Curse

Regulus X · Jul 22, 2009, 04:05 PM // 16:05

As the title implies, which is the better MMORPG Model of the two: Freeplay or Pay-2-Play?

I elect Pay-2-Play because it in turn brings incentive to the developers to try and keep their gaming fans playing for as long as possible by generating quality updates that're both effective and on time.

JR · Jul 22, 2009, 04:10 PM // 16:10

Both business models have their place. I think your question should have been: "Which business model do you prefer as a player?"

In an ideal world I would lean towards pay-2-play, for the same reasons as you: Giving the developer more money should translate into more content updates and better support.

Having said that, I very much like the ease at which I can pick up and put down Guild Wars, without having to worry about a subscription. If ArenaNet can make this model work equally well for Guild Wars 2 then I think they are going to be the clear leader in the F2P market.

Enon · Jul 22, 2009, 04:14 PM // 16:14

Both models have been proven to be successful and both models have pros and cons.
In my opinion neither is better than the other, mostly because of a huge number of external factors.

MithranArkanere · Jul 22, 2009, 04:42 PM // 16:42

I se no suggestion.

Free to play means that those that pay for the extras get advantages in the game, like experience scrolls or boosts.
Pay to play means that you have to pay monthly fees.

Both suck.

PAY ONCE is the way to go.
Worked for most Blizzard games, worked for all games with free servers I bought and works for Guild Wars.

Fabez · Jul 22, 2009, 04:45 PM // 16:45

1: X game requires a monthly fee to play, and you get any major content updates included with that package.

2: Y game requires a monthly fee to play, and requires you to pay an additional amount for any major content updates.

3: Z game requires no monthly fees, and you only pay once for the major content updates.

I realize this is a highly simplified (and perhaps not entirely correct) summary, but it serves for demonstration purposes.

My preference goes to option #3, as it allows for more casual gaming.

I second what JR said, being able to take a break without having to hassle with my subscription is bliss.

Ec]-[oMaN · Jul 22, 2009, 04:49 PM // 16:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regulus X

As the title implies, which is the better MMORPG Model of the two: Freeplay or Pay-2-Play?

I elect Pay-2-Play because it in turn brings incentive to the developers to try and keep their gaming fans playing for as long as possible by generating quality updates that're both effective and on time.

It doesn't promote that though in reality, especially for what Companies release as game updates and what they obtain in profits.

By nature the incentive to keep players around and paying to play is built right into MMO's. The perception of gain in items, virtual gold, levels and skills. Everytime you gain more there is less incentive to the player to stop playing the game because of the great perception of loss in a virtual world. MMO's are the biggest cash cows, and it's why so many of them have been made over the years, everyone wants a piece of that pie that seems to continually grow bigger.

Guild Wars vs any other P2P MMO is a perfect example, just look at the features ingame, how the game is built and what is it truly centered around? Right away Guild Wars has a low emphasis on item stats, armor, and low character levels, with the actual skills being used on a characters bar are of the greater importance. Now insert x title and tell me the same is true within x title?

*Darcy* · Jul 22, 2009, 04:55 PM // 16:55

Freeplay, because I won't pay FOR a game and then pay to PLAY it.

Xsiriss · Jul 22, 2009, 04:55 PM // 16:55

P2P is just for the money hungry pigs,no matter how frequently they update it,it's not worth close to £100 a year.They only need £5/roughly $8 a month from players,it's much more manageable and there would be a ton more people playing these P2P MMO's.I was so dissappointed that aion was P2P after rumours of a one off fee,if they need the money microtransactions are the way to go as it provides the option (like the BMP and 'one millionth edition).

As has been said,only the addicts/people with mass munnehs play P2P.F2P with microtransactions is clearly superior as it attracts all the casual gamers as well as hardcore,giving them the option of how much they want to spend on the game.

Aleta · Jul 22, 2009, 05:03 PM // 17:03

I have both.

Guild Wars

Runes of Magic

Free Realms

Everquest2

If I look at it honestly I"ve spent thousands over the past 4 years.

Having more then one acct for GW. Makeovers and skill/pet unlocks etc in GW. Diamonds in RoM, Station Cash in FR and EQ2.
Not to mention the monthly sub of $30 for Station access.

I don't think one is better then the other either. I like them all and EQ I like the best of them all but that's just me.

In effect I pay to play all of them because of micro transactions. But to compare content won't work because as someone said regular updates keep a person paying that monthly sub.

In the end I think it depends on your personal budget and what you are willing to spend. If that day comes for me I'll stop my sub.

SpyderArachnid · Jul 22, 2009, 05:12 PM // 17:12

Free to Play.

I don't buy a game, just so I have to pay for it every month. No game is that amazing that I would need to pay every month for it.

Unless of course, they made a virtual reality suit that puts you into your video game....

Clobimon · Jul 22, 2009, 05:14 PM // 17:14

This all depends on the company imo. I've paid approximately the same amount to play AoC in the last ~14 months that I've paid total for 4 years of GW with all content, CE's, extra slots, misc. The content difference is VAST! In no way, shape or fashion has AoC been worth the money I've paid for it at this point. The "funny" thing is that while GW(1) was ANet's primary focus they were far more involved, much, much more timely with updates, did hotfixes very quickly, have had annual and special events, and new content was on a set pattern. I actually find it rather amusing to see some complaints about ANet that are so very, very mild in comparison. It's something everyone should experience to get an appreciation for how good a job Arenanet did with GW and how I'm expecting them to handle GW2.

While GW isn't exactly f2p but more of a 'buy and play for free,' in this comparison GW's model wins easily. The best part is I can play now without paying a cent as much as I want until they flip the switch. I don't pay my $15 next month to Funcom and I can't log in starting the day my month runs out. Characters in limbo forever....

ShadowsRequiem · Jul 22, 2009, 05:18 PM // 17:18

Pay once like guildwars. I'd never want to play a game I would have to pay monthly for. GW has been out for 4 years so far which means at 15 bucks a month it would be around 720 dollars+the 200 for all 4 games. I've taken a lot of breaks from gw so free is the way to go.

Fay Vert · Jul 22, 2009, 05:20 PM // 17:20

Free Play doesn't work. GW has proved this by starting off free play but has now moved to the micro-payments model, which is very popular in mmos.

But there is no point asking the players which is best, the business model is down to the game company, and in either model there are examples of good and bad games.

So its not the business model that makes a good game, that just determines viability.

-Sonata- · Jul 22, 2009, 05:27 PM // 17:27

The model isn't much of a concern for me. The question I ask myself is, "Is this game worth what they're asking for it, if anything at all?"

Guild Wars, a buy to play, is worth it to me.

LOTRO, a pay to play, was worth it to me.

WoW, while not my cup of tea, I can understand it being worth the price.

Then there's games like Darkfall, or AoC, which are hardly worth it at all.

And while F2P games sometimes lack the luster and polish, there are some out there that are worth the HD space to play and have had long lifespans (example: Flyff)

As a few others have said; the majority of gamers are looking for high quality games and will pay for that quality if it applies.

Killamus · Jul 22, 2009, 05:29 PM // 17:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fay Vert

Free Play doesn't work. GW has proved this by starting off free play but has now moved to the micro-payments model, which is very popular in mmos.

Can you really consider GW a micro-payment game? I mean, they are there, but they have no real impact on the game. Anything that player1 purchases has no effect on anyone else in the game. No one loses out because they don't purchase something off the ingame store, whereas other micro payment games (CoD4, if I remember correctly) gives you an advantage over others who didn't purchase said item.

I really don't think that a new hairstyle really affects play, do you?

Jetdoc · Jul 22, 2009, 05:34 PM // 17:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fay Vert

GW has proved this by starting off free play but has now moved to the micro-payments model, which is very popular in mmos.

Luckily nothing that GW has offered in the micro-payment model affects game play in any material way. So drawing a parallel between GW and other MMOs that utilize a full blown micro-payment model is a pretty poor analogy, IMO.

Ravious · Jul 22, 2009, 05:35 PM // 17:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regulus X

I elect Pay-2-Play because it in turn brings incentive to the developers to try and keep their gaming fans playing for as long as possible by generating quality updates that're both effective and on time.

That made me rofl. You got it right up to "possible."

4thVariety · Jul 22, 2009, 05:41 PM // 17:41

As soon as people are expected to pay each month, or pay microtransactions, the whole gameplay is made slave to the business model. Stuff is taking forever on purpose, so people keep subscribing, interesting items are only available in the online shop.

I rather just buy a game, enjoy it and be done with it at some point.

Sadly, just as teenager believe in eternal love in Junior high, they also believe in that one game which is going to last for the rest of their lives. That belief is specifically targeted and exploited. In the end people pay more than the updates are worth. Save three months of subscription and you could buy Oblivion, or Fallout, or Mass Effect. Don't try to tell me some minor pay2play MMO update amounts to 1/10 of that.

distilledwill · Jul 22, 2009, 05:45 PM // 17:45

Ask me again when I've played Aion for a few months. That will be my first venture into P2P territory. Up until now its been all F2P stuff.

Painbringer · Jul 22, 2009, 05:47 PM // 17:47

Freeplay for me

Not saying there is anything wrong with the "if you haver spender" people out there

But i dont haver