Originally posted by Wazluk Originally posted by MarkJacobs Just taking a break between spreadsheets/pr drafts to hit some threads here and on our subreddit. CU is indeed a subscription game and will be launched as a subscription game for our Kickstarter. We will certainly have lifetime tiers for our backers (as I've said before) as well as other subscription pricing perks as well as the fact I've said we won't be pricing this at $14.99 so...
"...so kickstart begin!" You must have hit post too soon Mark...
LOL. I wish I could have said that because it would mean that I can stop staring at these "pledge tier" spreadsheets, pr drafts, etc.
Hundred heads are better than one. Kick us some of the spreadsheet. We'll help... :P
I cannot wait to play this. I know that has nothing to do with the topic - but heh, what the hay.
MarkJacobsCEO City State EntertainmentMemberRarePosts: 649
Originally posted by Raagnarz
Originally posted by MarkJacobs
Originally posted by Wazluk
Originally posted by MarkJacobs
Just taking a break between spreadsheets/pr drafts to hit some threads here and on our subreddit. CU is indeed a subscription game and will be launched as a subscription game for our Kickstarter. We will certainly have lifetime tiers for our backers (as I've said before) as well as other subscription pricing perks as well as the fact I've said we won't be pricing this at $14.99 so...
"...so kickstart begin!" You must have hit post too soon Mark...
LOL. I wish I could have said that because it would mean that I can stop staring at these "pledge tier" spreadsheets, pr drafts, etc.
The numbers all start to blend together after awhile don't they lol.
Yeah and since we are now up to over 90 items for our backers, the world is starting to blend together.
Mark Jacobs CEO, City State Entertainment
MarkJacobsCEO City State EntertainmentMemberRarePosts: 649
Originally posted by Comaf I cannot wait to play this. I know that has nothing to do with the topic - but heh, what the hay.
I just saw your sig. Thank you so much for your support, it really means a lot to me.
10-15 $ plus a 60$ box fee is very reasonable. If you pay to go to a theme park for a single day you usually pay that much. For only one day of entertainment, rather play a game for a month that you really enjoy for the same price. Then it's even lower the second month and so on, because you've already bought the game. Also, a lot of hobbies are just like this. For instance ski'ing if ypu buy the Skis and equipment, that's your box price. But you still have to pay every time you go to the ski lodge, that's your monthly sub. If you don't pay one day you will not ski there. This is the same for many hobbies, gaming is just a cheaper hobby $10-$15 dollars a month is not a substantial amount of money.
DISAGREE, if the game is good I'll gladly pay 15 or so a month as not to suffer the cheapskates and the cash shops. All FTP does is bring in the fly by night riftraft that will never be able to sustain a game for the long run.
I have established half of you don't know what you are talking about. Paying for a game does not get rid of trolls and immaturity. World of warcraft BIG example. That whole game is made up of trolls (not literally but there are a lot of trolls) RUNESCAPE. Another huge mmorpg filled with trolls. You can't argue that subscriptions are going to get rid of trolls because it does not work that way. It is a game whether they pay for it or not if someone wants to troll they will troll.
It's an RvR focused game, it has to be subscription based and not cash shop or it won't work. Cash shop means no level playing field, and basically makes any attempt at balancing futile (how can you have even a sembalance of balance if the guy who paid $100 has to be able t easily kill a whole bunch of free players)
It also doesn't promote longetivity for the game. Free players get bored and give up after realizing they are just fodder for paying players, and the people who pay get bored and quit once the free players leave. Meh, $15/month isn't that big of a deal, getting a balanced game is well worth that cost.
Originally posted by Destac I have established half of you don't know what you are talking about. Paying for a game does not get rid of trolls and immaturity. World of warcraft BIG example. That whole game is made up of trolls (not literally but there are a lot of trolls) RUNESCAPE. Another huge mmorpg filled with trolls. You can't argue that subscriptions are going to get rid of trolls because it does not work that way. It is a game whether they pay for it or not if someone wants to troll they will troll.
They are also PvE games that are VERY old. Huge difference. DAOC did not have any real trolls, they used Vnboard forum for that.
It's an RvR focused game, it has to be subscription based and not cash shop or it won't work. Cash shop means no level playing field, and basically makes any attempt at balancing futile (how can you have even a sembalance of balance if the guy who paid $100 has to be able t easily kill a whole bunch of free players)
It also doesn't promote longetivity for the game. Free players get bored and give up after realizing they are just fodder for paying players, and the people who pay get bored and quit once the free players leave. Meh, $15/month isn't that big of a deal, getting a balanced game is well worth that cost.
Do you not understand, free to play doesn't have to equal "pay to win." There are many games that are free to play that aren't pay to win.
league of legends, tera, etc.
Doesn't promote longetivity? What data are you drawing this conclusion from? Any thing to back it up?
Like SW:TOR? Tera? LOTR:O, TSW, Age of Conan, etc? All those games started with a sub model and have moved to free to play and saw huge increases in their player base. On top of this many of them moved to this model within a year of being out or less, so if a sub provides more "longetitivty" it sure didn't work for them.
The market has changed, compared to the old days when you had like 3-4 mmorpgs on the market, there's so many that are out there now competiting, sub based, free to play, fantasy, sci fi, etc. It' sa much more competitive market then what it used to be. When joe schmoe is looking for a new mmo to get into, a sub requirment can be a negative affect in getting new palyers into the game/trying it.
Even the all mightiy WoW has a free to play edition that lets people try the game up to level 20 or so.
Though this is all a moot point, as CU is going to be a tiered sub based game, so talking about this doens't really matter much.
Again, i see no reason why MMO'S should require a monthly fee when almost all the games on the market are B2P since the first age's of gaming, and i highly doubt the server maintenance are that expensive to maintain. My opinion its that some people just get used to the pay to play model and they are just "mind" lazy to think other way. ( didnt meant to offend anybody with the last part)
Subscriptions aren't as evil as people are advocating here.
In my days there wasn't a single game that was for free and being required to work 3 hours for a month's play didn't bother me as a student for the sheer amount of joy I got out of DAoC (and AC before that!).
However current day subscriptions seem fixed on mirroring blizzard's subscription model (with the evil 1 USD = 1 EUR conversion) instead of being competitive.
My guess is that most people that are now 'attacking' the monthly subscription model are the younger ones that are in a better spot than old time mmo-ers are, you have the freedom of choice. If you really think spending a couple of beer's worth per month is a bad investment for a good game....you've pirated too much Go to the cinema for once! Hell I'm betting some of you pay a huge subscription just for having TV channels.
The point is that as low as 5 bucks a month is still a monthly subscription and might be all that is asked for the lower subscriptions. We don't know what it will be, we however do know that if a company is going to compete, it's not one of the big publishers. We also don't know if we are required to buy a box of 60 USD...
A free to play game attracts huge amount of crowds everytime they release something new to the game, take SWTOR, look at GW2. New events --> crowded server, afterwards a huge decline. For a RvR based server this is deadly, especially since you start right away with the PVP action. To avoid this a company would require some sort of investment, in this case a subscription.
Server splits/merges/overlfows are deadly for a Realm's community and CU is right to try to protect that.
Last but not least, it somewhat discourages realm switching/spying by making new free accounts.
TLDR:
Subs aren't that expensive for the entertainment you get out of it.
You have a choice...
Pricing is not released.
Players are required to do an investment to prevent crowding and uncrowding at 'special' times.
What you have to remember is a lot of the people who want to play this game cut there teeth on no cash shop pay per month mmo games and if he went b2p or f2p with cash shop the very people those hard core people who want this game would not play.
A nich game like this with a small community needs to be pay per month, you can not guarentee that people will keep buying cosmetics and the small amount of people playing makes that kind of model unsustanable.
Purely on a bandwidth used per month + server running costs + admin costs (remember most box sales cover things like licence agreements and developement of the game to launch) so for a niche title like that a pay per month works best as in 1000 people log in and use 1000 peoples worth of bandwith + server time is all covered in the subscription per month.
This also allows the accountants to say okay we have 2000 people subscribed that gives us this exact amount per month minus loss which can be divided between costs and future developement.
Originally posted by Varthander Again, i see no reason why MMO'S should require a monthly fee when almost all the games on the market are B2P since the first age's of gaming, and i highly doubt the server maintenance are that expensive to maintain. My opinion its that some people just get used to the pay to play model and they are just "mind" lazy to think other way. ( didnt meant to offend anybody with the last part)
No one is "mind" lazy, we just understand why monthly fees (as opposed to B2P systems) are a good thing for MMOs.
Aside from the obvious effects like stopping hackers and gold spammers, which are also hindered by B2P systems, there is one simple truth. MMOs cannot operate solely on the initial B2P income. So what does this mean?
It means they have to supplement their income somehow. How do they supplement their income to pay for game maintenence and game expansion? Cash shops, purchaseable content, "buy this key and get special shiny things from your special chest."
These things are detrimental to the game and dumb everything down. Rather than focus entirely on improving the actual game and looking for ways to make that base game more appealing to ensure longevity and replayability (more monthly payments), the dev. team will instead be focused on acquiring a steady stream of cash via finding new ways to make players buy more "stuff" in the stuff store. "Buy these new rock-em-sock-em boxing gloves" - "Buy this awesome XP boost" - "Buy this neat new gun that can only be acquired from the store" Any legitimate game improvments and expansions are sidelined as a result, and you end up a stagnant game world without any longevity, based entirely upon cash shop impulse buyers.
Just look at the MMO market. You'd be hard pressed to find a single B2P game (or non-monthly fee game) that doesn't have a cash shop. If you do find one without a cash shop, it will have seperate access levels (Basic, Silver, Gold, etc.) based upon whether or not you're a subscriber. This always creates a system where those who pay are more powerful than those who do not, either directly or by them having access to content which allows them to become more powerful.
Ex. Champions Online and Star Trek Online (both also have cash shops)
tl;dr
P2P (monthly) games deliver the same thing to everyone (all access or no access) and have no need for cash shops and divisive subscription "categories." The developers can focus on improving the game itself to ensure income, not finding new ways to create income via new trinkets and assorted content restrictions.
I prefer B2P over F2P and Sub games. Some companies can have a good balance with these models, such as GW2 and TSW. I don't like tiered subscriptions either. Cash shops can be balanced too, and they don't have to go to the extremes like Lotro and Swtor did.
If we take WoW for example, it's a B2P, Sub, F2P ("starter edition"), and cash shop (pets and mounts only).
I seriously don't understand how this thread is still going strong, despite multiple posts from MJ clearly stating his intentions for Camelot Unchained.. /mind explodes
My name is Plastic-Metal and my name is an oxymoron.
Subscriptions aren't as evil as people are advocating here.
In my days there wasn't a single game that was for free and being required to work 3 hours for a month's play didn't bother me as a student for the sheer amount of joy I got out of DAoC (and AC before that!).
However current day subscriptions seem fixed on mirroring blizzard's subscription model (with the evil 1 USD = 1 EUR conversion) instead of being competitive.
My guess is that most people that are now 'attacking' the monthly subscription model are the younger ones that are in a better spot than old time mmo-ers are, you have the freedom of choice. If you really think spending a couple of beer's worth per month is a bad investment for a good game....you've pirated too much Go to the cinema for once! Hell I'm betting some of you pay a huge subscription just for having TV channels.
The point is that as low as 5 bucks a month is still a monthly subscription and might be all that is asked for the lower subscriptions. We don't know what it will be, we however do know that if a company is going to compete, it's not one of the big publishers. We also don't know if we are required to buy a box of 60 USD...
A free to play game attracts huge amount of crowds everytime they release something new to the game, take SWTOR, look at GW2. New events --> crowded server, afterwards a huge decline. For a RvR based server this is deadly, especially since you start right away with the PVP action. To avoid this a company would require some sort of investment, in this case a subscription.
Server splits/merges/overlfows are deadly for a Realm's community and CU is right to try to protect that.
Last but not least, it somewhat discourages realm switching/spying by making new free accounts.
TLDR:
Subs aren't that expensive for the entertainment you get out of it.
You have a choice...
Pricing is not released.
Players are required to do an investment to prevent crowding and uncrowding at 'special' times.
It discourages realm switching.
Well said. I completely agree with you. Sad that it is more than a paragraph so most people here won't read it.
I will never play a game for enjoyment thats Free to play, review them? Sure, but for my own casual at home consumption I know its a business. More money and more profits mean more work hours. more work hours = more patches. more patches = better product. Think about it, what killed warhammer? a rough spot when the economy in real life took a nose dive also the same time they had a major bugs that just didnt get fixed fast enough and made a large chunk of the population leave. and thats a company WITH subs.
compare how many patches came out for DAoC in the first 18 months compared to the number of patches that came out for LoTR. Even Guildwars which is selling like hotcakes still dosent have patches fast enough.
I will pay my 15 bucks per month. 80 of us pay 15 per month and thats the salary for a QA , change management or a Jr Dev.
I will never play a game for enjoyment thats Free to play, review them? Sure, but for my own casual at home consumption I know its a business. More money and more profits mean more work hours. more work hours = more patches. more patches = better product. Think about it, what killed warhammer? a rough spot when the economy in real life took a nose dive also the same time they had a major bugs that just didnt get fixed fast enough and made a large chunk of the population leave. and thats a company WITH subs.
compare how many patches came out for DAoC in the first 18 months compared to the number of patches that came out for LoTR. Even Guildwars which is selling like hotcakes still dosent have patches fast enough.
I will pay my 15 bucks per month. 80 of us pay 15 per month and thats the salary for a QA , change management or a Jr Dev.
I'm not sure what you're geting at here? ARe you implaying that a f2p game doesn't get patches fast enough, or have the means (money) to get them done in a timely manner?
It isn't like a free to play game developer constantly hires someone when they sell a few items on their cash shop then turns around and fires that person until they "sell" some more or something.
Guild Wars 2 for instance, has been having some decent NEW content patchest hat come around each month or so, compared to other mmo's that have sub's that dont' really get any new "content" updates rather maybe simple holiday events here and there but nothing major, until expansions and such.
I just don't see a connectiont o "patches" and f2p vs sub based, in my experience there's no huge difference vs them. If there' a bug or problem with the game, having the game be sub-based or f2p, the turn around to getting it patched seems similar to me regardless of where the money comes from.
I have played most f2p games out there. With that said im glad that this game is p2p. And in my experience p2p games has better updates, not bigger, not more frequent just plain better updates. A f2p game includes to much "cosmetic items" for the shops in their updates to make them more monies then actually give more content, a company will always ALWAYS focus on earning money, so aslong as CU stays sub based they can truly commit their entire team to making new content instead of ways to earn some xtra cash for their pockets.
And the fact that a sub based game will help the community thrive instead of getting overrun by everyone that just wants to follow the hype and have no idea what kind of game they are getting into. Sure most of those players might be "Easy Pickings" in an RvR game like this, but im here for the challenge and to cross swords with fellow RvR enthusiasts and not to browse a shop to buy a cool looking robe that has no impact on the gameplay just cause some ppl want to play for free
The only F2P system I've ever remotely liked has been League of Legend's model, and even that is flawed. Everything is obtainable by playing the game, over time, except for cosmetics though it will take a long time to get everything. The reason this model works is the type of game setting. F2P doesn't work in an MMO setting because there's not enough to sell that isn't power/game related and unbalancing the game. The reason subscription model has and still works is because it allows you full access to everything, equal footing, while the developers maintain constant updates.
You see the flaw in the design recently? Everyone is clamoring that subscription is bad/archaic/whatever, but the problem doesn't lie with the model itself. It lies within the lazy development of companies that remain subscription based. Look back at Asheron's Call, released in 1999. It was originall $9.95 a month to subscribe and was made by a few college kids that is now Turbine itself. With these limited resources and older technology, they managed to get out a monthly (yes, EVERY month) content update that added loads and loads of content, from new land, new creatures, new dungeons, new quests and almost always a continuation of storyline. The only time the monthly content laxed was when it was so large, it took 2-3 months, which was rare, but did happen. And those patches were so massive, it was game changing in both storyline and in game content.
Now how can a company over a decade ago produce such quality, monthly updates while companies like Blizzard only put out minor-moderate patches every 6+ months now? Because we, as consumers, let them. As long as people are willing to accept this absolutely piss-poor level of customer satisfaction and continue lapping it up like a starving kitten at a bowl of milk then it won't change.
The problem does not lie within the model, but the companies and we as gamers ourselves.
"Do you not understand, free to play doesn't have to equal "pay to win." There are many games that are free to play that aren't pay to win.
league of legends, tera, etc.
Doesn't promote longetivity? What data are you drawing this conclusion from? Any thing to back it up?
Like SW:TOR? Tera? LOTR:O, TSW, Age of Conan, etc? All those games started with a sub model and have moved to free to play and saw huge increases in their player base. On top of this many of them moved to this model within a year of being out or less, so if a sub provides more "longetitivty" it sure didn't work for them"
If cash shop doesn't mean an auto win, then developers better work for free. Sure there are some decent f2p games out there, I am playing a few myself, but they are not mmorpgs (in my case it's facebook type games that I play) so the cost of development and maintenance is completely different. Can you really compare league of legends to an mmo like say swtor? or war or what have you? Clearly LoL is much cheaper to make, maintain and update.
Of all the mmos you listed (with exceptions of ones after swtor, I honestly lost interest in mmos after that so not sure what came out) none of this games wanted to be f2p. It was more of a "Oh, wow, everyone left our game after a few months... I guess we can shut down and lose millions, or since we already have this game, we can push it as f2p and get a ton of people and maybe even make some money"
I am quite certain that for a true mmorpg to go f2p (right from the release, not when they see that sub model doesn't work because their game is crap) is a no go as I doubt cash shop will pay for the development, especially if it's not a pay to win type of cash shop. It is however a good move for a dieing game, and helps it get more people and some cash.
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
if there is one thing 200% sure about CU its that it'll be sub based, with possibilities of multit-tier sub (i.e.family sub) Mark said it so often in interviews He HATES F2P (or as some calls it Pay-to-Win) models with a passion. The only things that could be found in an in-game store could be cosmetic stuff, that is ALL.
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
Bowbow (kob hunter) Infecto (kob cave shammy) and Thurka (troll warrior) on Merlin/Midgard DAoC Thurka on WAR
Comments
"...so kickstart begin!" You must have hit post too soon Mark...LOL. I wish I could have said that because it would mean that I can stop staring at these "pledge tier" spreadsheets, pr drafts, etc.
Hundred heads are better than one. Kick us some of the spreadsheet. We'll help... :PLegend Gaming Website | Join Us!
Wazluk - Legionnaire of Terminus
Draken Stalker
Yeah and since we are now up to over 90 items for our backers, the world is starting to blend together.
Mark Jacobs
CEO, City State Entertainment
I just saw your sig. Thank you so much for your support, it really means a lot to me.
Mark Jacobs
CEO, City State Entertainment
The Arcade Corner
The Daily Exposition
It's an RvR focused game, it has to be subscription based and not cash shop or it won't work. Cash shop means no level playing field, and basically makes any attempt at balancing futile (how can you have even a sembalance of balance if the guy who paid $100 has to be able t easily kill a whole bunch of free players)
It also doesn't promote longetivity for the game. Free players get bored and give up after realizing they are just fodder for paying players, and the people who pay get bored and quit once the free players leave. Meh, $15/month isn't that big of a deal, getting a balanced game is well worth that cost.
They are also PvE games that are VERY old. Huge difference. DAOC did not have any real trolls, they used Vnboard forum for that.
Heartspark: Animist rr12, bors, Lone Enforcer, Retired
Dranzerk: Berzerker (kay) retired
Dhei: Spiritmaster (Kay) retired
Goblinking : Hunter (Kay) retired
Moongoose: Shadowblade (Kay) retired
Do you not understand, free to play doesn't have to equal "pay to win." There are many games that are free to play that aren't pay to win.
league of legends, tera, etc.
Doesn't promote longetivity? What data are you drawing this conclusion from? Any thing to back it up?
Like SW:TOR? Tera? LOTR:O, TSW, Age of Conan, etc? All those games started with a sub model and have moved to free to play and saw huge increases in their player base. On top of this many of them moved to this model within a year of being out or less, so if a sub provides more "longetitivty" it sure didn't work for them.
http://www.gamespot.com/news/tera-crosses-14-million-users-after-free-to-play-switch-6405633
http://www.vg247.com/2013/01/10/the-secret-world-activity-up-400-since-dropping-subscriptions/
The market has changed, compared to the old days when you had like 3-4 mmorpgs on the market, there's so many that are out there now competiting, sub based, free to play, fantasy, sci fi, etc. It' sa much more competitive market then what it used to be. When joe schmoe is looking for a new mmo to get into, a sub requirment can be a negative affect in getting new palyers into the game/trying it.
Even the all mightiy WoW has a free to play edition that lets people try the game up to level 20 or so.
Though this is all a moot point, as CU is going to be a tiered sub based game, so talking about this doens't really matter much.
Subscriptions aren't as evil as people are advocating here.
In my days there wasn't a single game that was for free and being required to work 3 hours for a month's play didn't bother me as a student for the sheer amount of joy I got out of DAoC (and AC before that!).
However current day subscriptions seem fixed on mirroring blizzard's subscription model (with the evil 1 USD = 1 EUR conversion) instead of being competitive.
My guess is that most people that are now 'attacking' the monthly subscription model are the younger ones that are in a better spot than old time mmo-ers are, you have the freedom of choice. If you really think spending a couple of beer's worth per month is a bad investment for a good game....you've pirated too much
Go to the cinema for once! 
Hell I'm betting some of you pay a huge subscription just for having TV channels.
The point is that as low as 5 bucks a month is still a monthly subscription and might be all that is asked for the lower subscriptions. We don't know what it will be, we however do know that if a company is going to compete, it's not one of the big publishers. We also don't know if we are required to buy a box of 60 USD...
A free to play game attracts huge amount of crowds everytime they release something new to the game, take SWTOR, look at GW2. New events --> crowded server, afterwards a huge decline. For a RvR based server this is deadly, especially since you start right away with the PVP action. To avoid this a company would require some sort of investment, in this case a subscription.
Server splits/merges/overlfows are deadly for a Realm's community and CU is right to try to protect that.
Last but not least, it somewhat discourages realm switching/spying by making new free accounts.
TLDR:
What you have to remember is a lot of the people who want to play this game cut there teeth on no cash shop pay per month mmo games and if he went b2p or f2p with cash shop the very people those hard core people who want this game would not play.
A nich game like this with a small community needs to be pay per month, you can not guarentee that people will keep buying cosmetics and the small amount of people playing makes that kind of model unsustanable.
Purely on a bandwidth used per month + server running costs + admin costs (remember most box sales cover things like licence agreements and developement of the game to launch) so for a niche title like that a pay per month works best as in 1000 people log in and use 1000 peoples worth of bandwith + server time is all covered in the subscription per month.
This also allows the accountants to say okay we have 2000 people subscribed that gives us this exact amount per month minus loss which can be divided between costs and future developement.
No one is "mind" lazy, we just understand why monthly fees (as opposed to B2P systems) are a good thing for MMOs.
Aside from the obvious effects like stopping hackers and gold spammers, which are also hindered by B2P systems, there is one simple truth. MMOs cannot operate solely on the initial B2P income. So what does this mean?
It means they have to supplement their income somehow. How do they supplement their income to pay for game maintenence and game expansion? Cash shops, purchaseable content, "buy this key and get special shiny things from your special chest."
These things are detrimental to the game and dumb everything down. Rather than focus entirely on improving the actual game and looking for ways to make that base game more appealing to ensure longevity and replayability (more monthly payments), the dev. team will instead be focused on acquiring a steady stream of cash via finding new ways to make players buy more "stuff" in the stuff store. "Buy these new rock-em-sock-em boxing gloves" - "Buy this awesome XP boost" - "Buy this neat new gun that can only be acquired from the store" Any legitimate game improvments and expansions are sidelined as a result, and you end up a stagnant game world without any longevity, based entirely upon cash shop impulse buyers.
Just look at the MMO market. You'd be hard pressed to find a single B2P game (or non-monthly fee game) that doesn't have a cash shop. If you do find one without a cash shop, it will have seperate access levels (Basic, Silver, Gold, etc.) based upon whether or not you're a subscriber. This always creates a system where those who pay are more powerful than those who do not, either directly or by them having access to content which allows them to become more powerful.
Ex. Champions Online and Star Trek Online (both also have cash shops)
tl;dr
P2P (monthly) games deliver the same thing to everyone (all access or no access) and have no need for cash shops and divisive subscription "categories." The developers can focus on improving the game itself to ensure income, not finding new ways to create income via new trinkets and assorted content restrictions.
I prefer B2P over F2P and Sub games. Some companies can have a good balance with these models, such as GW2 and TSW. I don't like tiered subscriptions either. Cash shops can be balanced too, and they don't have to go to the extremes like Lotro and Swtor did.
If we take WoW for example, it's a B2P, Sub, F2P ("starter edition"), and cash shop (pets and mounts only).
Well said. I completely agree with you. Sad that it is more than a paragraph so most people here won't read it.
I will never play a game for enjoyment thats Free to play, review them? Sure, but for my own casual at home consumption I know its a business. More money and more profits mean more work hours. more work hours = more patches. more patches = better product. Think about it, what killed warhammer? a rough spot when the economy in real life took a nose dive also the same time they had a major bugs that just didnt get fixed fast enough and made a large chunk of the population leave. and thats a company WITH subs.
compare how many patches came out for DAoC in the first 18 months compared to the number of patches that came out for LoTR. Even Guildwars which is selling like hotcakes still dosent have patches fast enough.
I will pay my 15 bucks per month. 80 of us pay 15 per month and thats the salary for a QA , change management or a Jr Dev.
I'm not sure what you're geting at here? ARe you implaying that a f2p game doesn't get patches fast enough, or have the means (money) to get them done in a timely manner?
It isn't like a free to play game developer constantly hires someone when they sell a few items on their cash shop then turns around and fires that person until they "sell" some more or something.
Guild Wars 2 for instance, has been having some decent NEW content patchest hat come around each month or so, compared to other mmo's that have sub's that dont' really get any new "content" updates rather maybe simple holiday events here and there but nothing major, until expansions and such.
I just don't see a connectiont o "patches" and f2p vs sub based, in my experience there's no huge difference vs them. If there' a bug or problem with the game, having the game be sub-based or f2p, the turn around to getting it patched seems similar to me regardless of where the money comes from.
I have played most f2p games out there. With that said im glad that this game is p2p. And in my experience p2p games has better updates, not bigger, not more frequent just plain better updates. A f2p game includes to much "cosmetic items" for the shops in their updates to make them more monies then actually give more content, a company will always ALWAYS focus on earning money, so aslong as CU stays sub based they can truly commit their entire team to making new content instead of ways to earn some xtra cash for their pockets.
And the fact that a sub based game will help the community thrive instead of getting overrun by everyone that just wants to follow the hype and have no idea what kind of game they are getting into. Sure most of those players might be "Easy Pickings" in an RvR game like this, but im here for the challenge and to cross swords with fellow RvR enthusiasts and not to browse a shop to buy a cool looking robe that has no impact on the gameplay just cause some ppl want to play for free
my 2 cents
The only F2P system I've ever remotely liked has been League of Legend's model, and even that is flawed. Everything is obtainable by playing the game, over time, except for cosmetics though it will take a long time to get everything. The reason this model works is the type of game setting. F2P doesn't work in an MMO setting because there's not enough to sell that isn't power/game related and unbalancing the game. The reason subscription model has and still works is because it allows you full access to everything, equal footing, while the developers maintain constant updates.
You see the flaw in the design recently? Everyone is clamoring that subscription is bad/archaic/whatever, but the problem doesn't lie with the model itself. It lies within the lazy development of companies that remain subscription based. Look back at Asheron's Call, released in 1999. It was originall $9.95 a month to subscribe and was made by a few college kids that is now Turbine itself. With these limited resources and older technology, they managed to get out a monthly (yes, EVERY month) content update that added loads and loads of content, from new land, new creatures, new dungeons, new quests and almost always a continuation of storyline. The only time the monthly content laxed was when it was so large, it took 2-3 months, which was rare, but did happen. And those patches were so massive, it was game changing in both storyline and in game content.
Now how can a company over a decade ago produce such quality, monthly updates while companies like Blizzard only put out minor-moderate patches every 6+ months now? Because we, as consumers, let them. As long as people are willing to accept this absolutely piss-poor level of customer satisfaction and continue lapping it up like a starving kitten at a bowl of milk then it won't change.
The problem does not lie within the model, but the companies and we as gamers ourselves.
league of legends, tera, etc.
Doesn't promote longetivity? What data are you drawing this conclusion from? Any thing to back it up?
Like SW:TOR? Tera? LOTR:O, TSW, Age of Conan, etc? All those games started with a sub model and have moved to free to play and saw huge increases in their player base. On top of this many of them moved to this model within a year of being out or less, so if a sub provides more "longetitivty" it sure didn't work for them"
If cash shop doesn't mean an auto win, then developers better work for free. Sure there are some decent f2p games out there, I am playing a few myself, but they are not mmorpgs (in my case it's facebook type games that I play) so the cost of development and maintenance is completely different. Can you really compare league of legends to an mmo like say swtor? or war or what have you? Clearly LoL is much cheaper to make, maintain and update.
Of all the mmos you listed (with exceptions of ones after swtor, I honestly lost interest in mmos after that so not sure what came out) none of this games wanted to be f2p. It was more of a "Oh, wow, everyone left our game after a few months... I guess we can shut down and lose millions, or since we already have this game, we can push it as f2p and get a ton of people and maybe even make some money"
I am quite certain that for a true mmorpg to go f2p (right from the release, not when they see that sub model doesn't work because their game is crap) is a no go as I doubt cash shop will pay for the development, especially if it's not a pay to win type of cash shop. It is however a good move for a dieing game, and helps it get more people and some cash.
I also DIsagree.
Make it with SUBSCRIPTION.
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
if there is one thing 200% sure about CU its that it'll be sub based, with possibilities of multit-tier sub (i.e.family sub)
Mark said it so often in interviews
He HATES F2P (or as some calls it Pay-to-Win) models with a passion.
The only things that could be found in an in-game store could be cosmetic stuff, that is ALL.
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
IT WILL BE SUB BASED !!!!! lol
Bowbow (kob hunter) Infecto (kob cave shammy) and Thurka (troll warrior) on Merlin/Midgard DAoC
Thurka on WAR