I used to prefer subscription. That doesnt really seem to exist anymore tho. A subscription used to mean something, youd get all the content and anything the game had available. Now it has no meaning to me. When WoW first started selling in game items on their website i threw a fit. I still bought a couple items tho, i just wanted them, i wasnt happy about it tho.
Then i found out even Lineage and Aion have micro-transactions and it blew my mind. Im disgusted by these games that force you to pay a subscription but then basically still have a cash shop.
"Premium" doesnt seem to exist anymore, its just a word they use to try and make people paying a subscription feel special.
Sometimes i miss WoW and think about going back, but then i just remember their micro transactions and i want no part anymore. Its bullcrap.
Dont get me wrong, i understand the whole "cosmetic" argument and that you dont have to buy these things. That doesnt make me like it any better.
Jeremiah 8:21 I weep for the hurt of my people; I stand amazed, silent, dumb with grief. Join me on TwitchFacebook Twitter
Sometimes i miss WoW and think about going back, but then i just remember their micro transactions and i want no part anymore. Its bullcrap.
Dont get me wrong, i understand the whole "cosmetic" argument and that you dont have to buy these things. That doesnt make me like it any better.
Eh, I don't mind frivolous items if they were actually used by companies to bolster income so they could do more for the players. However, we don't see that. In Blizzard's case, they also like to say the posting-community is the minority but they also make no attempt to poll the playerbase as to how much we want a feature. Player housing of any kind? Appearance tab? Guild housing? Separate trees for PVP v PVE? "Punishment" for ninjas/unsportsmanship-players? Blizzard doesn't want to know what the community really thinks. The number of people around here that have been a member since 05 or 07 and posted 3, 17, 22, 120 times suggests that a lot of people lurk and only post when they feel they have something to add.
Lastly, sorry to everyone for only including the options I did. I agree with some posters that B2P is a huge gamble that we don't see a lot of companies making. It worked for guild wars but in the mmo-overrload world + so much competition it's a risky undertaking and as clone after clone comes out, you begin to see risk is not a game these developers play (apart from these guys).
Spec'ing properly is a gateway drug. 12 Million People have been meter spammed in heroics.
I certainly enjoy SUB more than anything. I like having an even playing field (more or less) in my games if I choose to do the pvp part of the game. I can see an appeal however for F2P-P2W games. Some cant spend so much time during the day to get the items they wish so they fork over the extra scratch for them. But again, me, Yeah.. give me the even playing playing field and I"ll give you a run for your money.
The real interesting poll is the one on the site only devs and investors have access to. It shows almost the complete oposite result of this one,... I wonder why that is? Why do they want to give their games for free? They are sooo nice.
----- The person who is certain, and who claims divine warrant for his certainty, belongs now to the infancy of our species.
For mobile MMOs I think Freemium is very good. eg Pocket Legends:
1) These games are small and easy to try out so should be free to try
2) You only have to spend cash on new content if you want to or just try an alt.
3) I don't bother paying for much else except for where it allows gameplay eg pvp or pve.
4) It's still really cheap.
For PC MMOs:
Such games are only worth playing if they are top of the pile imo. The time and sheer size of these games means that if you sink time into them, it should be the seriously good to be worth playing imo. IF an MMO comes along that does that I'd pay sub no problem. If it can achieve it on B2P then also no problem. But I'd cut the line there. I think players paying and making an investment could act as a pay-wall and that's a good indicator of ppl's attitudes to a game??
Monthly Subs will be the cheapest method possible. Sure F2P=cash shops which you don't have to use. But; most F2P games make it so that you can't win/compete without spending; hence, the new "Freemium" Term thats been bouncing about for months. In the end, F2P => cost than monthly subs.
You are guessing and totally NOT supported by research.
The research i have just posted show that a MAJORITY of the F2P players never pay anything. So much for the myth of "In the end, F2P => cost than monthly subs".
Hybrid. BUT, it needs to be exactly like LOTRO's hybrid setup, NOT EQ2's or the upcoming AoC hybrid model. THose barely register as being hybrid. Lotro is the best.
I've played two "Pay to Win" games, Galaxy Online and Stronghold Kingdoms. In both of them I got sucked into spending a couple hundred dollars because of my desire to be in the "lead pack." I also quit both games in less than 6 months because after a while it just gets old when there is minimal skill or strategy involved and it's basically whoever is willing to spend the most money will win. I actually like both of the games and almost certainly would have played them much longer if they used a subscription model.
I might be old-school or something but I like to pay one single payment for a game and have all access to its features without any other fees.
Of course if there is an expansion ( I define expansion as a huge content sale such as Borderlands' Genreal Knoxx expansion) I wouldn't mind a small price for it. There should never be a price for something such as a single instance or dungeon.
Sub-fees are a gamble. You might have the expectation for free content along the way but a game such as WoW will charge you for the expansions.
F2P models are also B2W which is really not fair for people who want to play a free game but can't compete to those who have money to waste.
If developers weren't selling out half-baked games in the first place they could sell the software with out an impending monthly fee or some cash shop scheme that makes the game imba. Deadlines are what hurt the game. Anet's developement on GW2 has no deadline. (so they say) Take a look at Duke Nukem. it has taken "Forever" for it to be released. But hey its goin old school too. Im saying no health regen , weapon pickups etc.
I know it's not one of the choices but my personal preference it B2P - in the model of Guild Wars. B2P is great IMO because you pay once for the game, so the devs are rightfully getting their money, but then you don't have to pay anything else if you don't want to. In the GW model, the only things you would buy in the store is mostly cosmetic so there is no aspect of someone feeling they "need" to buy anything to play/win after the original purpose.
My second choice would be the hybrid in the way LoTRO does it. I have been playing that one for a few months now with my highest character being a level 33. I have yet to feel like I need to buy anything with actual money. I've only spent the points I've accumulated in game. I also have yet to feel the grind aspect of it - although I recognize I may not be a high enough level yet to see those issues.
F2P is fine for what it is but in most cases it kind of seems like you get what you pay for.
The worst for me is subscription, especially the WoW model. Here you buy the game just to install it, like Guild Wars, but then have to pay a monthly fee to even play the game at all. Ridiculous! I have played GW for over 5 years (all three games and EoTN) and have spent no more than $150 total on that game over that span. That breaks down to $30 a year. I would spend that $150 in 10 to 15 months playing a sub game that gives me the same amount of enjoyment. Especially in this day and age when games like LoTRO exist with their hybrid setup, I don't really understand why people would continue to pay sub fees.
That's my opinion anyway.
You want me to pay to play a game I already paid for???
The real interesting poll is the one on the site only devs and investors have access to. It shows almost the complete oposite result of this one,... I wonder why that is? Why do they want to give their games for free? They are sooo nice.
I wonder about this sometimes.. whether there's statistics or just blind drive by the developers.
Blizzard, or a few other mmo companies including ANet, NCSoft, even Sony, could poll players on their preference on a lot of topics. They just choose not to.
A favorite defense of Blizzard's is that the forum [posting] community is a small percentage of the actual playerbase but they never bring the polls to the launcher on what the posting community is vocal about. Examples include:
Player & Guild Housing
Appearance Tab
PVP-centric trees or abilities that work differently.
"Premium Services"
For instance, the next expasion could be pvp-centric in lore while still providing the same quality in PVE encounters (not saying there is or is not a lot of quality there) but they could focus on things like a terrific idea that one poster had--Guild housing on airships and guilds can battle airship verses airship in the skies. Blizzard says the majority of players don't want it but truth is the majority of players don't even know about the idea.
A company like Sony, with their several MMOs would probably be the best to poll on mmo mechanics because they'd be less likely to be blatantly biased to only one concept.
Spec'ing properly is a gateway drug. 12 Million People have been meter spammed in heroics.
How does someone elese preference of payment model, affect YOU?
For me, I'm totally against F2P/P2W and hope, for some reason, that if we can show companies that the majority doesn't want this that we won't see item malls affecting more of our games.
The Hybrid scares me worse. All the downsides of both. You pay simply to play and pay more to have a good time. Whether you're paying for an item or paying for access to an item.. It's a bad direction to go.
Spec'ing properly is a gateway drug. 12 Million People have been meter spammed in heroics.
I personally prefer a flat fee I know I'm paying each month. No premium service garbage. I pay a bill, just like I pay my cable company, and I get to use their services.
Same analogy, different reason. I pay a monthly fee, like I do for my cable bill, but those times when I want to get something extra, there's a menu of extras I can look through. Maybe it's a one-night event or an extra IP or a few extra channels, but the option is there for when and if I want it. Choice rocks.
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
How does someone elese preference of payment model, affect YOU?
Supporters of item mall games seem to glory in the idea that maybe P2P games will die out.
Why is that?
Obviously there's plent of F2P games, so why does the existence of a P2P game bother some of them so much?
There seems an equal amount of that on both sides. Actually, on these forums, there's an almost violent hatred displayed toward not only the F2P games but people who make and play them, as well. Going through just your post history alone, there's a good four or five dozen posts about how simply knowing that someone else might have paid for an extra is enough to negatively impact your enjoyment of the game.
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
I personally prefer a flat fee I know I'm paying each month. No premium service garbage. I pay a bill, just like I pay my cable company, and I get to use their services.
Same analogy, different reason. I pay a monthly fee, like I do for my cable bill, but those times when I want to get something extra, there's a menu of extras I can look through. Maybe it's a one-night event or an extra IP or a few extra channels, but the option is there for when and if I want it. Choice rocks.
But usually the flat fee doesn't get you much.
When looking at the "free movies" when I'm over someone's house who has cable, none of the free movies are really something I want to see.
And yet, the moves that I have to pay a bit extra are usually movies I want to see or have been meaning to see.
Something tells me that the programming is done like that on purpose.
Well, at least the cable networks kept their promise to not have any advertising because their customers were paying for what they considered a premium service.
oh wait!
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
None of the above. I don't believe it's fair to lump all Free To Play games into one category.
"Pay to Go Faster" In some the cash shop is not majorly imbalancing, nor will a non-purchasing player be much less competitive in the game than others.
"Pay to Win" In others, the cash shop is severely imbalancing and a non-purchaser is seriously less competitive in the game.
Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now working in Network Security. I don't Forum PVP. If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident. When I don't understand, I ask. Such is not intended as criticism.
How does someone elese preference of payment model, affect YOU?
Supporters of item mall games seem to glory in the idea that maybe P2P games will die out.
Why is that?
Obviously there's plent of F2P games, so why does the existence of a P2P game bother some of them so much?
The even more interesting question is why P2P game supporters are in denial despite over-whelming evidence that F2P games are the MAJORITY (by a large margin) of the MMO community and more and more MMOs are going that route.
Why is acknowledging the trend of the market bother some of them so much?
None of the above. I don't believe it's fair to lump all Free To Play games into one category.
"Pay to Go Faster" In some the cash shop is not majorly imbalancing, nor will a non-purchasing player be much less competitive in the game than others.
"Pay to Win" In others, the cash shop is severely imbalancing and a non-purchaser is seriously less competitive in the game.
It might be easier to just fold your arms and say "I hate F2P," than to try to rationalize that as anything but subjective and unrealistic. But, hey, I'll play that game, too. Let's divide the subscription games. 'Monthly' and 'Monthly with Occasional Arbitrary Extra Expansion Charge' sounds like a good division, no?
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
Comments
That is only because this place is a small sample & biases. In the real market, F2P is whipping P2P by a LARGE margin.
http://www.newzoo.com/ENG/1570-MMO_Market_Report.html
Research shows that in the US, in 2010,
Only F2P players 74%
Only P2P players 17%
9% play both. Out of the 74%, only a MINORITY pays anything.
I used to prefer subscription. That doesnt really seem to exist anymore tho. A subscription used to mean something, youd get all the content and anything the game had available. Now it has no meaning to me. When WoW first started selling in game items on their website i threw a fit. I still bought a couple items tho, i just wanted them, i wasnt happy about it tho.
Then i found out even Lineage and Aion have micro-transactions and it blew my mind. Im disgusted by these games that force you to pay a subscription but then basically still have a cash shop.
"Premium" doesnt seem to exist anymore, its just a word they use to try and make people paying a subscription feel special.
Sometimes i miss WoW and think about going back, but then i just remember their micro transactions and i want no part anymore. Its bullcrap.
Dont get me wrong, i understand the whole "cosmetic" argument and that you dont have to buy these things. That doesnt make me like it any better.
Jeremiah 8:21 I weep for the hurt of my people; I stand amazed, silent, dumb with grief.
Join me on Twitch Facebook Twitter
Eh, I don't mind frivolous items if they were actually used by companies to bolster income so they could do more for the players. However, we don't see that. In Blizzard's case, they also like to say the posting-community is the minority but they also make no attempt to poll the playerbase as to how much we want a feature. Player housing of any kind? Appearance tab? Guild housing? Separate trees for PVP v PVE? "Punishment" for ninjas/unsportsmanship-players? Blizzard doesn't want to know what the community really thinks. The number of people around here that have been a member since 05 or 07 and posted 3, 17, 22, 120 times suggests that a lot of people lurk and only post when they feel they have something to add.
Lastly, sorry to everyone for only including the options I did. I agree with some posters that B2P is a huge gamble that we don't see a lot of companies making. It worked for guild wars but in the mmo-overrload world + so much competition it's a risky undertaking and as clone after clone comes out, you begin to see risk is not a game these developers play (apart from these guys).
Spec'ing properly is a gateway drug.
12 Million People have been meter spammed in heroics.
I want thermal vision goggles to see the CEO's of MMO's hearts go cold.
P.S subscription!
The following statement is false
The previous statement is true
I certainly enjoy SUB more than anything. I like having an even playing field (more or less) in my games if I choose to do the pvp part of the game. I can see an appeal however for F2P-P2W games. Some cant spend so much time during the day to get the items they wish so they fork over the extra scratch for them. But again, me, Yeah.. give me the even playing playing field and I"ll give you a run for your money.
The real interesting poll is the one on the site only devs and investors have access to. It shows almost the complete oposite result of this one,... I wonder why that is? Why do they want to give their games for free? They are sooo nice.
-----
The person who is certain, and who claims divine warrant for his certainty, belongs now to the infancy of our species.
For mobile MMOs I think Freemium is very good. eg Pocket Legends:
1) These games are small and easy to try out so should be free to try
2) You only have to spend cash on new content if you want to or just try an alt.
3) I don't bother paying for much else except for where it allows gameplay eg pvp or pve.
4) It's still really cheap.
For PC MMOs:
Such games are only worth playing if they are top of the pile imo. The time and sheer size of these games means that if you sink time into them, it should be the seriously good to be worth playing imo. IF an MMO comes along that does that I'd pay sub no problem. If it can achieve it on B2P then also no problem. But I'd cut the line there. I think players paying and making an investment could act as a pay-wall and that's a good indicator of ppl's attitudes to a game??
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
You are guessing and totally NOT supported by research.
The research i have just posted show that a MAJORITY of the F2P players never pay anything. So much for the myth of "In the end, F2P => cost than monthly subs".
Hybrid. BUT, it needs to be exactly like LOTRO's hybrid setup, NOT EQ2's or the upcoming AoC hybrid model. THose barely register as being hybrid. Lotro is the best.
I've played two "Pay to Win" games, Galaxy Online and Stronghold Kingdoms. In both of them I got sucked into spending a couple hundred dollars because of my desire to be in the "lead pack." I also quit both games in less than 6 months because after a while it just gets old when there is minimal skill or strategy involved and it's basically whoever is willing to spend the most money will win. I actually like both of the games and almost certainly would have played them much longer if they used a subscription model.
I say subscription model all the way.
I might be old-school or something but I like to pay one single payment for a game and have all access to its features without any other fees.
Of course if there is an expansion ( I define expansion as a huge content sale such as Borderlands' Genreal Knoxx expansion) I wouldn't mind a small price for it. There should never be a price for something such as a single instance or dungeon.
Sub-fees are a gamble. You might have the expectation for free content along the way but a game such as WoW will charge you for the expansions.
F2P models are also B2W which is really not fair for people who want to play a free game but can't compete to those who have money to waste.
If developers weren't selling out half-baked games in the first place they could sell the software with out an impending monthly fee or some cash shop scheme that makes the game imba. Deadlines are what hurt the game. Anet's developement on GW2 has no deadline. (so they say) Take a look at Duke Nukem. it has taken "Forever" for it to be released. But hey its goin old school too. Im saying no health regen , weapon pickups etc.
on and on and on. money money money
-I am here to perform logic
I know it's not one of the choices but my personal preference it B2P - in the model of Guild Wars. B2P is great IMO because you pay once for the game, so the devs are rightfully getting their money, but then you don't have to pay anything else if you don't want to. In the GW model, the only things you would buy in the store is mostly cosmetic so there is no aspect of someone feeling they "need" to buy anything to play/win after the original purpose.
My second choice would be the hybrid in the way LoTRO does it. I have been playing that one for a few months now with my highest character being a level 33. I have yet to feel like I need to buy anything with actual money. I've only spent the points I've accumulated in game. I also have yet to feel the grind aspect of it - although I recognize I may not be a high enough level yet to see those issues.
F2P is fine for what it is but in most cases it kind of seems like you get what you pay for.
The worst for me is subscription, especially the WoW model. Here you buy the game just to install it, like Guild Wars, but then have to pay a monthly fee to even play the game at all. Ridiculous! I have played GW for over 5 years (all three games and EoTN) and have spent no more than $150 total on that game over that span. That breaks down to $30 a year. I would spend that $150 in 10 to 15 months playing a sub game that gives me the same amount of enjoyment. Especially in this day and age when games like LoTRO exist with their hybrid setup, I don't really understand why people would continue to pay sub fees.
That's my opinion anyway.
You want me to pay to play a game I already paid for???
Be afraid.....The dragons are HERE!
I wonder about this sometimes.. whether there's statistics or just blind drive by the developers.
Blizzard, or a few other mmo companies including ANet, NCSoft, even Sony, could poll players on their preference on a lot of topics. They just choose not to.
A favorite defense of Blizzard's is that the forum [posting] community is a small percentage of the actual playerbase but they never bring the polls to the launcher on what the posting community is vocal about. Examples include:
Player & Guild Housing
Appearance Tab
PVP-centric trees or abilities that work differently.
"Premium Services"
For instance, the next expasion could be pvp-centric in lore while still providing the same quality in PVE encounters (not saying there is or is not a lot of quality there) but they could focus on things like a terrific idea that one poster had--Guild housing on airships and guilds can battle airship verses airship in the skies. Blizzard says the majority of players don't want it but truth is the majority of players don't even know about the idea.
A company like Sony, with their several MMOs would probably be the best to poll on mmo mechanics because they'd be less likely to be blatantly biased to only one concept.
Spec'ing properly is a gateway drug.
12 Million People have been meter spammed in heroics.
Here's a better question.
How does someone elese preference of payment model, affect YOU?
Supporters of item mall games seem to glory in the idea that maybe P2P games will die out.
Why is that?
Obviously there's plent of F2P games, so why does the existence of a P2P game bother some of them so much?
For me, I'm totally against F2P/P2W and hope, for some reason, that if we can show companies that the majority doesn't want this that we won't see item malls affecting more of our games.
The Hybrid scares me worse. All the downsides of both. You pay simply to play and pay more to have a good time. Whether you're paying for an item or paying for access to an item.. It's a bad direction to go.
Spec'ing properly is a gateway drug.
12 Million People have been meter spammed in heroics.
Same analogy, different reason. I pay a monthly fee, like I do for my cable bill, but those times when I want to get something extra, there's a menu of extras I can look through. Maybe it's a one-night event or an extra IP or a few extra channels, but the option is there for when and if I want it. Choice rocks.
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
There seems an equal amount of that on both sides. Actually, on these forums, there's an almost violent hatred displayed toward not only the F2P games but people who make and play them, as well. Going through just your post history alone, there's a good four or five dozen posts about how simply knowing that someone else might have paid for an extra is enough to negatively impact your enjoyment of the game.
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
But usually the flat fee doesn't get you much.
When looking at the "free movies" when I'm over someone's house who has cable, none of the free movies are really something I want to see.
And yet, the moves that I have to pay a bit extra are usually movies I want to see or have been meaning to see.
Something tells me that the programming is done like that on purpose.
Well, at least the cable networks kept their promise to not have any advertising because their customers were paying for what they considered a premium service.
oh wait!
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Nice. I haven't seen this poll for a while, and again, it doesn't show much. Browser games from social networks (Facebook), really?
As a point of note, if one logs into Forsaken World they will find a LOT of players. All over the place.
It almost feels like the game launched yesterday, that's how much activity is there.
and of course it's f2p.
personally I am a bit on the fence. I would prefer a sub but I wouldn't mind buying "good" cosmetic items as I really like customzing my character.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
None of the above. I don't believe it's fair to lump all Free To Play games into one category.
"Pay to Go Faster" In some the cash shop is not majorly imbalancing, nor will a non-purchasing player be much less competitive in the game than others.
"Pay to Win" In others, the cash shop is severely imbalancing and a non-purchaser is seriously less competitive in the game.
And if you actually READ the research method, you will know that these numbers do NOT include FB games. They have a SEPARATE category for that.
BTW, FB is WAY bigger than ALL MMO market combined, in terms of players.
The even more interesting question is why P2P game supporters are in denial despite over-whelming evidence that F2P games are the MAJORITY (by a large margin) of the MMO community and more and more MMOs are going that route.
Why is acknowledging the trend of the market bother some of them so much?
It might be easier to just fold your arms and say "I hate F2P," than to try to rationalize that as anything but subjective and unrealistic. But, hey, I'll play that game, too. Let's divide the subscription games. 'Monthly' and 'Monthly with Occasional Arbitrary Extra Expansion Charge' sounds like a good division, no?
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
Free