. As my tag shows, I've dropped my $120 into the game expecting something good and it turns out that I think it will be something great.

As long as Pirannah can keep a good middle ground between what I need to spend real money on and what I need Cbills for that is fine with me. I don't care if someone want's to buy their mech stable with real money becuase that's the way the game works. I in a sense have done that by being a Legendary Founder, as have all the others that have put money down before they even saw the game.

[Perigren]

tyrone dunkirk, on 15 August 2012 - 06:39 AM, said:

... I like Tribes Ascend...

I loved Tribes2 and Vengeance despite most peoples feelings about it, I had high hopes for Ascend but it failed to capture my attention past release.

[Bansheedragon75]

Dr Killinger, on 15 August 2012 - 05:06 AM, said:

PC Gamer just reported on C&C Generals 2 being F2P:

http://www.pcgamer.c...-and-price-tag/

...and reading the comments, people are angry. Very angry. One even commented angrily towards MWO, without really substantiating his anger. Why are these people so against F2P? Granted, EA will probably make an absolute mess of the game, and even if they don't, it's incredibly fashionable to hate EA at the moment, so people will do everything they can to pull the game under.

Is the general gaming populace just not familiar enough with the F2P model yet? Have they been exposed to too many cheap pay-to-win iOS games?

The problem is not with the F2P nature of the game itself, but rather the fear that players have that the devs/publishers will be so greedy that they will put things into their RMT shops which are only available there and gives distinct and even significant advantages to those who can afford it.
While those who cant afford it either feel pressured into using money they dont really have or leave the game which they enjoy playing because they dont stand a chance against those who can afford to buy an advantage.

And I can understand peoples concerns with a greedy company like EA involved in this.
All EA cares about is their profit margins, and they will probably do whatever they can to increase that, not caring about how it affects the gameplay.

Edited by Dragonlord, 15 August 2012 - 08:45 AM.

[Arikiel]

People are freaking out about everything. It's just the way of the internet forum. Like why are Legendary and Elite Founder banners yellow and orange? Are they trying to imply Davion is best? Omg! They love Davion and hate all the other Houses. ***?!?! Whyyy?????

[TLBFestus]

My personal axe to grind;

Look at Battlefield 3 and what the jackalopes at EA are doing with it. I paid for a complete game, was even given bonus content, "Back to Karkland" for free when it was released for buying in early.

Then they come out with new DLC, which creates "premium players" and they want me to pay for "Back to Karkland" even though I had it already.

That was enough for me to want to believe in a FTP game, because I can spend as little or as much as I feel like on it (obviously I've spent some already). BF3 made me feel I had to spend the money to be successful.

I have faith the MWO won't trend too far in that direction.

[Morventhus]

eh im not upset with f2p games mostly but the change with C&C is huge... since they are getting rid of the single player and the awesomely hilarioius bad acting cutscenes... plus alot of people played C&C games for the campaign.... andwell the C&C f2p game was supposed to be generals 2 which i was looking forward too... specially since it was going to be sooo politically incorrect just like the first one

[Death Metal]

because about 80% of the f2p titles out currently are nothing more than a spastic attempt at a money grab by the publishers,

[Grendel408]

I think it's like AlexEss stated... it's unfamiliar and a total change from the norm... people should understand F2P games from mobile devices and facebook of all things. This is different though, it much respects it's like playing a game bought in the stores (or on a client like Steam), but it's F2P and most people have come to believe that F2P means "pay-2-win" or get left in the dust.

The Devs for MWO are staying away from that trend, and I can vouch for that from my experience so far. The Devs are dedicated, intend on keeping the game alive over time, and make it fair for others not wanting to invest a little money.

EA on the other hand is bound to screw something up like C&C... they twisted BF3 to a point I really don't play it anymore, and I loved that game lol... MWO can go bad and I'd still play the game cause of my love for the universe and content of the games over the years

[Pika]

Dr Killinger, on 15 August 2012 - 05:06 AM, said:

PC Gamer just reported on C&C Generals 2 being F2P:

http://www.pcgamer.c...-and-price-tag/

...and reading the comments, people are angry. Very angry. One even commented angrily towards MWO, without really substantiating his anger. Why are these people so against F2P? Granted, EA will probably make an absolute mess of the game, and even if they don't, it's incredibly fashionable to hate EA at the moment, so people will do everything they can to pull the game under.

Is the general gaming populace just not familiar enough with the F2P model yet? Have they been exposed to too many cheap pay-to-win iOS games?

I don't think people are angry at the fact it's free 2 Play per say, it's the connotations it brings with it. When I say to a friend "Hey come play (Insert game here) it's free to play!" they curl their nose up a bit, and answer with "And have to pay to win? No thanks." No matter how much I try and explain to them that almost no games are Pay2Win these days, it will not sink in.

You also have to understand the C&C series appeals to a demography who are now so used to being violated by EAs money grabbing hands, and probably think it's Free2Play and then you'll be buying every new unit released rather than a full game with a paid expansion. DLCs and F2Ps seem to be the new cash cows, and I think the gaming community just wants it finished, released games with one payment and maybe a second for an expansion to come back.

[Egomane]

Dr Killinger, on 15 August 2012 - 05:06 AM, said:

Is the general gaming populace just not familiar enough with the F2P model yet?

I believe it is because, all formerly good solo-player game series now become some multiplayer free to play franchise. If you want to play with your friends in an adhoc LAN-party, you can no longer play without an internet connection and everyone having an account on the different company servers you want to play the games of.

If you want to play the newest title of a game series you are a fan of for the singleplayer part, you are forced to become part of a community, if you want to or not. You can chose not to participate but you will inevitable get contacted by someone who wants to join ther group/clan/guild/whatever. You no longer get a story that will guide you through the game or any other incentive.

Don't get me wrong. I think free to play is a great concept, but it does not need to be applied to any and all games that are.

[Lin Shai]

Death Metal, on 15 August 2012 - 09:16 AM, said:

because about 80% of the f2p titles out currently are nothing more than a spastic attempt at a money grab by the publishers,

No, really ... This.

Most of these "free to play" games are set up so that they get some money out of people who wouldn't even think of paying $15/mo for a game, and more money out of people who were happy to pay them $15/mo in the past.

If you're not really into the game ... great deal. If it's a title you really like, it just got more expensive. The problem is that on the final balance sheet, this makes the game company more money. If that weren't the case they'd have stuck with the old subscription model.

Edited by Lin Shai, 15 August 2012 - 09:31 AM.

[DarkBazerker]

I remember when the only free to play online games was the ones made by one or two people which looked alot like they where made in the 1990's. Those games didn't have item malls or cash shops. Oh you could donate but you didnt get anything in return. It was a level playing field.

Now we have these free to play games made by companys like areia games inc, potato inc, perfect world inc the list goes on. All of these compays take a working game and break it, then sell the temporary fixes to the players for a high premium. One could easily spend thousand of dollars a year on any one of these games.

Bottom line is, no game is worth paying thousands on.

As far as MWO goes. They can charge for alot of things with out hurting the core of the game. Mechwarrior is all about customizing your mech to suit you and reflect what you like to do, or atleast that what i come to believe. With that thought in mind things like new paint colors, patterns, logos can and will sell. If PGI makes MWO so that you have to have a premium account just to buy better parts, or play in different areas then no thank you.

I have already made it a point not to play anymore F2P games anymore I'd been burned to many times. I did come back for MWO and I hope i made the right choice.

[xxx WreckinBallRaj xxx]

cipher, on 15 August 2012 - 05:17 AM, said:

F2P is the future of gaming. It's a two-way contract that works better than subscription models. Developers and publishers generally make more money from F2P. And in turn it holds the developer responsible for adding content more frequently to keep people buying new virtual items/services.

As for people freaking out about it, I guess they don't see that there are VERY FEW subscription MMOs left. Most of them switched to F2P (and no, it's not a mark of failure) or some blending or hybrid of F2P and subscription/initial purchase.

They do NOT make more money off of F2P unless the game is failing. This is why many games try to start out with a monthly, FAIL, then convert to F2P and finally end up on Steam. But Piranha is making it F2P right off the bat; which might be the way to do it. That sure worked for GW1 and is carrying over to GW2.(You do have to pay for the box but after that; it has no monthly. It's a 1 time fee for unlimited access and pretty much all game content and that's how I like it.)

[Tyrnea Smurf]

Free to Play is the online gamers equivalent to a drug dealer passing free samples to get a mark hooked. Once the mark likes his new drug he will begin to pay for that which was first offered free just to taste. Some will try it and not like it, others will only have a passing interest before something else wonders by, but for a certain segment of the population, 'gentlemen start your engines' seems to capture the moment even if it isn't a male behind the keyboard .

On the idea that f2p = p2w, every game ever designed is a p2w. You either pay with time or your wallet, some games are just more upfront about the situation.

The current f2p system has 2 versions I have noticed,

#1: a sub based game converting to a 'free' model where you get to try out say the first 20% or so of the game as a teaser with a store model to unlock features/content that would be included in the sub if you payed it. Turbine's Dungeons and Dragons Online was the first to try this model, and later their Lord of the Rings Online went this way as well as DDO tripled its revenues after going f2p. LOTRO had greater success when it converted, and both I think are still the best sub/f2p system as turbine allows you to unlock EVERYTHING by way of in game earned Turbine Points (the store currency). It would just take you years to do so, which is why you whip out that credit card to buy TP to unlock content/goodies. Star Wars The Old Republic will try this version, however from what I have read so far, TORs attempt to f2p is nothing more than a desperate attempt to get some money before the horse dies and recoop some of that 200 million development cost. It might work, but I doubt it as the end game i'm told still stinks like a wet wookie, and they arn't investing any money to change that until f2p proves popular enough to justify additional expenditures.

#2: A game designed from the ground up to be a store unlock based game. Some are browser based even, tend tward simple graphics (MWO and a few others are exceptions to this rule, but there are hundreds of little cheap money suck browser games out there) and a more pvp system to keep AI development costs down. MWO looks like it is graphics wise the top dog in this type of f2p game, but I suspect most of us will shell out considerable dough in the store, not so much for any true advantage, but those goodies like expanded mechbay slots, paint schemes for our mechs for example.

[Stringburka]

Tyrnea Smurf, on 15 August 2012 - 10:04 AM, said:

MWO looks like it is graphics wise the top dog in this type of f2p game, but I suspect most of us will shell out considerable dough in the store, not so much for any true advantage, but those goodies like expanded mechbay slots, paint schemes for our mechs for example.

Is this the way it's going to be though? I've had it said to me that the only thing you'll get for cash is the extra xp/c-bucks. Is that incorrect?