| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (38)

Posted: Sep 13th 2010 12:24PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Amen Brother, as a fellow non-Kool-Aid drinker I salute you ! EQ2 is a great game this F2P experiment dillutes and cheapens the brand.

Posted: Sep 13th 2010 12:33PM mttgamer said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I started EQ2X a couple days ago myself, I agree with the consensus that you got. It's something just to tide me over till Cataclysm, Guild Wars 2, or KOTOR, whatever comes first heh.


although i was TEMPTED to buy conjurer...but not for $7.50 >.

Posted: Sep 13th 2010 12:57PM Sunlover said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
If they remove weapon/equipment and spell restrictions, bag restrictions, and lift chat and auction restrictions a bit, they may start to see larger numbers and more interested players. Also, the SOE shop prices for many things are simply too high.

Also, I disagree with your assessment that the choice that the F2P games sales model provides "dilutes the virtual world nature of MMORPGs by turning them into disposable diversions that no one can be bothered to invest himself in" as being, quite simply, untrue. The only reason anyone, "F2P gamer" or otherwise, should choose to continue to spend time in any virtual world or playing any game is simply because it is fun. There are plenty of P2P games with low populations. Ask them if their population numbers and player retention have anything to do with their sales models. Ask Blizzard that same question. If the virtual world deserves my continuing and repeated visits, it will have them, regardless of sales model. Ask Turbine or Nexon. Ask, is this fun?

F2P and free trials are great for helping players decide, at their own pace, which virtual world they feel deserves their attention the most. If Norrath wants my attention, or anyone else's, SOE will simply have to earn it by offering a fun game with more reasonable restrictions. Simple as that. Hopefully they'll get there. Hopefully, every MMO will.

Posted: Sep 13th 2010 1:27PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I doubt I'll even bother to mess with EQ2X at all. I don't like the way SOE is implementing things compared to LotRO. The prices seem way out of line. The real killer is having to pay to even play most of the races and classes. No thanks SOE! It also doesn't help their cause that I'm playing another of their games and have seen first hand how they run things, which I"m not overly impressed with (although their support people seem quite good), nerfing things left and right, abandoning stuff, not releasing things they said they would, etc.

If they had gone the Guild Wars route, done up the game and its expansions into tiers, for instance, and just charged a one time fee for each section, along with cosmetic and/or speed up grind type items in the cash shop, I'd have considered it.

Posted: Sep 13th 2010 1:29PM Controlled Chaos said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I have to admit, though I've complained about your complete lack of objectivity before, I actually think your articles are better when you don't try. This attempt at it just made you sound so very bitter about the whole thing.

Anyways though, as I've said before, I'm a proponent of the F2P method and love the fact that one can actually play a game without having to fork over a credit card for something that, usually, isn't worth the time and money. In this case though, I feel that it was something of a bad idea. Trying to do this is along the same lines as trying to drag Ultima Online into the spotlight again. The game is twelve years old. People who still want to play it are doing so, but they can't honestly expect a lot of people to stick around. It's something that's already tried and true. Trying to gain the attention of quite a few people who, admittedly, have the attention spans of a speed addled rabbit just isn't going to work if the game isn't as flashy and what not as games being released now. F2P fits a lot of games just fine, but doesn't seem as easy with this one.

EQ2 is a game for old veterans of the genre. They probably should have just left it alone and went with something new.

Posted: Sep 13th 2010 1:42PM Seffrid said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"EQII is apparently good enough for dabblers, but not worthy of a larger commitment. That's the feeling I got from my initial experience with EQ2X. "

I think you need an "X" on the end of the opening "EQII", in other words I'd suggest that it is only EQ2X that is not worthy of a larger commitment, EQ2 Live is well worth that commitment.

This is on the basis partly of my own experience with the game, but also on your own comments throughout the article. It seems to me to be the EQ2X community you have the biggest problem with, not the EQ2 game itself.

Posted: Sep 13th 2010 1:46PM ployer said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
While I am not one to name characters with silly names... The name zombietwat made me laugh out loud.

Posted: Sep 13th 2010 1:49PM jimr9999us said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Thank you Jef for so clearly expressing through EQ2 the disappointed I felt when WB shut down sub-based LotRO and replaced it with a shopping mall.

Sony deserves credit for treating two different games as two different games though. I downloaded the client for f2p eq2 and after creating a new character I asked myself, "What gives me the right to play for free a game that I tried and decided not to sub to?" I had to log off and remove the file, simply out of respect for a mmog community I have grown to really admire over the years.

I visit Massively at least 2x a day and really appreciate an editorial viewpoint that stands counter to the wall of hype behind the micro-transaction business model machine. It is important we recognize the changes to our games as changes to the fundamental mechanics of the genre we embrace and approach them with a healthy degree of skepticism.

Posted: Sep 13th 2010 1:58PM Jms60t5 said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
My problem with EQ2X isn't that it's F2P -- it's that it's incredibly moronic F2P. The way SOE is implementing this is crude and unappealing. We want F2P players -- but we won't let you access the broker (a vital component to buy/sell goods/materials, a vital component to building up your house), we won't let you access global chat (so much for the "make them sell their goods in chat" argument they've been making). Pricing EACH class at $7.50 for unlock is hideous. The new "buy broker tokens" is brain-dead.
Here's a clue, SOE: look at the incredibly successful model of Runes of Magic. You have, without spending a penny, access to all the basic systems: crafting, auction, chat, skills, mounts, etc. You can buy stuff across a variety of types (mounts, buffs, tokens to guarantee a successful upgrade of equipment using the 'upgrade-stones' (can't recall what they're called at the moment)). You can "rent" additional bag/bank space, but the default spaces you have available are plentiful.
Look at the model LOTRO is using, with one caveat: I think breaking out zone overland quests into "buy these" bundles wasn't the smartest thing to do. On the flipside, the costs are much more affordable to do things in LOTRO, and most things you do are activated "across your account", not just "per character".

I'd love to be in a proper F2P EQ2. Such a thing, right now, does not exist. And that is a missed opportunity (missed, I think, deliberately, since they appear to be saying "we want F2P players, but we want to shove you into subscriptions").

Posted: Sep 14th 2010 1:00PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Exactly what you said to a "T".
The F2P model is so restrictive that its not worth my time at all(and I used to subscribe to Eq2 for a while). Compared to other offerings it is ultimately a joke and I uninstalled it already.
Reply

Posted: Sep 15th 2010 6:01AM whateveryousay said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Not just Runes of Magic either. Many MMOs have been using that type of system before RoM hit the scene, and continue to use it with great results. Limiting the key mechanics of a game and you limit the interest of the player. Give them more choices and they will feel more confident in giving you their money. Pressuring them into buying your product is a suckers gambit, especially when there's plenty of other options out there.
Reply

Posted: Sep 13th 2010 2:34PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Remember, its still in Beta, so they probably went the 'Safe' route and overpriced things at first until they can find a good pricing balance. I think players would be more pissed if they had the prices of item mall stuff sudden increase because Sony wasn't making the return on investment they had hoped for.

My one gripe is the chat restrictions. It feels like I'm playing a dumbed down single player RPG with only fetch and kill x monsters with the chat. Once every few hours, I would see an OOC post, that that's about it.

Posted: Sep 13th 2010 3:42PM Saker said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I feel exactly as mttgamer said (even to the points of buying a conjurer, having done necro before on AB). I too am looking forward to GW2. If I was going to go back to EQ2 it would be back to the regular subscription and AB server.
Reply

Posted: Sep 13th 2010 3:45PM Saker said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Bad post by me, was supposed to be above.

But! Had to comment on what wwishie said "Sony wasn't making the return on investment they had hoped for." no no my friend you don't know $oE, they can't possibly -ever- make what they want, that beast has a hunger undying!
Reply

Posted: Sep 13th 2010 2:27PM Randomessa said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
If EQIIX were handled a little less ham-handedly, or even transitioned to B2P, I would absolutely be playing it now, and trying to figure out how to split my time between it and GW2 when that comes out. As it is, even for free I have a hard time summoning up the motivation to log on.

Posted: Sep 13th 2010 3:03PM Dumac said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I am liking it so far. :P

I have never played EQ2, and ive played a lot of f2p MMOs, and my honest opinion is that EQ2X is miles ahead of all of them. Some restrictions were hard to accept, severe limitations on classes and the broker being the biggest, but from what it seems all the main content is there for free, and its fantastic. I have not felt like this about an MMO since i started playing WoW.

Also, i got into a great bronze/silver-only guild, everyone is really friendly and chatty, and we share a lot of stuff because we cant sell any of it, lol. Its a great feeling, actually.

So, overall, positive impressions. I'm still sort of waiting for some kind of restriction to hit me in the face, like needing master or grandmaster or whatever spells but not being able to get them, or something of that sort. But until then, im happy for not needing a sub for this, and i don't plan to spend much at all. Still haven't upgraded to silver. After doing that i might buy one or two classes, that would be about it. Yeah, im cheap. You try living in eastern europe.

Posted: Sep 14th 2010 4:12PM jimr9999us said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Score one for f2p...a great post that gives some hope :)
Reply

Posted: Sep 13th 2010 3:17PM Bhagpuss said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I hardly ever complain about the tone or accuracy of Massively reports, but this is the exception.

I've been playing EQ2 continually since beta. I normally play on a Station Access account, which I am keeping for the foreseeable future, but I've now also got a Silver and a Bronze account on EQ2X. Since the Freeport server started I haven't logged onto my Live account once. More than that, I have played more hours of EQ2X in the last couple of weeks than I played EQ2 in two months before that. All my other MMOs have taken a back seat because of the fun I'm having on my Silver account.

The community seems to be extremely friendly, responsive and mature to me. Much more so than the often cynical and jaded population on Live. Mrs Bhagpuss and I started a guild and we have people in it who aren't our alts for once. And they're people who we met in game, who knew very little about EQ at all, having come from That Other Game, and they are having a great time.

One thing I do agree on is that the numbers playing on Freeport really aren't spectacular. It's one busy server. Maybe three or four thousand online at peak, so on the 3:1 on/offline rule I can't see that the whole project can have drawn in many more than 10,000 players. And a lot of them have (or had) Live accounts.

In the end, I can't see EQ2X taking over from EQ2Live. Like the LiveGamer servers, it was seen by Live players as a threat but in the end I just don't believe that any change to the payment model will create more than passing interest in a six-year old MMO. On that basis, even an extra few thousand customers must be welcome.

Posted: Sep 13th 2010 3:58PM derrcase said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I noticed a few interesting things in the article. You say your biggest complaint with EQ2x (and F2P) is that they dilute the virtual world feel because of attracting transients and because of the move towards accessibility, worlds will be lost.

First, being free obviously attracts people who won't take root in the game and you seem to suggest keeping it P2P would solve the problem, but what does it matter? If it's F2P people will try the and if it's P2P much less people will. P2P will just bar people from playing at all. So its either F2P and some people will come and go or P2P and those same people never play at all while others would take root in either model. So you don't like people coming and going so you'd rather have them not come at all?

Second, you lament the move towards accessibility then you turn right around and say that the most horrific aspect of EQ2x is that the membership matrix is not simple (accessible) enough. Haha, what?

Posted: Sep 13th 2010 4:06PM Jef Reahard said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Oh noes, you got me!

Comparing the accessibility of a game to a fact sheet that gives general pricing info about said game isn't quite apples to apples, but ok.

Anyhow, yeah, I'm conflicted about the issue, you're right on that bit.
Reply

Breaking News

Breaking News

Massively-that-was


Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW