What generally makes P2P mmos better than free ones?

DOnt know about all p2p mmo's but WOW has a lot more gm activity.
Also bugs are fixed quickly, where in PW they tend to just make the buggy areas unavailable.

thankssir wrote: »

I just saw a youtube vid on the best mmo of 2008, and it was a p2p mmo. But it doesn't seem much better than PWI, if not, not even better than PWI. So what elements are there that makes p2p generally considered better than free and couldn't the developers of the free mmo just add them into their games?

On a p2p the devs and gms have to engage more with their playerbase,continually make the gaming experience better in regards to their content,security,well being of the majority of players blah de blah or else they lose their pay cheques.

On a f2p the devs and the like can get away with a lot more,eh even if the games really badly run as long as tonnes of free players still play it,you're going to always have people who will pay for cash shop items to have an edge over those free to play people.

Imo anyway thats what i've seen with the games so far i've played,although i admit pwi is a bit better than the rest of the f2p games,but its early days.

p2p games are better for hardcore players because there is no cash shops for people to buy their way to be good. f2p games will always have some people who will spend $1000s per month just to say they are better than others. in p2p its strictly who has the most time and who is the better player.

thankssir wrote: »

I just saw a youtube vid on the best mmo of 2008, and it was a p2p mmo. But it doesn't seem much better than PWI, if not, not even better than PWI. So what elements are there that makes p2p generally considered better than free and couldn't the developers of the free mmo just add them into their games?

lol have you ever played something like WoW? It seems like it's 10x better than pwi. No cash shop = no advantages. People can buy gold but it's not the same thing as what you can buy in this game. o_O

Besides, buying gold is risky. They perma ban gold buyers daily from player reports and observing transactions. They also perma ban bots too...something this game lacks. I guess that falls under support.

One thing I saw immediately was the that gameplay is pretty addicting. For example, the quests are actually a STORY that you will wanna read. Seems like someone actually thought it all out.

And hrmmm...I just like the general atmosphere of WoW. ****s pro.

Literature - Harshlands wrote: »

lol have you ever played something like WoW? It seems like it's 10x better than pwi. No cash shop = no advantages. People can buy gold but it's not the same thing as what you can buy in this game. o_O

Besides, buying gold is risky. They perma ban gold buyers daily from player reports and observing transactions. They also perma ban bots too...something this game lacks. I guess that falls under support.

One thing I saw immediately was the that gameplay is pretty addicting. For example, the quests are actually a STORY that you will wanna read. Seems like someone actually thought it all out.

And hrmmm...I just like the general atmosphere of WoW. ****s pro.

I quit WoW because it was too addicting...

PWI just seems to suit me just right, not everyone would want to play the most addicting game you know <.<...

Generally speaking, free-to-play games suffer from a lack of overall quality compared to pay-to-play games. It can be hard to really explain it, but if you play any of the older free to play games you will notice that there is just something overall sucky about them. Having said that, PWI changed my opinion on F2P games. I thought F2P games were always much worse (you get what you pay for after all), but PWI actually is the same level of quality as many P2P.

As for specifics, traditionally all F2P MMORPG's were PvP games. The simple reason for this is that there is nothing that will get you to use the cash shop like getting constantly player-killed by the people that do. Only recently have I started to see free-to-play games that did not make all servers PvP.

Also, until recently, all F2P games have been a horrible grind. It generally takes years and years to get to the max level in a F2P game. That in and of itself is not a problem (I do not like reaching level caps myself), but the process of getting there involved nothing but killing 100's of thousand of creatures in an incredibly boring grind fest. Once again, the reason for this is that it encourages players to buy temporary +experience buffs (like training esoterica in this game) as well as hp and mp regen items (like charms in this game) to make the grind faster. PWI is a little different in this regard in that there is Crazy Stone and World Quest which can be done without the need to grind or buy cash shop items. Most games do not offer anything like that.

Another thing is the design of the game. For example, this game has certain bosses that pretty much cannot be beaten unless every single party member has an hp charm or the party cleric uses the Regeneration Aura spell (commonly called Blue Ball or BB by the players). This spell drains 500 mp every 5 seconds and puts the cleric in attack mode (which drops their mp regen rate to 25% of normal). No buffs or healing spells ever put clerics in attack mode except for the two ball spells. Why is this? To encourage the sale of mp regen items. The spell only exists to sell charms. BB is actually one of these most powerful and boring spells in the entire game. The spell automatically runs itself. You just turn in on and you can basically go AFK for the rest of the fight. In a P2P game such a spell would not exist both because it is boring and because there is no point in putting a spell in a game that drains mp so fast it cannot really be used. That is, it could not be used if they did not sell infinite mp items in the cash shop.

That is essentially what charms are. Putting on an hp and mp charm is the equivalent to putting in an infinite life and mana cheat code in a normal game. P2P games would not have such items because they are just silly. What is the point in playing a character that is virtually immune to death because he has the ability to fully heal himself every 10 seconds (which means the only things that can kill him are things that are able to take out 100% of his health in just 10 seconds time)? What is the point of playing a caster class that fully regenerates mp every 5 seconds? Even a physical attack class with a magic stat of 5 can use skills pretty much endlessly when his mp fully regenerates every 5 seconds and a caster cannot even come close to running out of mp no matter what he does. These items are just plain silly. No game but a cash shop game would even have these items and in my opinion they seriously take away from the game (by killing virtually all strategy). In order to make the game the least bit challenging they have to make opponents that are so strong that they can kill you in less than 10 seconds and are challenging even if you have infinite mp. The result is ridiculously hard bosses that cannot be faced unless you buy charms (once again designing game play to force you to spend money at the cash shop).

I find it much more fun when casters are actually powerful and have to decide when to cast their spells. Casters are supposed to do huge damage, but run out of juice and have to rest. This means they can do extraordinary damage in just a short while, but cannot do the consistent damage over time of a physical damage class. When casters have infinite mp they have to be just as weak as physical damage classes in order to be balanced. So the result is that a caster is both a weak class and one that needs to spend money on cash shop items just to keep up with a physical class. That is the really bad way to design a caster that the F2P industry uses.

I think I will end this post soon since many people do not even read posts that get too long (even though they tend to have much more valuable information than short, pointless posts), but I will say this. As a general rule, in F2P games, the people that do not use the cash shop exists mainly to give the cash shop players someone to be better than. Cash shop players will always be better than players that do not use the cash shop no matter skilled the free player is. In this game for example, I have heard from several people that a high level cleric that does not have a mana charm is "a fail cleric" (their bad grammar not mine). You can imagine how silly it is to a person that is used to playing games where skill is involved to hear someone called a failure simply because they did not slap in the infinite mana cheat code. In most games (P2P MMORPG's included) people are actually expected to figure out how to play the game without cheat codes, but in F2P games cheat codes are sold in the cash shop (usually in the form of infinite hp and mp items) and the many of the players expect everyone to use these cheats.

This is nothing new. I played Anarchy Online back when it was first out and there was a bug that made it that when you died and came back to life in the same zone your spells would stack. If you died once in the zone, every spell you cast would cast twice every time you used it. If you died 4 times every spell would cast 5 times every time you used it. So if a healing spell cost 100 mp and healed for 500 hp, then dying 4 times would make it still cost 100 mp and it would heal for 2500 hp. I remember getting killed out of parties because I refused to take advantage of this glitch. The difference is, at least some of the players looked down on cheaters and the game company itself worked quickly to fix the bug. In F2P games the cheats are part of the game (and sold in the cash shop) so they will never be fixed and are not looked down upon by the players. I do not mind the existence of cash shops, but certain items (such as infinite hp/mp items) have no place in any game.

OMGLAZERZ - Heavens Tear wrote: »

PvE servers are, generally speaking, a new thing in MMOs, and some P2P MMOs don't have PvE servers.

They're not new. The first big MMO, Ultima Online, was the equivalent to what we'd call a PvP server. You could PK anyone at any time outside of towns. A lot of people complained about the PKing in that.

The second big MMO, Everquest, was the equivalent to what we'd call a PvE server. You could only PK each other in duels and arenas. They did have a PvP server, but the low population there I think established for certain that if forced to choose between total PvE and total PvP, most people will pick PvE. Contrary to what the PKers in UO claimed.

Never played Asheron's Call so I can't comment on that. The next semi-big MMO was Dark Age of Camelot. That introduced the idea of PvP zones. i.e. most of the game world was the equivalent to a PvE server, but certain zones were PvP (I don't count EQ's arenas because those were tiny). It also forced you into team PvP, instead of a free for all. WoW and Perfect World follow this model.

The biggest difference I've noticed between F2P and P2P games is the composition of the playerbase. F2P games tend to have a lot more kids and people who don't have or are unwilling to pay the monthly fee of a P2P game. Pretty much all the other differences I've seen cited so far can be attributed to the number of players the game has. WoW has more GMs and faster bugfixes because they have a lot more players, and hence a bigger revenue stream to support those things.

While were talking about pvp servers... I liked Cabal's system (F2P). Both PvE and PvP in the same server, just different channels. If the channel was full, then sucks to be you (or not). And once you reach a certain level (120+), you were forced to grind/quest in a PvP only map regardless of channel. But it was one side against the other so you at least couldn't get ganked too much unless in a KoS.

They even had a channel where you could get points (equivalent to rep here kinda) just for killing the other side or neutrals. I'd still be playing/go back to that if it weren't for the bots/hackers. b:sad

FedTehNoob - Lost City wrote: »

Starrr - Harshlands wrote: »

p2p games are better for hardcore players because there is no cash shops for people to buy their way to be good. f2p games will always have some people who will spend $1000s per month just to say they are better than others. in p2p its strictly who has the most time and who is the better player.

I think this is a very valid point.

Same.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say the PW really cannot be used as a good example of a quality F2P game considering it was developed and run as a P2P game initially. So, while it is a F2P game now, all of the early development was for a P2P game, not a F2P game.

Cat - Heavens Tear wrote: »

I think some p2p games are better but not all of them.

Key things I like about the ones I think are better are:

*The GMs and customer support are usually better.

*They are usually more fair to the player i.e. you cant buy yourself to the top.

*You actually spend less overall when you think about it. 1 mount here is on average $50. Thats 5 months of gameplay on the p2p game I play. And in a 5 month period most people spend more than that on the cash shop here in charms alone. Hell in one good hard 3 Hour TW I can use 2-3 charms in a 3 hour period. Thats 1 month of gameplay for most P2P games. And you dont feel pressured to spend money just to have the cool things in game.

*The population is more mature. F2P games any 5 year old and up that knows how to get on a computer and play can, and it shows in the community. Since alot of kids and teenagers dont have credit cards or jobs, it cuts back on the amount of them that play P2P. For me personally making for an overall better playing environment.

* They have more mods/updates/exspanions more often. Once again the P2P game I play has added I think around 8-12 expansions in the past 3 years. Thats alot more than most f2p games I have played.

Theres more than this, but these are the main ones.

I'm going to point out that you can buy your way to the top in a P2P game as well. It's risky, but doable.

OMGLAZERZ - Heavens Tear wrote: »

I'm going to point out that you can buy your way to the top in a P2P game as well. It's risky, but doable.

True but its not generally acceptable, not very often done, and the game itself doesnt encourage you to do it lol. And Im talking about the P2P games I play, not all of them, like WoW is a different story.

I have never played WoW and dont intend too. I know WoW has a massive crowd that buys their way to the top.

Well if we are to totally judge them on fairness of all players, then P2P's system where real money has no effect upon the game will indeed give more fairness into the game.

Hands down, every player gets the same darn thing in a P2P game, kinda like a communist system (If you want to look at the glass half empty) or kinda like a fair justice system of gear, exp, and levels (If you wanna look at the glass half full).

But the downside to a P2P game is that there is a ton of pressure put into the game by lots of players demanding they are getting their "money's worth". Causing growing unrest. It doesn't give you as much flexibility to pay because your are charged monthly whether you play or not (until you unsubscribe).

Also on many P2P games, there is still a greater demand for the illegal goods because F2P allows you to "legally cheat" in the Cash Shop. Thus, it poses more problems...

The downside to a F2P game is that it need a source of income. Most likely it will use a Cash Shop or introduce a "Membership option" for greater content of the game (Like Runescape, Adventure Quest, a bunch of other free 2 play games). The problem with the Cash Shop is that it totally unbalances out the game by giving players really high advantages (Though I would say Perfect World's Cash Shop does give you a huge advantage). Hell! You can get +12 any item (At the cost of over $2000, $1000 during event)

Well the upside? F2P gives you a lot of flexibility and the ability to totally try out a game fully before even spending a cent! Yes, you can have fun without paying a cent, but chances are that you will probably buy into temptation and fork over a good amount of money that is most likely higher than the cost of a P2P game. Though P2P requires you to pay no matter what, F2P allows you to establish or "try out" a game before paying. However, once you start paying, F2P could cost quite a lot for "fun"....

Though on the overall cost, P2P would generally be more expensive if your not too serious about a game. F2P would generally be more expensive if your serious about a game. P2P would probably be more enjoyable than an F2P overall, but individual experiences might also vary greatly. (Like I didn't like WoW's Arena system and thus I quit)

But overall, if you like a more "fair" RPG experience, pick P2P.
If you like a more flexible and carefree RPG experience, pick F2P.