Previous Thread
Expand All
Collapse All
Ignore Author
ReplyIt seems like most of the complaints I'm seeing on F2P are from existing or returning players, that are comparing it to the subscription plan. Try to look at it from a new perspective, one where you haven't experienced the goodness of subscription before. Wyrom and other GM's have said multiple times, that it's always going to be more beneficial to pay the subscription, no matter what boosts you buy in the simucoin store.
While people are completely welcome to play forever as F2P, I'm pretty sure the main focus (or at least that's how I interpreted it) is to get people hooked on the RP, and then for them to later sign up for at least the basic plan.
Try to view F2P as if you've never played Gemstone, see if that makes a difference for you.
<<Try to view F2P as if you've never played Gemstone, see if that makes a difference for you.>>
If i had never played gemstone, and tried it with f2p, i would have never played gemstone again.
The problem is all the rules are overly restrictive because zomg bot accounts. Safeguards to stop existing players abuse, to the point of crippling the experience for actual potential new customers.
If i had never played gemstone, and tried it with f2p, i would have never played gemstone again.
The problem is all the rules are overly restrictive because zomg bot accounts. Safeguards to stop existing players abuse, to the point of crippling the experience for actual potential new customers.
>>If i had never played gemstone, and tried it with f2p, i would have never played gemstone again.
That is your opinion but the true newbie players i have talked to have enjoyed the experience with a number of them stating they will most likely sub. Counting that is the goal of F2P not everyone shares the above opinion
> I see your point. I also expect that most F2P players are Returning/Existing players however.
Most perhaps. But definitely not all. My husband who is not even a gamer is giving F2P a go. He likes it overall. I don't know if he would have stuck with it past the first week if I had not been close to help him understand. Ambient scripts still catch him off guard, especially the ones created to give atmosphere flavor.
Now he's starting to get his head around how my experience differs from his and is considering how much he would like to have an experience closer to mine. After two weeks, he's starting to ask about verbs that bring our characters to life and asking about speaking in tones work. He's learning to let go of what he can't do in game, and embrace all that can be done.
<<<The ones that thought the experience was too limited, aren't playing anymore for you to talk to.>>>
Gemstone IV isn't everyone's cup of tea. People who love the game will love it regardless of F2P limitations. People who don't won't subscribe no matter how great it is. Either way, F2P is doing what it was designed to do.
~ GtG
Gemstone IV isn't everyone's cup of tea. People who love the game will love it regardless of F2P limitations. People who don't won't subscribe no matter how great it is. Either way, F2P is doing what it was designed to do.
~ GtG
<<Gemstone IV isn't everyone's cup of tea. People who love the game will love it regardless of F2P limitations. People who don't won't subscribe no matter how great it is. Either way, F2P is doing what it was designed to do. >>
That is not only needlessly elitist, but flat out wrong. Congratulations.
That is not only needlessly elitist, but flat out wrong. Congratulations.
> Gemstone IV isn't everyone's cup of tea. People who love the game will love it regardless of F2P limitations. People who don't won't subscribe no matter how great it is. Either way, F2P is doing what it was designed to do.
I strongly disagree with this. If I had not played DR and/or been playing a trial of GS when f2p changed, I very likely would not have subscribed. It truly was not a fun experience and the difference was very clear within even a day.
I strongly disagree with this. If I had not played DR and/or been playing a trial of GS when f2p changed, I very likely would not have subscribed. It truly was not a fun experience and the difference was very clear within even a day.
<<<Gemstone IV isn't everyone's cup of tea. People who love the game will love it regardless of F2P limitations. People who don't won't subscribe no matter how great it is. Either way, F2P is doing what it was designed to do. >>>
<<<That is not only needlessly elitist, but flat out wrong. Congratulations.>>>>
How on earth do you get "elitist" out of that? If it's "wrong" then by all means go on to explain why you think that, instead of simply dropping a meaningless snark. I think I made a pretty fair statement, on the whole.
~ GtG
<<<That is not only needlessly elitist, but flat out wrong. Congratulations.>>>>
How on earth do you get "elitist" out of that? If it's "wrong" then by all means go on to explain why you think that, instead of simply dropping a meaningless snark. I think I made a pretty fair statement, on the whole.
~ GtG
>You're speaking with an inherently biased sample set.
>The ones that thought the experience was too limited, aren't playing anymore for you to talk to.
LOL. This might be true, but then it's also true for you. What is your point? Your speculation is better than someone else's for subjective reasons?
"What Kaldonis does on his off time is totally Kaldonis's business, dude." ~Scribes
>The ones that thought the experience was too limited, aren't playing anymore for you to talk to.
LOL. This might be true, but then it's also true for you. What is your point? Your speculation is better than someone else's for subjective reasons?
"What Kaldonis does on his off time is totally Kaldonis's business, dude." ~Scribes
<<Gemstone IV isn't everyone's cup of tea. People who love the game will love it regardless of F2P limitations. People who don't won't subscribe no matter how great it is. Either way, F2P is doing what it was designed to do. >>
<<That is not only needlessly elitist, but flat out wrong.>>
Can't be flat out wrong. I'm a returning player, who loves the game, who is playing (currently) on a F2P account. I will keep playing on this F2P account, even when I go and resub with my Prime account later this year. I am having fun, enjoying being in and playing the game again, and am not giving a rat's arse about the F2P limits (which I'm not seeing as limits, currently).
Lyquitta, Cleric of Kuon
(Previously: Cylnthia, Paladin of Kuon)
<<That is not only needlessly elitist, but flat out wrong.>>
Can't be flat out wrong. I'm a returning player, who loves the game, who is playing (currently) on a F2P account. I will keep playing on this F2P account, even when I go and resub with my Prime account later this year. I am having fun, enjoying being in and playing the game again, and am not giving a rat's arse about the F2P limits (which I'm not seeing as limits, currently).
Lyquitta, Cleric of Kuon
(Previously: Cylnthia, Paladin of Kuon)
<<How on earth do you get "elitist" out of that? If it's "wrong" then by all means go on to explain why you think that, instead of simply dropping a meaningless snark. I think I made a pretty fair statement, on the whole.>>
It was not meaningless. It was snarky.
<< People who love the game will love it regardless of F2P limitations>>
And they will continue to love it while playing something else instead. Which means the world will continue to be empty, and simu isn't getting any micro-transactions. The fact that you think there is no market for people who find the current f2p model overly restrictive, and the potential market in the game for a more modern pricing structure is...amusing. I agree it's doing what it was intended to do, which is to be a replacement for a trial subscription first, and an actual f2p option second. That is the exact problem.
It's better than nothing, and a step in the right direction. That doesn't make it the correct one to take.
It was not meaningless. It was snarky.
<< People who love the game will love it regardless of F2P limitations>>
And they will continue to love it while playing something else instead. Which means the world will continue to be empty, and simu isn't getting any micro-transactions. The fact that you think there is no market for people who find the current f2p model overly restrictive, and the potential market in the game for a more modern pricing structure is...amusing. I agree it's doing what it was intended to do, which is to be a replacement for a trial subscription first, and an actual f2p option second. That is the exact problem.
It's better than nothing, and a step in the right direction. That doesn't make it the correct one to take.
I think a lot of these debates are based on the assumption that a $15 basic account should be done away with or isn't worth it. That may have been true in 2001, but I don't think it's true now.
A lot of the f2p isn't good enough advocates seem to think the f2p=basic and that never was close to the intent. A good f2p account should cost a player about $9 where a basic account is $15. The value here is $6 a month. If more options are worth $6 bucks then basic, if not then f2p.
Otherwise, what argument are you trying to make? HBO now is 14.99, but because it's not free "F" HBO? That seems to be a lot of the online perception of paying for things. Nobody wants to cause it's only of any value if it's free for people.
A lot of the f2p isn't good enough advocates seem to think the f2p=basic and that never was close to the intent. A good f2p account should cost a player about $9 where a basic account is $15. The value here is $6 a month. If more options are worth $6 bucks then basic, if not then f2p.
Otherwise, what argument are you trying to make? HBO now is 14.99, but because it's not free "F" HBO? That seems to be a lot of the online perception of paying for things. Nobody wants to cause it's only of any value if it's free for people.
"A good f2p account should cost a player about $9 where a basic account is $15. The value here is $6 a month. If more options are worth $6 bucks then basic, if not then f2p."
Sorry, but no. A good F2P account is FREE to PLAY. Because F2P means, FREE TO PLAY.
"A lot of the f2p isn't good enough advocates seem to think the f2p=basic and that never was close to the intent."
I also disagree with this statement. I never assumed that a F2P would equal a basic account. I was prepared for a lesser experience, but I wasn't prepared for every possible thing to cost simucoins. Reduced foraging without simucoins, can't earn treasure without simucoins, can't even move your bank to a different town without simucoins. It's a little much.
Sorry, but no. A good F2P account is FREE to PLAY. Because F2P means, FREE TO PLAY.
"A lot of the f2p isn't good enough advocates seem to think the f2p=basic and that never was close to the intent."
I also disagree with this statement. I never assumed that a F2P would equal a basic account. I was prepared for a lesser experience, but I wasn't prepared for every possible thing to cost simucoins. Reduced foraging without simucoins, can't earn treasure without simucoins, can't even move your bank to a different town without simucoins. It's a little much.
And yet, even with those limitations, you can play for free, can you not?
So, by your own declaration, it is a FREE to PLAY account?
(They didn't say it was "free to play on an equal footing with other folks", they said it was free to play. And, well, you may just get what you pay for. Oh, wait: you didn't do one side of that equation.)
.
.
Now that I've given my flippant answer...
The point your missing is that, from a business standpoint, the person you quoted is accurate. A good F2P account should still be generating income, and probably in about that $9-10 range. (i.e. Less than a Basic account, but more than $0.)
The reason for this is that they are, indeed, trying to make money overall: that's the entire reason for pursuing a microtransaction model in the first place.
So, by your own declaration, it is a FREE to PLAY account?
(They didn't say it was "free to play on an equal footing with other folks", they said it was free to play. And, well, you may just get what you pay for. Oh, wait: you didn't do one side of that equation.)
.
.
Now that I've given my flippant answer...
The point your missing is that, from a business standpoint, the person you quoted is accurate. A good F2P account should still be generating income, and probably in about that $9-10 range. (i.e. Less than a Basic account, but more than $0.)
The reason for this is that they are, indeed, trying to make money overall: that's the entire reason for pursuing a microtransaction model in the first place.
