Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Microtransactions & You (MMO business model poll)
DeaconX
Member UncommonPosts: 3,062
It seems Microtransactions are finding a place in the MMORPG market more and more these days so I wanted to ask the community how you feel about the idea and which business model you prefer:
Free to play – generally much lower production value and less support
Free to play with microtransaction support – allowing advantage to players who wish to pay for in game items and buffs
Standard subscription based – everyone pays the same monthly rate and has equal opportunity.
Low Subscription based with microtransaction support – costing less per month than the standard mmorpg’s and allows advantage to players who wish to pay for in game items and buffs.
BOYCOTTING EA / ORIGIN going forward.
Comments
Microtransactionz! neva! Neva! NEVER!!
Unless it’z just "flavour" stuff like different coloured mountz or whateva. I’ll neva play a game where da quality of your itemz dependz on ’ow much youI’z willin’ to spend.
Microtrasactions in a competetive environment just feels wrong to me. Sorta like the 3 balls for a dollar at the carnival/fair. That's the themepark, this is an MMO. Instead of "pay to play " it's feels more like "pay to win", and i don't dig that even if it comes out to the same amount paid. I would imagine it could (and probably does) work in some cases, but as it stands now i don't want it in an MMO.
In my experiences a micro-pay model can keep a game competative and make its money off simply giving players fun things to have.
That being said I think the game really needs to be designed around the micro-pay model and not just tacked on at the end.
In the mmorpg I am designing with a team, we aim to acheive ways for players to spend money on two different types on ingame items.
1 is cosmetic and fun items. For example a pet, a tuxedo, a mask. Silly things like that. Pop in a dollar or two and get somthing silly and fun, both to distiguish yourself, and to support the game you play.
The second is Game progressing. In our game "guilds" have the option of adding special "non mandatory" parts to their guild "areas" (wow how much more generic can I make this).
There will be a broad selection of addons you can get through game means, but we hope to add the fun/game ones. Or entertaining seasonal areas for a cost.
In terms of compeition, Its not going to be a deciding factor. For example a tavern. We may say 5 dollars and a tavern or other social gathering place would be tacked on. Another example is a statue. There are statues you can earn, but there are also statues that are only available for periods of time that can be bought.
Ideally we dont want people feeling pressured into paying money just so they can play the game. What we are aiming for is that people who like the game can put some money in to distiguish themselves and or add little extras to feel like they are contributing the game (which they are)
Its a fine line, but when part of your target audience doenst have a job, its a lot easier to get them interested if they can start out just downloading a program and playing rather then having a parent buy the game for them and fork out a monthly fee from the get go.
after 6 or so years, I had to change it a little...
Free to play – generally much lower production value and less support
Free to play with microtransaction support – allowing advantage to players who wish to pay for in game items and buffs
Standard subscription based – everyone pays the same monthly rate and has equal opportunity.
Low Subscription based with microtransaction support – costing less per month than the standard mmorpg’s and allows advantage to players who wish to pay for in game items and buffs.
In general, I prefer Free to Play games because the designers care more about the game. They designed it because it was something THEY liked to play. And I don't feel bad about leaving right away.
Free to Play with Micro<blah-blah> is a sucker's bet. It is actually crippleware with endless payments that generally exceed standard fee based service in almost all cases.
Also microtransaction support breeds massive hostility when it can be used to buy power in the game. Not to mention there can be some legal issues because when I PAY for a sword +3 then it can be considered a contract to use. I'm not sure a clicky-EULA would get you out of that one.
I wouldn't consider playing anything with microtransaction support. Even if they were only fluff items, they'd boil the toad. Soon there would be transactions for everything. Nope. No chance.
Standard subscription based games are the standard currently, but I feel they're going to begin to fade in popularity because of a cookie-cutter obsolescence issue. The devs are no longer trying to make a game they liked (unlike UO and the original EQ) but are under the control of asshole suits that ruin everything they touch without exception.
Low subscription microtransaction support sounds like the absolute worst model. You're going to pay to get crippleware and then be lead by the nose to purchase other stuff just to get even... The only thing you're going to do is lose.
That way you're guaranteed to pay the most money for the least entertainment all the while hooking yourself deeper into the game with microtransaction investment.
I would put people that would use that game model into the same boat as the poor idiots that payed for virtual cards in an on line CCG. (My head still hurts at that one.)
I agree with microtransaction when it just allows you to get faster any content in the game, not exclusive content
In general, i don't mind about F2P (with microtransactions) or standard monthly fee. But just because the games where you must pay each month usually have better content than F2P games (and usually there are less kids shrieking at any time)
Well, yeah. I guess there are howling kiddies in f2p games, but is it really a greater number than Vanguard or WOW?
Certainly the maturity level in vanguard is equal. I haven't played wow, but judging from the wowzers coming to vanguard lately I'd say they can't be much worse.
In fact, I'd think that the more obscure f2p games would be more mature having expended some effort in many cases to locate them. This assuming the kiddies get their games via word of mouth or a pretty box in walmart.
I think microtransaction games can be decent or really bad. I haven't seen one I'd actually call good yet. It all depends on how the microtransactions are handled. If the amount of experience you get from monsters and quests is reduced, and therefore the grinding is increased, and the only way to get a "normal" gaming experience is to spend money in the cash shop for experience enhancing items, then that's very bad.
On the other hand, if most of the items in the cash shop are just fluff that don't really impact the game or most importantly your progression through the game, and if the cash shop items can be sold through player shops so you can still get them without having to spend any actual money, then that's not as bad.
One game system that hasn't been discussed yet is tiered games, where the base game is free, and then they have an option for $5 a month that unlocks more content, then perhaps another option for $10 a month that unlocks even more content, such as Dungeon Runners and Anarchy Online. Again, this is partially dependent on how well it's implemented, but I think it's a good way for a big money high level game to offer free content and reasonable prices without necessarily unbalancing anything.
Item malls would only work if your purchasing limit per month was equal to an average amount of P2P monthly subscription,the items were not tradeable,and the items didnt give any sort of advantage over other players end game.
This would prevent people with deep pockets getting an edge over you,.unless of course you have 0 income or still live at home as a sibling.
I love exp rate pots from item malls..if you wanna pay more to level cap faster and your willing to pay, why not?
I think there are some good things that microtransactions bring, but it is a DELICATE balance that must be struck. There is a fine line between a premium bonus and overpowered.
One big issue I see with many MT games is that they are not always well developed. There are number out currently that are well developed (Sword, Cabal, ArchLord) and more on the way (Perfect World) but for the most part there is always this feeling that something is missing.
I think as more players actually experience some of the better F2P MT games I mentioned above a lot of the misnomers will go away (you must pay to win, you spend more money than you would in sub games, etc). A perfect example of that is Sword of the New World. On numerous occasions we have "adjusted" an item in our cash shop either after or before we release it so that it fits in with the balance in game. Not to mention the fact that our players on average spend less money in our game than in most (if not all) subscription games (about $5 a month).
That's just my 2 cents.
Website:
www.apb.com
Twitter:
@G1Neume
Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/APBReloaded
I know everyone likes different things, but I have to disagree with cash shop items not being tradable. I think it's good to make cash shop items tradable, because that way if someone wants more gold rather than going to a gold seller they can just buy a cash shop item and sell it in game, and also if someone wants some premium items but doesn't want to or can't spend the money for it, as long as they have enough in-game money they can still get some premium items from time to time.
Also, I don't think experience potions / scrolls are inherently bad per se, I think it's bad when the amount of experience you get without them is nerfed or an extra heavy emphasis is placed on grinding specifically to sell more experience scrolls. That's when it's bad.
And I agree that microtransaction games do need to have a very delicate balance. If a game is genuinely fun without spending a dime, then I may consider spending a bit of money every now and then to help support a game I like. However, if a game is only fun with cash shop items, then I won't spend a single penny. I'll just go find something else to do.
I think what's generally lacking from most free to play games right now is depth. The big money games have lots of depth, whereas most free to play games center just around combat and keep you running back and forth between the same small handful of locations for the first 30 or so levels of the game.
For me, if it is NCsoft I would trust them and would be willing to try.
If it is SoE, they wouldn't get my CC ever again; until they make amend.
Other companies, I am relatively open minded, but I rather keep it simple. Monthly fee is simple, micro-transactions...maybe...
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
I did mention that the quality of a tiered game is partially dependent on how well the tier is done. In most tiered games, at least all the ones I know about, you don't pay a higher tier as content is released. The tier fee doesn't go up as content is released. There's just one or two flat tier fees, and that's it. I'll use the same examples I did before, Dungeon Runners and Anarchy Online.
With Dungeon Runners, you can play the game free, or get some special benefits if you pay $5 a month. Those benefits are such things as no ads, being able to stack major healing potions in your inventory instead of each one taking up its own slot, and other such things. No matter how much more content they add, it's free or $5 a month. There are no higher tiers.
With Anarchy Online, for free you can play the basic original game and the Notum Wars expansion pack and there's some sort of lower level cap. For $5 a month you also have access to the Shadowlands expansion pack and the level cap is removed. For what I believe is $15 a month you have access to all the expansion packs of the game. If they add more expansion packs, those will also fall under the $15 a month plan. There is no increasing tier beyond that. So it all depends on how it's handled.
And that is exactly my point. You shouldn't have to "trust" anyone. The model needn't be complex.
Right now, you go out or download a client and pay a certain fee. Then you get a free month's gaming.
If you don't like it, chances are you will get 30 days enjoyment out of it and have paid about as much as a self-game for single player. Most of my games, with exceptions, are fun for about a month. (40k and MOO2 and Civilization notwithstanding.)
As you have said yourself... microtransactions aren't simple. They're making it complicated in order to fleece people. Standard con tactics.
Maybe they didn't have this in mind at the beginning and if you like you can give them the benefit of the doubt. But they will wind up sticking their players. It is inevitable human nature.
Surely a person wise enough to read Voltaire can understand this.
I can't stand micro-transactions. It gives an unfair advantage to those willing to pay. I'm perfectly fine with it if it makes getting something easier, as long as there is a way for those who don't pay to get it too without having to tear their hair out.
I'd rather pay a monthly fee for a well-polished game to be honest. It also gives me the reassurance that if the devs don't deliver, they won't get my money anymore. You'll find many F2P MMOs with terrible support and an extreme lack of updates simply because they think they're doing the players a favour.
I want a week or month trial, after that a standard subscription fee.
For, with a fee, I can be more sure that new content is developed or at least the server is kept up.
Microtransaction systems are perfect for the independant developer and for growing the MMO market and genre in the future. Many US companies classify them as casual games, the point being isn't that they are FREE, that is simply a gimick to induce people to try them, the point is that people can invest the time and money that is suitable for their budget and contraints.
The models in use in most games we see at the moment are imperfect, they are generally adaptions from the Asian market which has a different player mentality and thus requirements of the product and item shops. If a company can successfully build a microtransaction game and model for the Western markets then it will be a good system, it will take into account what players here want and provide it for them in a flexible manner that subscription based games just can't do.
If done right, it would also potentially eliminated RMT, gold farming and the other annoying "underworld" aspects of MMOs.
Most of the issues at the moment do also revolve around the majority of these games being based on PvP, so paying for an "I win button" has a greater impact on those who don't want to pay, so this is where the items in the shop must be very carefully considered, and highly recommended that anything that is not consumable (ie not potions etc), be a rentable item, therefore changes to items can't be an issue for complaint by the players as they simply them have the choice of not renewing their rent of the item in question.
There is also the fact that nothing in life is free, if you play an MMO, you are using up server resources, database resources, bandwidth, customer support time, etc. So if you don't purchase anything from the item shop, then someone else has to cover that cost, giving those with more money an incentive to spend that money (ie items that make you more powerful), is a way to cover the cost of the freeloaders. Though obviously as I said above, fair from an ideal solution.
I'm sure things will improve as more companies explore microtransaction models and games, but for now, be aware that they aren't designed for us and more often than not do provide an unfair advantage to those with deep pockets. But then that's not really any different to those who have 20 hours a day to grind in WoW or use RMT sites for gold and powerleveling. Money will always help you win in MMOs.
Nah.... here is 2 trade systems for a game.
http://www.sagatraders.com/
http://www.sagaunits.com/
Micro can help trade bussines. These guys trade a "Gold Dragon" for $8.
Nah.... here is 2 trade systems for a game.
http://www.sagatraders.com/
http://www.sagaunits.com/
Micro can help trade bussines. These guys trade a "Gold Dragon" for $8.
Can help, cause the current systems are flawed. It's supply and demand, if what the people want is only attainable from the host's item shop, then the RMT's have no market.
For example, no trade items, immediately they require effort or money on the part of the individual to aquire the items themselves, the can't buy the item from someone else as it's no trade. Sure it can be inconvient to limit items like this, but it has a huge impact on the RMT market and if the game is designed from the ground up to combat RMT and use a Microtransaction model then there is no reason for RMT to exist in such a game, and there is no reason why the item shop in said game would have a negative impact on the players of the game who do not wish to spend money.
Like I said, there is NO single MMO from Korea that is designed for the western market, this means there is no Item Shop, Microtransaction system, anti-RMT system, hell even most of them lack proper support tools, that is designed for the western market.
When a game does come out that is designed for the western market, probably SOE's casual game, then we will have a true example of how microtransaction systems can work in our market with our players and our needs. Until then, we're just looking at some bastard child of a system that wasn't meant for us.
There is no such thing as one size fits all, whether it is shoes, cars, MMOs or payment systems.
I cant answer this question. because it depends how good the game is. if 2 games are as good as each other and one is a motnhly fee and one is micropayments, i;d go micropayments and save myself some money. but fact is the best games are likely to be monthly fee
My blog: