I'm all for subscription, but the box price plus the subscription makes no sense. It's a ton to get into a game and then I have to keep paying to keep playing? I'm fine with putting down let's say 20-30 euros and pay 6-10 euros as a subscription, but the regular prices of a box for 40-60 euros and a subscription at 15 is just too much for the amount I get to play (and want to pay). Just my thoughts...
"We need men who can dream of things that never were." - John F. Kennedy And for MMORPGs ever so true...
The only thing I've yet to understand is how much ones wallet may influence the economy. As from what I understand there is a two way currency exchange. Know what I always love in my escape from the reality of a market society, playing a market society simulator.
I really hope Wildstar has something incredibly interesting going for it, because if it doesn't it'll more than likely follow every other uninteresting stale money grab game that has been regurgitated by this industry.
- but i like to know where my good hard earn money goes.
with F2p( cash shops, etc) i get to spend my money 'where i want it and how i want it' i customize my game time, i like to spend my money and see results instantly. as a casual player i divide my time in multiple games- back in the day when there were only 2 mmos= it might of been ok- but nowadays the choices are limitless that just dosent work anymore...
i wont pay a subscription fee, and wait months to see what develops for the game-those are called expansion packs.
Subscriptions maybe alright by you- but iam ok with my F2p games!
"Bill asked Jeremy Gaffney if they planned on paying attention to the success of FFXIV:ARR and their subscription model, this is what Jeremy had to say:
“We’re not watching the competition at all, really…. Because a business model does have an impact, but in general good games do well. And we know what we have is good and worth that value. But more importantly the elder game needs to be there, all the content needs to be there, the features list needs to be full. If we have those things, and we do, we’ll be fine.”
Sorry but I just don't believe they are not watching the competition. That would be very bad business practice. Perhaps Jeremy Gaffney does not do this personaly but I am 100% sure someone or some people in the company do look for what the competition is doing. How else could they make a decision and know their game is good enough to be sub-based. You need reference to make such a asumtion...right?
Besides that, I am still looking forward to Wildstar even more so due to it's sub-fee.
But it will be a pretty big gamble they are going to take with their sub-fee cause let's face it F2P games are not anymore what they used to be and are becoming better and better especially for F2P games. I'ts no longer low quality games that are F2P, better and higher quality games are going there too. Take Right, take Neverwinter, DCUO as a few example, and it doesn't matter if people like or dislike those games there is simply no denying they are of higher quality compared to F2P games of before them.
Excellent article. Not sure I'd use the term 'microtransaction-based game' though, at least not when describing the purchase of items from Neverwinter's zen store. F2P is a grubby business and in my opinion and experience, the business model taints the game to the point where the developers become the enemy and the only pleasure one can derive comes from the challenge of 'beating' the game without paying anything.
Paying $60 bucks for a game and only being able to play it for 1 month, then having to pay $14.99 a month at the promise that a new company with a new game provides content updates every month, with no accountability or "refund" if they fuck up and don't deliver? Oh yeah... NCSOFT?
Good luck with that. I'll see you in game when they go B2P. Enjoy your chat icon, "founder" title and thank you for being a mark and funding the content I'll probably get to play at box price.
Sincerely,
History
"As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*"
Paying $60 bucks for a game and only being able to play it for 1 month, then having to pay $14.99 a month at the promise that a new company with a new game provides content updates every month, with no accountability or "refund" if they fuck up and don't deliver? Oh yeah... NCSOFT?
Good luck with that. I'll see you in game when they go B2P. Enjoy your chat icon, "founder" title and thank you for being a mark and funding the content I'll probably get to play at box price.
Sincerely,
History
I'll wait 6 months longer than you do and play it for free.......
Originally posted by ZoeMcCloskey I am very motivated to give support to one of these P2P games as I think the model just makes for a better game.
So by your definition if Hello Kitty Online charged 30 dollars a month then it would be the best game on the market?.....The p2p model is terrible...I paid for both EQ1 and 2 for years because we had no other options....I saw little to no improvement month after month yet we had to keep giving them 15 bucks for the privilege of playing their game......What if every game ever released used this model?....Would people pay 15 a month to play all of them? no...... With p2p you are basically paying around 200 bucks a year (if there was a box price to) to play a video game where many of them are either free or considerably less if you have to buy the game.
Originally posted by ZoeMcCloskey I am very motivated to give support to one of these P2P games as I think the model just makes for a better game.
So by your definition if Hello Kitty Online charged 30 dollars a month then it would be the best game on the market?.....The p2p model is terrible...I paid for both EQ1 and 2 for years because we had no other options....I saw little to no improvement month after month yet we had to keep giving them 15 bucks for the privilege of playing their game......What if every game ever released used this model?....Would people pay 15 a month to play all of them? no...... With p2p you are basically paying around 200 bucks a year (if there was a box price to) to play a video game where many of them are either free or considerably less if you have to buy the game.
If Hello Kitty was a quality game with all the features of an MMO, including PvP, then its worth a sub of 12-15 dollars.
There are no games with a sub for 30 bucks..... were you by chance in the Dram club, in high school?
I prefer subs and not cash shop. I am tired of playing games that require a sub AND cash shop purchases to open loot containers.
"Sean (Murray) saying MP will be in the game is not remotely close to evidence that at the point of purchase people thought there was MP in the game." - SEANMCAD
Sorry Wildstar. I already drop 15 a month a good stable game,that I love. I was looking forward to playing the game, but it would take a hell of a lot to take my 15.00 out of blizz's pockets.
First, they make people buy buttloads of money for the box. That is, all those people who want to start right away. As soon as the hype is still around, they will make people charge subscription fees too. Later, when people start leaving, they'll change to a free 2 play / pay 2 win / shop thingy system, to make people return.
Originally posted by InFlamestwo No, i hope they fail and learn the hard lesson of choosing P2P. It's time to move on.
Being 20 years old, I can't imagine you've run many game development companies. I'm also going to go out on a limb and say you haven't done any real market research outside of maybe glancing at a few pretty graphs without even questioning the information behind them or the company that was hired to prove something specific in the study. Just because you want entertainment services provided to you free of charge, which I find abhorrent behavior, doesn't mean it's the correct choice for every single game that comes out.
But as you started out, there is a buy to play option. Other companies do gated content where you pay for additional content as you want it. I would support that before a box price AND subscription. There are too many MMOs coming out these days, and many of them disappoint. Yes, WoW and Eve still have box prices with subs, but both also have (small) cash shops and are the exception to the rule.
WildStar is aiming for the WoW crowd, and maybe they are still new and generally inexperienced enough with the genre to think that's their only option for good games. I might work, but it didn't work for RIFT and that had a lot of fast, high quality content patches that I quickly felt outpaced the features in WoW (I'll still argue that WoW is trying to catch up to RIFT in that aspect). RIFT is now free to play, and still a great game (one I've returned to more than WoW), but it does illustrate how much of a fight it is to do the box + sub game.
The media seems to love The Secret World and it followed a similar path, but went buy to play instead. That game, I feel, really did mix things up, while WIldStar is just trying to make small adjustments. I think both these examples plus the fact that Carbine is hiding things I feel are basic information for new MMOs (races that many of us already could easily find on the internet, classes that aren't exactly revolutionary, still waiting on how PvPers are supposed build war plots if they don't want to raid) make me feel uneasy about the finished product. Without getting to try the game first, I can't see myself falling for the box price + sub trap. It didn't work on FF14 for me, and it was building interest for me. WildStar, by comparison, has been losing my interest ever since E3.
The question isn't whether they are worth playing if they aren't worth paying for. The question is HOW MUCH are they worth to play. You're combining a $60 purchase price with another $180 a year in monthly subscription fees just to play something that will remain mostly unchanged in terms of overall gameplay during that time.
The appeal of the current games with various "freemium" models is that you can play casually without being required to maintain a monthly payment. And if you want something extra, whether it's a new content pack or class or whatever, you can get it when you want and not have to worry about constant payments in order to play the game.
But as you started out, there is a buy to play option. Other companies do gated content where you pay for additional content as you want it. I would support that before a box price AND subscription. There are too many MMOs coming out these days, and many of them disappoint. Yes, WoW and Eve still have box prices with subs, but both also have (small) cash shops and are the exception to the rule.
WildStar is aiming for the WoW crowd, and maybe they are still new and generally inexperienced enough with the genre to think that's their only option for good games. I might work, but it didn't work for RIFT and that had a lot of fast, high quality content patches that I quickly felt outpaced the features in WoW (I'll still argue that WoW is trying to catch up to RIFT in that aspect). RIFT is now free to play, and still a great game (one I've returned to more than WoW), but it does illustrate how much of a fight it is to do the box + sub game.
The media seems to love The Secret World and it followed a similar path, but went buy to play instead. That game, I feel, really did mix things up, while WIldStar is just trying to make small adjustments. I think both these examples plus the fact that Carbine is hiding things I feel are basic information for new MMOs (races that many of us already could easily find on the internet, classes that aren't exactly revolutionary, still waiting on how PvPers are supposed build war plots if they don't want to raid) make me feel uneasy about the finished product. Without getting to try the game first, I can't see myself falling for the box price + sub trap. It didn't work on FF14 for me, and it was building interest for me. WildStar, by comparison, has been losing my interest ever since E3.
Being a working father this game model will not work for me so I will pass on this game. I find to many other games to entertain me that I don't have to pay monthly for and don't have to spend 12 hours a day to advance (years ago I would have never said that but times have changed) . I'm too busy with work and family and I don't have 6 hours per night, and 18 hour days on weekends like I did back in 2004, and I don't have time to earn cred for game time. Those that do have time, have fun with that.
First, they make people buy buttloads of money for the box. That is, all those people who want to start right away. As soon as the hype is still around, they will make people charge subscription fees too. Later, when people start leaving, they'll change to a free 2 play / pay 2 win / shop thingy system, to make people return.
LMAO.
I've fucking lost track of how many of these posts I've read this evening. You guys keep telling yourselves that, fact is we have no way of knowing right now.
Everyone and their dog who was involved with the SWTOR beta was calling it out that the game would make the big "F2P" switcheroo at the 6 month mark; that was because after you quickly got over the novelty of the voiceovers and story, the game was plain terrible. I'm not even going to get into the game's other issues. But none of us have played this game yet, so enough with the nervous assumptions already, lol. There's a good chance that the freeloaders won't get the opportunity to touch this title (or ESO or FFARR) for a long time if ever, depending of course on how things turn out. This will require time, not keyboard prophets.
Either way I've been enjoying the hell out of the forums this evening, very entertaining indeed. It's nice to see the "F2Pers" squirming for a change. What goes around comes around, as they say.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
I totally agree with this article it covers all the points that I have argued over this topic for the last several years.
It seems most of the debate is over is the game "worth it" and judging by the comments from a lot of posters I don't think any game has ever been or ever could be "worth it" to them. I would really like to know what game was ever "worth it" and if it was why aren't the posters still playing it now instead of posting endless threads about how every game sucks.
I'm not going to say that most if not all games have some types of flaws and that they should not be called out for it but at the end of the day if you don't like it don't play it by voting with your time and wallets that will be the only thing that will cause real change not the endless complaining on various gaming websites.
Comments
I don't care how many subs WoW is bleeding, still over 8 million, at 15 a month, yup HOLY crap tons and tons of cash.
Maybe WS will be the WoW killer and get those. Who knows? Who Cares?
Nice read on giving a game a chance based on the game itself and not its business model.
"We need men who can dream of things that never were." - John F. Kennedy
And for MMORPGs ever so true...
The only thing I've yet to understand is how much ones wallet may influence the economy. As from what I understand there is a two way currency exchange. Know what I always love in my escape from the reality of a market society, playing a market society simulator.
I really hope Wildstar has something incredibly interesting going for it, because if it doesn't it'll more than likely follow every other uninteresting stale money grab game that has been regurgitated by this industry.
um im sorry Mr.Lashley,
- but i like to know where my good hard earn money goes.
with F2p( cash shops, etc) i get to spend my money 'where i want it and how i want it' i customize my game time, i like to spend my money and see results instantly. as a casual player i divide my time in multiple games- back in the day when there were only 2 mmos= it might of been ok- but nowadays the choices are limitless that just dosent work anymore...
i wont pay a subscription fee, and wait months to see what develops for the game-those are called expansion packs.
Subscriptions maybe alright by you- but iam ok with my F2p games!
“We’re not watching the competition at all, really…. Because a business model does have an impact, but in general good games do well. And we know what we have is good and worth that value. But more importantly the elder game needs to be there, all the content needs to be there, the features list needs to be full. If we have those things, and we do, we’ll be fine.”
Sorry but I just don't believe they are not watching the competition. That would be very bad business practice. Perhaps Jeremy Gaffney does not do this personaly but I am 100% sure someone or some people in the company do look for what the competition is doing. How else could they make a decision and know their game is good enough to be sub-based. You need reference to make such a asumtion...right?
Besides that, I am still looking forward to Wildstar even more so due to it's sub-fee.
But it will be a pretty big gamble they are going to take with their sub-fee cause let's face it F2P games are not anymore what they used to be and are becoming better and better especially for F2P games. I'ts no longer low quality games that are F2P, better and higher quality games are going there too. Take Right, take Neverwinter, DCUO as a few example, and it doesn't matter if people like or dislike those games there is simply no denying they are of higher quality compared to F2P games of before them.
Paying $60 bucks for a game and only being able to play it for 1 month, then having to pay $14.99 a month at the promise that a new company with a new game provides content updates every month, with no accountability or "refund" if they fuck up and don't deliver? Oh yeah... NCSOFT?
Good luck with that. I'll see you in game when they go B2P. Enjoy your chat icon, "founder" title and thank you for being a mark and funding the content I'll probably get to play at box price.
Sincerely,
History
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I'll wait 6 months longer than you do and play it for free.......
So by your definition if Hello Kitty Online charged 30 dollars a month then it would be the best game on the market?.....The p2p model is terrible...I paid for both EQ1 and 2 for years because we had no other options....I saw little to no improvement month after month yet we had to keep giving them 15 bucks for the privilege of playing their game......What if every game ever released used this model?....Would people pay 15 a month to play all of them? no...... With p2p you are basically paying around 200 bucks a year (if there was a box price to) to play a video game where many of them are either free or considerably less if you have to buy the game.
If Hello Kitty was a quality game with all the features of an MMO, including PvP, then its worth a sub of 12-15 dollars.
There are no games with a sub for 30 bucks..... were you by chance in the Dram club, in high school?
Thank you Rob! It's so nice to know I'm not alone!
If a game is worth the sub I'm happier to pay a sub and get the full game then deal with the F2P scam that happens.
Currently Playing: FFXIV:ARR
Looking Forward to: Wildstar
Being a pessimist is a win-win pattern of thinking. If you're a pessimist (I'll admit that I am!) you're either:
A. Proven right (if something bad happens)
or
B. Pleasantly surprised (if something good happens)
Either way, you can't lose! Try it out sometime!
It's only temporary anyway.
First, they make people buy buttloads of money for the box. That is, all those people who want to start right away. As soon as the hype is still around, they will make people charge subscription fees too. Later, when people start leaving, they'll change to a free 2 play / pay 2 win / shop thingy system, to make people return.
Let's play Fallen Earth (blind, 300 episodes)
Let's play Guild Wars 2 (blind, 45 episodes)
Hehe. I agree, not hoping they fail, but it is time to move on.
Being 20 years old, I can't imagine you've run many game development companies. I'm also going to go out on a limb and say you haven't done any real market research outside of maybe glancing at a few pretty graphs without even questioning the information behind them or the company that was hired to prove something specific in the study. Just because you want entertainment services provided to you free of charge, which I find abhorrent behavior, doesn't mean it's the correct choice for every single game that comes out.
But as you started out, there is a buy to play option. Other companies do gated content where you pay for additional content as you want it. I would support that before a box price AND subscription. There are too many MMOs coming out these days, and many of them disappoint. Yes, WoW and Eve still have box prices with subs, but both also have (small) cash shops and are the exception to the rule.
WildStar is aiming for the WoW crowd, and maybe they are still new and generally inexperienced enough with the genre to think that's their only option for good games. I might work, but it didn't work for RIFT and that had a lot of fast, high quality content patches that I quickly felt outpaced the features in WoW (I'll still argue that WoW is trying to catch up to RIFT in that aspect). RIFT is now free to play, and still a great game (one I've returned to more than WoW), but it does illustrate how much of a fight it is to do the box + sub game.
The media seems to love The Secret World and it followed a similar path, but went buy to play instead. That game, I feel, really did mix things up, while WIldStar is just trying to make small adjustments. I think both these examples plus the fact that Carbine is hiding things I feel are basic information for new MMOs (races that many of us already could easily find on the internet, classes that aren't exactly revolutionary, still waiting on how PvPers are supposed build war plots if they don't want to raid) make me feel uneasy about the finished product. Without getting to try the game first, I can't see myself falling for the box price + sub trap. It didn't work on FF14 for me, and it was building interest for me. WildStar, by comparison, has been losing my interest ever since E3.
The question isn't whether they are worth playing if they aren't worth paying for. The question is HOW MUCH are they worth to play. You're combining a $60 purchase price with another $180 a year in monthly subscription fees just to play something that will remain mostly unchanged in terms of overall gameplay during that time.
The appeal of the current games with various "freemium" models is that you can play casually without being required to maintain a monthly payment. And if you want something extra, whether it's a new content pack or class or whatever, you can get it when you want and not have to worry about constant payments in order to play the game.
But as you started out, there is a buy to play option. Other companies do gated content where you pay for additional content as you want it. I would support that before a box price AND subscription. There are too many MMOs coming out these days, and many of them disappoint. Yes, WoW and Eve still have box prices with subs, but both also have (small) cash shops and are the exception to the rule.
WildStar is aiming for the WoW crowd, and maybe they are still new and generally inexperienced enough with the genre to think that's their only option for good games. I might work, but it didn't work for RIFT and that had a lot of fast, high quality content patches that I quickly felt outpaced the features in WoW (I'll still argue that WoW is trying to catch up to RIFT in that aspect). RIFT is now free to play, and still a great game (one I've returned to more than WoW), but it does illustrate how much of a fight it is to do the box + sub game.
The media seems to love The Secret World and it followed a similar path, but went buy to play instead. That game, I feel, really did mix things up, while WIldStar is just trying to make small adjustments. I think both these examples plus the fact that Carbine is hiding things I feel are basic information for new MMOs (races that many of us already could easily find on the internet, classes that aren't exactly revolutionary, still waiting on how PvPers are supposed build war plots if they don't want to raid) make me feel uneasy about the finished product. Without getting to try the game first, I can't see myself falling for the box price + sub trap. It didn't work on FF14 for me, and it was building interest for me. WildStar, by comparison, has been losing my interest ever since E3.
lol Pass!
Being a working father this game model will not work for me so I will pass on this game. I find to many other games to entertain me that I don't have to pay monthly for and don't have to spend 12 hours a day to advance (years ago I would have never said that but times have changed) . I'm too busy with work and family and I don't have 6 hours per night, and 18 hour days on weekends like I did back in 2004, and I don't have time to earn cred for game time. Those that do have time, have fun with that.
LMAO.
I've fucking lost track of how many of these posts I've read this evening. You guys keep telling yourselves that, fact is we have no way of knowing right now.
Everyone and their dog who was involved with the SWTOR beta was calling it out that the game would make the big "F2P" switcheroo at the 6 month mark; that was because after you quickly got over the novelty of the voiceovers and story, the game was plain terrible. I'm not even going to get into the game's other issues. But none of us have played this game yet, so enough with the nervous assumptions already, lol. There's a good chance that the freeloaders won't get the opportunity to touch this title (or ESO or FFARR) for a long time if ever, depending of course on how things turn out. This will require time, not keyboard prophets.
Either way I've been enjoying the hell out of the forums this evening, very entertaining indeed. It's nice to see the "F2Pers" squirming for a change. What goes around comes around, as they say.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
I totally agree with this article it covers all the points that I have argued over this topic for the last several years.
It seems most of the debate is over is the game "worth it" and judging by the comments from a lot of posters I don't think any game has ever been or ever could be "worth it" to them. I would really like to know what game was ever "worth it" and if it was why aren't the posters still playing it now instead of posting endless threads about how every game sucks.
I'm not going to say that most if not all games have some types of flaws and that they should not be called out for it but at the end of the day if you don't like it don't play it by voting with your time and wallets that will be the only thing that will cause real change not the endless complaining on various gaming websites.