The Daily Grind: How much free-to-play game coverage do you want?

In the last six months or so, Massively has refocused quite a bit since our early days. When we started out, we went really broad, trying to encompass every element of the MMO genre out there. We talked about everything from RuneScape to semi-obscure Korean imports, all the way up to Warhammer, World of Warcraft, and Lord of the Rings Online. In the last six months, though, we've primarily been focused on AAA titles. We primarily did it because we thought it was what you wanted to see, but in the last month or so we've seen signs your interests may be broader.

Free-to-play games are constantly improving, formerly maligned Korean imports have seen a lot of development and localization love, and the microtransaction market is a moving target. Games like Atlantica Online, Runes of Magic, Wizard101, DOMO and Shaiya are increasingly showing up on our collective radars. What do you think about these games? Do you want to see more coverage of free-to-play games on Massively? What's your favorite free-to-play game that we really need to pay attention to? And if we do put more coverage of these games on the block, do you want to see things like patch notes or just the highlights/holiday announcements? Let us know!

Reader Comments (58)

Please, PLEASE don't increase the Free-to-Play coverage. That has completely ruined a competitor (mmorpg.com), to your benefit, of course. ;)

Stick to AAA and AA titles, please. I BEG of you.

Wrong !
First, I don't see what mmorpg.com has done wrong. I visit the site for different purposes than I visit here.
Second, I personally believe that the coverage should be as thorough as possible. Though I'd understand limiting F2P coverage to the most recent/hyped games to avoid drowning the site in its own content, F2P are a whole part of the MMO scene and deserve attention as much as the next AAA. Heck, I'd still rather play Ryzom if World of Warcraft was free.
If not for any of these reasons, keep covering F2P for the sake of diversity. Keeping these potential gems under silence would further encourage the wave of doomed-from-the-start projects that desperately join the market with no original content or gameplay believing they have any hope of gnawing at Colossus McBlizzard's market shares. Originality may fail most of the time, but it's still refreshing to see someone try something different every once in a while.

I'm not interested in free to play games or not-games like Second Life. I come here to read about games in development and AAA games currently out on the shelves. I am also interested in MMO news (like academic pieces on the minds of gamers, new legislation that effects us, legal troubles, etc).

I come to this site (and use to go to mmorpg.com) for news on the latest and greatest. Not SL and free to play games (though I'm not against reading the occasional article, I mostly skip them).

Free to play games are an important factor to consider in MMOG industry. I use Massively, and other similar sites, to keep a peripheral eye on the free to play market. I enjoyed the coverage of free to play games such as Atlantica.

When the market shifts and players start cutting back on subscription games; I suspect they will start looking for alternative games. Free to play games are a great alternative. Changing the news on the site to adjust for market changes makes logical sense.

Basically what he said.

I cruise the net every morning and evening to get a feel for what the market is doing. I enjoy reading about what is happening in different games regardless of what their payment schemes are like.

I think there are a lot of people who have not played some of the newer F2P games that have no clue what they are missing. There are some very interesting and new ideas out there and I for one enjoy hearing about them.

I also enjoy hearing about subscription games for the same reasons. I am more attracted to gameplay than subscription models so I think finding a balance of both is best.

I diasagree. I think touching the surface is ok.

Perhaps lighter coverage of the less popular titles while concentrating on the AAA stuff. I'd like to keep an eye on the free stuff but I don't want to have to wade through a not of mess every time I feel like browsing my favorite MMO news.

You'll need to strike a balance so you don't flood the mainstream folks with a bunch of noise.

Hmmm, interesting question there, Massively.

My answer would be ... it depends. Isn't that helpful?

My problem with the vast majority of F2Ps is that they are total junk. All it takes (for me, anyway) is one look at their ads and/or website and I *know* I'm not going to like the game. That said, Atlantica Online looks moderately interesting and a couple of others, like Battlefield Heroes, are on the horizon that show promise.

What I would advise is that you cover A-list F2Ps and keep an eye on the horizon for anything that looks genuinely promising.

Seriously, a list of the top 5 or 10 F2P games (based on a consensus of your writers and editors) and then cover those games, as well as keeping an eye on anything else F2P in development that looks like it might be of interest. Chances are, if you guys think these games are worthwhile, so, too, will your readers.

Can you set it up like CNN or other sites where you pick what you want to read as your front page? Customize it somehow?

If not find an innovative way to section it off please.

As for favorite semi-free game to play it would have to be Dungeon Runners.

Without doubt Massively should remain heavy in the AA, AAA game coverage. But it should not neglect the FTP area of gaming either.

There should be an acceptable balance of coverage that will please both sides without "dissing" the other.

I'd rather read about F2P games like Regnum Online, Crowns of Power, Atlantica, Rapplez, Requiem, over Second Life.

I have no clue why Second Life gets so much coverage on Massively.

I play P2P games and F2P MMO's.

Massively's original incarnation was as a site that covered Second Life.

Didn't realize it was a Second Life site before.

Ever since I have been reading... maybe 6 months. It was MMORPG's, with a sprinking of second life (that I skipped over).

I also browse MMORPG and I like how they cover all from F2P to P2P.

Also like ONRPG (they only cover F2P)

F2P games do have some place on Massively, in my opinion, but I don't think they deserve the same standing as AAA titles. There is a reason that most F2P games are F2P; they're garbage and no one would play them if they had a monthly subscription. There might be the occasional gem, and for that you should keep the radar up, but for the most part they don't interest me.

I think main coverage should stick to AAA titles (and reserve more detailed coverage from them, like patch notes and rumors), but it's nice to get exposure to lesser knowns or free titles once in a while - if it's a good game, why dismiss it because it's free?

I'm not terribly interested in F2P games myself but I recognize their popularity.

Why not a regular roundup (weekly? bi-weekly?) of news pertaining to F2P games as an initial foray, then see if there's enough interest in specific games to warrant more targeted coverage of specific titles.

I'm okay with some F2P coverage, but I think there has to be a filter on what kind of F2P games they are: namely, "AAA" F2P games (FreeRealms, etc) versus... all the crappy games from Asia. And then somewhere in between are the indie F2P games like Wizard 101.

Please keep and even expand your coverage of free-to-play games.

Well, you could blanket this under the 'everyone's wallet is stretched a little thin these days' and a number of people may be quitting their paid-subscription MMOs and are looking for a quality F2P. Massively can help them out by highlighting some info on some of the better F2P games out there. They are not all gems but there are a few that are worth playing and it won't hurt Massively's readership to include some coverage of them.

Perhaps if you up the coverage, it could be on a separate "feed" or some such... Kinda like how TUAW has the "!iPhone" section. Maybe make it the default, with the ability to "opt in"

| 1 | 2 | 3 | Most Recent | Next 20 Comments

The Daily Grind: How much free-to-play game coverage do you want?

Reader Comments (58)

Posted: Jan 9th 2009 8:05AM DaBruuzer said

Posted: Jan 9th 2009 8:31AM NeoDodge said

Posted: Jan 9th 2009 8:14AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jan 9th 2009 8:16AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jan 9th 2009 12:49PM jmerriex said

Posted: Jan 9th 2009 9:15AM Lateris said

Posted: Jan 9th 2009 8:35AM Idle said

Posted: Jan 9th 2009 8:36AM Tom in VA said

Posted: Jan 9th 2009 8:38AM Alarie said

Posted: Jan 9th 2009 8:41AM jlong64 said

Posted: Jan 9th 2009 9:03AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jan 9th 2009 9:16AM Nottom said

Posted: Jan 9th 2009 9:25AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jan 9th 2009 9:16AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jan 9th 2009 9:23AM Tikanjiah said

Posted: Jan 9th 2009 9:22AM Nottom said

Posted: Jan 9th 2009 10:05AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jan 9th 2009 10:15AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jan 9th 2009 10:14AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Jan 9th 2009 10:14AM saintnicster said

Info

Description

MSRP

Release Date

Genre

Developer

Publisher

Rating

Breaking News

The Secret World launch delayed to July 3rd

Featured Stories

Betawatch: May 19 - 25, 2012

Some Assembly Required: City of Heroes' Mission Architect

MMObility: Command and Conquer's new twist on the MMORTS

Engadget

Joystiq

WoW

TUAW