Pay to play vs Free to play

• Cyrene wrote on 2013-05-25 14:30
  Which do you prefer.. I don't see why people say Pay to play is better, your still paying just as much. It doesn't really affect the game..( Example: when people say it affects the playerbase and brings in more mature players) But I mean if immature players can get on xbox live can't they do the same on any mmo?
  It really doesn't effect the quality, look at gw2
• Hitaki wrote on 2013-05-25 14:44
  I'd begged to differ. The reason many Pay to play games have a more mature community is because they mainly are composed of older people who can pay for their own games and do not have as many kids who beg their parents to pay for them. Not only that, but these people invest money into their computers rather than kids who often don't have the luxury of high-end computers and are satisfied with their consoles.
  
  You can't use xbox live as a comparison because that's a niche market for kids since it's aimed at console players. How often do you see a kid talking about World of Warcraft compared to a kid talking about Call of Duty? Neither do you see kids excited for the next MMO compared to their excitement for the next console titles.
• Hanna wrote on 2013-05-25 15:11
  as hitaki said there's a huge difference between p2p console vs p2p pc
• Campylobacter jejuni wrote on 2013-05-25 15:44
  Most kids I hear talking about games are talking about Minecraft still. Correction, all.
• Mentosftw wrote on 2013-05-25 16:55

  Quote from Pallie;1095381:

  Which do you prefer.. I don't see why people say Pay to play is better, your still paying just as much. It doesn't really affect the game..( Example: when people say it affects the playerbase and brings in more mature players) But I mean if immature players can get on xbox live can't they do the same on any mmo?
  It really doesn't effect the quality, look at gw2

  
  
  You're going to be spending a lot more in Free to Play games once you establish a feeling of investment in the game. While a Pay to Play game on average costs about 180 dollars per year to play (based on 15 dollars per month), you can just as easily find people in Free to Play games who spend just as much or even multiples of that per month. Free to Play companies market their games to be as addicting as possible (not that I'm saying P2P games don't) with the emphasis on very heavy grinding that can be partially alleviated by having the player purchase an item in the cash shop through micro transactions (such as exp boosters). Many F2P games also have what players call "Pay to Win" where exclusive gear and items can only be obtained through micro transactions while P2P games don't. It's a simple fact of the matter (and obvious one at that) that P2P games have content that all players have access to in game on an equal playing field.
  
  The biggest problems with P2P games and also the reason why F2P are so successful is because of the differing feelings of investment that players get from playing either types of games. In P2P games, players must pay to try out of a game that if they don't like, feel like they may have to play the remainder of the membership because they were stuck with it. Unless the game is really good, the player will not stay and if they leave, will most likely never return. However this is the opposite with F2P games. F2P games often market to players that everything in the game is open to them and that they won't have to ever pay a single dollar to play their game. While this is true, in most cases to be successful in the game, they WILL have to go through at least some sort of transaction to reach certain points in the game (and most likely is a large part of core gameplay). A player that plays a F2P game thinks that he or she can leave the game and return at any time that they want and thus there is a high chance that veteran players will return after a long hiatus from playing the game simply because they know that they can join it again at any time without risk.
  
  F2P games also play on the mentality of gambling where there are many high risk activities that the player can undergo in order to achieve a reward. This either takes the form of gear upgrading or in the literal sense of random item boxes (gachas in mabinogi). In the cash shop where most if not all games have some sort of system where gear can be upgraded, there will always be an item that protects your items from destruction or raises the chance of success on the upgrade.
  
  A lot of these marketing reasons is why people dislike F2P companies (namely their marketing) is because they take advantage of the insecurities, greed and patience of a player in order to make a further transaction.
  
  You can also see the success of F2P games severely impact P2P games as many change to the F2P system because they are losing so much of their playerbase. Just look at games like Rift, Star Wars the Old Republic, Tera Online and many others, they're all sharing a similar story where they lose a massive portion of their playerbase required in order to profit and are forced to switch to F2P just to see if they can continue to survive. Many new MMOs are also starting as F2P probably in hindsight of the success of F2P games and the decline of P2P games. Games like RO2, PSO2 and are new MMOs with high production values and they've started as F2P while their previous installment was P2P.
• RB2temp wrote on 2013-05-28 16:32
  F2P games are nicer when you don't have a lot of money because you don't feel like you're losing something if you don't play the game, whereas P2P can make you feel locked in like you're paying rent. Even if you can afford it, you feel like you "have" to play and have to do this and that while optimizing your time carefully because you're always on the clock.
  
  P2P games are nicer when you have a bit of money to waste because then that doesn't matter, and the fact that you can get everything in the game for a simple monthly fee is more appealing.
• RB2temp wrote on 2013-05-28 16:32
  F2P games are nicer when you don't have a lot of money because you don't feel like you're losing something if you don't play the game, whereas P2P can make you feel locked in like you're paying rent. Even if you can afford it, you feel like you "have" to play and have to do this and that while optimizing your time carefully because you're always on the clock.
  
  P2P games are nicer when you have a bit of money to waste because then that doesn't matter, and the fact that you can get everything in the game for a simple monthly fee is more appealing.
• Campylobacter jejuni wrote on 2013-05-28 17:33
  Please don't forget hybrid models, like City of Heroes was or Planetside 2 and Champions Online are, and I think World of Tanks too. There is no either or in business practices, only on weblogs. Or, well, forums.
• RB2temp wrote on 2013-05-28 17:51
  If something has a mandatory monthly subscription to play, I consider it a P2P game.
  
  If something has an unnecessary monthly subscription to play (like Runescape), I consider it primarily an F2P game so long as it would be reasonable to stay an F2P player for a long period of time. Trials that only get you to level 10, for example, I'd probably throw in the P2P category.
• Mentosftw wrote on 2013-05-28 17:53
  ^ That cannot be used as the full definition anymore.
  
  Look up Wakfu, that is a subscription based game where you need to pay on a monthly basis to unlock 90% of the game and there is a cash shop at the same time where you can buy exclusive cosmetic (and some gear) with a cash shop currency that has to be bought with real money.
• RB2temp wrote on 2013-05-28 17:56
  Runescape is a game where you have to pay (on a monthly basis, at that) for 90% of the game. It has a cash shop, too.
  
  It's inherently subjective. "Play for a reasonable period of time" could mean a lot of different things to a lot of different people. Some simply cannot be without their content and others can do the same thing for years.
• Cucurbita wrote on 2013-05-28 18:13
  Pay to play games tend to be much higher equality for game, service, and quality of life.
• TLCBonaparte wrote on 2013-05-28 19:03

  Quote from Cucurbita;1096747:

  Pay to play games tend to be much higher equality for game, service, and quality of life.

  
  
  And it makes you a better person.
• RB2temp wrote on 2013-05-28 19:07

  Quote from Cucurbita;1096747:

  Pay to play games tend to be much higher equality for game, service, and quality of life.

  
  I'd say that's a reasonable assessment because if they aren't, people won't pay. It's not just a matter of being worth someone's time anymore.