I like how Wizards101 and LotRO does it. Even in contrast to their own companies other games.
F2P ala carte
Let me buy access at a reasonable price as I play along. It's like B2P but broken up into bits. In both games I researched what would paths to cap would be worth my investment and I planned ahead.
If it's not B2P, then that's my preferred method.
Subs are for suckers.
Closest to LOTRO would be:
F2P with cash shop (fluff, gear and benefits)
They do charge for expansions separately, but the cash shop has XP boosters, bags and fluff items.
Hmm, I agree with that. But I don't really see it as a gear shop.
I like how Wizards101 and LotRO does it. Even in contrast to their own companies other games.
F2P ala carte
Let me buy access at a reasonable price as I play along. It's like B2P but broken up into bits. In both games I researched what would paths to cap would be worth my investment and I planned ahead.
If it's not B2P, then that's my preferred method.
Subs are for suckers.
Closest to LOTRO would be:
F2P with cash shop (fluff, gear and benefits)
They do charge for expansions separately, but the cash shop has XP boosters, bags and fluff items.
Hmm, I agree with that. But I don't really see it as a gear shop.
Well you have every single things there to create perfect Legendary Weapon which is most important end-game gear. All Xp, all settings, scrolls, star light crystal and everything else list is long.
It is just not bundled into 'legendary weapon' as one item, but you have absolutely every single element of it. Of course as minor as they are there are stat tomes and when I was playing last time there were store-only relics. Most were average, but I remember one store-only settings that triumphed absolutely every other setting in-game that I could use for my Warden.
So there actually is gear in there too. Of course not even starting with all that cosmetic gear, horses, levelling gear, rarest craftng recipes and so on.
Sure there is no p2w "I kill you with one button" swords, but there is certainly gear there.
Wow, I was actually surprised to see that B2P with sub and no cash shop was leading. The industry would try and make you think differently. So many games are going F2P, but I guess maybe that's for the company's benefit more than the players. I do indeed prefer the B2P with sub. Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I like to just pay my dues and then not be interupted or have the company try and sneak into my wallet while I'm trying to enjoy myself. Those cash shop games really tend to throw the cash shop up in your face. It's a lot nicer when they just shove off and leave me alone. I like being able to access everything in game without dishing out more money. Sure, it may take some time and commitment, but whatever. I've got no problems playing a game to earn my in game rewards.
I thought about "with gear and benefits" because of the argument that convenience items are okay to level the playing field between people who have a surplus of time to grind and those who do not but have cash. However, I came out against this because I'm afraid it would encourage developers to make the game more inconvenient and grindy than necessary to in turn encourage players to buy from the CS. This is bad for the art (game design for the sake of the game itself rather than monetization).
I think fluff is great, if people want to buy it. I spent money in TSW's cash shop for sunglasses and stuff like that. Bag/storage space is okay, too, as long as the original starter sizes aren't ridiculously small and also as long as it doesn't encourage developers to fill up your inventory spaces intentially with too much variety of tokens you have to hang onto in your bank or too much vendor trash in your backpack, etc. It's a slippery slope, though, isn't it?
EDIT: I like B2P with sub and no CS, well. But I would rather a higher B2P price with no sub. For example, I like a lifetime sub, if available (and of course, if I like the game and trust the devs). I would also be more inclined to by higher-priced expansions for such a game, given quality development.
Originally posted by Demogorgon - Those that voted for B2P + sub + fluff shop... are you insane? Why the hell would you want to add a shop on top of a sub is beyond me tbh. A big 15% voted for this option. To me its puzzling to say the least. /sigh
Well, take WoW as an example of that model. I was subscribed to WoW at the time they started selling fluff like mounts and pets in the cash shop. I was there for the glorious Sparkle Pony controversy.
And I supported that idea for one simple reason: I was never, ever going to buy any fluff in the fluff shop, and I was happy that people who did would provide extra funding for the game.
Obviously you could say (and I wouldn't argue with you) that the fluff shop just meant more profits for Blizzard, since sub prices didn't drop, and content creation didn't exactly speed up. But ultimately, if someone other than me is paying extra, and it has no effect on the actual gameplay that I care about, I see that as at least a potential positive.
EDIT: I like B2P with sub and no CS, well. But I would rather a higher B2P price with no sub. For example, I like a lifetime sub, if available (and of course, if I like the game and trust the devs). I would also be more inclined to by higher-priced expansions for such a game, given quality development.
Yeah, it seems like the lifetime sub is an option that's becoming more popular, and I'm curious to see how those work. I know from a player standpoint that it makes a ton of sense, especially if you love a game. I wonder how that lump sum offsets ongoing development costs at the company, and what percentage of players choose it over a smaller regular payment. Be curious to know if companies prefer the larger up-front lump sum to the regular income.
EDIT: I like B2P with sub and no CS, well. But I would rather a higher B2P price with no sub. For example, I like a lifetime sub, if available (and of course, if I like the game and trust the devs). I would also be more inclined to by higher-priced expansions for such a game, given quality development.
Yeah, it seems like the lifetime sub is an option that's becoming more popular, and I'm curious to see how those work. I know from a player standpoint that it makes a ton of sense, especially if you love a game. I wonder how that lump sum offsets ongoing development costs at the company, and what percentage of players choose it over a smaller regular payment. Be curious to know if companies prefer the larger up-front lump sum to the regular income.
Nowadays?
They probably love it.
Put out an MMO, charge lifetime sub 200$-300$, make the game F2P after 6 months ->100-200% profit.
Originally posted by noero Wow, I was actually surprised to see that B2P with sub and no cash shop was leading. The industry would try and make you think differently. So many games are going F2P, but I guess maybe that's for the company's benefit more than the players. I do indeed prefer the B2P with sub. Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I like to just pay my dues and then not be interupted or have the company try and sneak into my wallet while I'm trying to enjoy myself. Those cash shop games really tend to throw the cash shop up in your face. It's a lot nicer when they just shove off and leave me alone. I like being able to access everything in game without dishing out more money. Sure, it may take some time and commitment, but whatever. I've got no problems playing a game to earn my in game rewards.
No, you are not 'old fashioned', you just have a good head on your shoulders and a clear view of things. Play to achieve is better then pay to achieve for everyone but the shareholders.
Every time I see a poll like this the sub option wins.
B2P with cash shop containing fluff items, or reskinned armor/weapon models and mounts.
Sub based MMO's are a dieing breed and an archaic hold over from years past when the sub fees were used for hosting servers. If B2P without a cash shop is good enough for all other games from PC's to consoles then its damn well good enough for MMO's. Its time MMO developers stop living in the past or trying to bleed subscriber numbers. Its been proven time and time again, for last few years B2 subless games are a money making endeavor but I wouldnt suppose a company that cant innovate or try originality to think any different.
I love this post. GW2 fanboy, voting for GW2's exact system, then claiming anything else is dying off... It's just too bad his post exists only an inch under the results, which prove the exact opposite.
I like to pay for a subscription service so that I actually get timely updates, ingame gm's and proper out of game support.
A cash shop with fluff is no problem either as long as it is only fluff. Programmers got to eat too
As an added benefit, a monthly sub keeps a lot of kids away from thegame.
$15 a month is not a lot (and usually you get deals to lower this to $9-10). If you have problems paying this amount, you should get a 2nd job and not play games anyway.
It's almost like with the modern smart phones. People pay $500 for a new phone, but cringe when they have to pay $2 for an app that they want to use on it. A proper gaming computer costs $2000 where I live. $15 a month is a drop in the ocean compared to that.
lately for me its been free to play since every single game that has come out since wow just isnt worth it. oh look 2 weeks to max level then grind dungeons for gear and tokens every single night. they put out a patch that has 5 or 6 new quests every couple of months then its back to dungeon grind. so boring.
im not opposed to a cash shop for fluff items, nor a sub fee, nor even buying the game if its truly worth it and will entertain me for the long haul. im sick of dungeon grinding, im sick of running the same dungeons over and over, and over, over for a piece of purple loot. if that is what mmos are becoming then I am gonna have to pass because that is not even a game, that is whack-a-mole.
so until a decent game comes out ill keep playing world of tanks and world of planes.
Good point, but thats not a problem of F2P thats a problem of bad game design. Developers today seem to want to cash in early then have nothing to keep the game going.
They are turning MMOs into console games with an (xbox live like) monthly fee as opposed to virtual worlds which is how they started.
Originally posted by Adamantine Most. Riddiculous. Poll. Ever.
Agreed. If for no other reason that the insane amount of bias included. While I found "B2P with sub" a cute way to get around "subscription", the first assumption (all the models could charge separately for large expansions) is a blatant attempt to diminish or remove F2P's most common feature which is that expansions are free. It also ignores the presence of games like EVE and Lineage 2 that currently have no charge for expansions.
However, the poll does one thing very well, and that is to show in concrete numbers how the MMORPG.com crowd is not indicative of the average MMO gamer. I hope more posters take the poll - the more that take it, the more accurate the representation.
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
Did not vote in this poll as it leaves out some obvious options. One is "B2P WITHOUT sub and WITHOUT cash shop".
This was intentional in that there is an assumption that developers will need some kind of revenue stream if they are to continue supporting servers, patch bugs, create new features and add new content in-between expansions. Perhaps the assumption is a bad one, but I think most would agree that an MMORPG by its nature needs some sort kind of ongoing revenue stream. Be interested in hearing people's thoughts on this one.
But wait... the arguement from many here is that GW2 is B2P and that the cash shop isn't needed for the further development. Usually that stance is accompanied by some out of context quote from Jeff Strain.
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
Did not vote in this poll as it leaves out some obvious options. One is "B2P WITHOUT sub and WITHOUT cash shop".
This was intentional in that there is an assumption that developers will need some kind of revenue stream if they are to continue supporting servers, patch bugs, create new features and add new content in-between expansions. Perhaps the assumption is a bad one, but I think most would agree that an MMORPG by its nature needs some sort kind of ongoing revenue stream. Be interested in hearing people's thoughts on this one.
But wait... the arguement from many here is that GW2 is B2P and that the cash shop isn't needed for the further development. Usually that stance is accompanied by some out of context quote from Jeff Strain.
The problem is that no one can substatiate that argument. We dont know how much money is needed to support an MMO from year to year nor how much revenue a cash shop brings in or how to increase it. Regardless of what anyone says (developers included) if the finances are not discussed its not real.
An MMO (or any business) cannot operate completely for free thus some form of (successful) monetization is required.
Did not vote in this poll as it leaves out some obvious options. One is "B2P WITHOUT sub and WITHOUT cash shop".
This was intentional in that there is an assumption that developers will need some kind of revenue stream if they are to continue supporting servers, patch bugs, create new features and add new content in-between expansions. Perhaps the assumption is a bad one, but I think most would agree that an MMORPG by its nature needs some sort kind of ongoing revenue stream. Be interested in hearing people's thoughts on this one.
But wait... the arguement from many here is that GW2 is B2P and that the cash shop isn't needed for the further development. Usually that stance is accompanied by some out of context quote from Jeff Strain.
Um... what? I dont think anyone, at least not more than a couple of nuts, has ever claimed it isnt needed to fund the game. The claim is that it isnt needed to "win" the game or enjoy it as pretty much everything in there is optional, and can also be obtained in-game, or bought through gold.
B2P with cash shop containing fluff items, or reskinned armor/weapon models and mounts.
Sub based MMO's are a dieing breed and an archaic hold over from years past when the sub fees were used for hosting servers. If B2P without a cash shop is good enough for all other games from PC's to consoles then its damn well good enough for MMO's. Its time MMO developers stop living in the past or trying to bleed subscriber numbers. Its been proven time and time again, for last few years B2 subless games are a money making endeavor but I wouldnt suppose a company that cant innovate or try originality to think any different.
Check the poll, please.
I am missing this option:
No game purchase, no cash shop, subscription. I think Perpetuum does just that?
B2P with cash shop containing fluff items, or reskinned armor/weapon models and mounts.
Sub based MMO's are a dieing breed and an archaic hold over from years past when the sub fees were used for hosting servers. If B2P without a cash shop is good enough for all other games from PC's to consoles then its damn well good enough for MMO's. Its time MMO developers stop living in the past or trying to bleed subscriber numbers. Its been proven time and time again, for last few years B2 subless games are a money making endeavor but I wouldnt suppose a company that cant innovate or try originality to think any different.
Check the poll, please.
I am missing this option:
No game purchase, no cash shop, subscription. I think Perpetuum does just that?
Does Perpetum not basically allow buying game currency PLEX style similar to EvE though?
In real game application I miss something like weekly subs or 'days pack' or 'hours packs' . Something like sub only game but that is not sold in 30 days but more flexible, even if that mean bit of price increase if I would want to play 30 days straight with my usual average numbers hours per day routine.
Originally posted by Adamantine Most. Riddiculous. Poll. Ever.
Agreed. If for no other reason that the insane amount of bias included. While I found "B2P with sub" a cute way to get around "subscription", the first assumption (all the models could charge separately for large expansions) is a blatant attempt to diminish or remove F2P's most common feature which is that expansions are free. It also ignores the presence of games like EVE and Lineage 2 that currently have no charge for expansions.
However, the poll does one thing very well, and that is to show in concrete numbers how the MMORPG.com crowd is not indicative of the average MMO gamer. I hope more posters take the poll - the more that take it, the more accurate the representation.
Does it really show that? How do you know? What are you comparing it to in order to make that determination that posters here are not in fact quite representative of the average MMO gamer. I'm not saying that they are, but how do you know for sure they are not?
I don't believe there is such a source, just people's varying interpretation of the marketplace, hard facts are difficult to come by in this industry.
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
Assume that all the models could charge separately for large expansions
For F2P cash shops selling gear and benefits, assume that gear items could also be purchased through game play, and that cash shop items would not match gear obtained through game play (no "pay to win").
Assume that any promotions (free trials, lifetime subs, etc) are separate, and not part of the regular payment plan -- the poll is about what you would support in an ongoing fashion
Assume it's a game you like.
If you have another model, add it below!
Honestly, I think this is the wrong question. The right question is "what payment model suits the game"
There's no real justifcation for a lobby-based PvE MMO to have a full monthly sub.
Conversely a full on pay-to-win cash shop will wreck a competitive FFA PvP MMO.
D&D Online works perfectly with a DLC model. A single-sharded open universe needs everyone to be using the same client with the same access to work.
B2P works perfectly for Guild Wars, but F2P would wreck EVE Online.
The publisher needs to decide what kind of payment model they're building the game around from the ground up and make sure that the model supports and enhances the game they're building. (Extra Credits did a good episode on this that nicely articulates my views IIRC)
EDIT: And then there are secondary considerations: is the game being actively developed? Are expansions charged for or free? Is there customer support and GM service? And so on.
Did not vote in this poll as it leaves out some obvious options. One is "B2P WITHOUT sub and WITHOUT cash shop".
This was intentional in that there is an assumption that developers will need some kind of revenue stream if they are to continue supporting servers, patch bugs, create new features and add new content in-between expansions. Perhaps the assumption is a bad one, but I think most would agree that an MMORPG by its nature needs some sort kind of ongoing revenue stream. Be interested in hearing people's thoughts on this one.
But wait... the arguement from many here is that GW2 is B2P and that the cash shop isn't needed for the further development. Usually that stance is accompanied by some out of context quote from Jeff Strain.
Um... what? I dont think anyone, at least not more than a couple of nuts, has ever claimed it isnt needed to fund 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
Comments
People are already doing the following: "The power is with our wallets, use your brain accordingly.". - it's called Free Markets
Hmm, I agree with that. But I don't really see it as a gear shop.
a yo ho ho
Well you have every single things there to create perfect Legendary Weapon which is most important end-game gear. All Xp, all settings, scrolls, star light crystal and everything else list is long.
It is just not bundled into 'legendary weapon' as one item, but you have absolutely every single element of it. Of course as minor as they are there are stat tomes and when I was playing last time there were store-only relics. Most were average, but I remember one store-only settings that triumphed absolutely every other setting in-game that I could use for my Warden.
So there actually is gear in there too. Of course not even starting with all that cosmetic gear, horses, levelling gear, rarest craftng recipes and so on.
Sure there is no p2w "I kill you with one button" swords, but there is certainly gear there.
I voted:
B2P without sub and with cash shop (fluff only)
I thought about "with gear and benefits" because of the argument that convenience items are okay to level the playing field between people who have a surplus of time to grind and those who do not but have cash. However, I came out against this because I'm afraid it would encourage developers to make the game more inconvenient and grindy than necessary to in turn encourage players to buy from the CS. This is bad for the art (game design for the sake of the game itself rather than monetization).
I think fluff is great, if people want to buy it. I spent money in TSW's cash shop for sunglasses and stuff like that. Bag/storage space is okay, too, as long as the original starter sizes aren't ridiculously small and also as long as it doesn't encourage developers to fill up your inventory spaces intentially with too much variety of tokens you have to hang onto in your bank or too much vendor trash in your backpack, etc. It's a slippery slope, though, isn't it?
EDIT: I like B2P with sub and no CS, well. But I would rather a higher B2P price with no sub. For example, I like a lifetime sub, if available (and of course, if I like the game and trust the devs). I would also be more inclined to by higher-priced expansions for such a game, given quality development.
Well, take WoW as an example of that model. I was subscribed to WoW at the time they started selling fluff like mounts and pets in the cash shop. I was there for the glorious Sparkle Pony controversy.
And I supported that idea for one simple reason: I was never, ever going to buy any fluff in the fluff shop, and I was happy that people who did would provide extra funding for the game.
Obviously you could say (and I wouldn't argue with you) that the fluff shop just meant more profits for Blizzard, since sub prices didn't drop, and content creation didn't exactly speed up. But ultimately, if someone other than me is paying extra, and it has no effect on the actual gameplay that I care about, I see that as at least a potential positive.
Yeah, it seems like the lifetime sub is an option that's becoming more popular, and I'm curious to see how those work. I know from a player standpoint that it makes a ton of sense, especially if you love a game. I wonder how that lump sum offsets ongoing development costs at the company, and what percentage of players choose it over a smaller regular payment. Be curious to know if companies prefer the larger up-front lump sum to the regular income.
Nowadays?
They probably love it.
Put out an MMO, charge lifetime sub 200$-300$, make the game F2P after 6 months ->100-200% profit.
Since 6 months would total ~90$ at 15$/month.
No, you are not 'old fashioned', you just have a good head on your shoulders and a clear view of things. Play to achieve is better then pay to achieve for everyone but the shareholders.
Every time I see a poll like this the sub option wins.
so much this
I love this post. GW2 fanboy, voting for GW2's exact system, then claiming anything else is dying off... It's just too bad his post exists only an inch under the results, which prove the exact opposite.
A post truly worthy of...
I like to pay for a subscription service so that I actually get timely updates, ingame gm's and proper out of game support.
A cash shop with fluff is no problem either as long as it is only fluff. Programmers got to eat too
As an added benefit, a monthly sub keeps a lot of kids away from thegame.
$15 a month is not a lot (and usually you get deals to lower this to $9-10). If you have problems paying this amount, you should get a 2nd job and not play games anyway.
It's almost like with the modern smart phones. People pay $500 for a new phone, but cringe when they have to pay $2 for an app that they want to use on it. A proper gaming computer costs $2000 where I live. $15 a month is a drop in the ocean compared to that.
Good point, but thats not a problem of F2P thats a problem of bad game design. Developers today seem to want to cash in early then have nothing to keep the game going.
They are turning MMOs into console games with an (xbox live like) monthly fee as opposed to virtual worlds which is how they started.
Agreed. If for no other reason that the insane amount of bias included. While I found "B2P with sub" a cute way to get around "subscription", the first assumption (all the models could charge separately for large expansions) is a blatant attempt to diminish or remove F2P's most common feature which is that expansions are free. It also ignores the presence of games like EVE and Lineage 2 that currently have no charge for expansions.
However, the poll does one thing very well, and that is to show in concrete numbers how the MMORPG.com crowd is not indicative of the average MMO gamer. I hope more posters take the poll - the more that take it, the more accurate the representation.
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 wait... the arguement from many here is that GW2 is B2P and that the cash shop isn't needed for the further development. Usually that stance is accompanied by some out of context quote from Jeff Strain.
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
The problem is that no one can substatiate that argument. We dont know how much money is needed to support an MMO from year to year nor how much revenue a cash shop brings in or how to increase it. Regardless of what anyone says (developers included) if the finances are not discussed its not real.
An MMO (or any business) cannot operate completely for free thus some form of (successful) monetization is required.
Um... what? I dont think anyone, at least not more than a couple of nuts, has ever claimed it isnt needed to fund the game. The claim is that it isnt needed to "win" the game or enjoy it as pretty much everything in there is optional, and can also be obtained in-game, or bought through gold.
Check the poll, please.
I am missing this option:
No game purchase, no cash shop, subscription. I think Perpetuum does just that?
Does Perpetum not basically allow buying game currency PLEX style similar to EvE though?
In real game application I miss something like weekly subs or 'days pack' or 'hours packs' . Something like sub only game but that is not sold in 30 days but more flexible, even if that mean bit of price increase if I would want to play 30 days straight with my usual average numbers hours per day routine.
Does it really show that? How do you know? What are you comparing it to in order to make that determination that posters here are not in fact quite representative of the average MMO gamer. I'm not saying that they are, but how do you know for sure they are not?
I don't believe there is such a source, just people's varying interpretation of the marketplace, hard facts are difficult to come by in this industry.
"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
Honestly, I think this is the wrong question. The right question is "what payment model suits the game"
There's no real justifcation for a lobby-based PvE MMO to have a full monthly sub.
Conversely a full on pay-to-win cash shop will wreck a competitive FFA PvP MMO.
D&D Online works perfectly with a DLC model. A single-sharded open universe needs everyone to be using the same client with the same access to work.
B2P works perfectly for Guild Wars, but F2P would wreck EVE Online.
The publisher needs to decide what kind of payment model they're building the game around from the ground up and make sure that the model supports and enhances the game they're building. (Extra Credits did a good episode on this that nicely articulates my views IIRC)
EDIT: And then there are secondary considerations: is the game being actively developed? Are expansions charged for or free? Is there customer support and GM service? And so on.
Give me liberty or give me lasers
Here's your couple of nuts. It's the same response I get whenever I bring that up.
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