Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

"In a subscription based game, you are overcharging half your player base, and undercharging the res

1356

Comments

  • MrbloodworthMrbloodworth Member Posts: 5,615

    Originally posted by maskedweasel

    Originally posted by merv808


    Originally posted by maskedweasel

    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.

    Most buffets also charge by the pound if you want. image

    However, if you go byond the 9$, is it the restauranteur problem or fuilt?

    ----------
    "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

  • dhayes68dhayes68 Member UncommonPosts: 1,388

    Well I think the problem initially is that the f2p model is called f2p. Realistically its not free to play. Automatically people approach it with the wrong mindset. Naturally that is going to cause problems right off the bat.

  • PreponerancePreponerance Member Posts: 295

    I think sub is the best way to go and here's why.

     


    1. Peoples habits change, like the previous poster and his wifes cell phone usage, she could end up FBing or Twittering

    2. The reason people want subs rather than F2P.  I know each and every month it's gonna cost me $15.00.  If I were to play a F2P with RMT/Cash Shop, I have no idea what I'm going to spend by the end of the month because I don't have the FREEDOM as I would on a sub.  Will I need more of this "potion" so I can raid as much as I would in a Sub MMO? Is Billy Bob gonna screw me and kill us more than normal cause he's drunk.  It's easier to budget when you know exactly how much your going to spend rather than guessing and having to pull out your credit card or charge your account or take time to go buy a game card.

     


    Edit: Subs take out the guess work of what I'm going to end up spending.


     


    Edit: Edit: Also: a lot more controllable so you don't become an obsessive buyer, I think that's where you hear the stories of people paying 1k a month in F2P.  That's more the users problem but the companies facilitate it.

  • MehveMehve Member Posts: 487

    Alternatively, half the the people paying $15/month are getting a good deal, the other half are getting an AMAZING deal. Given the earlier examples (i.e. a night at the movies), I tend to lean towards this viewpoint myself. From a value perspective, the "fair price" is not necessary at the median time-used/money-spent point.

    A Modest Proposal for MMORPGs:
    That the means of progression would not be mutually exclusive from the means of enjoyment.

  • MrbloodworthMrbloodworth Member Posts: 5,615

    Originally posted by Mehve

    Alternatively, half the the people paying $15/month are getting a good deal, the other half are getting an AMAZING deal. Given the earlier examples (i.e. a night at the movies), I tend to lean towards this viewpoint myself. From a value perspective, the "fair price" is not necessary at the median time-used/money-spent point.

    We all allready know that 15$ is rather cheap for entertainment, to bring it up is a bit outside the scope of the topic.

    ----------
    "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

  • TazlorTazlor Member UncommonPosts: 864

    that's why i play F2P games, i pay for what i want.

  • maskedweaselmaskedweasel Member LegendaryPosts: 12,195

    Originally posted by Mrbloodworth

    Originally posted by maskedweasel



     

    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.

    In technical terms, we always have this option, to pay or not to pay for a game. In literal terms it would depend on the type of game and the payment style, but in P2P models, we usually only have a number of choices for subscription fees, most of them still relating to the actual purchase of service time.

     

    B2P and F2P games with variations in between are starting to pop up more frequently,  but are we to believe that this is now the norm instead of a trend?  I think its way too early to tell.  This could be just an economical trend that could change in the future.



  • SnarlingWolfSnarlingWolf Member Posts: 2,697

    Originally posted by Mrbloodworth

    Originally posted by Mehve

    Alternatively, half the the people paying $15/month are getting a good deal, the other half are getting an AMAZING deal. Given the earlier examples (i.e. a night at the movies), I tend to lean towards this viewpoint myself. From a value perspective, the "fair price" is not necessary at the median time-used/money-spent point.

    We all allready know that 15$ is rather cheap for entertainment, to bring it up is a bit outside the scope of the topic.

     Yes we already know, and all accept and admit (including you) that $15 is CHEAP. So your original post is wrong. Also your "source" for it was proven to be a weak source at best and even in that source other, more important, people in the industry disagreed with him.

     

    All value has to be compared to other things in order to establish baselines. By comparing with many other forms of entertainment, including my movie example, $15 shouldn't get you much. Yet in MMOs it gets you an extreme amount. So the statement that half are getting overcharged is highly incorrect.  You also admit that it is a cheap value but yet someone think that half are being overcharged. A person would have to play only a couple hours in a whole month to be overcharged, and if someone is playing that little they likely are also about to unsub from the game. As one other person said, half are getting an amazing deal, and the other half are getting a great deal. No one is getting overcharged.

     

    So why is this thread still going and what are you still trying to prove?

  • merv808merv808 Member UncommonPosts: 511

    Originally posted by maskedweasel

    Originally posted by Mrbloodworth


    Originally posted by maskedweasel



     

    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.

    In technical terms, we always have this option, to pay or not to pay for a game. In literal terms it would depend on the type of game and the payment style, but in P2P models, we usually only have a number of choices for subscription fees, most of them still relating to the actual purchase of service time.

     

    B2P and F2P games with variations in between are starting to pop up more frequently,  but are we to believe that this is now the norm instead of a trend?  I think its way too early to tell.  This could be just an economical trend that could change in the future.

    In all fairness, to play, or not to play isn't much of an option.

    I think there will, at least, always be room for the hybrid models. More than likely neither of the 2 will be going away anytime soon

  • MrbloodworthMrbloodworth Member Posts: 5,615

    Thats becouse half are being overcharged, its not that hard to understand. No where did I say this was a bank breaking issue. Its a relitive thing, your 15 is not the same as the other guys 15 in reguatds to the output. Come back when you can discuss things, insted of trying to win the forum war good soilder.

    ----------
    "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

  • PreponerancePreponerance Member Posts: 295

    1/2 being overcharged is subjective though.  Do the casual gamers feel they are being over priced?

  • MrbloodworthMrbloodworth Member Posts: 5,615

    Originally posted by Preponerance

    1/2 being overcharged is subjective though.  Do the casual gamers feel they are being over priced?


    I could only answer for myself. So I won't. It’s more of an estimation than a hard number, im sure it fluxuates monthly, but the premise is what matters.

    ----------
    "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

  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 44,069

    Originally posted by Mrbloodworth

    Thats becouse half are being overcharged, its not that hard to understand. No where did I say this was a bank breaking issue. Its a relitive thing, your 15 is not the same as the other guys 15 in reguatds to the output. Come back when you can discuss things, insted of trying to win the forum war good soilder.

    I'll disagree. I say the minimum price point to play is the monthly sub, regardless whether you play 1 hour or 100, sort of like monthly membership to a gym or golf course.

    Doesn't matter if you go daily, weekly or once a month, the fee is the fee is the fee, up to you to take advanatage of the deal.

    Of course, in the case of golf courses (not gyms so much) there are courses (usually public) that let you pay as you go, which of course saves money for the infrequent player.  And just like in MMO's, pay as you go golf course are usually an inferior gaming experience compared to the monthly, actually, usually annual sub with an initiation fee (a bit like paying for the box price in a game)

    My father paid the same amount to be a member of a course whether he played 3 times a month or 15.... just the minimum cost of participating.

    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • PhilbyPhilby Member Posts: 849

    Originally posted by Preponerance

    1/2 being overcharged is subjective though.  Do the casual gamers feel they are being over priced?

    Nope if I only play every other day one dollar a day is still cheap.

    WOW isnt great because it has 12 million players. WOW has 12 million players because its great.

  • MrbloodworthMrbloodworth Member Posts: 5,615

    Originally posted by Kyleran

    Originally posted by Mrbloodworth

    Thats becouse half are being overcharged, its not that hard to understand. No where did I say this was a bank breaking issue. Its a relitive thing, your 15 is not the same as the other guys 15 in reguatds to the output. Come back when you can discuss things, insted of trying to win the forum war good soilder.

    I'll disagree. I say the minimum price point to play is the monthly sub, regardless whether you play 1 hour or 100, sort of like monthly membership to a gym or golf course.

    Doesn't matter if you go daily, weekly or once a month, the fee is the fee is the fee, up to you to take advanatage of the deal.

    Of course, in the case of golf courses (not gyms so much) there are courses (usually public) that let you pay as you go, which of course saves money for the infrequent player.  And just like in MMO's, pay as you go golf course are usually an inferior gaming experience compared to the monthly, actually, usually annual sub with an initiation fee (a bit like paying for the box price in a game)

    My father paid the same amount to be a member of a course whether he played 3 times a month or 15.... just the minimum cost of participating.


    Yes, but now that games are moving from the former, to the later, is the bill a shocking discovery and fuel for the fires of hate?

    ----------
    "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

  • maskedweaselmaskedweasel Member LegendaryPosts: 12,195

    Originally posted by Mrbloodworth

    Originally posted by Kyleran


    Originally posted by Mrbloodworth

    Thats becouse half are being overcharged, its not that hard to understand. No where did I say this was a bank breaking issue. Its a relitive thing, your 15 is not the same as the other guys 15 in reguatds to the output. Come back when you can discuss things, insted of trying to win the forum war good soilder.

    I'll disagree. I say the minimum price point to play is the monthly sub, regardless whether you play 1 hour or 100, sort of like monthly membership to a gym or golf course.

    Doesn't matter if you go daily, weekly or once a month, the fee is the fee is the fee, up to you to take advanatage of the deal.

    Of course, in the case of golf courses (not gyms so much) there are courses (usually public) that let you pay as you go, which of course saves money for the infrequent player.  And just like in MMO's, pay as you go golf course are usually an inferior gaming experience compared to the monthly, actually, usually annual sub with an initiation fee (a bit like paying for the box price in a game)

    My father paid the same amount to be a member of a course whether he played 3 times a month or 15.... just the minimum cost of participating.


    Yes, but now that games are moving from the former, to the later, is the bill a shocking discovery and fuel for the fires of hate?

    I don't really see how you could come to that conclusion.  There isn't an industry standard here.  Everything is subjective, even the original premise.  Theres no way to tell if these feelings are exactly split 50/50, but you can only reason that those that feel they are getting a good deal in a subscription MMO continue to subscribe while those that don't no longer play.

     

    The problem with F2P or B2P games is that they have no indicator on the success or enjoyment of their player base.  When was the last time a F2P game released their active subscriber base? Its nonexistent, even in games like Guild Wars.  The hybrid models are great in terms of value, but in the end, the only thing we as players care about in terms of the cost of the game, is if the cost justified the amount of time spent.



  • NovaKayneNovaKayne Member Posts: 743

    Umm, so?  You bored?

     

    This is always the case with a flat fee for unlimited use.  Look at all of the people screaming about ATT charging for limited plans instead of the unlimited versions.  It is because 3-5% of the users are taking 90% of the bandwidth.

     

    I have had my phone for about a month and have not topped out over 300 meg so far.  Do I feel cheated?  My wife has unlimited and pays $10 a month more than me.  She uses her "Unlimited" less than I do.

    Say hello, To the things you've left behind. They are more a part of your life now that you can't touch them.

  • MrbloodworthMrbloodworth Member Posts: 5,615

    Originally posted by NovaKayne

    Umm, so?  You bored?

     

    This is always the case with a flat fee for unlimited use.  Look at all of the people screaming about ATT charging for limited plans instead of the unlimited versions.  It is because 3-5% of the users are taking 90% of the bandwidth.

     

    I have had my phone for about a month and have not topped out over 300 meg so far.  Do I feel cheated?  My wife has unlimited and pays $10 a month more than me.  She uses her "Unlimited" less than I do.

    What if they switched your unlimited to Pay as you go?

    ----------
    "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

  • MehveMehve Member Posts: 487

    Originally posted by Mrbloodworth

    Originally posted by Mehve

    Alternatively, half the the people paying $15/month are getting a good deal, the other half are getting an AMAZING deal. Given the earlier examples (i.e. a night at the movies), I tend to lean towards this viewpoint myself. From a value perspective, the "fair price" is not necessary at the median time-used/money-spent point.

    We all allready know that 15$ is rather cheap for entertainment, to bring it up is a bit outside the scope of the topic.

    ??? Well, no, it pertains directly to your original post. If the people on the low-end of the use spectrum are satisfied with what they get for their payment, they're not being "overcharged". And since MMO's can generally be classified as a non-essential entertainment/luxury (or something similar), it can be inferred that people who aren't happy with the value proposition have likely already quiet their subscriptions.

    So there's likely a very high percentage of subcribers who are happy with what they pay for what they play, which makes the idea of "half" of the subscribers being "overcharged" very unlikely.

    A Modest Proposal for MMORPGs:
    That the means of progression would not be mutually exclusive from the means of enjoyment.

  • maskedweaselmaskedweasel Member LegendaryPosts: 12,195

    Originally posted by Mehve

    Originally posted by Mrbloodworth


    Originally posted by Mehve

    Alternatively, half the the people paying $15/month are getting a good deal, the other half are getting an AMAZING deal. Given the earlier examples (i.e. a night at the movies), I tend to lean towards this viewpoint myself. From a value perspective, the "fair price" is not necessary at the median time-used/money-spent point.

    We all allready know that 15$ is rather cheap for entertainment, to bring it up is a bit outside the scope of the topic.

    ??? Well, no, it pertains directly to your original post. If the people on the low-end of the use spectrum are satisfied with what they get for their payment, they're not being "overcharged". And since MMO's can generally be classified as a non-essential entertainment/luxury (or something similar), it can be inferred that people who aren't happy with the value proposition have likely already quiet their subscriptions.

    So there's likely a very high percentage of subcribers who are happy with what they pay for what they play, which makes the idea of "half" of the subscribers being "overcharged" very unlikely.

    I'll have to agree with this, enjoyment and satisfaction is key in determining who feels they are being overcharged or getting a good deal for their money.  Even if they play an hour a week, if they get enough enjoyment out of that hour that the 15 dollars is justifiable I don't think they'd feel like they weren't getting their moneys worth.



  • SnarlingWolfSnarlingWolf Member Posts: 2,697

    Originally posted by Mrbloodworth

    Thats becouse half are being overcharged, its not that hard to understand. No where did I say this was a bank breaking issue. Its a relitive thing, your 15 is not the same as the other guys 15 in reguatds to the output. Come back when you can discuss things, insted of trying to win the forum war good soilder.

     Right, you ignoring the facts people are laying out is me "trying to win the forum war".

     

    So once you actually reply to my posts that proved your original statement wrong, I guess we will have a discussion? Or is you ignoring proof that your statement is wrong your version of "trying to win the forum war", or just your typical attitude from all threads you start where those who prove you wrong or don't agree with your limited point of view must be wrong by default because you are the only one who knows things?

  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 44,069

    Originally posted by Mrbloodworth

    Originally posted by Kyleran


    Originally posted by Mrbloodworth

    Thats becouse half are being overcharged, its not that hard to understand. No where did I say this was a bank breaking issue. Its a relitive thing, your 15 is not the same as the other guys 15 in reguatds to the output. Come back when you can discuss things, insted of trying to win the forum war good soilder.

    I'll disagree. I say the minimum price point to play is the monthly sub, regardless whether you play 1 hour or 100, sort of like monthly membership to a gym or golf course.

    Doesn't matter if you go daily, weekly or once a month, the fee is the fee is the fee, up to you to take advanatage of the deal.

    Of course, in the case of golf courses (not gyms so much) there are courses (usually public) that let you pay as you go, which of course saves money for the infrequent player.  And just like in MMO's, pay as you go golf course are usually an inferior gaming experience compared to the monthly, actually, usually annual sub with an initiation fee (a bit like paying for the box price in a game)

    My father paid the same amount to be a member of a course whether he played 3 times a month or 15.... just the minimum cost of participating.


    Yes, but now that games are moving from the former, to the later, is the bill a shocking discovery and fuel for the fires of hate?

    No, they shouldn't be.  I'm currently paying for 3 EVE subs on a monthly basis and have spent about 125.00 on a F2P game (I can afford it, wasn't necessary to spend the money, I just chose to make my gaming experience more convenient) and I don't really care, if the game is fun, I'm going to pay the fare regardless of the payment model.

    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • FreddyNoNoseFreddyNoNose Member Posts: 1,558

    Originally posted by Mrbloodworth

    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

     You looking at it wrongly.  Back in the day, we paid per hour to play games like AOLs nwn or TSN's tsoy.  Some were into the hundreds of dollars per month.  Eventually there were needs to be taken care of such as the desire to have the same amount paid each month for people on a budget (or retentive types).  The fixed sub fee appealed to many people and solved problems for the hardcore and budget planning folks.  The costs went down for almost everyone.

  • AxehiltAxehilt Member RarePosts: 10,504

    Originally posted by bastionix

    Originally posted by Talin

    You are completely incorrect. F2P + RMT when a user doesn'y buy anything is FREE!.

    Yeah, in theory.

    But in reality you're not being treated the same way and don't get the same items, don't get access to the items you need, don't get the good potions / trinkets, you know how it goes, it's always like that..

    Bad F2P is bad.  Good F2P is good.

    League of Legends and DDO (mostly) are good F2P.

    Discussing bad F2P systems is almost useless and irrelevant, as most here will agree they're bad systems.

    "What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver

  • DistopiaDistopia Member EpicPosts: 21,183

    What makes no sense to me is if you only have so much time to play a game (none basically, if all you can manage is 3 hrs a month).

    Why play games that cost you monthly? If I only have 15 minutes a month to work out in a gym, why not just run instead? The price of entry is the price of entry. If it's not cost efficient for you, why bother to enter?

     

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson


Sign In or Register to comment.