P2P + cash shop worked fine for WoW, so why can't it work for TSW?
WoW didn't launch with one. It came far later and after WOW had a huge established customer base who were vested in their characters.
TSW is trying to launch with it. Don't be surprised if it significantly impacts their potential customer base in a negative way. If it doesn't, good for Funcom. One thing is for sure, though. People that were interested in playing it aren't now. nad those people have friends they drag along with them from game to game. You can bet those friends aren't going to play either, and so on, and so forth.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
I have an idea! How about we pay a monthly fee, a box fee, a in game shop and EA can tack on a service charge of say 9.99$ a month to use their service Origins!
All I can say is this article just let me know TSW is a trash game that will be quickly overshadowed by STWORS and GW2.
I wonder if EA already knows this game will tank so they are tacking this on to make as much as possible for at least the first year while the game is running?
The fact that I normally like cash shops that arent pay to win.. I mean its nothing to me to support developers of a game i play everyday to get some really cool ingame items.. I dont even want to know how much ive spent on mmos in my life, so this doesnt really effect my choice to not play this game..
You know what did? This game has looked completely retarded WAY before they announced the cash shop, back when I read about it semi in depth and said LOL no thanks..
Well looks like it's between GW2 and SWTOR for me now then. Lets see what MT SWTOR announce before I finally decide.
SUB + CS.. lol.. seriously have to have something wrong with you to think this is not just greed.
What's worse are the people saying they will play but not use the shop.. So you're happy to buy a game.. pay for the game monthly and not get access to all the content.. lol
Look, if you're that eager to give funcom the cash then why not just send them it in the post.. Sure they wont say no.. Sure they would even happily give you a pretty pink reciept.
Now I wonder where I can get a list of people emails from who think this sort of crap is a great as I need some help getting a vast sum of cash out of the country and they sound like they would be ideal candidates to help me.
Not only Funcom are greedy, the whole industry is going fot the big buck. Same old games over and over and over again. TSW at least brings something different (I hope so). Aaahhhh no point in such discussion, I personally will wait and see, maybe it will work well.
It's articles like these and mindless consumer sheeple that encourage the industry to adopt this IDIOTIC trend! Why on earth should I pay for items when I already BOUGHT the game and actively PAYING a monthly subscription?
This trend needs to be STOPPED and the only way of effectively doing that is that we ( the paying customers and game enthusiasts ) make a stand and refuse to be ripped off.
So please stop promoting corporate interests on a mainstream MMO site. It just tarnishes your credibility!
I couldn't agree more. Cash shop + subscription is fail!
Over time, all content will be geared to things they can charge for in store. Once they hook you, they keep you paying.
I prefer subscription based, but I wouldn't be against purely cash shop game.
Cash Shop and sub can be so expensive as a gamer...especially if it has an RvR or PvP content as this one does. If playing the game actively we could be talking effectively doubling or trebling a normal sub.
Originally posted by Illyssia Cash Shop and sub can be so expensive as a gamer...especially if it has an RvR or PvP content as this one does. If playing the game actively we could be talking effectively doubling or trebling a normal sub.
If it's too expensive, do not play the game. If they put something in the cs that crosses the line from 'fluff' to 'power', do not play the game. This is one of the things where you actually have a choice.
Personally, I think they are hedging their bets. They know they are going to get an influx of players, and then the game population is going to drop off. If the game population is pretty stable, then great. They can keep putting fluff items in the cs. If they do go with a F2P option, they already have a cs in place and can use it to put premium items in there like faster skill point accumulation.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
If it's too expensive, do not play the game. If they put something in the cs that crosses the line from 'fluff' to 'power', do not play the game. This is one of the things where you actually have a choice.
Personally, I think they are hedging their bets. They know they are going to get an influx of players, and then the game population is going to drop off. If the game population is pretty stable, then great. They can keep putting fluff items in the cs. If they do go with a F2P option, they already have a cs in place and can use it to put premium items in there like faster skill point accumulation.
Oh sure it is logical from Funcom point of view. They might or might not end up good with going with double diping , but I understand them. I mean if it will work they will earn more. Simple.
Though I don't really care about their reasons or their point of view. From my point of view as consumer it is bad. Not only beacuse of price (as I would accept higher sub price if that could give me not CS) , but becasue I don't like to have CS in game for many diffrent reasons. Them having infrastructure in game since day 1 for fast P2P -> F2P transition , also is big disadvantage for me as I don't want to lay f2p game.
So I am going to vote with my vallet and don't play this game.
To get an idea of what TSW's cash shop and rpices may be like, just take a look at AoC's cash shop. Many items are fairly pricey, and many vanity items tend to be per character instead of per account. Expect to see those double xp potions as well.
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
Cash Shop and sub can be so expensive as a gamer...especially if it has an RvR or PvP content as this one does. If playing the game actively we could be talking effectively doubling or trebling a normal sub.
If it's too expensive, do not play the game. If they put something in the cs that crosses the line from 'fluff' to 'power', do not play the game. This is one of the things where you actually have a choice.
Personally, I think they are hedging their bets. They know they are going to get an influx of players, and then the game population is going to drop off. If the game population is pretty stable, then great. They can keep putting fluff items in the cs. If they do go with a F2P option, they already have a cs in place and can use it to put premium items in there like faster skill point accumulation.
Don't worry, most of the people complaining about there beign a cash shop in the game won't play the game at all now because there's a cash shop.
There's also a sick irony to them adding a cash shop to their game before even going free to play. They're driving away a lot of potential sub paying customers by adding a cash shop, thus losing out on a lot of initial box sales. The people who are fine with cash shops are the ones that influx after the game goes F2P. Net result, Funcom loses out on potential revenue by jumping the gun by adding a cash shop far too early.
NO,a cash shop in a p2p game DOESN'T make sense at all no matter what it has for sale.Even cosmetics are bad in a p2p game.I Don't want someone's character to look cooler than mine just because he paid more,on the other hand,i don't mind if someone else's character looks cooler than mine because he played more or better than me.
TL:DR : cash shops in a p2p game is unfair and sucks.
And I think it's not fair that other people have way more time than I do and therefore get better stuff. Why shouldn't I be allowed to compensate that with money?
Originally posted by Ceridith Originally posted by lizardbones
Originally posted by Illyssia Cash Shop and sub can be so expensive as a gamer...especially if it has an RvR or PvP content as this one does. If playing the game actively we could be talking effectively doubling or trebling a normal sub.
If it's too expensive, do not play the game. If they put something in the cs that crosses the line from 'fluff' to 'power', do not play the game. This is one of the things where you actually have a choice.
Personally, I think they are hedging their bets. They know they are going to get an influx of players, and then the game population is going to drop off. If the game population is pretty stable, then great. They can keep putting fluff items in the cs. If they do go with a F2P option, they already have a cs in place and can use it to put premium items in there like faster skill point accumulation. Don't worry, most of the people complaining about there beign a cash shop in the game won't play the game at all now because there's a cash shop. There's also a sick irony to them adding a cash shop to their game before even going free to play. They're driving away a lot of potential sub paying customers by adding a cash shop, thus losing out on a lot of initial box sales. The people who are fine with cash shops are the ones that influx after the game goes F2P. Net result, Funcom loses out on potential revenue by jumping the gun by adding a cash shop far too early.
Are they actually losing a noticeable number of subs though? One thing I've noticed over the years is that forum population opinions are really skewed away from the general population of players. This is more extreme with mmorpg and even more extreme from that on these forums in particular.
I can honestly see a lot of people being happy that they can buy additional clothing and style items from an in game store. In other words, it's attractive to a lot of people. People like shopping. You can blame it on the Piggly Wiggly supermarket. Seriously, look it up on Google.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Cash Shop and sub can be so expensive as a gamer...especially if it has an RvR or PvP content as this one does. If playing the game actively we could be talking effectively doubling or trebling a normal sub.
If it's too expensive, do not play the game. If they put something in the cs that crosses the line from 'fluff' to 'power', do not play the game. This is one of the things where you actually have a choice.
Personally, I think they are hedging their bets. They know they are going to get an influx of players, and then the game population is going to drop off. If the game population is pretty stable, then great. They can keep putting fluff items in the cs. If they do go with a F2P option, they already have a cs in place and can use it to put premium items in there like faster skill point accumulation.
Don't worry, most of the people complaining about there beign a cash shop in the game won't play the game at all now because there's a cash shop.
There's also a sick irony to them adding a cash shop to their game before even going free to play. They're driving away a lot of potential sub paying customers by adding a cash shop, thus losing out on a lot of initial box sales. The people who are fine with cash shops are the ones that influx after the game goes F2P. Net result, Funcom loses out on potential revenue by jumping the gun by adding a cash shop far too early.
Are they actually losing a noticeable number of subs though? One thing I've noticed over the years is that forum population opinions are really skewed away from the general population of players. This is more extreme with mmorpg and even more extreme from that on these forums in particular.
I can honestly see a lot of people being happy that they can buy additional clothing and style items from an in game store. In other words, it's attractive to a lot of people. People like shopping. You can blame it on the Piggly Wiggly supermarket. Seriously, look it up on Google.
OFF TOPIC: The first time I traveled to the south for an extended period and saw that the local supermarket was called the Piggly Wiggly, I about died from laughter.
Topic: I think that the devs took one look at the fluff shop Blizz has in play and said to themselves "we can milk this like they did and bring in some bank!" It may or may not work for em if it stays fluff. If they make it a one stop power shop, that's goin to turn off many of the gamers (myself included) that think that the pay to win model is actually better named pay to fail.
NO,a cash shop in a p2p game DOESN'T make sense at all no matter what it has for sale.Even cosmetics are bad in a p2p game.I Don't want someone's character to look cooler than mine just because he paid more,on the other hand,i don't mind if someone else's character looks cooler than mine because he played more or better than me.
TL:DR : cash shops in a p2p game is unfair and sucks.
And I think it's not fair that other people have way more time than I do and therefore get better stuff. Why shouldn't I be allowed to compensate that with money?
Choose a hobby that caters better to your limited schedule.
I get that some people have less time than others. Hell, I have less free time than I used to compared to a few years ago. But I don't complain about not having time to play games and MMOs that require a large time investment and other people are ahead of me because of it. I accept it for what it is, and simply instead choose to play games that I know will work with my schedule so I can still enjoy them.
The entire premise of being able to pay extra to play the game less is just nonsense. Stop and seriously think about how ridiculous that is. If you're not enjoying the time spent in a game because you don't have the time, then pick a game that's designed to allow you to get enjoyment with a more casual paly schedule.
Hell if anything, having less free time to play MMOs means that you go through it's content more slowly, and get to enjoy the game for longer before being burnt out.
Are they actually losing a noticeable number of subs though? One thing I've noticed over the years is that forum population opinions are really skewed away from the general population of players. This is more extreme with mmorpg and even more extreme from that on these forums in particular.
I can honestly see a lot of people being happy that they can buy additional clothing and style items from an in game store. In other words, it's attractive to a lot of people. People like shopping. You can blame it on the Piggly Wiggly supermarket. Seriously, look it up on Google.
Definately forums don't reflect general player poulation well. Especially those who write on forums. There is alot of forum users (registered and unregistered) that never post though. Still even them don't reflect general gaming population. You're right.
Will they lose alot of subs? No idea. We don't have time machine or access to alternative universes , so we won't have two TSW releases one with cash shop and one with a cash shop , so we'll never know if they lost alot or not.
As for shopping. I like shopping as well. I like to shop for certain thing in RL.
I even like to shop in mmorpg's with ingame currency.
I don't like to shop in a mmorpg's with real money , I just don't like this $ to mmorpg connection. (it does not matter that you pay in CS with Funcom Points , shards , or whatever , names don't matter it still have connection to money and it is just naming marketting for certain law / psychological reasons).
Originally posted by Mundus
And I think it's not fair that other people have way more time than I do and therefore get better stuff. Why shouldn't I be allowed to compensate that with money?
There is no valid objective reason why you should not be able to.
I personally don't want to play on a server where it is possible to compensate time , dedication and skill with money.
It is a bit simillar like I would not like to play a party of chess if he could pay some $ to get f.e. 'ressurection' for lost figures , becasue for example he don't want or cannot spent as much time laying chess as me so he is worse player.
Fair and not fair is very diffrent to define and it actually imho is frequently dependant on what's your position in certain dillema.
We see people disagree on what's fair or not in real life all the time.
I think spending $ to attain in game items is unfair , but that is just me. You think otherwise and that's ok.
Unfortunatelly there is no space to any compromise , simply because not always compromise is possible , contrary to some people belief.
Cash Shop and sub can be so expensive as a gamer...especially if it has an RvR or PvP content as this one does. If playing the game actively we could be talking effectively doubling or trebling a normal sub.
If it's too expensive, do not play the game. If they put something in the cs that crosses the line from 'fluff' to 'power', do not play the game. This is one of the things where you actually have a choice.
Personally, I think they are hedging their bets. They know they are going to get an influx of players, and then the game population is going to drop off. If the game population is pretty stable, then great. They can keep putting fluff items in the cs. If they do go with a F2P option, they already have a cs in place and can use it to put premium items in there like faster skill point accumulation.
Don't worry, most of the people complaining about there beign a cash shop in the game won't play the game at all now because there's a cash shop.
There's also a sick irony to them adding a cash shop to their game before even going free to play. They're driving away a lot of potential sub paying customers by adding a cash shop, thus losing out on a lot of initial box sales. The people who are fine with cash shops are the ones that influx after the game goes F2P. Net result, Funcom loses out on potential revenue by jumping the gun by adding a cash shop far too early.
Are they actually losing a noticeable number of subs though? One thing I've noticed over the years is that forum population opinions are really skewed away from the general population of players. This is more extreme with mmorpg and even more extreme from that on these forums in particular.
I can honestly see a lot of people being happy that they can buy additional clothing and style items from an in game store. In other words, it's attractive to a lot of people. People like shopping. You can blame it on the Piggly Wiggly supermarket. Seriously, look it up on Google.
It's not just subs, it's initial box sales. Sub games make a huge influx of cash during the first month after release, expressly due to box sales. This is also what tends to recoup development costs quickly.
Anarchy Online and Age of Conan, both sold a good deal of boxes at their respective releases, then subscribership dropped down. But Funcom still sold a lot of boxed games, at $50 a pop.
With a cash shop announced prior to release and in the initial realeased game, it may very well turn away enough players from even bothering to buy the initial boxed game in the first place, resulting in Funcom failing to sell a sufficient number of box sales at release.
So again, it's not just subs, but initial box sales that Funcom is turning away.
Over 280 posts now on this. Obviously a contraversial/polarizing idea Funcom is trying. I can't think of too many business that successfully started with "It's contraversial and polarizing!" Granted, the posters on this site are more likely to be informed but word of mouth is still the best advertising. This does not bode well for Funcom.
Anecdotal only: Was talking to a coworker earlier this morning about SW:ToR and I mentioned TSW and their business model. He told me that it's pretty unlikely he'll even bother now.
Over 280 posts now on this. Obviously a contraversial/polarizing idea Funcom is trying. I can't think of too many business that successfully started with "It's contraversial and polarizing!" Granted, the posters on this site are more likely to be informed but word of mouth is still the best advertising. This does not bode well for Funcom.
Anecdotal only: Was talking to a coworker earlier this morning about SW:ToR and I mentioned TSW and their business model. He told me that it's pretty unlikely he'll even bother now.
Someone's never watched FOX news I take it.
People love drama, however in this case, some will not play, but most will eventually come around to the realization that P2P with a cash shop is here to stay.
What Funcom is doing is joining the mainstream, not setting the trend.
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
Over 280 posts now on this. Obviously a contraversial/polarizing idea Funcom is trying. I can't think of too many business that successfully started with "It's contraversial and polarizing!" Granted, the posters on this site are more likely to be informed but word of mouth is still the best advertising. This does not bode well for Funcom.
Anecdotal only: Was talking to a coworker earlier this morning about SW:ToR and I mentioned TSW and their business model. He told me that it's pretty unlikely he'll even bother now.
An example of the thing I said in my earlier posts in this thread. It's already happening Funcom. You didn't believe me when I and others said you needed a better crafting system with AoC before launch and look at what you're doing with it.
We were right.
And now you're doing this with TSW despite calls from that same gallery area to not do it.
Better hope we aren't right a second time.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
The cost of a mmo subscription is way over due to be raised. For over 10 years now the price for one has averaged about 12 bucks per month. This is very low compared to the leaps and bounds we have witnessed with technology cost and advancements. But instead of a developer/publisher taking a chance to raise the cost of a sub, we had Cryptic usher in the sub + model.
Now I won't even sit back and say I took this approach lightly. I refused to buy any game from Cryptic that had this payment model. And it definately helped that both mmos they released were lackluster at best: STO and CO. But as time moved on I started to think. Why am I complaining about a price increase that is completely optional? I mean it was nothing like the SWG increase that was pretty much forced to pay or don't play.
Also I believe that this model kind of makes transitioning from sub to F2P that much easier if a developer is left with that option. I mean it doesn't change much for the consumers who are already exposed to the cash shop, nor the developers that have an established model for transactions in place. Dunno maybe I'm alone in my thinking, but the way I see it was either 1 of two things could have panned out:
Raise the price of subs to a level that struggling gamers may not be ready for.
Introduce a revenue stream that is proven to work but not very popular.
I persoanlly think the 2's have it.
*Replaced Funcom with Cryptic since they started the sub+ model first.
"Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas."
Comments
P2P + cash shop worked fine for WoW, so why can't it work for TSW?
Eleanor Rigby.
WoW didn't launch with one. It came far later and after WOW had a huge established customer base who were vested in their characters.
TSW is trying to launch with it. Don't be surprised if it significantly impacts their potential customer base in a negative way. If it doesn't, good for Funcom. One thing is for sure, though. People that were interested in playing it aren't now. nad those people have friends they drag along with them from game to game. You can bet those friends aren't going to play either, and so on, and so forth.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
I have an idea! How about we pay a monthly fee, a box fee, a in game shop and EA can tack on a service charge of say 9.99$ a month to use their service Origins!
All I can say is this article just let me know TSW is a trash game that will be quickly overshadowed by STWORS and GW2.
I wonder if EA already knows this game will tank so they are tacking this on to make as much as possible for at least the first year while the game is running?
The fact that I normally like cash shops that arent pay to win.. I mean its nothing to me to support developers of a game i play everyday to get some really cool ingame items.. I dont even want to know how much ive spent on mmos in my life, so this doesnt really effect my choice to not play this game..
You know what did? This game has looked completely retarded WAY before they announced the cash shop, back when I read about it semi in depth and said LOL no thanks..
Well looks like it's between GW2 and SWTOR for me now then. Lets see what MT SWTOR announce before I finally decide.
SUB + CS.. lol.. seriously have to have something wrong with you to think this is not just greed.
What's worse are the people saying they will play but not use the shop.. So you're happy to buy a game.. pay for the game monthly and not get access to all the content.. lol
Look, if you're that eager to give funcom the cash then why not just send them it in the post.. Sure they wont say no.. Sure they would even happily give you a pretty pink reciept.
Now I wonder where I can get a list of people emails from who think this sort of crap is a great as I need some help getting a vast sum of cash out of the country and they sound like they would be ideal candidates to help me.
Lots of angry angries here. I won't pay for something in a game I'm paying for, so...I won't play this one. Take care!
FailCom again, ..... i'm out of here .... i realy was looking forward ...
Not only Funcom are greedy, the whole industry is going fot the big buck. Same old games over and over and over again. TSW at least brings something different (I hope so). Aaahhhh no point in such discussion, I personally will wait and see, maybe it will work well.
I couldn't agree more. Cash shop + subscription is fail!
Over time, all content will be geared to things they can charge for in store. Once they hook you, they keep you paying.
I prefer subscription based, but I wouldn't be against purely cash shop game.
Subscription based + cash shop = no
Cash Shop and sub can be so expensive as a gamer...especially if it has an RvR or PvP content as this one does. If playing the game actively we could be talking effectively doubling or trebling a normal sub.
If it's too expensive, do not play the game. If they put something in the cs that crosses the line from 'fluff' to 'power', do not play the game. This is one of the things where you actually have a choice.
Personally, I think they are hedging their bets. They know they are going to get an influx of players, and then the game population is going to drop off. If the game population is pretty stable, then great. They can keep putting fluff items in the cs. If they do go with a F2P option, they already have a cs in place and can use it to put premium items in there like faster skill point accumulation.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Oh sure it is logical from Funcom point of view. They might or might not end up good with going with double diping , but I understand them. I mean if it will work they will earn more. Simple.
Though I don't really care about their reasons or their point of view. From my point of view as consumer it is bad. Not only beacuse of price (as I would accept higher sub price if that could give me not CS) , but becasue I don't like to have CS in game for many diffrent reasons. Them having infrastructure in game since day 1 for fast P2P -> F2P transition , also is big disadvantage for me as I don't want to lay f2p game.
So I am going to vote with my vallet and don't play this game.
To get an idea of what TSW's cash shop and rpices may be like, just take a look at AoC's cash shop. Many items are fairly pricey, and many vanity items tend to be per character instead of per account. Expect to see those double xp potions as well.
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
Don't worry, most of the people complaining about there beign a cash shop in the game won't play the game at all now because there's a cash shop.
There's also a sick irony to them adding a cash shop to their game before even going free to play. They're driving away a lot of potential sub paying customers by adding a cash shop, thus losing out on a lot of initial box sales. The people who are fine with cash shops are the ones that influx after the game goes F2P. Net result, Funcom loses out on potential revenue by jumping the gun by adding a cash shop far too early.
And I think it's not fair that other people have way more time than I do and therefore get better stuff. Why shouldn't I be allowed to compensate that with money?
Personally, I think they are hedging their bets. They know they are going to get an influx of players, and then the game population is going to drop off. If the game population is pretty stable, then great. They can keep putting fluff items in the cs. If they do go with a F2P option, they already have a cs in place and can use it to put premium items in there like faster skill point accumulation.
Don't worry, most of the people complaining about there beign a cash shop in the game won't play the game at all now because there's a cash shop.
There's also a sick irony to them adding a cash shop to their game before even going free to play. They're driving away a lot of potential sub paying customers by adding a cash shop, thus losing out on a lot of initial box sales. The people who are fine with cash shops are the ones that influx after the game goes F2P. Net result, Funcom loses out on potential revenue by jumping the gun by adding a cash shop far too early.
Are they actually losing a noticeable number of subs though? One thing I've noticed over the years is that forum population opinions are really skewed away from the general population of players. This is more extreme with mmorpg and even more extreme from that on these forums in particular.
I can honestly see a lot of people being happy that they can buy additional clothing and style items from an in game store. In other words, it's attractive to a lot of people. People like shopping. You can blame it on the Piggly Wiggly supermarket. Seriously, look it up on Google.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
OFF TOPIC: The first time I traveled to the south for an extended period and saw that the local supermarket was called the Piggly Wiggly, I about died from laughter.
Topic: I think that the devs took one look at the fluff shop Blizz has in play and said to themselves "we can milk this like they did and bring in some bank!" It may or may not work for em if it stays fluff. If they make it a one stop power shop, that's goin to turn off many of the gamers (myself included) that think that the pay to win model is actually better named pay to fail.
Choose a hobby that caters better to your limited schedule.
I get that some people have less time than others. Hell, I have less free time than I used to compared to a few years ago. But I don't complain about not having time to play games and MMOs that require a large time investment and other people are ahead of me because of it. I accept it for what it is, and simply instead choose to play games that I know will work with my schedule so I can still enjoy them.
The entire premise of being able to pay extra to play the game less is just nonsense. Stop and seriously think about how ridiculous that is. If you're not enjoying the time spent in a game because you don't have the time, then pick a game that's designed to allow you to get enjoyment with a more casual paly schedule.
Hell if anything, having less free time to play MMOs means that you go through it's content more slowly, and get to enjoy the game for longer before being burnt out.
Definately forums don't reflect general player poulation well. Especially those who write on forums. There is alot of forum users (registered and unregistered) that never post though. Still even them don't reflect general gaming population. You're right.
Will they lose alot of subs? No idea. We don't have time machine or access to alternative universes , so we won't have two TSW releases one with cash shop and one with a cash shop , so we'll never know if they lost alot or not.
As for shopping. I like shopping as well. I like to shop for certain thing in RL.
I even like to shop in mmorpg's with ingame currency.
I don't like to shop in a mmorpg's with real money , I just don't like this $ to mmorpg connection. (it does not matter that you pay in CS with Funcom Points , shards , or whatever , names don't matter it still have connection to money and it is just naming marketting for certain law / psychological reasons).
There is no valid objective reason why you should not be able to.
I personally don't want to play on a server where it is possible to compensate time , dedication and skill with money.
It is a bit simillar like I would not like to play a party of chess if he could pay some $ to get f.e. 'ressurection' for lost figures , becasue for example he don't want or cannot spent as much time laying chess as me so he is worse player.
Fair and not fair is very diffrent to define and it actually imho is frequently dependant on what's your position in certain dillema.
We see people disagree on what's fair or not in real life all the time.
I think spending $ to attain in game items is unfair , but that is just me. You think otherwise and that's ok.
Unfortunatelly there is no space to any compromise , simply because not always compromise is possible , contrary to some people belief.
It's not just subs, it's initial box sales. Sub games make a huge influx of cash during the first month after release, expressly due to box sales. This is also what tends to recoup development costs quickly.
Anarchy Online and Age of Conan, both sold a good deal of boxes at their respective releases, then subscribership dropped down. But Funcom still sold a lot of boxed games, at $50 a pop.
With a cash shop announced prior to release and in the initial realeased game, it may very well turn away enough players from even bothering to buy the initial boxed game in the first place, resulting in Funcom failing to sell a sufficient number of box sales at release.
So again, it's not just subs, but initial box sales that Funcom is turning away.
Over 280 posts now on this. Obviously a contraversial/polarizing idea Funcom is trying. I can't think of too many business that successfully started with "It's contraversial and polarizing!" Granted, the posters on this site are more likely to be informed but word of mouth is still the best advertising. This does not bode well for Funcom.
Anecdotal only: Was talking to a coworker earlier this morning about SW:ToR and I mentioned TSW and their business model. He told me that it's pretty unlikely he'll even bother now.
Someone's never watched FOX news I take it.
People love drama, however in this case, some will not play, but most will eventually come around to the realization that P2P with a cash shop is here to stay.
What Funcom is doing is joining the mainstream, not setting the trend.
"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
An example of the thing I said in my earlier posts in this thread. It's already happening Funcom. You didn't believe me when I and others said you needed a better crafting system with AoC before launch and look at what you're doing with it.
We were right.
And now you're doing this with TSW despite calls from that same gallery area to not do it.
Better hope we aren't right a second time.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
The cost of a mmo subscription is way over due to be raised. For over 10 years now the price for one has averaged about 12 bucks per month. This is very low compared to the leaps and bounds we have witnessed with technology cost and advancements. But instead of a developer/publisher taking a chance to raise the cost of a sub, we had Cryptic usher in the sub + model.
Now I won't even sit back and say I took this approach lightly. I refused to buy any game from Cryptic that had this payment model. And it definately helped that both mmos they released were lackluster at best: STO and CO. But as time moved on I started to think. Why am I complaining about a price increase that is completely optional? I mean it was nothing like the SWG increase that was pretty much forced to pay or don't play.
Also I believe that this model kind of makes transitioning from sub to F2P that much easier if a developer is left with that option. I mean it doesn't change much for the consumers who are already exposed to the cash shop, nor the developers that have an established model for transactions in place. Dunno maybe I'm alone in my thinking, but the way I see it was either 1 of two things could have panned out:
Raise the price of subs to a level that struggling gamers may not be ready for.
Introduce a revenue stream that is proven to work but not very popular.
I persoanlly think the 2's have it.
*Replaced Funcom with Cryptic since they started the sub+ model first.
"Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas."