The subscription model is dead. Or is it?

Marid

The subscription model is vastly superior to the (not so) microtransaction model, imo. With the sub-model everything can be available to the players to craft and/or find as loot...provided they are willing to put forth the effort to do so (with the sub-model everyone who is in the game wants to be in the game, i.e. they are motivated to be there...that is not necessarily the case with the "F2P" model, thus you'll have 10x as many scammers and trolls polluting the community).

 To oversimplify it: subscription = honest and upfront; microtransation = dishonest and underhanded. 

AlBQuirky

The model isn't dead. It still exists

It's the players who have changed. Me, I want to play and pay for the same as everyone else does.

Subscriptions do that. You get a "cool item" in the game and everyone has a chance to get it, too. Cash shops tend to separate the "haves" from the "have nots." This has also changed game design at the most basic point.

The excuses for not liking it seem kind of weak to me. Has an MMO ever NOT updated? Never added content? Just took your sub month after month? EQ, even in maintenance mode (after over 20 years) still updates.

Taking a break from a sub game is easy-peasy. Stop payment. Go on vacation. Get sucked into another video game. Come back and resubscribe. No problemo. You don't have to repurchase the whole game, though there may be expansions to buy.

Even playing field. That's what I want. I want to play the same game that everyone is playing. If I see some piece of cool equipment, I want to know where to get it, not how much it cost

But MMOs are making mega-millions with cash shops, so they will continue to build their games around them.

Kyleran

Ungood said:

flguy147 said:

Do you think there is a correlation with the sub model dying and the decline of MMORPGs?   I dont think its the only reason but part of the problem.  But again there are many issues.  Personally i love cool cosmetics items, mounts, etc.  It makes it fun if i can actually acquire them by playing the game instead of buying them off a store which i never buy stuff off a cash shop.  Wish we would go back to the sub model.  

This has always been something that baffled me.

I hear players talk about how they would spend upwards to, I think the highest I have heard to date was like 30 a month fee to play a game, where they get nothing but access to the game, which they will lose the second they cease to pay their subscription fee.

But If access to the game is given to them for free, even if they are playing and enjoying the game, they won't spend that self same $30 a month for some extra perks to keep the game going.

Never Understood this to be honest, and I don't think I ever will, and I am not sure if I even want to try. 

I've only played a few F2P games for any length of time. In every one I ended up spending more money across a shorter period of time than I ever did with the many games which used the traditional B2P / Sub model.

YMMV.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Kyleran

Remali said:

Sub by itself is not a problem
The problem is that some mmos are pushing a cash shop as well as having a sub+payed xpacs+ box price +++ it never ends

True, too often we see game Devs going for an "omni" monetization model as you've described .

Some take it even further, selling pre-order packs (even for "f2p" games), early or beta access, and even cash shop sales years in advance of release (looking at you, Ashes)

Kyleran

Remali said:

Sub by itself is not a problem
The problem is that some mmos are pushing a cash shop as well as having a sub+payed xpacs+ box price +++ it never ends

True, too often we see game Devs going for an "omni" monetization model as you've described .

Some take it even further, selling pre-order packs (even for "f2p" games), early or beta access, and even cash shop sales years in advance of release (looking at you, Ashes)

A slippery slope indeed.

Lithuanian

Sub is not dead, it just needs right approach. Just a game, where you pay legendary 15$ a month without cash shop. Or - cash shop with few vanity items that give zero bonus to gameplay, except the look. Introduce it and enjoy slow, yet guaranteed inflow of cash + good PR from gamers.

Sovrath

Lithuanian said:

Sub is not dead, it just needs right approach. Just a game, where you pay legendary 15$ a month without cash shop. Or - cash shop with few vanity items that give zero bonus to gameplay, except the look. Introduce it and enjoy slow, yet guaranteed inflow of cash + good PR from gamers.

That's the problem $15 a month IS legendary. It no longer covers what they want/need.

Lithuanian

If 15$ does not cover what is needed - ok, increase it. Some will yell, that's natural.
If 15$ does not cover what they want - ok too, then game developers need to talk to community. Open donation page. Or start some cash-grab f2p to cover main game's expenses.
The point is - game with right sub does have future.

Ungood

Dlusion333 said:

I'd 100% rather subscribe than these Free to Play games with micro transactions for non-cosmetic items. Why put effort in when a kid with their moms credit card can pass you before even starting the game... Subscription like FFXIV is perfect, I love them, sadly not too into the game itself but I love their model.

I hate to break this to you, but any kid that is living off their mom's credit card is going to kick your ass in any game you try to play against them because they have more time to play and better twitch skill.

Just saying.

botrytis

I do not pay for things like Spotify, Disney +, etc. Why would I pay a monthly sub for a game? I feel the B2P is the way to go, then have a CS that just has skins (for looks) not for anything else. 

I feel sub games do a disservice to other games because it makes you feel you HAVE to game to get your money's worth. No thanks, it is fun for me not a job.

Theocritus

Here's the problem I have with the sub model: It isn't the $15 a month so much, it's that it adds up after several months.....You look back a couple years later and realize you have spent several hundred dollars just to access a video game. In the end it feels like a total waste of money.

Amathe

Parents want certainty when they pay for things for their kids.

If a kid says, this is $15 a month, I can say ok.

If a kid says I need $25. Now I need $30. Now I need 30 more dollars, etc, etc., I am going to say no.

So subscription games are probably good for people not paying their own way.

Kajidourden

Theocritus said:

Here's the problem I have with the sub model: It isn't the $15 a month so much, it's that it adds up after several months.....You look back a couple years later and realize you have spent several hundred dollars just to access a video game. In the end it feels like a total waste of money.

As opposed to what other form of entertainment, exactly?  MMOs are stupid cheap in terms of hours spent:dollars spent.  You literally cannot find a cheaper way to play games unless you just infinitely loop something like The Witcher 3.

Ungood

Kyleran said:

Ungood said:

flguy147 said:

Do you think there is a correlation with the sub model dying and the decline of MMORPGs?   I dont think its the only reason but part of the problem.  But again there are many issues.  Personally i love cool cosmetics items, mounts, etc.  It makes it fun if i can actually acquire them by playing the game instead of buying them off a store which i never buy stuff off a cash shop.  Wish we would go back to the sub model.  

This has always been something that baffled me.

I hear players talk about how they would spend upwards to, I think the highest I have heard to date was like 30 a month fee to play a game, where they get nothing but access to the game, which they will lose the second they cease to pay their subscription fee.

But If access to the game is given to them for free, even if they are playing and enjoying the game, they won't spend that self same $30 a month for some extra perks to keep the game going.

Never Understood this to be honest, and I don't think I ever will, and I am not sure if I even want to try. 

I've only played a few F2P games for any length of time. In every one I ended up spending more money across a shorter period of time than I ever did with the many games which used the traditional B2P / Sub model.

YMMV.

I know I spent more as well, as with a sub I paid my $15, and that was it. 

But to use GW2 for an example. I used to spend $20 per paycheck, roughly $40 a month, and, you know, if they had a great sale going on, I might spend an extra $20 here or there, when HoT came out, they had tiers of what you could buy, and I bought the biggest pack, blah, blah, and now rolls out the "I must have spent so much" 

But really, in contrast to many other gaming hobbies, MMO's are dirt cheap for the time return.

But as I always saw it, it was not that I was spending more, it was that I was getting something for my money and I felt like I was supporting the game I was enjoying. 

The thing here is that is huge for me, is that I was never required to spend that money. I was never forced to pay like I would have been with a sub. I spent what I felt comfortable with, willingly at my own pace. If I didn't buy something this month because I was between contracts and living off savings, or they simply had nothing that enticed me, I never had to worry about access to my account being shut off because I didn't pay them.

Equally so, I know when I paid a sub, I was much faster willing to drop it if at any time I was not having fun with their game. Just the way it goes.

Which really is a huge downside to the Sub. For example, one of my friends opted to play GW2 again, so I dusted off my account, and logged back in to play with them, helped them get the bug mount thingy and helped them with the LS stuff to get the new dragon mount (for as far as I could go), give them a bunch of my crap to help them along with getting another legendary, and some of that new years stuff.

Now, I am gonna be honest, I enjoyed playing with my friend again, but, that never would have happened if they required me to pay a Sub to log back in.. Never.

Ungood

Theocritus said:

Here's the problem I have with the sub model: It isn't the $15 a month so much, it's that it adds up after several months.....You look back a couple years later and realize you have spent several hundred dollars just to access a video game. In the end it feels like a total waste of money.

and the real burn here is that you will always have to pay them MORE money.

At no point does your account become yours, It's always and forever locked behind a paywall.

Sovrath

Theocritus said:

Here's the problem I have with the sub model: It isn't the $15 a month so much, it's that it adds up after several months.....You look back a couple years later and realize you have spent several hundred dollars just to access a video game. In the end it feels like a total waste of money.

If a video game, an rpg, can take 30 to 60 or so hours and an mmorpg can theoretically be 730 hours per month that $15 is a steal.

or more realistically, if you play 10 hours per week that's $15 for 40 hours.

Kyleran

Theocritus said:

Here's the problem I have with the sub model: It isn't the $15 a month so much, it's that it adds up after several months.....You look back a couple years later and realize you have spent several hundred dollars just to access a video game. In the end it feels like a total waste of money.

If you did the same excercise on some other luxury spending you do, say drinking or smoking you likely would feel exactly the same.

I'm about to cancel cable TV as I've found it cheaper to pay for just the services I use (monthly subs all) like Prime, Netflix and Hulu.

Kyleran

Amathe said:

Parents want certainty when they pay for things for their kids.

If a kid says, this is $15 a month, I can say ok.

If a kid says I need $25. Now I need $30. Now I need 30 more dollars, etc, etc., I am going to say no.

So subscription games are probably good for people not paying their own way.

I've yet to meet a parent yet who didnt put their foot  down when game spending goes up too much.

The "kid with an open credit card" is largely a myth, most  game spending is done by adults with full control of (or lacking control)  of their money.

Azaron_Nightblade

It's not dead. It's just a tough sell these days. FFXIV is still doing very well with it, but the cash shop is definitely helping a lot too.

Amathe

Kyleran said:

Amathe said:

Parents want certainty when they pay for things for their kids.

If a kid says, this is $15 a month, I can say ok.

If a kid says I need $25. Now I need $30. Now I need 30 more dollars, etc, etc., I am going to say no.

So subscription games are probably good for people not paying their own way.

I've yet to meet a parent yet who didnt put their foot  down when game spending goes up too much.

The "kid with an open credit card" is largely a myth, most  game spending is done by adults with full control of (or lacking control)  of their money.

I admire your fortitude and excellent parenting. I had to step in and prevent my wife from allowing our son to put some game company's kids through college. I'm exaggerating, but still lol.

rojoArcueid

I'm not the biggest subscription supporter but I do subscribe to WoW and FFXIV every once in a while and it's a better deal than spending 3-4 digit amounts on free games. What i don't like about subscriptions (in general, not just in gaming) is the commitment where i lose access if i don't keep paying. I don't subscribe to spotify, Hulu, Netflix, PS Now, Gamepass, etc, etc, etc. Outside of WoW and XIV on and off, I buy what i want and that's it.

Also, I don't have kids but if i had kids they'd be in for disappointment. "you want money to buy fortnite skins? look at that shelf full of games, not a single one has a cash shop".

Kyleran

Amathe said:

Kyleran said:

Amathe said:

Parents want certainty when they pay for things for their kids.

If a kid says, this is $15 a month, I can say ok.

If a kid says I need $25. Now I need $30. Now I need 30 more dollars, etc, etc., I am going to say no.

So subscription games are probably good for people not paying their own way.

I've yet to meet a parent yet who didnt put their foot  down when game spending goes up too much.

The "kid with an open credit card" is largely a myth, most  game spending is done by adults with full control of (or lacking control)  of their money.

I admire your fortitude and excellent parenting. I had to step in and prevent my wife from allowing our son to put some game company's kids through college. I'm exaggerating, but still lol.

Only one of my children was part of the online computer gaming era and back  when being a whale meant having 4 or 5 sub accounts.

But I do understand what you mean as I had to do similar for the Pokemon card craze in the late 90s which my daughters got wrapped up in.

P2W didn't actually start with video games, card games were doing it long before.

cameltosis

The subscription model is far from dead, in fact, I would say it is on the rise.......just not within the MMORPG genre.

Just take a look at Netflix, Spotify, Amazon Prime, Hulu etc. In the Western world, we love a subscription, we just have certain expectations. I happily pay out for Netflix, Amazon Prime and Spotify because between the three, I have access to pretty much unlimited TV, movies and music, plus I get my free next-day deliveries. The value for money far exceeds traditional Sky / cable packages and is way cheaper that buying everything for myself, so I accept the limitation that im renting and don't own shit.

With MMORPGs, that value for money has diminished over time, so we're less willing to play. Also, being the Massively Multiplayer genre, having other players in game is of prime importance to the devs, so removing barriers to entry is even more important. I don't give a shit how many other people are watching Netflix because it doesn't influence me, but I do care how many people are online on my server.

I also specifically mention subscriptions being popular in the Western world because numerous devs have also told us that F2P is largely the "fault" of Asian gamers. We in the West like to pay a fair price for our stuff, but in the east they are used to F2P and refuse to pay money up front. Many devs have come out and said they hate having to support multiple business models and thus multiple codebases for their games, so it proved cheaper for the devs to just pick one and use that model globally. They chose F2P.

But, more importantly with the MMORPG genre, you have to match the business model to your game's design.

If you are designing a game to be played over months or years, to focus on the community, to have plenty of group content, long term goals and the like, then you absolutely want to go with subscriptions. This ensures a higher quality community, a smaller but more stable playerbase, predictable income etc. Being community focused, you also want to ensure that every member of your community is on an even footing, rather than segregated by money spent.

If you are designing a shorter-term MMORPG and follow a design that mimics traditional single player games, then B2P is probably best. If you know you are only going to run the game for 3-5 years, then get money up front to cover the initial dev costs, then charge for xpacs to cover ongoing costs, jobs a good'un.

If you are designing a really short term MMORPG that can be completed quickly, mostly solo, and thus the game has to rely on large player churn, then F2P is the way to go. This allows the most amount of players to play the game and gives the most opportunities for extracting money in the short time the players are in game. In my opinion, if you are designing your game this way then why even bother with an MMO? But im not in control of design decisions, so if they decide to pointlessly make a short term mmo, then F2P is the way to go.

The last 10 years has seen long-term, community focused MMORPGs mostly disappear, hence the disappearance of the subscription model. But, if/when that design focus comes back around, I've no doubt we'll see the return of subscriptions.

I'm personally looking forwards to Camelot Unchained. It's a game designed around being massively multiplayer, having a good server community and stuff, so is going subscription. The business model fits the game.

What I'd like to see in the future (and what I think would work well), is various studios teaming up so we can have a "one subscription to rule them all" type deal. £20 per month but it gets me access to LotRO, SWTOR, ESO, WoW, FFXIV or whatever their future equivalents are. I've also wondered whether Steam should do something like that: £50 per month but you get access to every single game on Steam, with money being shared out in a similar fashion to Spotify or Netflix.

Ungood

Robokapp said:

Ungood said:

Robokapp said:

Wizardry said:

Runescape is not even a good game so idc what it is doing.

citation needed.

It's his personal opnion, they said it, that's all the citation they need. If you feel that it was the best game ever, then that is what you think.

Good and Bad are subjective.

it looks like he's stating it as a fact actually. Check out the original quote. 

That would be your Subjective Opinion of things.

And just like their Subjective Opinion that the game not any good, which you are free to disagree with, I am free to disagree with you about this.

Ergo, we Disagree, and behold no sources, or citations needed.

And look.. life goes on.