Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
A preferred payment model poll
green13
Member UncommonPosts: 1,341
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
green13
Member UncommonPosts: 1,341
Comments
The results are not surprising.
It is only a small sample size (100), but the pattern of results remained perfectly stable after the first 20 respondents.
Very few players want MTs for aesthetic items (14%). The remainder are split almost evenly between not wanting them and not caring.
Almost no-one (1%) want MTs for items with in-game effects. The latest information we have from Cryptic indicates that such items will be in Champions Online.
Almost half (46%) of respondents said that MTs will affect their purchasing decision either strongly or very strongly. About a third (32%) said not at all.
More than half (56%) prefer the subscription model at the standard rate, and another 23% would be willing to pay a higher subscription. A tiny minority (4%) would like a freebie + MTs model. A small number (16%) supported the advertised payment model of subscription + MTs.
For subscription cost, many (45%) won't go over $15 a month, but 51% would pay $17 a month.
While very few players prefer the MT model (16%), 46% indicated that they would spend some money on them, with 8% saying they'd spend $12 or more per month.
_____________________
That final one is the most interesting one to me. It must look very appealing to Cryptic - that's almost 1 in 10 players paying double the subscription - but it looks bad to me as a player. That's in 1 in 10 players buying buttloads of items with in-game effects.
Cosmetic items I have no problem with, Battlefield heroes uses it as its main RMT function and it dosent effect the game at all.
Convinience items..XP boosters, inventory space, unique mounts..im less keen on this, but still wouldnt have an issue as long as the same items were obtainable in game. As long as you could earn a mount or buy bank space with game currency, its not a game breaker. XP boosters or skill boosters would have to be balanced.
What worries me and makes me wary is the game changing items Cryptic are offering, as it makes the entire game trivial. Who ever has the biggest wallet wins type of games ill gladly avoid, especially when they already have a sub fee tacked on. It reeks of greed and reminds me of scams like HG:L
Retail fee + subscription + the possibility little Kevin can use daddys credit card to dominate doesnt sound too appealing to me, but ill keep my eyes on it to see exactly what these items are going to look like. The game would have to be pretty spectacular to make me want to play it in that state.
For some reason the name 'Cryptic bucks' makes me chuckle, it just sounds so ridiculous. Cryptic bucks. Bucks of Cryptic.
They should make official polls on this before they release and lose half customer base because of MTs.
I'm against CO and STO currently, but that's just because of the MT being in-game items, aesthethical or functional, I'm against both.
I completely agree that decisions like this should be driven by hard data. And it's possible they do have some unpublished market research on this which shows that they'll pick up more money from MTs than they'll lose from subscriptions. All they need for that is enough players who care more about genre (i.e. superhero mmo) than payment model - which we can't tell from this poll put together by a CO forum member.
It's also possible, given their gradual method of release on the payment model, that they're measuring tolerance for MTs by pre-order sales.
But there's also an attitude in the industry that "we'll give it to you and you'll like it". Just look at how SOE put their shopping mall into EQ & EQ2 without any prior warning. And Cryptic's method of informing their potential customers of this change was.... well they didn't. We got it via a report from a beta previewer who happened to notice the in-game shop function.
It'll be fascinating to see how it all works out come launch day.
Question: Do you feel the views of the people on this forum regarding RMT are indicative of the average MMO gamer's views on RMT?
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Question: Do you feel the views of the people on this forum regarding RMT are indicative of the average MMO gamer's views on RMT?
Do you have any reason to believe that mmorg.com members aren't representaive of MMO gamers?
Though I think you might have misunderstood him. When he says "official polls" I read this as a "real survey". So while I think you'd probably get a representative sample from mmorpg.com forum members, you couldn't control for people doing silly things like participating multiple times under different account names.
Game developers do conduct this kind of research, as do academics and market research firms. I think that's what he was talking about.
57% either don't care about RMT existing or want it in the game. So the people totally against it are actually the minority. But still they probably lost about 25% of the people interested in this game solely because of RMT.
Erm - no.
The poll says - and this is in relation to MTs for aesthetic items only - 14% want them, 46% don't want them and 37% don't care.
So that would make 51% who either don't care or who want aesthetic MTs or 83% who don't care or don't want them.
Not hard to spot the highest number there....
Following up on the notion of finding some more robust research on this topic, I managed to dig up a few interesting reports online.
1) This article reports results showing that the subscription mmo market is still growing - and grew by 22%in 2008. And growth outside of WOW is on the rise - that was 12% in 2007 but 27% in 2008.
http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=23003
2 ) This article reports results from a study on the likelihood of non-mmo'ers to enter the market for either subscription or free + MT based games.
http://www.fatfoogoo.com/2008/07/mmo%E2%80%99s-need-to-offer-more-free-to-play-micro-transaction-based-titles/
The results (you can click on the graph to get a bigger image) are just the percentage of respondents saying they were highly interested (i.e. scored 6 or 7 on a 7 point scale of interest) in either subscription or free + MT payment model mmos. While some in the gaming industry have misrepresented these results - eg. massively.com falsely reported this as "Subscription model unappealing to majority of users" - all these results say is that people not currently playing an mmo (i.e. not even "users") are more likely to be interested if it's free. That's hardly surprising - if you presented the same option with any other activity someone isn't already engaged in and gave them a free and a non-free version, you'd probably get similar results.
3) Some actual figures from a game that has separate subscription and microtransaction versions of the game.
http://www.mmorpg-center.com/story-479-The-Revenues-behind-the-Free-MMORPG.html
It's interesting that he makes more from the MT version of this ($230k per month from MT version, 70k from subscriptions) and that a tiny minority of players in the MT version are contributing an average of $50 a month. Averaged over all users, that drops to about $1 to $2 per player (because most will never pay anything).
If anyone knows of any other freely published research that's available online (I saw one site wanting $3000 to buy their report!), I'd love to look at it.
I'm personally encouraged by that first article. I'd honestly give up mmo'ing entirely if the whole market jumped on the microtransaction bandwagon, but it looks like I'll have many happy years of subscription gaming ahead of me
The poll results match my views except that I'd likely spend $10 or so every few months if there was something I really wanted to purchase through a micro-transaction. Personally it bugs me that devs are creating two lists of costume pieces for those that don't pay above subscription price and those who do. The only way I'd ever be fully comfortable with micro-transactions is if they keep the items to just costume pieces or aesthetics and if people were only buying things that other players could eventually purchase by playing the game over a longer period of time.
Though, I will at least give Champions a chance no matter what they decide to do.
I was thinking of trying this game out, but after hearing about sub + cash shop, I really don't want to anymore. I have no problem with cash shops that sell cosmetic items. I have a problem with subscribing while a cash shop is available. IMO if you have a cash shop for your game it should be F2P. Maybe if the sub fee was only $5 a month with the shop, I wouldn't mind.
I agree. I don't like it, no matter how trendy it becomes in the industry. I think we must resist and show them, we don't agree.
Erm - no.
The poll says - and this is in relation to MTs for aesthetic items only - 14% want them, 46% don't want them and 37% don't care.
So that would make 51% who either don't care or who want aesthetic MTs or 83% who don't care or don't want them.
Not hard to spot the highest number there....
46% don't want them but that doesn't neccessarily mean they won't play because it's there. Of that 46% how many people ABSOLUTELY WON'T PLAY because of RT? It could be 40% or as little as 10%, therefore the minority.
Also why do you count the people who don't care as part of your percentage?
Question: Do you feel the views of the people on this forum regarding RMT are indicative of the average MMO gamer's views on RMT?
Do you have any reason to believe that mmorg.com members aren't representaive of MMO gamers?
They are representative of a certain subset, but not of the norm. They are, in general, the more hardcore gamers - regularly visiting a third party site for a video game is testament to that. Many of the topics discussed passionately as near do or die issues here are of little or no concern at all to the general MMO gamer.
Where the average gamer would ask of a new MMO "Is it fun?" an MMORPG.com poster's first questions would probably be
- Are the graphics state of the art?
- How many subscribers does it have?
- What are they doing about botters and hacks?
The average MMO gamer plays a game until it isn't fun and then cancels. An MMORPG.com gamer is more likely to write an essay about why he is quitting, what the developers did wrong, and on what specific conditions he will even consider coming back... and continue to play the game.
Eric is under the impression that they will "lose half their customer base because of MTs" which, by the sentiments expressed on these boards, one would think to be a correct assessment, despite the incredible successes that companies like Aeria Games, K2 Networks and Nexon have experienced in the NA market for years. The regulars of a particular forum or fansite are more hardcore/extreme players and their views/concerns will be very different from your average gamer.
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Erm - no.
The poll says - and this is in relation to MTs for aesthetic items only - 14% want them, 46% don't want them and 37% don't care.
So that would make 51% who either don't care or who want aesthetic MTs or 83% who don't care or don't want them.
Not hard to spot the highest number there....
46% don't want them but that doesn't neccessarily mean they won't play because it's there. Of that 46% how many people ABSOLUTELY WON'T PLAY because of RT? It could be 40% or as little as 10%, therefore the minority.
Also why do you count the people who don't care as part of your percentage?
Why did you count them in yours?
Anyway, I'm glad to see the vast majority of people are against micro-transactions. Terrible, terrible concept.
Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic
Played: SWG, Guild Wars, WoW
Playing: Eve Online, Counter-strike
Loved: Star Wars Galaxies
Waiting for: Earthrise, Guild Wars 2, anything sandbox.
/facepalm
they are not the 'vast majority' but if you want to believe that and keep trolling on a message board for a game you absolutely hate, then go right ahead.
Nice poll and good info ....... But i really think this is the way MMO's are going. MT's are every where. Your cable company has them .... you have basic cable and for a small fee more you get HD ...... Your cell phone company has them ..... you want free nights and weekends?? thats only $$ more. You buy a car and want an extra warranty that will cost just $$$$ more. ECT........ I can on for days about real world MT'S. Its just a matter of time before MMO's do it. What if WoW, Aion , AoC , WAR, had them would you stop playing your MMO just because of this. PPL take change hard, and MMO's are changing, they need your $$$.
Played Aoc/DDO/FFXI/WAR / LoTRo / CO / Aion
Playing Rift
Waiting for FFXIV to be the game it should. so sad =(
Erm - no.
The poll says - and this is in relation to MTs for aesthetic items only - 14% want them, 46% don't want them and 37% don't care.
So that would make 51% who either don't care or who want aesthetic MTs or 83% who don't care or don't want them.
Not hard to spot the highest number there....
46% don't want them but that doesn't neccessarily mean they won't play because it's there. Of that 46% how many people ABSOLUTELY WON'T PLAY because of RT? It could be 40% or as little as 10%, therefore the minority.
Also why do you count the people who don't care as part of your percentage?
I applaud your creativity, but seriously...
You took a 14% who wanted aesthetic MTs and interpreted that as a "minority" of players don't want them. The poll said that 46% of players don't want them and 37% don't care. You added the don't cares to the wants to reach your strange conclusion - so why would you question someone adding the don't wants to the don't cares? By no stretch of the reasonable imagination can you conclude from those statistics that the "people totally against it are in the minority".
To give some idea of how many people absolutely won't play, while this question wasn't specifically asked (note that I didn't create this poll) we can make reasonable inferences based on responses to other questions, which is exactly what I did earlier in this thread.
Almost half (46%) of respondents said that MTs will affect their purchasing decision either strongly or very strongly. About a third (32%) said not at all.
More than half (56%) prefer the subscription model at the standard rate, and another 23% would be willing to pay a higher subscription. A tiny minority (4%) would like a freebie + MTs model. A small number (16%) supported the advertised payment model of subscription + MTs.
For subscription cost, many (45%) won't go over $15 a month, but 51% would pay $17 a month.
While very few players prefer the MT model (16%), 46% indicated that they would spend some money on them, with 8% saying they'd spend $12 or more per month.
It looks like another 500 people have responded to the poll and the results have shifted a bit away from favouring MTs but the overall pattern is still similar.
There's 72% of respondents saying no to aesthetic MTs and 84% saying no to in-game effects MTs.
We also have 72% of respondents saying that the payment model will strongly or very strongly affect their decision to purchase the game and 76% say they prefer the subscription model (at the standard rate) with only 13% supporting subscription + MTs.
Put all of these together and it's obvious that the existing payment model will have a significant negative influence on subscriptions.
The other statistic that we need to look at though, as I did before, is the percentage of respondents who indicate that they'd spend any money on MTs. The other statistics all point to preference but this one speaks to tolerance. While there's a steady 12-13% responding that they want either aesthetic or in-game MTs and prefer the subscription + MTs model, 26% indicate that they're willing to spend at least some money on MTs.
So again, these results give no indication that people against MTs are a minority. They say exactly the opposite.
Question: Do you feel the views of the people on this forum regarding RMT are indicative of the average MMO gamer's views on RMT?
Do you have any reason to believe that mmorg.com members aren't representaive of MMO gamers?
They are representative of a certain subset, but not of the norm. They are, in general, the more hardcore gamers - regularly visiting a third party site for a video game is testament to that. Many of the topics discussed passionately as near do or die issues here are of little or no concern at all to the general MMO gamer.
But in the context of this issue, do you consider them unrepresentative?
What case could be made for casual gamers being willing to spend more for a game than hard-core gamers?
If this was a question of freebie + MTs versus subscription, then there would be a difference. Casual gamers are more tolerant of the freebie + MTs model, because they don't like subscriptions. But this is a subscription + MTs model which marries the worst of both models.
The research that has been done on this issue with both groups suggests that neither would find appeal in this model. So the sample is probably respresentative for this particular poll.
Question: Do you feel the views of the people on this forum regarding RMT are indicative of the average MMO gamer's views on RMT?
Do you have any reason to believe that mmorg.com members aren't representaive of MMO gamers?
They are representative of a certain subset, but not of the norm. They are, in general, the more hardcore gamers - regularly visiting a third party site for a video game is testament to that. Many of the topics discussed passionately as near do or die issues here are of little or no concern at all to the general MMO gamer.
But in the context of this issue, do you consider them unrepresentative?
Yes.
What case could be made for casual gamers being willing to spend more for a game than hard-core gamers?
When they perceive the value of the extras to be worth the money they are spending. You seem to be working under the assumption that the company is shooting for sub + RMT from everyone, when the reality is they know that only a small percentage spend on RMT. Devs already know this and build their model based on that.
Paying for extras in a subscription game is nothing new. It's been around for years and has been successful (indicating the playerbase accepts it and likes it) in each MMO that has done it.
If this was a question of freebie + MTs versus subscription, then there would be a difference. Casual gamers are more tolerant of the freebie + MTs model, because they don't like subscriptions. But this is a subscription + MTs model which marries the worst of both models.
To YOU it is the worst of both models. To others, it's a feature. You are realying your personal opinion as fact. If you pay for a ticket to go to a sports game, do you get upset they are selling beer and jerseys, or do you look forward to buying a cold beer or two? It's a cool extra that makes the experience just that much more fun for some. Excuse me.. for a LOT of people.
The research that has been done on this issue with both groups suggests that neither would find appeal in this model. So the sample is probably respresentative for this particular poll.
Ok, I'll bite... can you link the research, please?
A great thread for you to read would be the one on de-mystifying CO:
www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/244670/Demystifying-MicroTransactions-in-Champions-Online.html
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Question: Do you feel the views of the people on this forum regarding RMT are indicative of the average MMO gamer's views on RMT?
No.
And that's the reason that by official polls I mean on CO's official forums and not MMORPG.com forums.
Because IMO they surely aren't reading their 200+ pages of MT discussion, which is also a very hot topic over there, yet calling it feedback. And if I gave a damn about potential player feedback at that point, I would make a poll for some real results.
A poll there would make the settle the matter on who should stop acting as "majority" over the case, plus the obvious numbers of subscribers. They are gambling and besides disliking item shop MTs, there's the fact you may end up spending $50 for a game that may turn F2P weeks later, because as I mentioned it is a gamble, it's a first-of-a-kind game. For them it's a win-win though as they can always go F2P, numbers could only potentially legitimate the anti-MT crowd.
I agree on your point about a poll on their forums, but... what is the 'first of a kind' feature here?
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Do you want microtransactions for aesthetic items?
14% (91) Yes
72% (457) No
13% (82) Don't care
630 voters have answered this question.
Do you want microtransactions for items with in-game effects (stats, new powers, etc)?
1% (12) Yes
84% (535) No
13% (83) Don't Care
630 voters have answered this question.
How strongly do you think microtransactions will affect your purchasing decision for Champions Online?
65% (409) Very strongly
7% (47) Strongly
5% (33) Moderately
2% (18) Slightly
18% (118) Not at all
625 voters have answered this question.
Which payment system do you prefer?
76% (478) Subscription at standard rate
6% (42) Subscription only, at a higher than standard rate if need be
13% (87) Subscription at standard rate plus microtransactions
2% (13) Free subscription plus microtransactions
1% (7) Other (Please specify)
627 voters have answered this question.
-----------------------------------------------------
Those numbers are pretty clear. RMT is EXTREMELY unpopular no matter how you spin it.
Alltern8 Blog | Star Wars Space Combat and The Old Republic | Cryptic Studios - A Pre Post-Mortem | Klingon Preview, STO's Monster Play
I agree on your point about a poll on their forums, but... what is the 'first of a kind' feature here?
Sorry, I didn't make it very clear, it's regarding the commercial model.
The Item Mall MT + Retail and Subscription model, it's like the sum of F2P and P2P models. Games either chose one or the other, or aimed at used a cheap "premium" subscription that is not technically required to play. This is the first one I know attempting both models in this way, and it's why I call it a gamble.
Question: Do you feel the views of the people on this forum regarding RMT are indicative of the average MMO gamer's views on RMT?
Do you have any reason to believe that mmorg.com members aren't representaive of MMO gamers?
They are representative of a certain subset, but not of the norm. They are, in general, the more hardcore gamers - regularly visiting a third party site for a video game is testament to that. Many of the topics discussed passionately as near do or die issues here are of little or no concern at all to the general MMO gamer.
But in the context of this issue, do you consider them unrepresentative?
Yes.
What case could be made for casual gamers being willing to spend more for a game than hard-core gamers?
When they perceive the value of the extras to be worth the money they are spending. You seem to be working under the assumption that the company is shooting for sub + RMT from everyone, when the reality is they know that only a small percentage spend on RMT. Devs already know this and build their model based on that.
Paying for extras in a subscription game is nothing new. It's been around for years and has been successful (indicating the playerbase accepts it and likes it) in each MMO that has done it.
If this was a question of freebie + MTs versus subscription, then there would be a difference. Casual gamers are more tolerant of the freebie + MTs model, because they don't like subscriptions. But this is a subscription + MTs model which marries the worst of both models.
To YOU it is the worst of both models. To others, it's a feature. You are realying your personal opinion as fact. If you pay for a ticket to go to a sports game, do you get upset they are selling beer and jerseys, or do you look forward to buying a cold beer or two? It's a cool extra that makes the experience just that much more fun for some. Excuse me.. for a LOT of people.
The research that has been done on this issue with both groups suggests that neither would find appeal in this model. So the sample is probably respresentative for this particular poll.
Ok, I'll bite... can you link the research, please?
A great thread for you to read would be the one on de-mystifying CO:
www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/244670/Demystifying-MicroTransactions-in-Champions-Online.html
Too funny.
A great thread for you to read might be this one (note the first response)
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/244670/Demystifying-MicroTransactions-in-Champions-Online.html
And I posted said research earlier in this thread we're in now.
What you/Bill call MTs in other mmos aren't. Both the available research and common sense tell us that CO's payment model is a major handicap, which we'll all see come September.