It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
yyahoo: So F2P games that only sell costumes are actually successful? Wow, I underestimate the shallowness of gamers. Now, these cosmetic only F2Ps, they don't have any forced in game advertising do they? Paid ads would certainly help pad the dev's wallets as well.
avatar
Geri11: Ahahaha, god, you are so naive. Ever heard of Team Fortress 2?
Multiplayer game? Never played it. Never been my thing. I wouldn't say that makes me naive, but whatever...
Post edited July 03, 2014 by yyahoo
"F2P properly"
You say that like it's POSSIBLE. F2P *requires* DRM.

What ever happened to "make a product" -> "sell said product". Fuck this "F2P" bullshit.

avatar
Fenixp: So, no matter how F2P games decide to work, you're going to condemn them?
Yes, absolutely. F2P games simply should not exist.
F2P requires DRM. DRM shouldn't exist.

Note, I have NOTHING against (appropriately priced and not DRMed) DLC.
Post edited July 03, 2014 by mqstout
avatar
mqstout: "F2P properly"
You say that like it's POSSIBLE. F2P *requires* DRM.

What ever happened to "make a product" -> "sell said product". Fuck this "F2P" bullshit.

avatar
Fenixp: So, no matter how F2P games decide to work, you're going to condemn them?
avatar
mqstout: Yes, absolutely. F2P games simply should not exist.
F2P requires DRM. DRM shouldn't exist.

Note, I have NOTHING against (appropriately priced and not DRMed) DLC.
You do know what DRM is right? Now, you do know this is going to be a multiplayer game right? So being online is kinda required anyway to play. Plus, it's not even coming to PC.
avatar
Geri11: Ahahaha, god, you are so naive. Ever heard of Team Fortress 2?
avatar
yyahoo: Multiplayer game? Never played it. Never been my thing. I wouldn't say that makes me naive, but whatever...
Okay, so it seems you didn't get my point. You wrote, and I quote "So F2P games that only sell costumes are actually successful?" My point is, that TF2, a free to play multiplayer game on Steam has hats. Yes, hats that you can get in game, or buy for money. You can't buy skills or level ups or anything like that, only cosmetics. Now these hats are kind of an ongoing internet joke, because for some, people tend to pay over 30 dollars. So if you have been living under a rock for the last, say, 4 years, then I'm here to tell you: the F2P games that people actually enjoy only offer cosmetics for real money. And yes, it is very profitable.
Post edited July 03, 2014 by Geri11
avatar
mqstout: "F2P properly"
You say that like it's POSSIBLE. F2P *requires* DRM.

What ever happened to "make a product" -> "sell said product". Fuck this "F2P" bullshit.

Yes, absolutely. F2P games simply should not exist.
F2P requires DRM. DRM shouldn't exist.

Note, I have NOTHING against (appropriately priced and not DRMed) DLC.
avatar
Geri11: You do know what DRM is right? Now, you do know this is going to be a multiplayer game right? So being online is kinda required anyway to play. Plus, it's not even coming to PC.
avatar
yyahoo: Multiplayer game? Never played it. Never been my thing. I wouldn't say that makes me naive, but whatever...
avatar
Geri11: Okay, so it seems you didn't get my point. You wrote, and I quote "So F2P games that only sell costumes are actually successful?" My point is, that TF2, a free to play multiplayer game on Steam has hats. Yes, hats that you can get in game, or buy for money. You can't buy skills or level ups or anything like that, only cosmetics. Now these hats are kind of an ongoing internet joke, because for some, people tend to pay over 30 dollars. So if you have been living under a rock for the last, say, 4 years, then I'm here to tell you: the F2P games that people actually enjoy only offer cosmetics for real money. And yes, it is very profitable.
I asked a rhetorical question and expressed a little surprise at the apparent answer. Again, it doesn't make me naive. I don't pay attention to multiplayer games, but I have attempted to play many a "free" to play game that was so heavily limited in its design that it ruined the game. I continue to express surprise that people purchase non-game affecting items, but I guess that's simply explained by my lack of interest in social based gaming.

I never got into MMOs or multiplayer based games. I was burned early in the introduction multiplayer games years ago by players who would drop out of competitive games because they were losing, leaving me with nothing but lost time. I was also disillusioned by the constant stream of childish behavior by other players. Have things changed much since then? I couldn't say for certain, but I do read about other players continuing to experience those issues.

Regardless, you probably could say I was "living under a rock" when it comes to direct knowledge of multiplayer only and many F2P games, but only by choice because of my negative experiences before. There may be exceptions to the rule, but there are still many games out there (a majority?) that use F2P as a method of ripping off the players. I will stand by my position that I would still prefer to play a game where I pay a flat fee and get access to everything rather than the "nickel/dime" approach of F2P and DLC.
avatar
Geri11: You do know what DRM is right? Now, you do know this is going to be a multiplayer game right? So being online is kinda required anyway to play. Plus, it's not even coming to PC.
Multiplayer games don't require DRM. Let players host their own. Let players make mods. Let players chose who they do and don't want to play with.
'Possible on PC', it seems... Although the quotation makes it pretty clear that that means technically possible, but if it happens, it won't be soon because CDPR knows the PC isn't short of MOBAs.
Post edited July 04, 2014 by VanishedOne
avatar
Geri11: You do know what DRM is right? Now, you do know this is going to be a multiplayer game right? So being online is kinda required anyway to play. Plus, it's not even coming to PC.

Okay, so it seems you didn't get my point. You wrote, and I quote "So F2P games that only sell costumes are actually successful?" My point is, that TF2, a free to play multiplayer game on Steam has hats. Yes, hats that you can get in game, or buy for money. You can't buy skills or level ups or anything like that, only cosmetics. Now these hats are kind of an ongoing internet joke, because for some, people tend to pay over 30 dollars. So if you have been living under a rock for the last, say, 4 years, then I'm here to tell you: the F2P games that people actually enjoy only offer cosmetics for real money. And yes, it is very profitable.
avatar
yyahoo: I asked a rhetorical question and expressed a little surprise at the apparent answer. Again, it doesn't make me naive. I don't pay attention to multiplayer games, but I have attempted to play many a "free" to play game that was so heavily limited in its design that it ruined the game. I continue to express surprise that people purchase non-game affecting items, but I guess that's simply explained by my lack of interest in social based gaming.

I never got into MMOs or multiplayer based games. I was burned early in the introduction multiplayer games years ago by players who would drop out of competitive games because they were losing, leaving me with nothing but lost time. I was also disillusioned by the constant stream of childish behavior by other players. Have things changed much since then? I couldn't say for certain, but I do read about other players continuing to experience those issues.

Regardless, you probably could say I was "living under a rock" when it comes to direct knowledge of multiplayer only and many F2P games, but only by choice because of my negative experiences before. There may be exceptions to the rule, but there are still many games out there (a majority?) that use F2P as a method of ripping off the players. I will stand by my position that I would still prefer to play a game where I pay a flat fee and get access to everything rather than the "nickel/dime" approach of F2P and DLC.
Now, I'm with everyone else saying that LoL and whatnot are great games. Many even have community-altering functions that keep the dill weeds out. That said, I'm with you. It has to be a spectacularly reviewed-by-friends game for me to play it if it's free. Because I've spent massive wasted hours and loads of crap. It's better to spend a buck at Humble Bundle than nothing almost always.

That said, League of Legends and Blizzard's Hearthstone have been great for me. Both have advantages to paying, but it's such a small advantage or a quickly-disappearing advantage that it's not really worth getting upset about.

And lastly, as for all the name-calling, let's be nice guys, eh?*

*(eh? inserted to make me sound like a Canadian, which inherently carries with it an expertise in civility and nice-ness. Altough I am not Canadian, I wouldn't mind it. And it's the home of my forefathers.)
For the life of me I don't understand this MOBA mania. What is the point of so many MOBAs with diffirent logos on them? Does every franchise seriously need it's own MOBA? DC Comics, Lord of the Rings (that one really hurt me to even know it exists) and now Witcher? And that is all in addition to dozens upon dozens of other MOBAs. How many clones of the exact same game do people need?