Poll on paying for games

[Midwayman]

In addition it attracts the dregs of society into the game. No, that doesn't mean every F2P fan must be an asshole, but when a game is literally open for all, you get all kinds showing up..

I don't know about the 'dregs of society' but f2p means no consequences for getting banned. So people hack and act like complete **REMOVED** in a way they wouldn't if getting banned meant shelling about for another copy of the game.

Hell even on paid games like BF4 every time EA decides to do a free access weekend, the experience get noticeably worse.



No cursing in PCG.

Anandtech Administrator
KeithTalent

 

[Craig234]

I don't know about the 'dregs of society' but f2p means no consequences for getting banned. So people hack and act like complete **REMOVED** in a way they wouldn't if getting banned meant shelling about for another copy of the game.

Hell even on paid games like BF4 every time EA decides to do a free access weekend, the experience get noticeably worse.

There's more truth to that for new accounts than accounts wit ha lot of value built.

 

[Sonikku]

Pay?

 

[blastingcap]

I'm curious of people's opinion - despite the market saying players like 'free to play'.

I prefer the subscription model.

Mainly because I don't like developers incented to do anything but provide entertainment - not to create artificial limits in the game players will want to pay for getting rid of.

It's funny - despite preferring the subscription model as an opinion, I have spent a ton on World of Tank's 'free to play' model.

I understand there are gray areas - some F2P do it better than others, and some DLC starts to resemble micro-transactions, but there's still a difference.

I don't mind having a mandatory charge; in fact I like it. I feel like free to play games have way too many immature people way too often. Yeah I know a kid can pay for a game and be obnoxious too, but every little bit of barrier to entry against those people helps.

 

[Harrod]

I really don't mind a micro transaction type of game, but then again, I don't go over board on it either. Case in point the game Hero's and Generals, I could probably play for several hundred hours to get to the sniper class to get a sniper rifle, but I don't plan on playing the game that long, while I do like the game, it's no Bad Company 2. So spending 8 dollars to get a gun that makes the game more fun is worth it to me, because I value my time more than that 8 dollars.

On another point, I've never viewed any online multiplayer game as win-able, so to me it's just about having fun.

 

[cmdrdredd]

I really don't mind a micro transaction type of game, but then again, I don't go over board on it either. Case in point the game Hero's and Generals, I could probably play for several hundred hours to get to the sniper class to get a sniper rifle, but I don't plan on playing the game that long, while I do like the game, it's no Bad Company 2. So spending 8 dollars to get a gun that makes the game more fun is worth it to me, because I value my time more than that 8 dollars.

On another point, I've never viewed any online multiplayer game as win-able, so to me it's just about having fun.

I've no problem with this. $8 isn't that big of a deal, and if it lets you have fun with the game why not right? The problem I have is people who play Candy Crush and keep buying more lives or whatever it sells and end up paying way more than a full game should cost. Where the game has a built in limitation on time, money, lives, ammo or whatever and you get to a point where you can't win and have to pay for more of whatever to get through that level.

 

[Midwayman]

There's more truth to that for new accounts than accounts wit ha lot of value built.

Sure, but there is a lot of smurfing. They have their real account they play nice with, and then create another to go troll and rotfl stomp the noobs. Part of the reason I dislike f2p.

 

[tential]

There's more truth to that for new accounts than accounts wit ha lot of value built.

For league of Legends people build up their primary account to a high level good rating, etc.
Then they start a second account.
Then a third.

From my brother who powerlevels accounts for cash he says it's extremely easy to win 15 games in a row or so and get from whatever tier you start at to gold 1. Then just leave the account there and smurf/troll games.

You have your main, but people who are long time players have more than 1 account at this point.
I personally don't but I also won't hide by actions behind a new account. Smurfing isn't something I really get

 

[Craig234]

For league of Legends people build up their primary account to a high level good rating, etc.
Then they start a second account.
Then a third.

From my brother who powerlevels accounts for cash he says it's extremely easy to win 15 games in a row or so and get from whatever tier you start at to gold 1. Then just leave the account there and smurf/troll games.

You have your main, but people who are long time players have more than 1 account at this point.
I personally don't but I also won't hide by actions behind a new account. Smurfing isn't something I really get

Ya, I think it varies by game. For example on World of Tanks, people get higher level accounts after thousands of games, and usually play with other higher level tanks.

Any of them could make a new account and troll low level tanks, but that's taking away from getting credit for their main account, making it more unattractive.

It doesn't seem to be a big problem, nor does it in Rift which occasionally has claims of someone doing that in 'general chat', but not much.

On the other hand, a lot of MMO's seem to have areas for newer players that are viewed as some sort of chat focused areas ('Barrens chat'), but not so much from trolling alts.

 

[Sulaco]

Pay?

Oooo, you pirate your games. Aren't you cool.:thumbsdown:

 

[Subyman]

Looking at the poll, its funny how the gaming industry keeps moving toward a business model hardly anyone likes.

 

[tential]

Ya, I think it varies by game. For example on World of Tanks, people get higher level accounts after thousands of games, and usually play with other higher level tanks.

Any of them could make a new account and troll low level tanks, but that's taking away from getting credit for their main account, making it more unattractive.

It doesn't seem to be a big problem, nor does it in Rift which occasionally has claims of someone doing that in 'general chat', but not much.

On the other hand, a lot of MMO's seem to have areas for newer players that are viewed as some sort of chat focused areas ('Barrens chat'), but not so much from trolling alts.

People who trolled MMOs in low level areas never bothered me in Lineage 2. You'd start a new character, and fully geared people would be camping low level areas killing newbies off. You'd teleport back to town and "Shout" to all people in town "Reds PKing in XYZ area, please help me, they have good gear to take!"
Next thing you know, people would come and fight off those killing off newbies.

Did it suck to get killed by a fully geared person at level 1-5? Yes... but I don't know, that was kind of the MMO part of the game to me. That there would be good guys and villains that were PLAYERS and not just NPCs. I was never a good guy. I wasn't an outright villain, but if I walked by you heading to my own farm area, I'd probably kill you just for fun. The risk of losing gear was a risk I was always willing to take to start some drama. Especially if you were on a big competing clan. MMOs just aren't fun without a good guy and a villain and some competition.

MMOs now a day though are just a farm fest to kill NPCs or an "Arena fest" which I find boring. Real world PVP should be the focus of an MMO and finding ways to constrain the game to force people to fight for resources should be a defining point of game creation for an MMO. For "Quests" the world should be big, but the end game last 10 levels/end game of an MMO should be as small as possible to force conflict.

 

[tential]

Looking at the poll, its funny how the gaming industry keeps moving toward a business model hardly anyone likes.

This small group of people dislikes it. The industry as a whole clearly loves it. People want games to grow and want to be able to pay small amounts to make it happen.
We won't pay $100 for Halo 5 at launch, but we'll pay $60 up front, then $10 for maps, then another $10 for more maps, then another $10 for even more maps, and maybe another $10 for some custom outfits/weapons.

I was very happy to read a thread over on neogaf where people have stated that some devs are moving away from this trend. They'll charge you for the Weapons/Outfit/Player customization only now and are giving the maps away free in order to not fraction the playerbase.

The way I have currently seen it, games aren't worth it after the 3rd map pack sometimes. At that point, the player base has so many people with different portions of the game "unlocked" that wait times inbetween matches are long, certain friends you make only have certain map packs, etc.

Console games have pretty much lost me as a consumer due to the microtransaction model, but it's gained them a lot more consumers than it has lost them.

 

[TheSlamma]

Console games have pretty much lost me as a consumer due to the microtransaction model, but it's gained them a lot more consumers than it has lost them.

I think it's gained a lazy generation who can't run the mile in under 8 minutes who's lazy parents are cool handing over the credit card to their video game babysitters is what it is.

Sheep are well known to vote (with their wallets in this case) against their best interests

 

[Craig234]

I wasn't an outright villain, but if I walked by you heading to my own farm area, I'd probably kill you just for fun. The risk of losing gear was a risk I was always willing to take to start some drama.

You were a villain. What you describe is basically a villain. But a lot of villains try to say they're not.

 

[dud]

Looking at the poll, its funny how the gaming industry keeps moving toward a business model hardly anyone likes.

Agreed ... Yet people STILL continue to pay through the nose to play. As I've said before ... All you have to do is go to the WOT thread and ask how much people have payed so far to "play".

The last time I did it was amazing. Some had paid over $300 or more yet they staunchly defended this decision. I've played WOT for over 6 months (I was a late adopter) but as much as I like the game I would not pay for it. Why ... Because it is just not worth it to me.

 

[tential]

You were a villain. What you describe is basically a villain. But a lot of villains try to say they're not.

Killing enemy clans on site, irregardless if they declare war on you or not isn't being a villain. If it is, then I guess I'm a villain. I miss MMOs a lot lol

 

[Craig234]

Killing enemy clans on site, irregardless if they declare war on you or not isn't being a villain. If it is, then I guess I'm a villain. I miss MMOs a lot lol

He didn't say just enemy clans.

He said things like killing you, alone, just for fun.

 

[Craig234]

It's interesting. There's an independent RPG maker, mostly one guy, Spiderweb games.

For a long time, he published them, something like $35 each, bundles a bit less, rare sales that IIRC were something like 30% or maybe up to 50% off.

I waited years to get something then finally got one series one sale, but it was still like$75 for 5 games, plus hint books.

A bit later, he got on steam, and suddenly the same games on sale have been like $4 for the series.

So even if you want to support that model and buy those games, you can find it's hard not to feel a bit 'ripped off' sometimes, and wonder how much he can make at that price.

 

[tential]

He didn't say just enemy clans.

He said things like killing you, alone, just for fun.

Yes I'm aware of what I said. But I also felt you need to clarify at that point that everyone in high level areas is affiliated with some clan. You'd need the gear provided to farm it efficiently/without fear of retaliation. Except, I never cared about retaliation.
If they were going to call their whole clan to come protect them so be it. Wasn't like they would win anyway.

But ya, I'd also probably just kill if you if you were in my spot and I told you to leave and you didn't. Shiny weapons (high level gear) should be more than enough incentive to realize you're in a spot you're not supposed to be in. Loners usually got a warning first. Anyone who was in a guild/clan capable of getting something done? KoS.

But meh, I probably killed people just for fun as well. The top clan is also always the most hated clan anyway. Might as well give them a real reason to hate me other than "They take every single high level boss/castle in the game and don't leave anything left for us." Throwing in a "They'll kill you randomly too" is always a good one. Reading forum hate was so much fun... I miss those days

 

[njdevilsfan87]

Subscription any day of the week. Keeps the toxic community members out, the cheating to a minimum, and probably supports the game's long term development better. F2P models are probably too erratic with income (or should I say front loaded) to sustain themselves long term.

 

[norseamd]

Sheep are well known to vote (with their wallets in this case) against their best interests

http://www.anyclip.com/movies/gladiator/estimating-the-situation/#!quotes/

 

[Midwayman]

Ya, I think it varies by game. For example on World of Tanks, people get higher level accounts after thousands of games, and usually play with other higher level tanks.

Any of them could make a new account and troll low level tanks, but that's taking away from getting credit for their main account, making it more unattractive.

No point in WoT. You can hop in a low level tank anytime you want. Well unless they did something since I stopped playing to prevent experienced players being matched with noobs.

 

[Raduque]

While i pretty much prefer to simply pay once and get the full game with everything, if I enjoy a freemium game, I will pay for some IAPs. Two examples that come to mind recently are Pocket Trains and Skyforce 2014.

The first is a Transport Tycoon Lite-ish game focusing on simplistic trainset building. I bought Bucks and Crates about $5 of each.

Skyforce is a top-down vertical shmup. I paid $2 to go ad-free, and I bought a few thousand stars (I think $5).

Both games I have easily put as much time into them as I have for big-budget PC games... 30 hours, minimum. I feel I got my money's worth in both time and gameplay.

Note that I don't actually play MMOs that you have to pay for, except Eve. I still have an active sub of that one.

 

[Craig234]

No point in WoT. You can hop in a low level tank anytime you want. Well unless they did something since I stopped playing to prevent experienced players being matched with noobs.

The point being, if you get banned for abuse in chat, not wanting your main account banned.