Feldon 
Last Thursday we noticed a curious tweet and Facebook post from EQ2’s Community Manager Isulith regarding the Freeport server and Free-to-Play players:
Just as a friendly reminder for Facebook users on the EverQuest II FB page: please do not use the term “freeps”.
If you have been playing on PvP servers for a while (especially back when there was more than one) you probably wondered how “freep” could be offensive, since it has traditionally referred to players aligned with City of Freeport faction.
In response to several questions from players, Isulith had this response:
The issue is when people are using it to say “freeps get off my server,” etc.
Using it in PvP is fine. It becomes an issue when players are using it against other players to be derogatory.
and:
Some players are using it as a term to encompass all free players in a derogatory way.
Certainly, we’ve noticed an influx of both new and returning players (who were automatically granted Silver access, and grandfathered use of character slots and races, but who must still buy item and broker unlocks) wondering why their gear is unequipped, and what other restrictions they now face as Free-to-Play members.
What do you think?
- Do you find “freeps” to be a derogatory term?
- Do you think it’s a good use of SOE’s time to sanitize such comments from their Facebook feed(s)?
- Do you feel the rest of us pay $14.99/month for a game other people are playing for free (plus unlocks)? Keep in mind some people pay as little as $2.50 a month if they took advantage of Triple SC and bought a year’s sub in advance.
“Do you think it’s a good use of SOE’s time to sanitize such comments from their Facebook feed(s)?”
Seriously? What kind of leading, biased question is that? Isulith is in community relations, that kind of stuff is what they do. Would you rather she be off coding? I’m not sure that would be a good idea.
– Terms are not inherently derogatory, but I have no doubt at all that this one is being used that way. As a player of Extended back when that existed, I can tell you that the hate between the two payment models is as bitter and pervasive as it is ridiculous.
– I think that from a business perspective, SOE would be foolish to allow subscribers to drive away their hoped-for new F2P customer base through blanket derogatory language. Honestly I am surprised that I’ve never seen any other company take a stand against this sort of behavior before.
– I think that as customers, each of us should consider for ourselves which payment model works best for us. If you find yourself upset that non-subscribers are playing for less, that would seem to indicate that you should switch to the non-subscription model yourself. If you’re not willing to do that, it indicates that the F2P option isn’t such a great deal after all, for your own situation. In either case, I honestly don’t understand what there is to complain about, though I would welcome an explanation from someone who feels that way.
Every driver is also a pedestrian who just doesn’t happen to be walking right now. Every subscriber is a free player who currently happens to be subscribing.
I spent a good deal of this Double XP weekend mentoring my Level 90 Silver-account Berserker to my Level 30 All-Access-Gold Beastlord. I’ve had the paid subscription since launch (earlier really since it rolls on from EQ1), I created the Silver account when EQ2X began and I currently have another four or five Silver accounts that I upgraded from Bronze on the Triple-SC weekend.
There’s no unbreachable divide between the payment options. It’s not a civil war or a religion. You don’t have to pick sides or convert. Just USE the options the way YOU want to and let everyone else do the same.
The idea that some people are of a lesser economic rank (and thus implying they are inferior players in some way) is just never going to go away, not in real life, not in a game world played by real people. Players with more money get more stuff that makes life better, a fact of life in and out of Norrath. I do think the official weighing in on this issue not only brings attention to it, but does nothing to stop it (oh I shouldn’t say that? oh my gosh, I didn’t realize I was being rude! Sure.). Now we ALL know that there’s some kind of attitude about bronze or silver players that’s going on, when I would guess the majority had no idea it was even an issue.
It is interesting that this has arisen, although perhaps not surprising, since as Feldon pointed out, some people do pay less than other people to play the same game. I don’t particularly find “freeps” a derogatory term, but perhaps it’s now negative because it implies that those who are playing for free or almost free have less to play with, in the game, than those who either have gold as a monthly sub, just as before, or got gold for less by playing the numbers game. Is it derogatory because it implies a lack of committment to the game, or a lack of money outside the game? I for one don’t care if someone pays nothing or $14.99 a month, although perhaps I should, since the tank with treasured armor isn’t going to keep me alive in heroic instances, and that certainly impacts my gameplay. The simple fact is that with the new system, a great deal of game success depends on how much one spends, versus how well one plays. In treasured gear and apprentice spells you are not going to be as an effective a player, despite every effort to do so, which brings about the current dilemma on the haves, and the have nots, and what to call them. And once more game changing items appear on the marketplace, which they will, then the economic divide will gap even wider, and the labels will keep on coming. That’s human nature.
SOE has developed its very own little class system of the haves and the have nots (and implies that we all need to be haves, by spending more money), and now is in a tizzy when confronted with the social fall out. Some folks played the system — and didn’t Linda Carlson even suggest we do so, when she announced players should wait for double station cash to buy AOD? — and paid less and have it all, some people spend the same money as before the change and have it all, and then there are those who are on the pay as you go, which apparently has now been deemed inferior.
It used to be that “raiders” and “hard core” players (and don’t forget min/maxers) were cliques people could point to, versus the “casuals.” Raiders want this, and raiders want that, and the casuals are dumbing down the game with their requests, etc., etc. Still goes on. Now we have a new set of distinctions, based on spending cash, not time.
SOE is using the economic wrench by requiring players to spend more real cash to play on a level playing field. You can’t expect that kind of real social change not to have some serious fallout in the player base. The days of a free world, where we all paid the same and worked for our rewards, are gone. When social and economic distinctions are made this obvious, it is only a matter of time before people start putting labels on things, and obviously, derogatory ones at that.
I truly wish I could edit, because I think SOE has every right to santize their facebook page of language they find offensive, and I guess “freep” is now offensive to some people. They have a language filter in game, which I am sure will be adding “freep” sometime soon. However, I still think the distinctions and name calling will go on whether they allow it on an official site or not, and my reasons stand above.
I agree with the first post, its like arguing why the graphic designers aren’t squashing bugs in the code. The community manager is suppose to be promoting the game and community so trying to prevent conflict would be part of his job.
Now I don’t really care about the term and never have heard it or seen it yet in chat (but I turn chat off most of the time) but I’m also an insensitive bastard as well that isnt offended easily (unless you bash space cats.)
We’re all customers one way or another, I would be surprised to see this time next year what percentage of there customer base has never paid sony one dime to play I would bet its pretty low.
I never understood what the phrase “class warfare” really meant until I was exposed to forums for hybrid-F2P games. It’s the same in every one I’ve personally seen.
It seems that some subscribers would be happier seeing things taken away from non-subscribers than to receive more themselves. As Bhagpuss references, there’s a tendency for people to take a certain payment model and make it a part of their identity, investing their ego into it–and to see those who use the other model as the enemy.
Granted, it may just be a vocal minority. But all the same, a hostile vocal minority is entirely capable of driving away potential customers.
@Kwill:
“The simple fact is that with the new system, a great deal of game success depends on how much one spends, versus how well one plays.”
If you’re viewing DoV as the only part of the game that counts, then you may be right. If someone is dedicated to spending absolutely nothing, DoV is largely off limits.
In the rest of the game, however, they can do just fine. You reference “apprentice spells and treasured gear” even though no account type is restricted that heavily–at worst, one is limited to mastercrafted gear and adept spells, which at this point (due to all the extra AAs and the gear revamp) is sufficient for pretty much anything below 90.
And I have to add, there’s nothing stopping a subscriber from showing up to your group with a tank in treasured gear. I’ve known plenty who would. And I think it’s worth noting that in my time on Extended I never encountered anyone who insisted on doing content in insufficient gear with the justification that it’s the best they were allowed to use–no, on the contrary they realized what was off limits and stayed away, or (more often) bought unlockers for the gear they would need. “Free players are going to ruin my group” is a common sentiment, but I’ve never seen it happen in reality. But perhaps I’ve just been lucky.
I should also add that someone dedicated to spending absolutely nothing doesn’t have Velious, since that costs money, so you need not worry about them showing up to your Kael or Drunder group. And since DoV is largely the only content that would require unlocks anyway…
This is the first I’ve heard this term. Then again I play a Qeynosian on Antonia Bayle and Freeport as a gold subscriber since launch day, so I don’t know of the prejudice that lies beyond those walls. Seriously though, some people take this game way too seriously when they start belittling and attacking their fellow player over such ridiculous reasons. Oh boy he plays for free or lives in freeport, woop de do. As if it somehow effects our gameplay… The human race has a affinity to hate each other. It’s sad to see this projected into a fantasy video game. It shows a lack of individual integrity. EQ2 is a broad enough game that what joe the swashy does with his character should have no effect on willy the wizard, but there’s always a reason for him to complain on the forums though.
@claviarm — I agree, the name calling does seem like a witch hunt for players who would dare to show up with sub-par gear (otherwise, who cares?). You are correct, it is DoV content that is the issue, but since they are pushing everyone to get to 90 as fast as possible, at least it seems that way to me, then is the tin-foil hat theory that everyone will just go Gold so they can play?
It is true that below 89 the content is do-able with less than raid gear and un-mastered, even with just adepts and quest gear. I certainly have done it. But you have to actually take your time, fight at or under your level, for the most part, and not expect to get to 90 in a week.
I should make it clear that I personally dislike free to play, because I don’t like being asked to pay for every little thing. I have a Gold subscription so I can play as I have been. Some people may love the cafeteria plan of buying just what they want, and saving money by not paying for things they don’t want.
@eschia — a long time ago, I did a scholarly paper on the topic of how despite females and male characters being entirely equal in EQ2 (and other video games) people still treated any player perceived to be a female differently than male players. They got more free stuff, they weren’t expected to tank (that has changed, I think), and they got propositioned and hassled.
So, sadly, it is human nature to take a blank slate and make it into what we are familiar with, good or bad.
It was a sad state of affairs in my eyes SOE trying to santise facebook,how utterly deluded can you be?
Freeps is a non word,if you take offence at it well perhaps you shouldnt be playing an MMO?i see far worse in 1=9 chat that makes me either laugh of when it gets too much i consider reporting the person who’s played(ive yet to do so by the way).
F2P is here and so what? for the moment it isnt effecting my gameplay(i suspect that will change and soon too and at that time i will leave the game) but for now the players that have come back or indeed are trying it are welcome in my eyes and when SOE starts selling the game changing gear it wont be those players fault either.
By all means stamp out any form of racism but freeps? time to get a grip in my eyes
Do you find “freeps” to be a derogatory term?
Sure, but so is noob, scrub, baddie, and all kinds of other tepid terms players throw around to elevate themselves from the unwashed masses.
Free-to-players, like it or not, are institutionally inferior due to equipment restrictions, and are further made inferior by their very definition. They play for free. Regardless of the fact they probably bring more money in for Sony than subscribers, this nomenclature will always label them as “freeloaders” by default.
Do you think it’s a good use of SOE’s time to sanitize such comments from their Facebook feed(s)?
I can only assume this is rhetorical and/or tongue-in-cheek.
Do you feel the rest of us pay $14.99/month for a game other people are playing for free (plus unlocks)? Keep in mind some people pay as little as $2.50 a month if they took advantage of Triple SC and bought a year’s sub in advance.
No. I see F2P as a demo. I’m sure there are plenty of freetards that get nickled and dimed all the way to 90, but I think the vast majority of F2Pers either play a little bit at a time and don’t care, or quit after they determine the game’s not for them, or subscribe.
I was deleted from the EQ2 page because I repeatedly called out the developers for their poor direction they are taking the game ans despite the fact no one disagree with me and a lot of people actually added to my griefs I was still deleted and banned from the EQ2 facebook page.
Freep those freepin freeps!
By the time I read the facebook comments about freep, those negative comments have already been purged from facebook. So I did not see the entire back and forth.
However we have class warfare in eq2 forums. I was actually called an old dinosaur one that should go away and die, by a certain free to play person. Seams this person looks down his nose at vets. He said its “not your game any more” that was the edited version of it. So it does exist. I personally don’t have a problem with the free to play crowd or the freeport server, but a lot of them have problems with us vets, and it shows. All you have to do is read the threads about freeport taking away options up to 11 pages now, and another one about free to play.
What is sad about “R’s” post about it not being my game an more, is he might be right SJ and crowd seam to have changed the demographic of who they want playing their game.
I don’t know about the facebook post, but the eq2forms are full of this type of hate going back and forth between free to play folks and vets alike. Something I bet SJ and them did not plan on happening.
Oh and if SOE spent half the time they do removing comments on their facebook site and banning folks, and turned that time into fixing broken bits of their game, then maybe the game would start getting better.
Talk about mixed up priorities.
I saw that exchange, Isest … and yes, SOE does seem to be moving toward the more casual customer that will buy fluff items and not complain about various broken things, instead “enjoy the challenge.”
Do you find “freeps” to be a derogatory term?
I think its insulting to think that players can’t create there own terminology and use it freely. Of course as long as it isn’t a word based on a historic race or swear word. Anyways, when I think freep, I can’t shake out of my head Detroit FreePress (Freep.com) being a Michigander.
Do you think it’s a good use of SOE’s time to sanitize such comments from their Facebook feed(s)?
Scrubbing social channels that are not racist, or contain swear words, hurtful/trolling comments… etc. is really bad form. They should no better than that! Opening the game up to F2P and quickly gaining player base that was previously restricted by the upfront monthly and game cost – what did they think was going to happen:
It would attract mature, well mannered players???? That these new players wouldn’t taint the somewhat well mannered community that previously existed???? I’ll leave that, at that to not turn this into a book 🙂
Do you feel the rest of us pay $14.99/month for a game other people are playing for free (plus unlocks)? Keep in mind some people pay as little as $2.50 a month if they took advantage of Triple SC and bought a year’s sub in advance.
I gladly pay 14.99 per month with my free 500SC per month. Take away the 500SC, my tune might change, but for now I’m good with it. But all business’ have promotional events to create buzz. If a player is in tune with the buzz and can take advantage of it – good for them! If they don’t because they missed it, or don’t care to try, then they should have been more in tune.
I also think they were well aware of what they did. They know its going to be rocky still while they release the new Velious content, and if they can lock a player in for a year while they get everything balanced that might have been their partial intention.
I think it’s basically SOE is stating posters/players can’t use any derogatory slang, if it’s meant to hurt. So whether its historically racial or brand new minted to make fun of people who won’t spend money on a sub, same basic idea that a group of people is being singled out as different (and possibly inferior in some way).
@harvey
(1) freeps not a real word a made up word and folks need to grow thick skins otherwise they going to have a hard time adjusting to the real world.
(2) SOE has always been heavy handed in the forums and really on facebook. If they took that energy and spent time fixing broken stuff in the game we would all be better.
(3) I am sick of subsidising the free to play guys only to have them get on the eq2 forums and talk down to those of us who are vets and or paying a sub. Class warfare works both ways. Yea some of them are paying for unlocks or what not, I am talking the rif raff who shows up and plays the game totally for free with no unlocks, no anything and does it on my dime, and that is what frost me the most, my sub going to pay for those guys using bandwidth, with no intentions of supporting the game they are playing. Sorry if that ruffles feathers but that’s the way I see it.
My sub is up in 4 months, we shall see what happens then.
Sony has a long track record of ignoring the long-time players, and favoring the newer ones. This is not unexpected, but sometimes the balance makes one question if the game is as fun as it should be for the time and money we have given to Sony over the last 7 years.
Examples are older zone falling apart (I think I still fall through the floor in Sol’s Eye when walking through doors), Call of the Veteran not working much of the time (here’s your reward, vets! It’s only been broken two years now…) and many other examples that bother us old farts.
The new players are, however, where it is at for Sony. If only old or returning players were their main focus the game would stagnate as that is a diminishing population. We need new blood, and if free to play gets that, great!
Those of us who choose to pay the $15/month or more choose that. We could have converted over to the F2P model. Perhaps Sony should consider adding a monthly reward of for those who remain on the monthly subscription model, much like they do for those who pre-purchase expansions. Give us some in-game goodie that lets us feel appreciated for paying $144/year more than those free to players who bought in advance.