View Single Post
Old 01-10-2006, 02:47 PM   #36
Zhiroc
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 92
Zhiroc is on a distinguished road
I debated getting back into this argument, because I think I've already said my piece, and I doubt I'll change any minds. But oh well.... Believe it or not, I'm trying to be reasonable here....

I get, every year, enough frequent flyer miles through "free perks" from credit card companies, rental car agencies, and hotels to take at least 2 trips free. Yet we'd sue the airlines in a heartbeat if they started advertising themselves as "free to fly".

In advertising, it is not sufficient to make a completely true statement--it also has to be a not-misleading statement. For example, in the recent past, I believe the government has started to regulate the advertising terms "low-fat" and "light cigarettes" not because the claims were false (and they were not), but because they were misleading. The fact that they were universally used in the industries they pertained to before the gov't changed the rules did not matter.

Let's face it, advertising is basically taking stretching truth to an art form, no matter what the product or service. The line between ethical and unethical is in the eye of the beholder, and the government.

OK, if someone wants my definition of what makes a game, or anything else "free" that is not misleading, here it is: that a sizeable portion of the customer base uses it freely. This makes it a rather functional definition: It's usable/fun/etc. enough for a large enough group of people to see it that way. Otherwise, the "free" label is mostly a bait-and-switch ploy. I'd say that fraction should be somewhere around 20-25%. But again, here we'd argue as to the number.

The #1 thing that puts the "free" label on the IRE games on very shaky ethical grounds for me is the lack of documentation about the number of lessons it takes to level your skills. Without this vital piece of information, a prospective player can't evaluate the economics of the credit system for themselves. Oh, and by the way, the numbers attributed to me in an earlier post probably overstate it a little, because rereading the docs, I found that mini-skills take less lessons. How many less? I have no idea--it's not documented, and even my guild doesn't have those numbers posted. I also cannot inquire using a command in the game as to how many lessons I've spent on my skills, so at this point, I still have no clue.

And by the way, being one of those players in games that use spreadsheets and databases to understand games down to their basics, the above, and the implication it had on my RL costs was not apparent to me for at least a couple of months. The credits I bought using the 21-day novice bonus were plenty to handle skills at the beginning. I was just beginning to burn them up pretty quick near the end as I started getting to higher levels. If I had continued, I no doubt would have been spending at probably a rate 3x or more what I spend on a graphical "commercial" MMORPG, which I found astonishing. And that's without a single artifact... But that would have been my choice had I done that. Luckily, I decided to walk away...

I'd also question the ability of the credit market to support free players with enough credits at reasonable prices, but that's really hard to predict. It looks like there about 434 credits for sale right now (at about an avg of 3k/credit). But last summer, the number took a big dip, and prices almost doubled. Without following the market daily, it's hard to say whether there's enough there to support say, 5 or 10 players getting gold and buying them up to play free. It might be an interesting test, but I have no time for it, and no inclination to grief existing players if it does send prices through the roof.
Zhiroc is offline   Reply With Quote