Originally posted by Eir_S I'm looking at this from the standpoint of someone who questions why sub fees exist The concept on the last page that "box price + subscription fee is necessary" for an MMO is 100% conjecture, is my point. Plain and simple.
They exist for sole reason:
Companies are asking for it and people pay.
There is no other reason. It isn't nickel diming, it is a product offered for a price. You can find different product for different prices on the market, it is up to each to pick one that they find the best suitable.
Yes, it is a conjecture, I was never denying that but it is also well supported by evidence - market.
It is also well reasoned:
The thing about purchase fee + subscription is that is has the best value of revenue/user which is crucial for large investments. If you would go for different model, the player base required could be easily unreasonably high.
Example:
SWTOR goal is 500k subscribers that is about 7.5M USD per month.
Let's say that F2P games make about 1.5 USD/user.
To generate same revenue needed for SWTOR based on F2P model, you would need not 500k subscribers but 5M users.
That is huge difference. Leaving issues with having 5M users alone, it might easily seem as less achievable goal - 5M users.
That's all I was really saying, the company charges for it and may even think that it's necessary to keep themselves afloat (though honestly EA and Bioware hardly need the money from an MMO to keep going), and people pay it. The industry, Sony in particular, are noticing the potential benefits of other payment methods however. It's not going to change overnight, but if I'm going to pay for something, I want that money to go towards the game, not their other products (as has been rumored Blizzard has a practice of doing).
Dismissing my comparison because of the markets they're aimed at is typical. GW2 is going the non-sub-fee route and are completely confident in doing so, and their budget is massive, and there's no doubt in the minds of the industry that they will succeed.
The concept on the last page that "box price + subscription fee is necessary" for an MMO is 100% conjecture, is my point. Plain and simple.
As for my example being absurd, I'm looking at this from the standpoint of someone who questions why sub fees exist, not how much they cost or whether or not everyone can afford it. They don't exist for a good enough reason to the player to continue to be a prevalent payment model, and they never will. They keep you playing in mundane ways to fill up time so you stay addicted and playing until the next renewal period. That's absurd.
I'd pay the cost per month is a triviality about 5-10 minutes work real life for hours and hours of gaming. Who cares if the payments are necessary it's good value for money. If I go out and do most other entertainment activities it will cost me aheck of a lot more than an MMO subscription.
________________________________________________________ Sorcery must persist, the future is the Citadel
Originally posted by Eir_S It's not going to change overnight, but if I'm going to pay for something, I want that money to go towards the game, not their other products (as has been rumored Blizzard has a practice of doing).
Change? Vast majority of MMO market operates under F2P model. Saying that the model is suitable for every MMO per principle is just silly.
And Blizzard is doing it right, it is their money, not yours.
Youre posting links about GW and bandwidth costs as if I even mentioned that.
IM TALKING ABOUT DEVELOPMENT AND PROFIT!
You should really read my posts thoroughly.
NOT ONCE did I say subs are necessary for a game. That would be stupid. I (and MILLIONS of other people) think that the games provides enough value to justify a sub.
A company doesn't just set their prices by cost. They set their prices by what the market will bear. If peole are willing to pay $10 or something, but a company only charges $5 because their costs are only $2, they may be screwing themselves out of money.
Look at wow, millions of people find it worthwhile to pay $15 a month. If they cut the price, they are missing out on millions of potential dollars.
So cash shops are ok but subs aren't? Foolish. I hate cash shop games. So do lots of others. If you want to complain about nickel and diming look no further than your average pay to win cash shop.
You are the one that made the comparison to call of duty. That's an apples to oranges comparison if I've ever seen one.
You mention bandwidth over and over but ignore my points about the ongoing development costs of an mmo. Cod doesn't have these.
And, so you know, it's not wrong for a corporation to want to make profit. That's how capitalism works.
I don't like cash shops, but I like them not being a necessity, and what I said about you adding arguments to my posts then debunking them was true. You've got nothing.
Also, in relation to you not saying anything about bandwidth costs and necessity of subs...
"your argument is not really relevant. I wasn't even talking to you or about you"
Hmm. Maybe you should read my posts more carefully. That's all I have to say to you.
It's not going to change overnight, but if I'm going to pay for something, I want that money to go towards the game, not their other products (as has been rumored Blizzard has a practice of doing).
Change? Vast majority of MMO market operates under F2P model. Saying that the model is suitable for every MMO per principle is just silly.
And Blizzard is doing it right, it is their money, not yours.
True, it is their money, but we can agree to disagree on what is "right". My (and Blizzard's) country's major ongoing problems stem from its greedy big businesses, it extends to more than just players of MMOs, I'm not the only person who feels this way.
The game is decent as a free to play type game. But it is not an mmo its more of a single player RPG with some chat thrown in. Who is actually willing (Be honest) to pay $15 dollars a month for a game not worth one penny???
Odd.... Today I've joined a guild and grouped on and off for hours. I don't recall doing that in Skyrim or any other single player RPG I've played. I guess if you want a game to not feel like a single player RPG, you have to be social? There's plenty of group content in game if you really want it. Who would have thunk it?
Oh, to answer your question, I would and will continue to pay a monthly fee as long as the game is entertaining.
The Modern Warfare games, for one. MW2's launch budget was $200 million. No sub fee. You do know what the term "nickle and dime" means when used in relation to the consumer? That's all EA is doing.
Call of Duty [Modern Warfare 2] cost $40 million to $50 million to produce, people close to the project said, about as much as a mid-size film. Including marketing expenses and the cost of producing and distributing discs, the launch budget was $200 million, on par with a summer popcorn movie -- and extremely high for a video game.
A widely disproved rumor, MW2 actually cost $200 million to launch. And yes, I do trust the LA Times and IGN over you, no offense. There are other games that subsist completely on box price sales.
Secondly, MW2 and MW3 are online games, there is NO difference between the millions of players online at a time in an online shooter and an MMO, in fact due to the style and complexity of graphics and the number of MW players outnumbering SWTOR players, online shooters probably have a higher bandwidth cost.
You've simply fallen for marketing brainwashing in thinking MMOs use that 15 dollars for game development and not to line investors' pockets.
Somehow our modern culture has begun to equate "profit" as evil....greedy...unfair (I blame the VERY liberal teachers filling our youth with this garbage) when every company has the right to make a profit and should do what they can to not only stay in business but make money for the people who originally invested in the game.
Talk about nickel and dime? Try most of your so called F2P games - which actually cost more per month for many people who use the cash shop and those who don't will not fully benefit from what the game has to offer.
A large majority of MMORPG posters here are whiny...cheap and NEVER happy with ANY game and spend all of their time crying about the state of MMO's. They also have no sense of commerce or business and seem to think that game companies should just make them a perfect game for free because heaven forbid they actually pay for anything.
I call them "Occupy MMORPG"
Currently playing SWTOR and it's MUCH better than it was at launch.
The Modern Warfare games, for one. MW2's launch budget was $200 million. No sub fee. You do know what the term "nickle and dime" means when used in relation to the consumer? That's all EA is doing.
Call of Duty [Modern Warfare 2] cost $40 million to $50 million to produce, people close to the project said, about as much as a mid-size film. Including marketing expenses and the cost of producing and distributing discs, the launch budget was $200 million, on par with a summer popcorn movie -- and extremely high for a video game.
A widely disproved rumor, MW2 actually cost $200 million to launch. And yes, I do trust the LA Times and IGN over you, no offense. There are other games that subsist completely on box price sales.
Secondly, MW2 and MW3 are online games, there is NO difference between the millions of players online at a time in an online shooter and an MMO, in fact due to the style and complexity of graphics and the number of MW players outnumbering SWTOR players, online shooters probably have a higher bandwidth cost.
You've simply fallen for marketing brainwashing in thinking MMOs use that 15 dollars for game development and not to line investors' pockets.
Somehow our modern culture has begun to equate "profit" as evil....greedy...unfair (I blame the VERY liberal teachers filling our youth with this garbage) when every company has the right to make a profit and should do what they can to not only stay in business but make money for the people who originally invested in the game.
Talk about nickel and dime? Try most of your so called F2P games - which actually cost more per month for many people who use the cash shop and those who don't will not fully benefit from what the game has to offer.
A large majority of MMORPG posters here are whiny...cheap and NEVER happy with ANY game and spend all of their time crying about the state of MMO's. They also have no sense of commerce or business and seem to think that game companies should just make them a perfect game for free because heaven forbid they actually pay for anything.
I call them "Occupy MMORPG"
Another poster trying to insult my intelligence because I believe in a different payment plan for MMOs. You got me, I'm not actually 33 years of age, I was brainwashed by very liberal teachers in high school just this year and am also cheap and never satisfied with anything and never want to pay for what I own.
Seriously, you stretch things a bit far in your overzealous defense of companies that don't care a jot about you. Your post was nothing but insulting garbage and when I do play my free month of TOR, I hope I don't run into any idiots like you. Don't bother responding, I don't like flamewars.
i just un sub from SW...game was a very big dissapointment it ws good for about a week then the thrill died and now its a chore to play...very dissapointing...felt like every other mmo out there
I don't think people are understanding my original post. The game is decent but there are other mmos that are worth the subscription price for what they have, this game just isn't it. It is not on whether I like the game or not , its merely whether it is worth charging a monthly fee for!
I think it plays more like a single player RPG with storyline and what they should have done was made it a buy once and play free forever type game. To me it just doesn't feel like its an mmo! It's actual a few step backwards as an mmo...!
I would give you a guest pass to SWOTR, but then I wouldn't be able to find a way to live with myself afterwards....
Originally posted by Eir_S True, it is their money, but we can agree to disagree on what is "right".
There is no room for disagreement, it is a fact, it is Blizzard's money. Period.
What you call greed here is your own intolerance, you push your ideals onto others, you are telling people how to spend their money - game developers included.
If your perception isn't shared, you call it nickel diming and greed.
But continue to be combative; it reflects very well on SWTOR's community.
What does MMORPG.com have to do with any game's "community"?
He is a member of that game's community is he not? His reactions to any critique of the game is one of utter vehemence -- I doubt that changes if someone within the game voices any criticism.
Is it fair to judge entire gaming community of GW2 on basis of how you present yourself? would that be fair? you get all defensive too when someone criticise GW2, just that when it is your own favorite game everything is allowed.
Feel free to; I have done nothing wrong or questionable in how I "present myself". I have called spades for what they are, spades. Honesty rubs some people the wrong way so I can't help it if I step on toes now and then.
You don't have to because posting history speaks volumes. I had to lol at the red bolded part.
You must not lose faith in humanity. Humanity is an ocean; if a few drops of the ocean are dirty, the ocean does not become dirty -- Mahatma Gandhi
The Modern Warfare games, for one. MW2's launch budget was $200 million. No sub fee. You do know what the term "nickle and dime" means when used in relation to the consumer? That's all EA is doing.
Call of Duty [Modern Warfare 2] cost $40 million to $50 million to produce, people close to the project said, about as much as a mid-size film. Including marketing expenses and the cost of producing and distributing discs, the launch budget was $200 million, on par with a summer popcorn movie -- and extremely high for a video game.
A widely disproved rumor, MW2 actually cost $200 million to launch. And yes, I do trust the LA Times and IGN over you, no offense. There are other games that subsist completely on box price sales.
Secondly, MW2 and MW3 are online games, there is NO difference between the millions of players online at a time in an online shooter and an MMO, in fact due to the style and complexity of graphics and the number of MW players outnumbering SWTOR players, online shooters probably have a higher bandwidth cost.
You've simply fallen for marketing brainwashing in thinking MMOs use that 15 dollars for game development and not to line investors' pockets.
Somehow our modern culture has begun to equate "profit" as evil....greedy...unfair (I blame the VERY liberal teachers filling our youth with this garbage) when every company has the right to make a profit and should do what they can to not only stay in business but make money for the people who originally invested in the game.
Talk about nickel and dime? Try most of your so called F2P games - which actually cost more per month for many people who use the cash shop and those who don't will not fully benefit from what the game has to offer.
A large majority of MMORPG posters here are whiny...cheap and NEVER happy with ANY game and spend all of their time crying about the state of MMO's. They also have no sense of commerce or business and seem to think that game companies should just make them a perfect game for free because heaven forbid they actually pay for anything.
I call them "Occupy MMORPG"
Another poster trying to insult my intelligence because I believe in a different payment plan for MMOs. You got me, I'm not actually 33 years of age, I was brainwashed by very liberal teachers in high school just this year and am also cheap and never satisfied with anything and never want to pay for what I own.
Seriously, you stretch things a bit far in your overzealous defense of companies that don't care a jot about you. Your post was nothing but insulting garbage and when I do play my free month of TOR, I hope I don't run into any idiots like you. Don't bother responding, I don't like flamewars.
No need for a flame war at all and my defense of companies has nothing to do wheter or not they "care" about me - that's irrelevant. Companies are in business to make money - that's it...itt's not selfish...it's called self interest. Companies are not in business to hire people or give people pensions or insurance or make games that cannot sustain themselves - they want to make money.
My point is: Capitalism is a wonderful thing - if SWTOR wants to charge 15 bucks a month for access to their game...more power to 'em and to me...it's worth it because I love the game. If you refuse to play a game because of a sub fee and that's the only reason...you have every right to do so and if enough people feel this way the company will either change it's fee structure or fold.
But - my impression from reading a number of posts in this forum is that people will not even play a game that charges a sub because THEY think it's not right...evil or unfair that GREEDY companies line their investors pockets becaise they don't CARE about people. Well...they do care that people spend money with their company...but that's it.
I just think it's silly to bash a company for making a product and wanting to make money.
Currently playing SWTOR and it's MUCH better than it was at launch.
True, it is their money, but we can agree to disagree on what is "right".
There is no room for disagreement, it is a fact, it is Blizzard's money. Period.
What you call greed here is your own intolerance, you push your ideals onto others, you are telling people how to spend their money - game developers included.
If your perception isn't shared, you call it nickel diming and greed.
It's also a fact that I disagree with their nickel and diming. Cry about it, it's called having a differing opinion, I never forced my ideals on anyone, if that's even possible on a forum, nor did I, nor would I ever tell anyone how to spend their money. Some people on this forum tend to put words into other people's mouths to "win" a debate. Consider yourself the victor.
The Modern Warfare games, for one. MW2's launch budget was $200 million. No sub fee. You do know what the term "nickle and dime" means when used in relation to the consumer? That's all EA is doing.
Call of Duty [Modern Warfare 2] cost $40 million to $50 million to produce, people close to the project said, about as much as a mid-size film. Including marketing expenses and the cost of producing and distributing discs, the launch budget was $200 million, on par with a summer popcorn movie -- and extremely high for a video game.
A widely disproved rumor, MW2 actually cost $200 million to launch. And yes, I do trust the LA Times and IGN over you, no offense. There are other games that subsist completely on box price sales.
Secondly, MW2 and MW3 are online games, there is NO difference between the millions of players online at a time in an online shooter and an MMO, in fact due to the style and complexity of graphics and the number of MW players outnumbering SWTOR players, online shooters probably have a higher bandwidth cost.
You've simply fallen for marketing brainwashing in thinking MMOs use that 15 dollars for game development and not to line investors' pockets.
Somehow our modern culture has begun to equate "profit" as evil....greedy...unfair (I blame the VERY liberal teachers filling our youth with this garbage) when every company has the right to make a profit and should do what they can to not only stay in business but make money for the people who originally invested in the game.
Talk about nickel and dime? Try most of your so called F2P games - which actually cost more per month for many people who use the cash shop and those who don't will not fully benefit from what the game has to offer.
A large majority of MMORPG posters here are whiny...cheap and NEVER happy with ANY game and spend all of their time crying about the state of MMO's. They also have no sense of commerce or business and seem to think that game companies should just make them a perfect game for free because heaven forbid they actually pay for anything.
I call them "Occupy MMORPG"
Another poster trying to insult my intelligence because I believe in a different payment plan for MMOs. You got me, I'm not actually 33 years of age, I was brainwashed by very liberal teachers in high school just this year and am also cheap and never satisfied with anything and never want to pay for what I own.
Seriously, you stretch things a bit far in your overzealous defense of companies that don't care a jot about you. Your post was nothing but insulting garbage and when I do play my free month of TOR, I hope I don't run into any idiots like you. Don't bother responding, I don't like flamewars.
No need for a flame war at all and my defense of companies has nothing to do wheter or not they "care" about me - that's irrelevant. Companies are in business to make money - that's it...itt's not selfish...it's called self interest. Companies are not in business to hire people or give people pensions or insurance or make games that cannot sustain themselves - they want to make money.
My point is: Capitalism is a wonderful thing - if SWTOR wants to charge 15 bucks a month for access to their game...more power to 'em and to me...it's worth it because I love the game. If you refuse to play a game because of a sub fee and that's the only reason...you have every right to do so and if enough people feel this way the company will either change it's fee structure or fold.
But - my impression from reading a number of posts in this forum is that people will not even play a game that charges a sub because THEY think it's not right...evil or unfair that GREEDY companies line their investors pockets becaise they don't CARE about people. Well...they do care that people spend money with their company...but that's it.
I just think it's silly to bash a company for making a product and wanting to make money.
Why in the world would you bring politics to a gaming forum.. i think that is his problem with your post and you are polarizing peolple because ot it.
Consumers have a right to demand something fo their dollar. We as consumers of products should demand the best from anything we purchase or think about purchasing..
I think maybe what you are sniffing around with your political analogy is that people are noticing the MMO space is a big cash grab now... and just like any artistic experience... once you think about how much $$ you will make, you start making decisions based on how many poeple can we pull in rather than how the art can really be special.
HOllywood is the perfect example and the gaming industry is following suit.
( i could be wrong about poeples intentions here but maybe that is what you guys are getting at ? )
Also, best leave politics out of gaming discussions i think, its like the ultimate derail.. whats next ? God supports TOR or doesn't ?
Its a game, lets discuss its merits and drawbacks as consumers.. that is who we are and our POV unless of course we are paid by maker of said product or something..
Originally posted by Eir_S It's also a fact that I disagree with their nickel and diming.
It is not a fact that it is nickel diming ;-)
Yes, you do force your ideals onto others.
You say that subscription is nickel diming which implies it must be to everyone else. You say that company should spend their profits certain way you approve. etc.
Just because you have an opinion does not make you right. Not all opinions are equal either.
If you refuse to play a game because of a sub fee and that's the only reason...you have every right to do so and if enough people feel this way the company will either change it's fee structure or fold
No, apparently I don't have every right. Just most of them. One of the rights not afforded me is the right to express my feelings about the current subscription payment model without being insulted or told I'm forcing my opinions on others. I will keep my fascist, nazi opinions to myself for fear of disturbing the horde, oh mighty leader. I've defended my points accurately and patiently, they are only my opinions, and I've been attacked for it, life goes on. On the plus side, your last post to me was not so blatantly offensive and you in turn expressed your views accurately and patiently, but I'm done with this thread. If I want people yelling at me over video games, I'll get an X-Box.
Back in the day... I don't think MMO costs for subscription were ever "Sold" to consumers beacsue of bandwith costs... Server farms, I mean top server farms that handle way more bandwith than any MMO does at the TOP hosting places ( like Rackspace for example ) cost around 50 k a month, give or take say 25 K.
That is a fraction of the cost of subs of MMOs, what you are paying for or we thought we were paying for was ongoing content development...
Single player games now capitalize on this with DLCs.
Guild wars took a differnt approach, release expansions and not mini updates and they made their dollar there... its a different approach is all.
i think there's an interesting clash of views in this thread which is very topical at the moment.
but, i'd like to point out that, for me, the idea of a sub vs ftp shouldn't be much of an issue. not these days. i think we must all be open-eyed enough to see the sub mode is a dying breed. ftp will be the norm - as, technically, it should be.
for me, i think of a game as a game. subs came about more as a way of covering ongoing costs, but in many cases these overheads aren't as relevant these days. what game is released which doesn't have some form of mass multiplayer option? you look at 3dshooters. hard to find one forcing you to sub to play.
the argument that mmos somehow deliver ongoing content which provides the sub value is mostly inaccurate as many mmos charging subs will still charge for any major content update by calling it an expansion anyway.
certainly there's continual development, but in many cases you could argue it's counter-productive to the game itself. look at wow - the constant changing of skills and tinkering and tweaking. yet, can you say it has improved? that you've gotten your money's worth? really? any change is met by a wall of criticism and rage. and it STILL doesn't "fix" anything. it's just a step to another fix. sometimes it might be best to leave it, and tinker with the expansion.
in some ways, i feel they do hot updates to keep the rage flowing so it looks like they're doing something with your money.
personally, i've paid subs, and i'd pay them again. i don't hate them. but i don't see they provide inherent value to a game. it doesn't automatically make the game "good". it doesn't make it balanced. it certainly doesn't mean it will have more content updates. it doesn't mean you won't be paying for expansions. it doesn't even mean the game will be free of bugs. a sub is, for me, a way for companies to maintain a continual flow of cash after the game's initial release. whether this helps the game to thrive or die is something to argue about.
personally, i think it's time for a new model.
i would prefer to pay for content. at least then i'm choosing what i'm paying for, choosing where i'm going, and in many ways this would help make the game thrive. i feel a game company would work its fingers off designing things specifically for me to buy. rather than design me a single dungeon and yawning me off for a year until the next expansion, they might consider giving me one a month. i'd pay a few dollars. and if i don't like this "type" of dungeon, maybe they'd ask me what i'd like and work to improve their game rather than be lazy.
or add in some pandas.
i'd like to see a more fluid relationship between my money given to the developer (who i don't mind paying to keep in business) and the content that developer gives to me.
Originally posted by xion12121 I don't think people are understanding my original post. The game is decent but there are other mmos that are worth the subscription price for what they have, this game just isn't it. It is not on whether I like the game or not , its merely whether it is worth charging a monthly fee for! I think it plays more like a single player RPG with storyline and what they should have done was made it a buy once and play free forever type game. To me it just doesn't feel like its an mmo! It's actual a few step backwards as an mmo...!
I think it's worth the money, you think it's not. One of us will pay, one of us won't. What is the purpose of this discussion again?
I definitely don't understand your original post. I'm not sure what there is to understand.
This is your entire OP:
The game is decent as a free to play type game. But it is not an mmo its more of a single player RPG with some chat thrown in. Who is actually willing (Be honest) to pay $15 dollars a month for a game not worth one penny???
So, your point is that this game is not worth one penny. That's not the case. It is worth whatever people will pay for it.
If you don't think it's worth it, that's one thing. All you have to do is something you were already doing before it came out. Continue not paying for it. Your opinion of it's worth doesn't really mean much to the market at large.
Again, it's worth whatever people will pay for it. You say it's not worth a penny, but over a million other people (more than any other mmo at launch ever) think that it is worth at least $60.
As far as valuing a copy of this game (it's "worth") retailers sell it for at least $60, and people buy it. If the game is worth that price to it's customers (more at launch than any other mmo) then that is what it's value is.
If you were going to sell an unopened copy of this game to someone, and your business depended on selling this game, what would you charge? Would you sell it for "not even one penny?" No. You would sell it at full retail price, because that is it's value. In this example, you don't even have to like the game, you could think it was the worst game ever, but it's worth would still be $60.
It's also a fact that I disagree with their nickel and diming.
It is not a fact that it is nickel diming ;-)
Never said it was.
Yes, you do force your ideals onto others.
Am I making you read this? I'm sure as hell not making you respond.
You say that subscription is nickel diming which implies it must be to everyone else.
No, on a web forum, that only implies that it's my opinion, unless you can prove otherwise.
You say that company should spend their profits certain way you approve.
etc.
No, I didn't. Not once.
Just because you have an opinion does not make you right.
I didn't say it did. In fact, I only said that I would follow the quotes of industry experts and not people on a forum. Somewhere someone got offended and turned on the flamethrowers. All I wanted was for you to admit it was complete conjecture that subscriptions are "necessary". And you did that. So I'm through here.
Comments
They exist for sole reason:
Companies are asking for it and people pay.
There is no other reason. It isn't nickel diming, it is a product offered for a price. You can find different product for different prices on the market, it is up to each to pick one that they find the best suitable.
Yes, it is a conjecture, I was never denying that but it is also well supported by evidence - market.
It is also well reasoned:
The thing about purchase fee + subscription is that is has the best value of revenue/user which is crucial for large investments. If you would go for different model, the player base required could be easily unreasonably high.
Example:
SWTOR goal is 500k subscribers that is about 7.5M USD per month.
Let's say that F2P games make about 1.5 USD/user.
To generate same revenue needed for SWTOR based on F2P model, you would need not 500k subscribers but 5M users.
That is huge difference. Leaving issues with having 5M users alone, it might easily seem as less achievable goal - 5M users.
That's all I was really saying, the company charges for it and may even think that it's necessary to keep themselves afloat (though honestly EA and Bioware hardly need the money from an MMO to keep going), and people pay it. The industry, Sony in particular, are noticing the potential benefits of other payment methods however. It's not going to change overnight, but if I'm going to pay for something, I want that money to go towards the game, not their other products (as has been rumored Blizzard has a practice of doing).
I'd pay the cost per month is a triviality about 5-10 minutes work real life for hours and hours of gaming. Who cares if the payments are necessary it's good value for money. If I go out and do most other entertainment activities it will cost me aheck of a lot more than an MMO subscription.
________________________________________________________
Sorcery must persist, the future is the Citadel
Change? Vast majority of MMO market operates under F2P model. Saying that the model is suitable for every MMO per principle is just silly.
And Blizzard is doing it right, it is their money, not yours.
haters always gona hate no matter what ppl do ...
IM TALKING ABOUT DEVELOPMENT AND PROFIT!
You should really read my posts thoroughly.
NOT ONCE did I say subs are necessary for a game. That would be stupid. I (and MILLIONS of other people) think that the games provides enough value to justify a sub.
A company doesn't just set their prices by cost. They set their prices by what the market will bear. If peole are willing to pay $10 or something, but a company only charges $5 because their costs are only $2, they may be screwing themselves out of money.
Look at wow, millions of people find it worthwhile to pay $15 a month. If they cut the price, they are missing out on millions of potential dollars.
So cash shops are ok but subs aren't? Foolish. I hate cash shop games. So do lots of others. If you want to complain about nickel and diming look no further than your average pay to win cash shop.
You are the one that made the comparison to call of duty. That's an apples to oranges comparison if I've ever seen one.
You mention bandwidth over and over but ignore my points about the ongoing development costs of an mmo. Cod doesn't have these.
And, so you know, it's not wrong for a corporation to want to make profit. That's how capitalism works.
Shadow's Hand Guild
Open recruitment for
The Secret World - Dragons
Planetside 2 - Terran Republic
Tera - Dragonfall Server
http://www.shadowshand.com
I don't like cash shops, but I like them not being a necessity, and what I said about you adding arguments to my posts then debunking them was true. You've got nothing.
Also, in relation to you not saying anything about bandwidth costs and necessity of subs...
"your argument is not really relevant. I wasn't even talking to you or about you"
Hmm. Maybe you should read my posts more carefully. That's all I have to say to you.
True, it is their money, but we can agree to disagree on what is "right". My (and Blizzard's) country's major ongoing problems stem from its greedy big businesses, it extends to more than just players of MMOs, I'm not the only person who feels this way.
Odd.... Today I've joined a guild and grouped on and off for hours. I don't recall doing that in Skyrim or any other single player RPG I've played. I guess if you want a game to not feel like a single player RPG, you have to be social? There's plenty of group content in game if you really want it. Who would have thunk it?
Oh, to answer your question, I would and will continue to pay a monthly fee as long as the game is entertaining.
Somehow our modern culture has begun to equate "profit" as evil....greedy...unfair (I blame the VERY liberal teachers filling our youth with this garbage) when every company has the right to make a profit and should do what they can to not only stay in business but make money for the people who originally invested in the game.
Talk about nickel and dime? Try most of your so called F2P games - which actually cost more per month for many people who use the cash shop and those who don't will not fully benefit from what the game has to offer.
A large majority of MMORPG posters here are whiny...cheap and NEVER happy with ANY game and spend all of their time crying about the state of MMO's. They also have no sense of commerce or business and seem to think that game companies should just make them a perfect game for free because heaven forbid they actually pay for anything.
I call them "Occupy MMORPG"
Currently playing SWTOR and it's MUCH better than it was at launch.
Another poster trying to insult my intelligence because I believe in a different payment plan for MMOs. You got me, I'm not actually 33 years of age, I was brainwashed by very liberal teachers in high school just this year and am also cheap and never satisfied with anything and never want to pay for what I own.
Seriously, you stretch things a bit far in your overzealous defense of companies that don't care a jot about you. Your post was nothing but insulting garbage and when I do play my free month of TOR, I hope I don't run into any idiots like you. Don't bother responding, I don't like flamewars.
i just un sub from SW...game was a very big dissapointment it ws good for about a week then the thrill died and now its a chore to play...very dissapointing...felt like every other mmo out there
I don't think people are understanding my original post. The game is decent but there are other mmos that are worth the subscription price for what they have, this game just isn't it. It is not on whether I like the game or not , its merely whether it is worth charging a monthly fee for!
I think it plays more like a single player RPG with storyline and what they should have done was made it a buy once and play free forever type game. To me it just doesn't feel like its an mmo! It's actual a few step backwards as an mmo...!
I would give you a guest pass to SWOTR, but then I wouldn't be able to find a way to live with myself afterwards....
There is no room for disagreement, it is a fact, it is Blizzard's money. Period.
What you call greed here is your own intolerance, you push your ideals onto others, you are telling people how to spend their money - game developers included.
If your perception isn't shared, you call it nickel diming and greed.
You don't have to because posting history speaks volumes. I had to lol at the red bolded part.
You must not lose faith in humanity. Humanity is an ocean; if a few drops of the ocean are dirty, the ocean does not become dirty -- Mahatma Gandhi
No need for a flame war at all and my defense of companies has nothing to do wheter or not they "care" about me - that's irrelevant. Companies are in business to make money - that's it...itt's not selfish...it's called self interest. Companies are not in business to hire people or give people pensions or insurance or make games that cannot sustain themselves - they want to make money.
My point is: Capitalism is a wonderful thing - if SWTOR wants to charge 15 bucks a month for access to their game...more power to 'em and to me...it's worth it because I love the game. If you refuse to play a game because of a sub fee and that's the only reason...you have every right to do so and if enough people feel this way the company will either change it's fee structure or fold.
But - my impression from reading a number of posts in this forum is that people will not even play a game that charges a sub because THEY think it's not right...evil or unfair that GREEDY companies line their investors pockets becaise they don't CARE about people. Well...they do care that people spend money with their company...but that's it.
I just think it's silly to bash a company for making a product and wanting to make money.
Currently playing SWTOR and it's MUCH better than it was at launch.
It's also a fact that I disagree with their nickel and diming. Cry about it, it's called having a differing opinion, I never forced my ideals on anyone, if that's even possible on a forum, nor did I, nor would I ever tell anyone how to spend their money. Some people on this forum tend to put words into other people's mouths to "win" a debate. Consider yourself the victor.
Why in the world would you bring politics to a gaming forum.. i think that is his problem with your post and you are polarizing peolple because ot it.
Consumers have a right to demand something fo their dollar. We as consumers of products should demand the best from anything we purchase or think about purchasing..
I think maybe what you are sniffing around with your political analogy is that people are noticing the MMO space is a big cash grab now... and just like any artistic experience... once you think about how much $$ you will make, you start making decisions based on how many poeple can we pull in rather than how the art can really be special.
HOllywood is the perfect example and the gaming industry is following suit.
( i could be wrong about poeples intentions here but maybe that is what you guys are getting at ? )
Also, best leave politics out of gaming discussions i think, its like the ultimate derail.. whats next ? God supports TOR or doesn't ?
Its a game, lets discuss its merits and drawbacks as consumers.. that is who we are and our POV unless of course we are paid by maker of said product or something..
It is not a fact that it is nickel diming ;-)
Yes, you do force your ideals onto others.
You say that subscription is nickel diming which implies it must be to everyone else.
You say that company should spend their profits certain way you approve.
etc.
Just because you have an opinion does not make you right. Not all opinions are equal either.
No, apparently I don't have every right. Just most of them. One of the rights not afforded me is the right to express my feelings about the current subscription payment model without being insulted or told I'm forcing my opinions on others. I will keep my fascist, nazi opinions to myself for fear of disturbing the horde, oh mighty leader. I've defended my points accurately and patiently, they are only my opinions, and I've been attacked for it, life goes on. On the plus side, your last post to me was not so blatantly offensive and you in turn expressed your views accurately and patiently, but I'm done with this thread. If I want people yelling at me over video games, I'll get an X-Box.
Back in the day... I don't think MMO costs for subscription were ever "Sold" to consumers beacsue of bandwith costs... Server farms, I mean top server farms that handle way more bandwith than any MMO does at the TOP hosting places ( like Rackspace for example ) cost around 50 k a month, give or take say 25 K.
That is a fraction of the cost of subs of MMOs, what you are paying for or we thought we were paying for was ongoing content development...
Single player games now capitalize on this with DLCs.
Guild wars took a differnt approach, release expansions and not mini updates and they made their dollar there... its a different approach is all.
i think there's an interesting clash of views in this thread which is very topical at the moment.
but, i'd like to point out that, for me, the idea of a sub vs ftp shouldn't be much of an issue. not these days. i think we must all be open-eyed enough to see the sub mode is a dying breed. ftp will be the norm - as, technically, it should be.
for me, i think of a game as a game. subs came about more as a way of covering ongoing costs, but in many cases these overheads aren't as relevant these days. what game is released which doesn't have some form of mass multiplayer option? you look at 3dshooters. hard to find one forcing you to sub to play.
the argument that mmos somehow deliver ongoing content which provides the sub value is mostly inaccurate as many mmos charging subs will still charge for any major content update by calling it an expansion anyway.
certainly there's continual development, but in many cases you could argue it's counter-productive to the game itself. look at wow - the constant changing of skills and tinkering and tweaking. yet, can you say it has improved? that you've gotten your money's worth? really? any change is met by a wall of criticism and rage. and it STILL doesn't "fix" anything. it's just a step to another fix. sometimes it might be best to leave it, and tinker with the expansion.
in some ways, i feel they do hot updates to keep the rage flowing so it looks like they're doing something with your money.
personally, i've paid subs, and i'd pay them again. i don't hate them. but i don't see they provide inherent value to a game. it doesn't automatically make the game "good". it doesn't make it balanced. it certainly doesn't mean it will have more content updates. it doesn't mean you won't be paying for expansions. it doesn't even mean the game will be free of bugs. a sub is, for me, a way for companies to maintain a continual flow of cash after the game's initial release. whether this helps the game to thrive or die is something to argue about.
personally, i think it's time for a new model.
i would prefer to pay for content. at least then i'm choosing what i'm paying for, choosing where i'm going, and in many ways this would help make the game thrive. i feel a game company would work its fingers off designing things specifically for me to buy. rather than design me a single dungeon and yawning me off for a year until the next expansion, they might consider giving me one a month. i'd pay a few dollars. and if i don't like this "type" of dungeon, maybe they'd ask me what i'd like and work to improve their game rather than be lazy.
or add in some pandas.
i'd like to see a more fluid relationship between my money given to the developer (who i don't mind paying to keep in business) and the content that developer gives to me.
I definitely don't understand your original post. I'm not sure what there is to understand.
This is your entire OP:
So, your point is that this game is not worth one penny. That's not the case. It is worth whatever people will pay for it.
If you don't think it's worth it, that's one thing. All you have to do is something you were already doing before it came out. Continue not paying for it. Your opinion of it's worth doesn't really mean much to the market at large.
Again, it's worth whatever people will pay for it. You say it's not worth a penny, but over a million other people (more than any other mmo at launch ever) think that it is worth at least $60.
As far as valuing a copy of this game (it's "worth") retailers sell it for at least $60, and people buy it. If the game is worth that price to it's customers (more at launch than any other mmo) then that is what it's value is.
If you were going to sell an unopened copy of this game to someone, and your business depended on selling this game, what would you charge? Would you sell it for "not even one penny?" No. You would sell it at full retail price, because that is it's value. In this example, you don't even have to like the game, you could think it was the worst game ever, but it's worth would still be $60.
Does that answer your OP?
Shadow's Hand Guild
Open recruitment for
The Secret World - Dragons
Planetside 2 - Terran Republic
Tera - Dragonfall Server
http://www.shadowshand.com
Never said it was.
From your replies, I assume you are not even aware of what your statements imply and when you offend people, you do it unintentionally.