Given the right game, Free2Play is okay by me. I’d prefer a pay-once-and-own-it model (ala Guild Wars or any traditional videogame), but we cannot always get what we wish for. For an ever-evolving content game like an MMORPG, I still feel subscriptions deliver the content I would prefer to play. I dislike content measured out in bite-sizes and gated, which is typical of the Free2Play model.

So on a purely gameplay perspective, it really depends on the game. I’d rather gameplay directed the business model rather than the other way around, that’s for sure.

One part of Free2Play that irks me is the psychology of it. It’s not entirely “free”, it’s more of a free trial. To enjoy the whole game, you usually have to purchase something and quite often it ends up more expensive than a subscription. It’s a bit insidious. Just like many gamblers will claim they’re always up regardless of overwhelming statistics against them, many Free2Play players convince themselves they’re saving money, but that just doesn’t add up considering how insanely profitable it has been.

I have to give kudos to Tesh again, for often pointing this out: Subscriptions favour hardcore players while Free2Play favours casual (at least in time-played). If you play only occasionally or in short bursts, Free2Play gets a lot closer to free. Counterwise, if you get really involved, then subscriptions are cheaper. Most MMO players put in a good deal of time and effort into these games. I can’t recall what the quoted average gametime is for WoW players, but it isn’t “casual”.

The terminology lies to us. Most players consider themselves casual, but most players will also accumulate a lot of purchases via microtransactions.

On a cost basis alone, the best scenario is to have both choices and wisely choose between them: Subscription or Free2Play. Turbine provides this and that’s a saving grace. I may not like how they’ve gotten there, but they do have some better options than elsewhere.

I wish it was more about the gameplay. I really do.

How does that saying go? Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice, shame on you? The vast majority of licensed games I’ve played have been inferior to original content. The bigger the license, the worse it gets. The number of games that have “Star Wars” in their title that I have actually enjoyed are very few. Sure, there are some exceptions, but most of the time the games screw up on one side or the other:

Either they’ve compromised gameplay to squeeze it into the established settings, or they’ve compromised the setting by squeezing it into their gameplay.

When Publishers are well aware the license is the main selling point, it affects development funding. If they’ve spent most of their budget on the name… Well I’m sure you can sort out the conclusions there.

Of course, here’s the clincher: If the game is done really well and they somehow get gameplay and setting to match, it’s a thrill isn’t it? I know I can name a few great worlds I’d like to play in. Most of those are much smaller licenses though.

A game is a challenge within a subset of rules.

Challenge doesn’t necessarily mean hard, because it could be anything, even pure luck. Roll the dice and win, or in the best example: A slot machine is still a game. Of course, even a slot machine has rules, you can’t just smash it open.

I think most people would define pure luck as poor gameplay, regardless of how compelled they may be to play.

I also think most people would define something that they cannot ‘beat’ as poor gameplay, but that’s more personal, because something extraordinarily difficult for one person could be relatively easy for another. Variety is the best solution.

The problem, I feel, is that the entire games industry is focusing on making things more casual / easy / accessible. It’s a natural turn, why wouldn’t they want to have a wider base of customers to sell to? So the ‘hardcore gamer’ as it were, is being vilified, even by people who probably fit the description (key note: If you’ve ever written a word about games on your blog). The bandwagon is currently praising elements that aren’t really gameplay.

The easiest way to become more accessible is to reduce gameplay. Reduce the challenge. It’s the biggest barrier, right?

The easiest way to reduce barriers is to lax and widen the ruleset. Rules are barriers.

After reducing challenge and rules, the next step to more inclusion is to increase the rewards. Dangle the carrot, maybe even drop it more often. Human beings have complex and numerous subtle incentives that they’ll react to.

In the hunt for reaching a wider, more casual market, developers have to be careful they aren’t gutting their games in the process.

Let’s just please not end up playing nothing but slot machines.

1. Progression – Experience to level, or obtaining gear at Endgame.
2. Rewards – Gear, currency, notoriety or any other status-symbol or in-game possession.
3. Fun Factors – Is the activity just plain fun to do, or awe-inspiring in some way?
4. Competition – Many players are keen to compete and compare their performance with other players / groups / guilds / factions.
5. Social Interaction – At the core of any multiplayer RPG is the basic social satisfaction from hanging out with your friends & guildmates, teaming up in a cooperative way and meeting / interacting with new people. Human desire to be accepted as part of a group should not be overlooked.

Each of these can motivate players in different directions. For instance, an activity could be fun, but the players may feel discouraged if it doesn’t provide experience. It’s great to be social, but if solo’ing is the fastest way to level, players will shun teaming up.

The first two motivations can be considered incentives in their purest form, in a way they are both rewards although it’s important to separate them because one will motivate a certain type of player whereas the other may not.

In an interview with Ten Ton Hammer, Mark Jacobs repeated an established adage in MMORPGs:
[quote=Mark Jacobs]
Players are always going to look for the quickest way to level. That’s true for any MMO. Any developer that doesn’t see that hasn’t been paying enough attention.
[/quote]

I’d call this more truthiness than truism, because it’s missing an important element–

Add Convenience

Convenience is the sixth motivator and it’s the trump card. You can take any combination of the above and mix in convenience and whatever the activity is, it will go over in a big way. One example is if quests are trackable on a map, most players will naturally complete the quests that are closest rather than any sort of story-progression.

Players will always find the shortcuts.

For Warhammer, Scenarios match multiple categories, they’re certainly competitive and fun and if the queues are short the experience is good. But above all, they’re super-convenient.

Mythic may try to nerf Scenarios, or more likely boost the incentives for other activities, but the fact of the matter is that they need to boost all of the motivators, not just exp and rewards if they hope to make their game more well rounded and get players deeper into RvR and Public Quests.