Various panels and devlopers, namely its been brought up at AGDC among others. Including John Blakely (VP of Sony Online Entertainment), Mark Jacobs (VP EA, Studio GM EA Mythic), Raph Koster (President Areae), and Erik Bethke (CEO GoPets).
And your sources for the "steadfast rule"? Sounds like it is something you decided by yourself and doesn't have any research or sources to make it a truth.
Various panels and devlopers, namely its been brought up at AGDC among others. Including John Blakely (VP of Sony Online Entertainment), Mark Jacobs (VP EA, Studio GM EA Mythic), Raph Koster (President Areae), and Erik Bethke (CEO GoPets).
I can list people and say they said things too, proof? It is also sad the the best names on that list are Mythic and Sony. No NCSoft, Turbine, Blizzard, Funcom. But still proof from those guys would at least help your agument slightly, even if other people in this thread (myself included) showed how you'd have to play a couple hours a month to not get your money's worth.
And your sources for the "steadfast rule"? Sounds like it is something you decided by yourself and doesn't have any research or sources to make it a truth.
Various panels and devlopers, namely its been brought up at AGDC among others. Including John Blakely (VP of Sony Online Entertainment), Mark Jacobs (VP EA, Studio GM EA Mythic), Raph Koster (President Areae), and Erik Bethke (CEO GoPets).
I can list people and say they said things too, proof? It is also sad the the best names on that list are Mythic and Sony. No NCSoft, Turbine, Blizzard, Funcom. But still proof from those guys would at least help your agument slightly, even if other people in this thread (myself included) showed how you'd have to play a couple hours a month to not get your money's worth.
I find it amusing that some of you can’t see the validity in the rule, or that somehow those in the top levels of the industry or, top level positions with in extremely successful companies know less than you, a forum user.
---------- "Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
And your sources for the "steadfast rule"? Sounds like it is something you decided by yourself and doesn't have any research or sources to make it a truth.
Various panels and devlopers, namely its been brought up at AGDC among others. Including John Blakely (VP of Sony Online Entertainment), Mark Jacobs (VP EA, Studio GM EA Mythic), Raph Koster (President Areae), and Erik Bethke (CEO GoPets).
I can list people and say they said things too, proof? It is also sad the the best names on that list are Mythic and Sony. No NCSoft, Turbine, Blizzard, Funcom. But still proof from those guys would at least help your agument slightly, even if other people in this thread (myself included) showed how you'd have to play a couple hours a month to not get your money's worth.
I find it amusing that some of you can’t see the validity in the rule, or that somehow those in the top levels of the industry or, top level positions with in extremely successful companies know less than you, a forum user.
The only person in that link who claimed sub fees are overcharging half of the users was Koster. That does not a truth make. One random guy who isn't know in the industry really at all (because he isn't actually in the industry, he makes some tiny titles that aren't serious or major MMOs) doesn't make that the truth for the industry.
This panel is basicall 2 people who aren't even in the industry, and two people from companies doing poorly in the industry. But even on top of that, only the least known and least influencial of the group said what you are trying to push as facts. There is likely a reason why successful subscription based MMO companies are not saying this, it is not truth.
But as always with your current crusade into "f2p is awesome and anyone who disagrees is wrong cause I say so" quest now that your favorite game is going f2p, you will decide that clinging to what a person who isn't even actually in the industry says is a way to prove you are right.
F2P are no exception to this normally. Start off there. (but over charging even more).
The only way to even address this is to seel time not in days but sell active time. So $15 equals 210 hours of play or something.
But lets be honest i do not feel this is really applicable, they charge $15 not becuase its the right amount but becuase that is what is a standard rate to charge. Most of these pub.s could be chargeing $10 and making a nice profit but mmos are not about the 10 or 15 $ its about if you want to play them or not.
Why do people cry about $10 or $15 anyways, its a joke to honestly. if you play that game for more than four hours it cheeper that a moive ticket. And most people do that every day or more. The entertianment value is A WONDERFUL DEAL FOR THE PRICE.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
I find it amusing that some of you can’t see the validity in the rule, or that somehow those in the top levels of the industry or, top level positions with in extremely successful companies know less than you, a forum user.
The only person in that link who claimed sub fees are overcharging half of the users was Koster. That does not a truth make. One random guy who isn't know in the industry really at all (because he isn't actually in the industry, he makes some tiny titles that aren't serious or major MMOs) doesn't make that the truth for the industry.
This panel is basicall 2 people who aren't even in the industry, and two people from companies doing poorly in the industry. But even on top of that, only the least known and least influencial of the group said what you are trying to push as facts. There is likely a reason why successful subscription based MMO companies are not saying this, it is not truth.
But as always with your current crusade into "f2p is awesome and anyone who disagrees is wrong cause I say so" quest now that your favorite game is going f2p, you will decide that clinging to what a person who isn't even actually in the industry says is a way to prove you are right.
You have to be jokeing?
BTW, im curently playing Wow again. So, there goes that. I really wish you guys could calm your nerd rage.
---------- "Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
You are a consumer; do what you do with every other purchase and service you use in your life: look at the cost and look at the benefit, and decide if it is right for you.
Look at how cable TV works. You pay if you want access to a service, regardless of if you use it once a week or all day every day. If you want more channels, you pay an even higher subscription price. Why do people think MMOs shouldn't work the same way?
If the service provided is justifiable based on the value it provides to you, pay it. If not, move along. Lamenting on how a company decides to offer their services is laughable; take your $$$ to the competition.
What about pay per view?
---------- "Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
And your sources for the "steadfast rule"? Sounds like it is something you decided by yourself and doesn't have any research or sources to make it a truth.
Various panels and devlopers, namely its been brought up at AGDC among others. Including John Blakely (VP of Sony Online Entertainment), Mark Jacobs (VP EA, Studio GM EA Mythic), Raph Koster (President Areae), and Erik Bethke (CEO GoPets).
I can list people and say they said things too, proof? It is also sad the the best names on that list are Mythic and Sony. No NCSoft, Turbine, Blizzard, Funcom. But still proof from those guys would at least help your agument slightly, even if other people in this thread (myself included) showed how you'd have to play a couple hours a month to not get your money's worth.
I find it amusing that some of you can’t see the validity in the rule, or that somehow those in the top levels of the industry or, top level positions with in extremely successful companies know less than you, a forum user.
Just to clarify ........... you do realize this isn't an all for it panel right? Mark Jacobs is against RMT and Free to play with Item malls. He also did not agree with the Steadfast rule. So when name dropping, make sure to only include those that actually agreed with you lol. SOE and GeoPets I expected to be pro F2P + item mall lol. Raph seemed to back Jacobs up mostly.
And your sources for the "steadfast rule"? Sounds like it is something you decided by yourself and doesn't have any research or sources to make it a truth.
Various panels and devlopers, namely its been brought up at AGDC among others. Including John Blakely (VP of Sony Online Entertainment), Mark Jacobs (VP EA, Studio GM EA Mythic), Raph Koster (President Areae), and Erik Bethke (CEO GoPets).
I can list people and say they said things too, proof? It is also sad the the best names on that list are Mythic and Sony. No NCSoft, Turbine, Blizzard, Funcom. But still proof from those guys would at least help your agument slightly, even if other people in this thread (myself included) showed how you'd have to play a couple hours a month to not get your money's worth.
I find it amusing that some of you can’t see the validity in the rule, or that somehow those in the top levels of the industry or, top level positions with in extremely successful companies know less than you, a forum user.
Just to clarify ........... you do realize this isn't an all for it panel right? Mark Jacobs is against RMT and Free to play with Item malls. He also did not agree with the Steadfast rule. So when name dropping, make sure to only include those that actually agreed with you lol. SOE and GeoPets I expected to be pro F2P + item mall lol. Raph seemed to back Jacobs up mostly.
So.........
Yep. It was also quite a while ago. The topic of this thread isn't about being "all for it".
Its about how with some methods of payment, those with higher consumption rates are realizing how much they may need to spent to support the habits, while those that were previously overcharged, are now paying for only what they consume, at a potential savings.
He asked for the sourse of the quote, i gave him one instiance of its use over the years that happens to be online. Of course, now they are not worthy of takeing seriously.
---------- "Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
I see your point. I personally hate the F2P and stores becuase they engineer it to make it required. Perhaps a different subscription model would be better something like $8.99 for less then 40 hours a month and $14.99 for 40 or more hours per month.
Could you verify that?
I play a couple F2P and am NOT REQUIRED to use Item Mall unless I choose to.
My charactors do just fine without it.
There are potions and other things that can enhance Skills but only in PVE, not in PvP....
Meh this is entertainment we are talking about and it follows different rules than most things.
Should you pay more for your cable because you watch TV more often than your neighbor does? Should you pay more because you sat in the theater longer than the person that came in after the previews and left before the credits? Should an all day pass to a themepark cost more for the person that stays all day and less for the person that stays for 5 hours?
Entertainment does things a lot different than say insurance. I do agree that an option should be put in.
Unlimited play time for 30 days= 9.99 - 14.99
Then sale blocks of time for those that don't play as often. Your average gamer plays 20ish hours a week thats about 80 hours a month. 14.99 isn't a bad deal.
A casual gamer plays around 5-10 a week hitting around 20-40 hours a month. So I'd say sale 30 hour blocks of time for 4.99 -7.99.
This gives your casual gamer a break, but still makes that monthly sub look nice for those that play often.
That is an excellent idea, not saying the prices you set are perfect but I think that is an awesome idea.
The churn of "casuials" pays more of the bills than the long term users (They do not use 15$ worth of resources per month). Its a steadfast rule that with a subscription based model:
"You are over charging half your player base, and undercharging the other half".
Simply put, those that only play a little bit here and there, are being over charged, those that spend all day in the game, all week, are being undercharged.
Is this why we see claims of "OMG ill end up paying more than my monthly sub" from some users? Is this the REAL issue with the "ala carte" or episodic systems we see today? You now need to pay your full bill? Granted, long term users do create a draw for other users, but it dosnt offset the cost.
/discuss
Meh this is entertainment we are talking about and it follows different rules than most things.
Should you pay more for your cable because you watch TV more often than your neighbor does? Should you pay more because you sat in the theater longer than the person that came in after the previews and left before the credits? Should an all day pass to a themepark cost more for the person that stays all day and less for the person that stays for 5 hours?
Entertainment does things a lot different than say insurance. I do agree that an option should be put in.
Unlimited play time for 30 days= 9.99 - 14.99
Then sale blocks of time for those that don't play as often. Your average gamer plays 20ish hours a week thats about 80 hours a month. 14.99 isn't a bad deal.
A casual gamer plays around 5-10 a week hitting around 20-40 hours a month. So I'd say sale 30 hour blocks of time for 4.99 -7.99.
This gives your casual gamer a break, but still makes that monthly sub look nice for those that play often.
That is an excellent idea, not saying the prices you set are perfect but I think that is an aesome idea.
I actually don't get credit lol, this is just a mild revision of APB's business model. They charge 9.99 for 30 days of unlimited play or 7.99 for a 20 hour block of action district time. I don't agree with the 7.99 when the 30 days is only 9.99 but it's one of the better models I've come across.
Asian market is championing the "hourly pay" and its working fine for them. /shrug
I hope this was a joke right ? They work for 25 cents an hour too in china it's working fine for them right ?
Here is the butt of it-
1 Chinese dollar (Yuan) = $6.77 today
A US quarter = 1.69 Yuan
That is way too much. A person making 100-150 Yuan a month was fairly typical in an avg Mcdonalds type job.
160 hours a month = 11 cents an hour for many Chinese workers. Add that many workers have to sign a contract stating if you leave (quit) before the duration you agreed to in contract, you have to pay a penalty amount back to employer. Sometimes more then you earned in the first place.
On topic... sorry. I am used to monthly subscriptions and I don't want a pay per minute (hour) model overtaking everything else. I have seen other online businesses migrate away from this model, not to it. I don't know what is going to happen with the cash store F2P model over time. I have a suspicion that it will saturate and decline as a viable method. There is a reason Comcast charges flat, insurance is flat, and mobile plans are moving to flat models.
Next fad will be a hybrid of both. Arenanet had it right with GW, if the company can maintain high quality content and server integrity.
Otherwise I am fine paying the $14.99 for 24/7 access. Wish they created family plans (2-4 accounts under a "family" umbrella) for $24.99 or something. As gamers have kids, and those kids grow and become interested. Sustaining 3-4 monthly accounts for an online game will be hard for most of us. (it already happens)
Part of the warmth of a MMORPG game is the social interaction. If people are punching in and punching out of a game it will change the culture of the game as players will minimize their non-productive activities like chatting and making friends, etc.
Even if this Steadfast Rule were true, what does it matter?
The amount being over/undercharged is insignificant.
Not to mention that changes that would provide potential savings may end up costing more if that person doesn't have a consistant schedule of play.
I am all for expanding the methods of payments, but it needs to be reasonable. When I look at APB, the 20 hours vs the unlimited is such a small amount that I would rather get unlimited and skip the off chance that 20 hours isnt going to be enough and then I am overpaying grossly.
And currently, I dont mind at all that my lack of usage of Blizzards services that I am paying for is covering some elitist that feels the need to wave his epeen in my face.
The way I see it, it is a reasonably priced service that costs consistantly the same for varied levels of usage. However, the service is never lesser or greater for me than it is with someone else who has different usage than I do.
I would shy away from a pay per hour unless it was so well priced that I would not be overcharged if I have a week or two of excessively high usage to my normal levels.
I don't care how you pay...paying by hour is fine. I just don't want a C-store. Real-life store with t-shirts and coffee mugs and keychains is fine. but not an in-game store.
THIS
Originally posted by SnarlingWolf
And your sources for the "steadfast rule"? Sounds like it is something you decided by yourself and doesn't have any research or sources to make it a truth.
Given a movie ticket costs over 10 bucks and gets me 2 hrs of entertainment on average, If I play 3 hours in an MMO a month then I am breaking even. I doubt half of the MMO users sub a game they log into less then 3 hours in a month.
maybe i should clarify. I'm not asking for a change to the P2p model. But if there is to be a change, I want one that doesn't include a cash shop.
basically I don't want a cash shop.
As a prevailing method of transactions neither do I. It's a shame WoW proved to other companies that it works with that stupid dog and pony trick that netted them millions in a few days. ugh.... Blizzard - such a curse and blessing to this genre.
Part of the warmth of a MMORPG game is the social interaction. If people are punching in and punching out of a game it will change the culture of the game as players will minimize their non-productive activities like chatting and making friends, etc.
This is where APB's model gets creative. They have the social district which is completely free after you have bought the game. If you don't pay the monthly fee you don't access the action districts, but you still have access to the social district. This is where all the customization and such is done. I'd actually like to see this model explored more.
I mean it may have been amazing for a cash injection but it's something that won't work again. So I think blizzard is done with these "brilliant" ideas.
Those bitching will be the first to buy the next one, watch, they are closet collectors.
---------- "Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
I gotta say, the entire premise of this thread is ridiculous. The same exact thing could be said about just about any product and service sold. Lets give it a try.
20 people can go to a restaurant, lets say, Burger King, and buy a small value meal. Whats the ratio of the people that will finish the meal to the people that won't. The ones that didn't finish the meal and only ate half of it, well perhaps you can consider them being overcharged, but in the end they are still paying for the meal no matter how much they are eating.
Take an unlimited cell phone data plan. My wife barely uses any data, whereas in this last month alone I had just over 2.5GBs of data transferred through movies, streaming, open server connections, and e-mail synchronization. Some might say I'm being undercharged, but I'm paying for my service, and my service is considered unlimited. My wife still needs internet access on her phone even if she doesn't use but 100 MBs a month, yet the going rate is the same.
Tiered payment models again, work in this way. The person that only spends 6 hours a week playing the game may not spend the equivalent of 5 bucks a month on a tiered model, but on the other end of the spectrum, the player that plays 6 hours a day would be getting gouged.
Each payment model has something that is good about them, and something that is bad, such as F2P games that are designed for users to purchase items, to B2P games that restrict content for subsequent content releases, to P2P games that release updated content patches to keep subscribers subscribing.
Theres no black and white here. You get what you pay for no matter if you decide to use it, or not. In the end someone will always feel they come out the winner, while someone else, the loser.
Take an unlimited cell phone data plan. My wife barely uses any data, whereas in this last month alone I had just over 2.5GBs of data transferred through movies, streaming, open server connections, and e-mail synchronization. Some might say I'm being undercharged, but I'm paying for my service, and my service is considered unlimited. My wife still needs internet access on her phone even if she doesn't use but 100 MBs a month, yet the going rate is the same.
Why not switch to a pay as you go plan then?
I guess a btter question is, why not use a hybrid model, and have your wife switch to a pay as you go?
Its part of my point, a good number of other services have optional way to pay, does it make them any more "evil"?
What if you were required to pay as you go, your wife may be happy, however your in for a large bill now.
---------- "Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
I gotta say, the entire premise of this thread is ridiculous. The same exact thing could be said about just about any product and service sold. Lets give it a try.
20 people can go to a restaurant, lets say, Burger King, and buy a small value meal. Whats the ratio of the people that will finish the meal to the people that won't. The ones that didn't finish the meal and only ate half of it, well perhaps you can consider them being overcharged, but in the end they are still paying for the meal no matter how much they are eating.
Take an unlimited cell phone data plan. My wife barely uses any data, whereas in this last month alone I had just over 2.5GBs of data transferred through movies, streaming, open server connections, and e-mail synchronization. Some might say I'm being undercharged, but I'm paying for my service, and my service is considered unlimited. My wife still needs internet access on her phone even if she doesn't use but 100 MBs a month, yet the going rate is the same.
Tiered payment models again, work in this way. The person that only spends 6 hours a week playing the game may not spend the equivalent of 5 bucks a month on a tiered model, but on the other end of the spectrum, the player that plays 6 hours a day would be getting gouged.
Each payment model has something that is good about them, and something that is bad, such as F2P games that are designed for users to purchase items, to B2P games that restrict content for subsequent content releases, to P2P games that release updated content patches to keep subscribers subscribing.
Theres no black and white here. You get what you pay for no matter if you decide to use it, or not. In the end someone will always feel they come out the winner, while someone else, the loser.
Your analogies don't work at all.
Sure someone may only eat half of their value meal...but they did at least have the choice to pay for small, medium, or large.
Unlimited Cell phone plans are better values for people who use their phones a lot. people that use them less can and should save money by going with a lesser plan.
The point the OP is making is that the current P2P model, doesn't offer you a choice. You either pay $15 a month or you don't play at all. and he's right. People who don't play as much get overcharged.
This is why the new hybrid models have/are becoming more popular. For me (and a lot of other gamers) some months are worth paying for, others aren't.
Take an unlimited cell phone data plan. My wife barely uses any data, whereas in this last month alone I had just over 2.5GBs of data transferred through movies, streaming, open server connections, and e-mail synchronization. Some might say I'm being undercharged, but I'm paying for my service, and my service is considered unlimited. My wife still needs internet access on her phone even if she doesn't use but 100 MBs a month, yet the going rate is the same.
Why not switch to a pay as you go plan then?
For the very same reason, the possibility that she may use more, or I may use less, we don't have to worry about variations in the bill. I know she may not use that much data, but one day she may decide to start checking facebook or twittering, or maybe she'll decide she doesn't want to use the internet at all, I don't control her habits and with this plan we don't need to, in this aspect we as the users get to determine what is financially viable in coordination with our usage.
As our usage declines instead of increases, we can decide to cut the bill or switch plans. If it increases or stays the same in my case, then we still come out ahead.
Unfortunately for games we don't have this option, but costs are usually so minimal on P2P games in comparison with other forms of entertainment that its almost a non-issue.
Unfortunately for games we don't have this option,
You sure about that? Seems this is the current trend, more options. I don't see many "F2P" games, I see lots of games with optional plans.
---------- "Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
I gotta say, the entire premise of this thread is ridiculous. The same exact thing could be said about just about any product and service sold. Lets give it a try.
20 people can go to a restaurant, lets say, Burger King, and buy a small value meal. Whats the ratio of the people that will finish the meal to the people that won't. The ones that didn't finish the meal and only ate half of it, well perhaps you can consider them being overcharged, but in the end they are still paying for the meal no matter how much they are eating.
Take an unlimited cell phone data plan. My wife barely uses any data, whereas in this last month alone I had just over 2.5GBs of data transferred through movies, streaming, open server connections, and e-mail synchronization. Some might say I'm being undercharged, but I'm paying for my service, and my service is considered unlimited. My wife still needs internet access on her phone even if she doesn't use but 100 MBs a month, yet the going rate is the same.
Tiered payment models again, work in this way. The person that only spends 6 hours a week playing the game may not spend the equivalent of 5 bucks a month on a tiered model, but on the other end of the spectrum, the player that plays 6 hours a day would be getting gouged.
Each payment model has something that is good about them, and something that is bad, such as F2P games that are designed for users to purchase items, to B2P games that restrict content for subsequent content releases, to P2P games that release updated content patches to keep subscribers subscribing.
Theres no black and white here. You get what you pay for no matter if you decide to use it, or not. In the end someone will always feel they come out the winner, while someone else, the loser.
Your analogies don't work at all.
Sure someone may only eat half of their value meal...but they did at least have the choice to pay for small, medium, or large.
Unlimited Cell phone plans are better values for people who use their phones a lot. people that use them less can and should save money by going with a lesser plan.
The point the OP is making is that the current P2P model, doesn't offer you a choice. You either pay $15 a month or you don't play at all. and he's right. People who don't play as much get overcharged.
This is why the new hybrid models have/are becoming more popular. For me (and a lot of other gamers) some months are worth paying for, others aren't.
But you misunderstand, take away choice, such as the price of a buffet, and you still have the same situation.
Use or lack of use of the services rendered shouldn't always mandatorily dictate the cost of the item or service in question.
For example, the buffet will always cost 10 dollars per person whether you eat 2 chicken legs and are full, or you eat 10 chicken legs and a side of mashed potatoes. The costs for service are decided upon by the restauranteur. Its the consumers job to determine of the costs are worth the product.
Its just the type of model. Sure, hybrid payment models are welcome, but often times, different payment models come with different pitfalls, which again, are subject to consumer choice on whether or not the additional cost or change of game style is adequate to justify paying for it.
Comments
SoE, EA and GoPets, real class acts there.
I can list people and say they said things too, proof? It is also sad the the best names on that list are Mythic and Sony. No NCSoft, Turbine, Blizzard, Funcom. But still proof from those guys would at least help your agument slightly, even if other people in this thread (myself included) showed how you'd have to play a couple hours a month to not get your money's worth.
Thoes people were not on the panel.
http://www.virtualworldsnews.com/2007/09/blogging-the--7.html
I find it amusing that some of you can’t see the validity in the rule, or that somehow those in the top levels of the industry or, top level positions with in extremely successful companies know less than you, a forum user.
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
The only person in that link who claimed sub fees are overcharging half of the users was Koster. That does not a truth make. One random guy who isn't know in the industry really at all (because he isn't actually in the industry, he makes some tiny titles that aren't serious or major MMOs) doesn't make that the truth for the industry.
This panel is basicall 2 people who aren't even in the industry, and two people from companies doing poorly in the industry. But even on top of that, only the least known and least influencial of the group said what you are trying to push as facts. There is likely a reason why successful subscription based MMO companies are not saying this, it is not truth.
But as always with your current crusade into "f2p is awesome and anyone who disagrees is wrong cause I say so" quest now that your favorite game is going f2p, you will decide that clinging to what a person who isn't even actually in the industry says is a way to prove you are right.
F2P are no exception to this normally. Start off there. (but over charging even more).
The only way to even address this is to seel time not in days but sell active time. So $15 equals 210 hours of play or something.
But lets be honest i do not feel this is really applicable, they charge $15 not becuase its the right amount but becuase that is what is a standard rate to charge. Most of these pub.s could be chargeing $10 and making a nice profit but mmos are not about the 10 or 15 $ its about if you want to play them or not.
Why do people cry about $10 or $15 anyways, its a joke to honestly. if you play that game for more than four hours it cheeper that a moive ticket. And most people do that every day or more. The entertianment value is A WONDERFUL DEAL FOR THE PRICE.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
You have to be jokeing?
BTW, im curently playing Wow again. So, there goes that. I really wish you guys could calm your nerd rage.
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
What about pay per view?
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
Just to clarify ........... you do realize this isn't an all for it panel right? Mark Jacobs is against RMT and Free to play with Item malls. He also did not agree with the Steadfast rule. So when name dropping, make sure to only include those that actually agreed with you lol. SOE and GeoPets I expected to be pro F2P + item mall lol. Raph seemed to back Jacobs up mostly.
So.........
Yep. It was also quite a while ago. The topic of this thread isn't about being "all for it".
Its about how with some methods of payment, those with higher consumption rates are realizing how much they may need to spent to support the habits, while those that were previously overcharged, are now paying for only what they consume, at a potential savings.
He asked for the sourse of the quote, i gave him one instiance of its use over the years that happens to be online. Of course, now they are not worthy of takeing seriously.
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
Could you verify that?
I play a couple F2P and am NOT REQUIRED to use Item Mall unless I choose to.
My charactors do just fine without it.
There are potions and other things that can enhance Skills but only in PVE, not in PvP....
That is an excellent idea, not saying the prices you set are perfect but I think that is an awesome idea.
I actually don't get credit lol, this is just a mild revision of APB's business model. They charge 9.99 for 30 days of unlimited play or 7.99 for a 20 hour block of action district time. I don't agree with the 7.99 when the 30 days is only 9.99 but it's one of the better models I've come across.
Here is the butt of it-
1 Chinese dollar (Yuan) = $6.77 today
A US quarter = 1.69 Yuan
That is way too much. A person making 100-150 Yuan a month was fairly typical in an avg Mcdonalds type job.
160 hours a month = 11 cents an hour for many Chinese workers. Add that many workers have to sign a contract stating if you leave (quit) before the duration you agreed to in contract, you have to pay a penalty amount back to employer. Sometimes more then you earned in the first place.
On topic... sorry. I am used to monthly subscriptions and I don't want a pay per minute (hour) model overtaking everything else. I have seen other online businesses migrate away from this model, not to it. I don't know what is going to happen with the cash store F2P model over time. I have a suspicion that it will saturate and decline as a viable method. There is a reason Comcast charges flat, insurance is flat, and mobile plans are moving to flat models.
Next fad will be a hybrid of both. Arenanet had it right with GW, if the company can maintain high quality content and server integrity.
Otherwise I am fine paying the $14.99 for 24/7 access. Wish they created family plans (2-4 accounts under a "family" umbrella) for $24.99 or something. As gamers have kids, and those kids grow and become interested. Sustaining 3-4 monthly accounts for an online game will be hard for most of us. (it already happens)
Part of the warmth of a MMORPG game is the social interaction. If people are punching in and punching out of a game it will change the culture of the game as players will minimize their non-productive activities like chatting and making friends, etc.
Even if this Steadfast Rule were true, what does it matter?
The amount being over/undercharged is insignificant.
Not to mention that changes that would provide potential savings may end up costing more if that person doesn't have a consistant schedule of play.
I am all for expanding the methods of payments, but it needs to be reasonable. When I look at APB, the 20 hours vs the unlimited is such a small amount that I would rather get unlimited and skip the off chance that 20 hours isnt going to be enough and then I am overpaying grossly.
And currently, I dont mind at all that my lack of usage of Blizzards services that I am paying for is covering some elitist that feels the need to wave his epeen in my face.
The way I see it, it is a reasonably priced service that costs consistantly the same for varied levels of usage. However, the service is never lesser or greater for me than it is with someone else who has different usage than I do.
I would shy away from a pay per hour unless it was so well priced that I would not be overcharged if I have a week or two of excessively high usage to my normal levels.
THIS
and THIS
PIRATE LORDS
As a prevailing method of transactions neither do I. It's a shame WoW proved to other companies that it works with that stupid dog and pony trick that netted them millions in a few days. ugh.... Blizzard - such a curse and blessing to this genre.
This is where APB's model gets creative. They have the social district which is completely free after you have bought the game. If you don't pay the monthly fee you don't access the action districts, but you still have access to the social district. This is where all the customization and such is done. I'd actually like to see this model explored more.
Those bitching will be the first to buy the next one, watch, they are closet collectors.
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
I gotta say, the entire premise of this thread is ridiculous. The same exact thing could be said about just about any product and service sold. Lets give it a try.
20 people can go to a restaurant, lets say, Burger King, and buy a small value meal. Whats the ratio of the people that will finish the meal to the people that won't. The ones that didn't finish the meal and only ate half of it, well perhaps you can consider them being overcharged, but in the end they are still paying for the meal no matter how much they are eating.
Take an unlimited cell phone data plan. My wife barely uses any data, whereas in this last month alone I had just over 2.5GBs of data transferred through movies, streaming, open server connections, and e-mail synchronization. Some might say I'm being undercharged, but I'm paying for my service, and my service is considered unlimited. My wife still needs internet access on her phone even if she doesn't use but 100 MBs a month, yet the going rate is the same.
Tiered payment models again, work in this way. The person that only spends 6 hours a week playing the game may not spend the equivalent of 5 bucks a month on a tiered model, but on the other end of the spectrum, the player that plays 6 hours a day would be getting gouged.
Each payment model has something that is good about them, and something that is bad, such as F2P games that are designed for users to purchase items, to B2P games that restrict content for subsequent content releases, to P2P games that release updated content patches to keep subscribers subscribing.
Theres no black and white here. You get what you pay for no matter if you decide to use it, or not. In the end someone will always feel they come out the winner, while someone else, the loser.
Why not switch to a pay as you go plan then?
I guess a btter question is, why not use a hybrid model, and have your wife switch to a pay as you go?
Its part of my point, a good number of other services have optional way to pay, does it make them any more "evil"?
What if you were required to pay as you go, your wife may be happy, however your in for a large bill now.
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
Your analogies don't work at all.
Sure someone may only eat half of their value meal...but they did at least have the choice to pay for small, medium, or large.
Unlimited Cell phone plans are better values for people who use their phones a lot. people that use them less can and should save money by going with a lesser plan.
The point the OP is making is that the current P2P model, doesn't offer you a choice. You either pay $15 a month or you don't play at all. and he's right. People who don't play as much get overcharged.
This is why the new hybrid models have/are becoming more popular. For me (and a lot of other gamers) some months are worth paying for, others aren't.
For the very same reason, the possibility that she may use more, or I may use less, we don't have to worry about variations in the bill. I know she may not use that much data, but one day she may decide to start checking facebook or twittering, or maybe she'll decide she doesn't want to use the internet at all, I don't control her habits and with this plan we don't need to, in this aspect we as the users get to determine what is financially viable in coordination with our usage.
As our usage declines instead of increases, we can decide to cut the bill or switch plans. If it increases or stays the same in my case, then we still come out ahead.
Unfortunately for games we don't have this option, but costs are usually so minimal on P2P games in comparison with other forms of entertainment that its almost a non-issue.
You sure about that? Seems this is the current trend, more options. I don't see many "F2P" games, I see lots of games with optional plans.
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
But you misunderstand, take away choice, such as the price of a buffet, and you still have the same situation.
Use or lack of use of the services rendered shouldn't always mandatorily dictate the cost of the item or service in question.
For example, the buffet will always cost 10 dollars per person whether you eat 2 chicken legs and are full, or you eat 10 chicken legs and a side of mashed potatoes. The costs for service are decided upon by the restauranteur. Its the consumers job to determine of the costs are worth the product.
Its just the type of model. Sure, hybrid payment models are welcome, but often times, different payment models come with different pitfalls, which again, are subject to consumer choice on whether or not the additional cost or change of game style is adequate to justify paying for it.