Subscription is a mindset more than a payment model. I've come to that conclusion with a lot of pondering.
I think a subscription based game is a service operation. You sell the client connection software then your mission is to make the content more exciting over time. You have to pay attention to complaints and sort them. You have to acknowledge them even if you have to talk people off the edge of buildings at times because they are overreacting. You have to be tender with your participants. You have to make them believe there is a community. You have to show up sometimes to remind them that you have power but that you don't abuse it. You have to make friends.
Not every company can do that. Instead, making well thought out content in the existing system is challenging because the larger the code base grows, the more things which become affected as content is added. You have to not only know what your game is but what will improve it and keep all those systems in your head or conversations. And if your neighbor is selling something better, you have to step up your creativity. This is why over time populations dwindle but if you can go back to tenderizing and exhibit effort regularly, you'll keep participants.
This is where cash shop games found that content that is based on existing items is so much easier to produce that they stopped making content when they can just make another item to buy occasionally. It's the difference of service work versus assembly line work and I think it started with +1. That's the easiest way I can explain what roams in my noggin' about it.
I don't think every game can fulfill a subscription obligation. I don't give free games a chance anymore so I can't tell you which of the hundreds out there have the capacity to be a subscription game or support their community that way. I can surmise that companies who have multiple games have less chances of being sub games. That's simply because they have spread themselves out and can't monitor things well enough.
Same exact thing can be said about B2P with paid DLCs and expansions.
The thing is that when people buy DLC they feel value, they bought actual content, when they pay a sub, well, tey can just play the game and most often they dont get anything else.
Same goes with cash shops, if theyre well done, non intrusive, someone buying a horsey in cash shop for 15$ might feel more value than paying a sub.
And thers a history thingy, where most of long term MMOers didnt get squat for their sub except "exclusive right to play the game"
I don't have a problem paying sub. I have done it many years for many games. However, when the first Guild Wars came out (I know there is hot debate right now if it is or isn't an MMO), I was amazed by this new devilry known as B2P. Then I started to scrutinize more on what I was paying for with my sub on whatever MMO I was currently playing. Specially when the fundamental gameplay of game X wasn't changing other than bug fixes. It's not like I was getting $15 worth of DLC content every month, and neither were the rest of you.
Either way, after GW1 I still subbed to games and even experimented with a lifetime sub for me and my wife when LOTRO came out. Learned my lesson with that one as well. Now-a-days a game really has to do something different and better than the games that came before it before I decide to sub. Specially since just about every Western MMO (I really don't like Asian MMOs) has dropped the sub for B2P/F2P except WoW. History has proven to repeat itself over and over again and you can either learn from the past or keep making the same mistake. It was definitely interesting to watch ESO when people asked why or when it was going to drop it's sub and to see the devoted say it would never happen. LOL, I even remember a particular poster saying WoW would go B2P/F2P before ESO. Nobody "wished" it to happen to ESO. Just expected it based on the game and from the trends of the past. /shrug
Originally posted by cheyane Yes it can . I have no problem paying for any game I support.
I agree completely with you - I have no problem paying for a game I like.
I really don't get people who think games are supposed to be free. Now, before anyone gets up in arms...I can understand how someone may not want to pay sub fees, but a lot of times it feels like those same people wouldn't buy the game either. All they want is everything to be F2P. The irony here is that I doubt they have a problem buying a console game for an experience that lasts 1/99th the time a decent MMO can provide. F2P is just not a good model...it breeds some seriously unethical behavior.
Unfortunately things have shifted and the average gamer is casual and they outnumber us, the more traditional gamers 3:1 and devs have no choice but to cater to them. If there is a solution I do not have it. All I know is what I prefer - which is a sub model.
Originally posted by Viper482 I will take a good sub game over a game built around a cash shop any day.
I understand the sentiment.
In the grand context of MMO's is ESO a good game? Not great but good. I understand everyone will not agree but objectively I think it is good. It could not stand as a subscription game. I'm saying it couldn't buy enough time with the subscriptions to evolve into a game where enough people felt it merited a subscription.
Look at the past, the turd that AO was at release had much more time to evolve as a game. The developer could ride the subscription money while they did so. That luxury does not exist today.
I think to survive as a sub game from release today a game would have to be great out of the box. Further, I think it is close to impossible for that to happen.
I think a subscription based game is a service operation.
Actually, the F2P developers have always been far more in touch with the fact that MMOs are a service not a product than the western devs. This may be because the box, sub, expansion model has worked so well in the context of sell product, maintain product, sell add-ons. The whole sub model is pretty much built around maxing out box sales and buying time til the expansion box sale. When you look at the varying exceptions within that model - Asheron's Call (yes, there were 2 xpacs), Lineage 2, EVE Online - you see a lot more of a service and community focus.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Originally posted by Malabooga B2P with non intrusive cash shop and paid DLCs/expansions is fairest system, to player and devloper.
Disagree.
Free client, robust trial, and sub with NO cash shop is the fairest to all.
B2P is just putting an entry fee on the door for people entering your mall and does nothing to remove the initial barrier to entry, while still requiring nasty practices like selling gold and RNG casino lockboxes.
There is only one MMORPG worth playing that caters to my tastes, so since it charges a sub fee, I pay it. If they dropped the sub tomorrow I'd likely still play, unless the alternate payment model pissed me off too much.
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
Yes. If a game is enjoyable then you should be willing to pay for it. Nothing is free in this life. Not really. If that means using a cash shop, subbing, or another form of payment. I will sub to any game I'm playing if I am having fun. Its an added bonus if you get something out of it, which most F2P/B2P games offer with a sub.
Back in the day, you could count the total number of sub-based games on one hand. It was new, internet access for business bandwidth was crazy expensive and you had all kinds of hardware issues that you dont have today with virtual servers. Those games deserved a sub.
Fast forward to today when for $15 you can buy a single meal at a sub-par restaurant or get a months worth of gaming pleasure. People act like $15 a month is a huge cost but monthly gaming subscriptions have not risen in price since the industry emerged. Everything else you buy has risen in cost and yet time and time again we see people complain about the whopping $15 a month sub fee. Sub fees are soooo much better than the free-to-try, keep paying to keep up in the cash shop, keep introducing new gear grind crap that we have today disguised as F2P games.
"Sean (Murray) saying MP will be in the game is not remotely close to evidence that at the point of purchase people thought there was MP in the game." - SEANMCAD
Back in the day, you could count the total number of sub-based games on one hand. It was new, internet access for business bandwidth was crazy expensive and you had all kinds of hardware issues that you dont have today with virtual servers. Those games deserved a sub.
Fast forward to today when for $15 you can buy a single meal at a sub-par restaurant or get a months worth of gaming pleasure. People act like $15 a month is a huge cost but monthly gaming subscriptions have not risen in price since the industry emerged. Everything else you buy has risen in cost and yet time and time again we see people complain about the whopping $15 a month sub fee. Sub fees are soooo much better than the free-to-try, keep paying to keep up in the cash shop, keep introducing new gear grind crap that we have today disguised as F2P games.
Wow...putting inflation into perspective really makes me feel differently about F2P games. You really can't compare $15 from 10-15 years ago to $15 now, can you? You sir, just blew my mind.
For me main advantage of subscription is lack of Cash Shop. When an MMORPG have both sub and CS even if it's cosmetic one only then subscription loses it's appeal completly.
Lack of Cash Shop is mainly because I like MMORPG with least amount of RMT as possible, so that means that company wanting me to pay subscription should be actively minimizing 3rd party/players RMT as well.
Of course all that has to be coupled with game itself being up to par with my gameplay&quality expectations.
So yeah bar is set very high, I doubt any company atm would want to try and meet it. IMHO real subscription model (meaning no CS) is dead for now.
Whether it will resurrect in the future? Well sooner or later it will, but whether that someday is 5 years or 50 years from now is remain to be seen.
Back in the day, you could count the total number of sub-based games on one hand. It was new, internet access for business bandwidth was crazy expensive and you had all kinds of hardware issues that you dont have today with virtual servers. Those games deserved a sub.
Fast forward to today when for $15 you can buy a single meal at a sub-par restaurant or get a months worth of gaming pleasure. People act like $15 a month is a huge cost but monthly gaming subscriptions have not risen in price since the industry emerged. Everything else you buy has risen in cost and yet time and time again we see people complain about the whopping $15 a month sub fee. Sub fees are soooo much better than the free-to-try, keep paying to keep up in the cash shop, keep introducing new gear grind crap that we have today disguised as F2P games.
Wow...putting inflation into perspective really makes me feel differently about F2P games. You really can't compare $15 from 10-15 years ago to $15 now, can you? You sir, just blew my mind.
When you would ask me in '98 what MMORPG will cost in 2015, I would respond that about ~150$ for box and 30$-40$ for 1 month of subscription.
I actually expected for them to expand slower and in very diffrent direction gameplay&concept wise and being sort of elitish video game entertainment.
Back in the day, you could count the total number of sub-based games on one hand. It was new, internet access for business bandwidth was crazy expensive and you had all kinds of hardware issues that you dont have today with virtual servers. Those games deserved a sub.
Fast forward to today when for $15 you can buy a single meal at a sub-par restaurant or get a months worth of gaming pleasure. People act like $15 a month is a huge cost but monthly gaming subscriptions have not risen in price since the industry emerged. Everything else you buy has risen in cost and yet time and time again we see people complain about the whopping $15 a month sub fee. Sub fees are soooo much better than the free-to-try, keep paying to keep up in the cash shop, keep introducing new gear grind crap that we have today disguised as F2P games.
Wow...putting inflation into perspective really makes me feel differently about F2P games. You really can't compare $15 from 10-15 years ago to $15 now, can you? You sir, just blew my mind.
When you would ask me in '98 what MMORPG will cost in 2015, I would respond that about ~150$ for box and 30$-40$ for 1 month of subscription.
I actually expected for them to expand slower and in very diffrent direction gameplay&concept wise and being sort of elitish video game entertainment.
I guess I was very young and naive then
I'm sure I would've said the same thing. But at the very least I feel a little better now about spending money in my new favorite F2P game (Trove).
What merits a subscription? Updates? Level of content? Fun of the game? It is a matter of perspective. Most games fail in their promised to provide frequent and adequate updates. If that is the sole reasoning behind a subscription, then the answer you be none; there are currently no games that warrant a subscription. For me, it is a combination of all of them. If the game is fun, and the subscription has something more tangible than just playing the game, like Station Points for SOE as a monthly bonus; then I can justify a sub.
Raquelis in various games Played: Everything Playing: Nioh 2, Civ6 Wants: The World Anticipating:Everquest NextCrowfall, Pantheon, Elden Ring
What merits a subscription? Updates? Level of content? Fun of the game? It is a matter of perspective. Most games fail in their promised to provide frequent and adequate updates. If that is the sole reasoning behind a subscription, then the answer you be none; there are currently no games that warrant a subscription.
How do you deny that FFXIV doesn't warrant a subscription? If there is any way to squeeze out bigger patches or more volume on a similarly frequent and constant basis, please let me know. Your bar has been set so high we need help from a higher life force to reach it.
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
This seems like a bit of an inane question. I think subscriptions are a perfectly acceptable payment model -- even if there is a cash shop in addition. Avalon recently went free to play after having a subscription model for 24 years; it's seen a surge in players online for sure but people still have the option to subscribe if they want and many do.
I think a subscription based game is a service operation.
Actually, the F2P developers have always been far more in touch with the fact that MMOs are a service not a product than the western devs. This may be because the box, sub, expansion model has worked so well in the context of sell product, maintain product, sell add-ons. The whole sub model is pretty much built around maxing out box sales and buying time til the expansion box sale. When you look at the varying exceptions within that model - Asheron's Call (yes, there were 2 xpacs), Lineage 2, EVE Online - you see a lot more of a service and community focus.
It is a service. It is amazing how many feel entitled to free service.
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
Originally posted by Muntz The games of the past I played all had subscriptions that was what was done in those times. So, a bad release or even a decent release with a smaller then expected amount of content wasn't the death knell of the subscription. There simple was only one payment model. It seemed like companies had years to fix everything and add the appropreate level of content. Not true now a days. I don't wonder if the standard required for a game to merit a subscription is too high for a newly released game to meet. Even if your supported by deep pockets as time goes on there will be a great deal of pressure to release. For such a complex piece of software your done basically when you need cash flow. That isn't going to be a fully completed game.
They all should be sub models, and no cash shop. Anything else is just stealing your money, and making the corporation so much money, they dont even know what to do with it.
Comments
Same exact thing can be said about B2P with paid DLCs and expansions.
The thing is that when people buy DLC they feel value, they bought actual content, when they pay a sub, well, tey can just play the game and most often they dont get anything else.
Same goes with cash shops, if theyre well done, non intrusive, someone buying a horsey in cash shop for 15$ might feel more value than paying a sub.
And thers a history thingy, where most of long term MMOers didnt get squat for their sub except "exclusive right to play the game"
I don't have a problem paying sub. I have done it many years for many games. However, when the first Guild Wars came out (I know there is hot debate right now if it is or isn't an MMO), I was amazed by this new devilry known as B2P. Then I started to scrutinize more on what I was paying for with my sub on whatever MMO I was currently playing. Specially when the fundamental gameplay of game X wasn't changing other than bug fixes. It's not like I was getting $15 worth of DLC content every month, and neither were the rest of you.
Either way, after GW1 I still subbed to games and even experimented with a lifetime sub for me and my wife when LOTRO came out. Learned my lesson with that one as well. Now-a-days a game really has to do something different and better than the games that came before it before I decide to sub. Specially since just about every Western MMO (I really don't like Asian MMOs) has dropped the sub for B2P/F2P except WoW. History has proven to repeat itself over and over again and you can either learn from the past or keep making the same mistake. It was definitely interesting to watch ESO when people asked why or when it was going to drop it's sub and to see the devoted say it would never happen. LOL, I even remember a particular poster saying WoW would go B2P/F2P before ESO. Nobody "wished" it to happen to ESO. Just expected it based on the game and from the trends of the past. /shrug
"If I offended you, you needed it" -Corey Taylor
I agree completely with you - I have no problem paying for a game I like.
I really don't get people who think games are supposed to be free. Now, before anyone gets up in arms...I can understand how someone may not want to pay sub fees, but a lot of times it feels like those same people wouldn't buy the game either. All they want is everything to be F2P. The irony here is that I doubt they have a problem buying a console game for an experience that lasts 1/99th the time a decent MMO can provide. F2P is just not a good model...it breeds some seriously unethical behavior.
Unfortunately things have shifted and the average gamer is casual and they outnumber us, the more traditional gamers 3:1 and devs have no choice but to cater to them. If there is a solution I do not have it. All I know is what I prefer - which is a sub model.
Now, which one of you will adorn me today?
I understand the sentiment.
In the grand context of MMO's is ESO a good game? Not great but good. I understand everyone will not agree but objectively I think it is good. It could not stand as a subscription game. I'm saying it couldn't buy enough time with the subscriptions to evolve into a game where enough people felt it merited a subscription.
Look at the past, the turd that AO was at release had much more time to evolve as a game. The developer could ride the subscription money while they did so. That luxury does not exist today.
I think to survive as a sub game from release today a game would have to be great out of the box. Further, I think it is close to impossible for that to happen.
There are a few out there that can merit a sub ...
FFXIV:ARR is well worth the monthly fee
Eve .... if you're into pvp and in a large corp yes but if you pve only you might get bored quick.
Wow probably still does although I don't like the game personally ..there is still a large player base and tons of stuff to keep you busy
Actually, the F2P developers have always been far more in touch with the fact that MMOs are a service not a product than the western devs. This may be because the box, sub, expansion model has worked so well in the context of sell product, maintain product, sell add-ons. The whole sub model is pretty much built around maxing out box sales and buying time til the expansion box sale. When you look at the varying exceptions within that model - Asheron's Call (yes, there were 2 xpacs), Lineage 2, EVE Online - you see a lot more of a service and community focus.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Disagree.
Free client, robust trial, and sub with NO cash shop is the fairest to all.
B2P is just putting an entry fee on the door for people entering your mall and does nothing to remove the initial barrier to entry, while still requiring nasty practices like selling gold and RNG casino lockboxes.
"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
Yes. If a game is enjoyable then you should be willing to pay for it. Nothing is free in this life. Not really. If that means using a cash shop, subbing, or another form of payment. I will sub to any game I'm playing if I am having fun. Its an added bonus if you get something out of it, which most F2P/B2P games offer with a sub.
Back in the day, you could count the total number of sub-based games on one hand. It was new, internet access for business bandwidth was crazy expensive and you had all kinds of hardware issues that you dont have today with virtual servers. Those games deserved a sub.
Fast forward to today when for $15 you can buy a single meal at a sub-par restaurant or get a months worth of gaming pleasure. People act like $15 a month is a huge cost but monthly gaming subscriptions have not risen in price since the industry emerged. Everything else you buy has risen in cost and yet time and time again we see people complain about the whopping $15 a month sub fee. Sub fees are soooo much better than the free-to-try, keep paying to keep up in the cash shop, keep introducing new gear grind crap that we have today disguised as F2P games.
Wow...putting inflation into perspective really makes me feel differently about F2P games. You really can't compare $15 from 10-15 years ago to $15 now, can you? You sir, just blew my mind.
Now, which one of you will adorn me today?
For me main advantage of subscription is lack of Cash Shop. When an MMORPG have both sub and CS even if it's cosmetic one only then subscription loses it's appeal completly.
Lack of Cash Shop is mainly because I like MMORPG with least amount of RMT as possible, so that means that company wanting me to pay subscription should be actively minimizing 3rd party/players RMT as well.
Of course all that has to be coupled with game itself being up to par with my gameplay&quality expectations.
So yeah bar is set very high, I doubt any company atm would want to try and meet it. IMHO real subscription model (meaning no CS) is dead for now.
Whether it will resurrect in the future? Well sooner or later it will, but whether that someday is 5 years or 50 years from now is remain to be seen.
When you would ask me in '98 what MMORPG will cost in 2015, I would respond that about ~150$ for box and 30$-40$ for 1 month of subscription.
I actually expected for them to expand slower and in very diffrent direction gameplay&concept wise and being sort of elitish video game entertainment.
I guess I was very young and naive then
I'm sure I would've said the same thing. But at the very least I feel a little better now about spending money in my new favorite F2P game (Trove).
Now, which one of you will adorn me today?
What merits a subscription? Updates? Level of content? Fun of the game? It is a matter of perspective. Most games fail in their promised to provide frequent and adequate updates. If that is the sole reasoning behind a subscription, then the answer you be none; there are currently no games that warrant a subscription. For me, it is a combination of all of them. If the game is fun, and the subscription has something more tangible than just playing the game, like Station Points for SOE as a monthly bonus; then I can justify a sub.
Raquelis in various games
Played: Everything
Playing: Nioh 2, Civ6
Wants: The World
Anticipating: Everquest Next Crowfall, Pantheon, Elden Ring
How do you deny that FFXIV doesn't warrant a subscription? If there is any way to squeeze out bigger patches or more volume on a similarly frequent and constant basis, please let me know. Your bar has been set so high we need help from a higher life force to reach it.
This seems like a bit of an inane question. I think subscriptions are a perfectly acceptable payment model -- even if there is a cash shop in addition. Avalon recently went free to play after having a subscription model for 24 years; it's seen a surge in players online for sure but people still have the option to subscribe if they want and many do.
8 years and counting addicted to
Avalon: The Legend Lives - the longest running online RPG in history
It is a service. It is amazing how many feel entitled to free service.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
They all should be sub models, and no cash shop. Anything else is just stealing your money, and making the corporation so much money, they dont even know what to do with it.
The only subscription I accept is one that either has no cash shop or one that is optional.
FFXIV has a pay to win cash shop so I'm an completely against that one.