LMAO , this kills me , you do realize that a sub for most games that require it .. amount to .50 a day ....
Thats it .50 .. is that the problem here?
I believe the problem is the $15 a month if your not even playing and even if you just want to pop in to see if anything has changed, you still have to pop $15 for that even if you don't log in for another month.
I prefer P2P my self, but the OP has some very valid arguments.
LMAO , this kills me , you do realize that a sub for most games that require it .. amount to .50 a day ....
Thats it .50 .. is that the problem here?
I believe the problem is the $15 a month if your not even playing and even if you just want to pop in to see if anything has changed, you still have to pop $15 for that even if you don't log in for another month.
I prefer P2P my self, but the OP has some very valid arguments.
Good post OP
I've played some MMOs where, at the end, I kept on paying but I never bothered logging in. It cost me at least 3-4 months worth of subscription fees that I never even used while I was deciding if I wanted to even play the stupid game anymore. While I don't care about the money, I'd rather see the MMO refund the sub fee on any month that you don't actually log in at all.
Originally posted by Torvaldr If someone has more time to spend then the playing field isn't level. The time spent in an mmo doesn't work like real life. If you workout 80 hours a week in a gym you're not going to get more buff than someone working out on a more reasonable schedule. In fact you'll hurt yourself and actually lose progress.
That isn't how it works in an mmmo. The more time spent is always beneficial. Paying the $15 gives everyone equal access, but it doesn't create a level playing field. That sort of system promotes time currency. It also pretends to ignore the sale of rmt gold currency to provide an advantage. P2P systems are inherently more susceptible to exploiting time (esp via account sharing) and gold sales.
I've never said having more time to invest is unfair, nor do I think those with disposable income to burn is unfair. Don't fool yourself, people with more time and money own those without either.
I don't like mandatory subs, but I don't really care if games use that model either because there are plenty of sub-free games to play. I just take issue with the ridiculous premise that p2p games have better development or communities. They don't. F2P games use some tactics to push people to buy things in their store. P2P games use some time sink tactics to keep players paying longer. Both need content or the player leaves.
Time is not the same as money. One has a choice. One does not.
Most people have little choice (keyword here) in how much they make. I'm sorry, but the person without the smarts to become a Doctor or Lawyer does not get those choices for careers. A person who is not athlete material does not get the career choice of Professional Athlete.
Everyone gets 24 hours a day (as far as I know). How we spend that time is made of choices. - You may choose to work 80 hours a week to make more money. - You may choose to get married. - You may choose to have children. - You may choose to go to a gym. - You may choose to watch movies. - You may choose to play video games. See? Choices.
This is the difference many do not see between time and money. Time is finite (24 hours/day) and involves choices. Money is not finite (0-Billions of dollar made yearly), and rarely involves choices.
That is silly .. you really want to say that people don't have choices how to spend their money?
- You may choose to spend $5 on a Macdonald meal, or $50 on a steak dinner
- You may choose to see a IMAX move for $18 or a regular one for $15
see? Choices ...
The virtual goods in MMO stuff is so small (and also sub fee) that most people have choices.
There have been the usual bullshit comparisons put out here such as "phone" "cable" "internet" "movies" " concerts" etc.
Of course none of them are valid. Here is one that is. Think fitness club membership. 30 bucks a month. Either you are going to the fitness club regularly and getting your moneys worth.....
Or
You are sitting on the couch watching reruns of Big Bang Theory and saying " I will go next week"
Finally after a couple of months you say screw it and cancel your membership. It just isn't worth it when you don't have the desire to go.
A much better payment model for this person would be a pay as you go model. It might be more expensive but you only pay for what you use.
Contrary to all the people that say, why are you worried about pissing away 15 bucks a month ( Or 90 dollars in 6 months) , this option makes sense to a lot of people, myself included. I have nothing against a sub model of payment, its just that I know there will be a point somewhere where I would like to continue playing but not enough to warrant that monthly payment. I actually think subs hinder, long term committment to a game but that is just my opinion.
Ooops, edited for bad math!
I've read this thread and the above post is one of only 2 people in the entire thread who actually "gets it" - why, if given a choice - I prefer F2P or B2P over P2P and consistently vote that way with my wallet. Comparisons to "cable, internet" etc are the wrong analogies to use. I don't see an MMO's services in the same light as that of a car, internet, cable tv, eating out or a night at the movies (which I typically avoided as well for the past 12 years because it's become so expensive compared to the value received imo). That is not the kind of economic reasoning that goes through my mind when evaluating if a game is worth paying for.
The most correct one to describe my personal economic reasoning is the one he used above - a gym membership.
Neither is it true that F2P = mediocre game quality or lack of updates. Not even a few weeks ago someone at mmorpg forums had a rant about how WoW gets less content releases than GW2, Rift, SWTOR, STO, TSW, etc and they have nowhere near the player base that WoW does. And WoW is sub-only - what's their excuse? Can't use F2P business model for being the cause of lack of timely and quality content updates that drove that guy to post his rant and others here to post agreement with him.
But back to the subs=(to them defacto) higher quality take on things. Look at ESO. Lots of "I only play Subscription MMOs because F2P = suckitude" have come out hating ESO saying it's suckitude is so great it's not worthy of them subbing. Is being subscription-only a factor in ESO's supposed gaming suckitude? I saw the same kind of arguments when SWTOR first released and was sub-only as well. Sub-only gamers citing it not being worthy of them subbing.
My post is not meant to attack sub-preferring gamers. It's that the quality of the game and gaming population is similar to other manufactured/developed items. In every category you'll find superior to low-grade examples. F2P games are not by definition inferior in quality and content (or typically have a "trailerpark trash" fanbase) as a category. But that is exactly the angle many "sub-only" mmo-ers either say outright or imply in their posts for giving their defense of the superiority of sub-only mmos (they begin to weaken their own arguments if they start to hedge their bets. Thus the use of No True Scotsman reasoning).
I myself play mostly hybrid business model games. They offer cash shops + a subscription option. Or they offer box price + cash shop options. Or all 3. Which I *do* support financially. I've built up a small but decent cosmetic wardrobe in TSW for example (my primary MMO). No "free-loader" here but I don't cast blame on people whom don't pay since their presence often ups the value of the game itself for people whom *do* financially support the game. Also, some people are not in a position to support a game (out of a job, minimum-wage worker with kids to support, huge student loans, etc.) even though they like it and wish they could.
I've sat down and done some calculations. I've actually *saved* money over the long haul (while still financially supporting each and every one of the mmos I play) compared to going the subscription route. I'd be overpaying if I went the sub-route. And I definitely could not afford to sub to all the games I play. But going with B2P or F2P I have the chance to be happily gaming right alongside my "Subscriptions-Uber-Alles"-preferring friends with both of us also signalling via spending the relative value found in the product. And we are both happy.
It's not such a bad thing that companies are offering many avenues for supporting their product financially imo. There's room enough for everyone to find a business model and game they enjoy. May everyone at MMORPG have many future years of happy MMO-ing.
p.s. I'm admittedly on the fence about the 2 non-F2P/non-B2P games I'm considering playing because the time cards I'd use are for blocks of consecutive months rather than Pay-As-You-Go. Not much better than just subbing save for the publisher not having the ability to auto-draft a bank acct (a serious no-no with me. No auto-drafting for any reason with me). Which means the only advantage the cards have over the sub-route is no ability to auto-draft.
Playing Now: The Secret World, Guild Wars 2, Neverwinter
If $15/month is too expensive for you even for a game that you like, then it's not likely that you'd pay much in a "free to play" game, either, so why should publishers care about your opinion?
The economic argument for "free to play" isn't that you'll get people to play for free who wouldn't pay a subscription. It's that you'll get a handful of people to pay vastly more than $15/month--and those people necessarily aren't the sort who would complain that $15/month is too expensive.
Pretty much "this"
Because they can't be sure I won't turn into a whale?
Because I can be content for the whales?
Because I may know some whales and pull them into the game?
If $15/month is too expensive for you even for a game that you like, then it's not likely that you'd pay much in a "free to play" game, either, so why should publishers care about your opinion?
The economic argument for "free to play" isn't that you'll get people to play for free who wouldn't pay a subscription. It's that you'll get a handful of people to pay vastly more than $15/month--and those people necessarily aren't the sort who would complain that $15/month is too expensive.
It's like a street performer with an offering basket at the side. People will pay the amount compared to the value they find in his/her performance.
Publishers obviously do prefer higher spenders compared to lower spenders. Who doesn't? But they'd also rather have some of my money than none at all just as I'm sure the busker on the corner would too. Why refuse my money since I'm willing to pay too even if it is less than that of subscribers?
Playing Now: The Secret World, Guild Wars 2, Neverwinter
If $15/month is too expensive for you even for a game that you like, then it's not likely that you'd pay much in a "free to play" game, either, so why should publishers care about your opinion?
The economic argument for "free to play" isn't that you'll get people to play for free who wouldn't pay a subscription. It's that you'll get a handful of people to pay vastly more than $15/month--and those people necessarily aren't the sort who would complain that $15/month is too expensive.
Pretty much "this"
Because they can't be sure I won't turn into a whale?
Because I can be content for the whales?
Because I may know some whales and pull them into the game?
Possible but that's an unknown quantity.
They "might" get you to spend money and that is certainly a hope. They might get you to pull in others and of course that's "a hope".
But they know that "whales" are always going to spend money and always going to spend a lot of money. So they are going to want to make sure they are always catered to.
Therefore they will make sure that their intended customer base is the one that is kept happy and healthy.
As a business owner who are you going to want to listen to: those who will always spend money and are going to spend the lion's share of money and be the lion's share of your income or those who "might" be? Because any investment is better spent on those who will as opposed to "those who might".
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
If $15/month is too expensive for you even for a game that you like, then it's not likely that you'd pay much in a "free to play" game, either, so why should publishers care about your opinion?
The economic argument for "free to play" isn't that you'll get people to play for free who wouldn't pay a subscription. It's that you'll get a handful of people to pay vastly more than $15/month--and those people necessarily aren't the sort who would complain that $15/month is too expensive.
Pretty much "this"
Because they can't be sure I won't turn into a whale?
Because I can be content for the whales?
Because I may know some whales and pull them into the game?
Possible but that's an unknown quantity.
They "might" get you to spend money and that is certainly a hope. They might get you to pull in others and of course that's "a hope".
But they know that "whales" are always going to spend money and always going to spend a lot of money. So they are going to want to make sure they are always catered to.
Therefore they will make sure that their intended customer base is the one that is kept happy and healthy.
As a business owner who are you going to want to listen to: those who will always spend money and are going to spend the lion's share of money and be the lion's share of your income or those who "might" be? Because any investment is better spent on those who will as opposed to "those who might".
It is not mutually exclusive. They can listen to both ... and place more weights on whales. There are so few whales anyway that it is not like they are going to overwhelm the communication channels.
If $15/month is too expensive for you even for a game that you like, then it's not likely that you'd pay much in a "free to play" game, either, so why should publishers care about your opinion?
The economic argument for "free to play" isn't that you'll get people to play for free who wouldn't pay a subscription. It's that you'll get a handful of people to pay vastly more than $15/month--and those people necessarily aren't the sort who would complain that $15/month is too expensive.
Pretty much "this"
Because they can't be sure I won't turn into a whale?
Because I can be content for the whales?
Because I may know some whales and pull them into the game?
Possible but that's an unknown quantity.
They "might" get you to spend money and that is certainly a hope. They might get you to pull in others and of course that's "a hope".
But they know that "whales" are always going to spend money and always going to spend a lot of money. So they are going to want to make sure they are always catered to.
Therefore they will make sure that their intended customer base is the one that is kept happy and healthy.
As a business owner who are you going to want to listen to: those who will always spend money and are going to spend the lion's share of money and be the lion's share of your income or those who "might" be? Because any investment is better spent on those who will as opposed to "those who might".
You say that like it's a bad thing. It's fine if they make sure the whales are happy and healthy. I get to decide if what they're providing to me is acceptable and fun. If it is, I play. If it isn't, I go somewhere else. I have no expectations in any game beyond whether I enjoy playing it. I am never going to buy anything from their cash shop. It's either fun without it or I just don't play.
If $15/month is too expensive for you even for a game that you like, then it's not likely that you'd pay much in a "free to play" game, either, so why should publishers care about your opinion?
The economic argument for "free to play" isn't that you'll get people to play for free who wouldn't pay a subscription. It's that you'll get a handful of people to pay vastly more than $15/month--and those people necessarily aren't the sort who would complain that $15/month is too expensive.
Pretty much "this"
They don't care about any single persons opinion. Opinions only count when a large enough volume of them agree on something to make it seem like that is what a community wants. At that point they're just looking to see what's popular not what a single subscriber wants.
Your money votes for you and it doesn't matter if it comes as a sub in a p2p game or a cash shop purchase in a f2p game. You don't spend you don't vote.
I rarely post here, but this thread started by the OP is simply moronic. I also work and don't have a lot of extra time, which is the case with most responsible, working adults in the world. This is not rocket science. If you don't have $15 of disposable income to spend each month on a game, REGARDLESS of how much you play, then DON'T FUCKING SUBSCRIBE!!!!!!!! And don't whine about it, just don't subscribe! Jesus, man, I want a Ferrari, and I'm pissed that it costs so damn much, but I'm not posting on forums complaining about it, because you know what? Ferrari would tell me either make more money or do something else!
Sure $15 a month isn't expensive until you look at it being $180 per year and then I see that as ALOT to spend on one game.
I at most play for 80 hours spread out throughout a year, that is around 6/7 hours a month. Am I really going to have to spend $180 to be able to play when I want? I have so many other games to play, so much else to do in my life, one MMO isn't all I play.
Reading the comments, people keep saying it is a small amount.. it isn't $180 over 12 months and what if I play other MMOs? What if I pay for stuff like Netflix? I have house bills, I have tax, I have my mobile, my car and whatever else pops up.
I think forced subscriptions have to go and they need to be replaced by optional ones + the F2P model.
Im fine with this if and only if subscription option gets you the entire game with no exceptions besides maybe cosmetic mounts, pets, and costumes if the game already has TONS of these available through gameplay. the incentive should be for developers to make you want to sub, not buy things.
F2P and cash shops have certainly had a negative effect on game design though.
Sure $15 a month isn't expensive until you look at it being $180 per year and then I see that as ALOT to spend on one game.
I at most play for 80 hours spread out throughout a year, that is around 6/7 hours a month. Am I really going to have to spend $180 to be able to play when I want? I have so many other games to play, so much else to do in my life, one MMO isn't all I play.
So if I have to pay a sub... I just wont bother.
The market agrees with you even if some people here don't. It doesn't matter why players don't want to pay subs ( game hoping I'm sure is a big one ) f2p isn't something that's getting smaller or less popular.
If you look at the future games being made this is really the dumbest thing people argue about. Nothing really seems to indicate either payment model is going to "die" both types are still being made. The past only shows that mmos that can't hold on to people go free to play. Subs are still viable for some games and f2p is going to be made. This is really like arguing what your favorite type of icecream is.
Reading the comments, people keep saying it is a small amount.. it isn't $180 over 12 months and what if I play other MMOs? What if I pay for stuff like Netflix? I have house bills, I have tax, I have my mobile, my car and whatever else pops up.
What is the first to go? Subscription based MMOs.
Because it is a small amount, regardless if you like to spend it or not.
And basically it all comes down to you. If you like something and it costs money, then you have to make that choice. You like Netflix? You are willing to pay the $8-$15 a month for it? That's your choice. Do you ask them why they charge you that subscription fee for the little of it that you watch a month? Probably not.
It's not a game developers problem if you pay for other things in life but cannot justify paying a subscription for their service. They need to pay their bills as well. Not everything in life can be free, and when they are they usually come with restrictions that make free kinda pointless.
You have to set priorities and make sacrifices in life. If you can't justify the expense, move on to something else. Surely you can find something more cost effective to fill those 6-7 hours a month. Or stick it out and wait for the game to offer some form of F2P/Tiered plan. or stick to F2P titles in general.
There are 3 types of people in the world. 1.) Those who make things happen 2.) Those who watch things happen 3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
The reason I hate subscription mmo's is the people that rant about how P2P keeps the trash out, how the cost barrier stops most kids from playing (at least the real troublemakers), and how P2P means a better game in general with more content, etc. etc. I just don't want to play an mmo with self righteous, child hating, entitled people.
Now I'm not saying that there is only that type of person playing P2P games, but it is definitely the majority of the representations that I see in forums.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
Okay so because super casual guy thinks 50 cents a day is some how a financial burden, the market is flooded with trashy F2P games to keep you busy here and there.
Even if I only played 15mins a day or 2 hours a week, it would still make more financial sense on a fun per cost basis to play a sub game, verses a F2P where every minute of game play is annoying and tied around the ever constant cash shop mini mall deal of the day spam.
Sure $15 a month isn't expensive until you look at it being $180 per year and then I see that as ALOT to spend on one game.
I at most play for 80 hours spread out throughout a year, that is around 6/7 hours a month. Am I really going to have to spend $180 to be able to play when I want? I have so many other games to play, so much else to do in my life, one MMO isn't all I play.
So if I have to pay a sub... I just wont bother.
Seems like you should look at facebook games or somewhere else to get your gaming fix. 6-7 hours a month in any mmo you're not getting much out of it. The genre does not support that casual of play, atleast I wouldn't play an mmo that did.
I would think that there has to be a good balance between sub and b2p models. I dont mind a mostly cosmetic item shop and I would also be fine paying 5$ a month as a sub. I would even go up to 7$ a month for a decent game with a item shop that is mostly limited to non-game affecting purchases. At 15$ I simply feel like it becomes over priced and limiting. If I choose to play more than 1 mmo at once that 15$ becomes 30$ or 45$ pretty fast. Also, when you have more people in your house playing, I enjoy playing with my wife but she doesnt have much time to dedicate to gaming, thats 30$ for 2 people and one will hardly play. Then add in the 50$ box fee, 100$ for both of us. I see that as a high entry fee.
When a game sells expansions as well, I find it difficult to spend 15$ on a sub fee, especially if expansions are sold often. I can see a company making profit off of box fees, subs, and an item shop, but with most sub based games it seems as if the profits are high on all 3. WoW is a good example of having all 3 at the extreme. Now how does GW2 compete with profit considering its buy to play, with no sub, with an item shop that mostly doesnt effect play.
I would think that 5-7$ a month would cover server costs and what not while still giving profit. Having an in game shop thats mostly cosmetic would add into that profit as well. I would also think that there is a sweet spot for a sub that increases volume of players making up for lost profit which will also create more business for the item shop and box purchases.
My problem with subscriptions is that it charges you the same rate as everyone else no matter how much you play. So if someone plays 24/7, they're paying exactly the same as someone who only manages to get 4 hours a week in.
I think forced subscriptions have to go and they need to be replaced by optional ones + the F2P model.
While I understand where you are coming from, I do not agree with you. Specifically what I colored red. I don't think anyone, whether it is a casual or a hardcore player, should get any kind of cost reduction on a subscription for a video game. If you find that you do not get the most out of your money for the subscription you've paid for because you don't have enough time to play, then you really probably shouldn't play any MMO that requires a subscription. And that's on you if you want to- it's your perogative. I just don't think, "I'm grown, I'm busy, I can't be held to a subscription if I don't play that much 'cos it's too expensive" is really a good enough reason for anybody to receive any kind of price cut, discount, or anything else that is a monetary setback to the product you are purchasing.
I, personally, prefer Subscriptions. I, personally, would rather be part of a community that cares enough to pay to be there than to be stuck in a F2P hell where people can make multiple accounts to troll the community, smaller chances to catc hhacks/exploits, and anything else that comes along with F2P that I have personally seen and not wanting anything to do with.
Worst Online Communities: WoW/WoD(the OG MMO Trolls), DayZ/WarZ, SMITE/LoL/DOTA, EVE Online, APB "Im ready for All the comparisons I think its dumb and its embarrassing Im switching off No longer listening Ive had enough of persecution and conditioning Maybe its instinct- Were only animal" - Lily Allen, Sheezus
Okay so because super casual guy thinks 50 cents a day is some how a financial burden, the market is flooded with trashy F2P games to keep you busy here and there.
Even if I only played 15mins a day or 2 hours a week, it would still make more financial sense on a fun per cost basis to play a sub game, verses a F2P where every minute of game play is annoying and tied around the ever constant cash shop mini mall deal of the day spam.
Well technically speaking I believe $15 a month for the 6 or so hours Tixylix gets to play would amount to $2.50 per hour, not 50 cents. He is someone who would find the value of his MMO(s) more equitable and fair using a Pay-for-what-you-actually-use model instead of subscribing. A similar analogy would be to a gym that advertised "pay only for the hour(s) you actually use our gym facilities" instead of shoehorning everyone into the one-size-fits-all offering of a yearly contract. The first is fee-per-use. The second is similar to having a lawyer on retainer. You aren't paying for the product..you're reserving the right to access the producer's product whether that access is financially excessive cost-wise to the game producer or not at all that month (in which case the excess cost is shouldered by the customer for that month of non-use, not the publisher). One customer is willing to accept that pay-to-not-use risk. The other is not. But both are actual paying customers though they are willing to pay for the same product but under different conditions. These are two different kinds of mmo-customer bases with 2 different paying-psychologies and needs.
The nice thing about the hybrid business model more and more western mmos are using is that it permits publishers to price discriminate among their actual player base. Compared to someone like me a subscriber is actually one of those "Whales" the MMO publishing industry keeps hoping to stack their player base with. Somehow though I don't see many P2P-lovers seeing themselves as "whales" and that's likely because they see the amount they pay for the product offered as fair and equitable (funny how that actually fits the probable self-reasoning of a F2P "whale" as he's buying from his favorite F2P mmo too but I digress).
The above also shows a lack of familiarity (or maybe just hyperbole?) with many hybrid model western mmos. Asian-owned grinders often do have the whole spam thing. If that bugs you continue to not play games doing this and don't pay. But there are plenty of F2P/B2P western mmos that don't do that at all. Neither TSW nor GW2 spam the playerbases' screens constantly with appeals to "buy our latest cash shop special" while you're busy playing. I typically only find out about it because I'm on those games' mailing lists. That's about it.
But there are people - like me - or the guy with the wife several posts above me - or Tixylix - whom will also pay for a publisher's product so long as that product is offered at a value that that customer finds fair and equitable. If it is not deemed so either the potential customer passes by or the publisher won't offer their product at that price (ie...we're priced out of the market).
To not capture the money of people like me when a publisher's financial reasons don't prevent it is a publisher whom is leaving money on the table they could and would otherwise receive.
Playing Now: The Secret World, Guild Wars 2, Neverwinter
OP a subscription fee on mmo is more then just game time a mmo with subscription fee mean basically that everyone have same condition get gear, weapon and see content no one is above anyone everyone and same right and condition get to end game and kill that nasty raid boss.
Then if someone spend 24 hours in game or 4 hours or 1 hours in game it dont matter for you have same right and condition as one that spend 24 hours in game.
The problem with F2P is that the ending up to be unfair in end take SWTOR if you are a F2P person you have spend more money in there cash shop get item to make game playable + you cant enter all end game content if dont pay extra so in the end it is easy and cheap to pay there subscription fee to unlock all thing you otherwise need to spend more money to buy from there cash shop. Many F2P mmo do restrict F2P player and also you end up spend more real money on those game.
So before you judge subscription model you reminder you spend more money on F2P mmo then on subscription mmo and think i end spend more $$$ on SWTOR then i did when i did when a subscribe hell i even got there expansion for free when i subscribe to SWTOR otherwise i need to pay extra to get as F2P player but if you think that is ok for you and you think you have extra money to spend on it fine but not all do have those type of money also patch on F2P mmo sometime take longer then on subscription mmo.
So subscription is not only how much time you spend in game it have with other thing to.
I'm not going to pick apart all the nonsense from the sub fanbois, cause it's just that, nonsense. It's like you're all stuck in 2006 where all sub games are superior and F2P games sucks (they don't -- in fact most sub games are inferior at this point to some F2P or B2P games), sub games give you everything for one price (they don't, they have cash shops too), and F2P games are pay-to-win (they're not). Oh, and that it's all about not having the money. It's not. Cause y'know, if it's just 50 cents then I'm sure someone here would be more than willing to pay for my WoW sub. I mean, it's just 50 cents a day, right? You have a decent job, right, so clearly you can afford to give a mere 50 cents away to a stranger, right? Or maybe you value that 50 cents a day in some way and aren't willing to just give it away to someone or something unless you feel as though you're actually getting your money's worth. Hmm... And what if you want to play more than one game at a time? What if there are 4 or 5 MMOs you really like? Then those monthly sub fees start adding up pretty quickly and it's sure not just 50 cents a day anymore, and the cost versus time spent playing ratio starts to not look so good anymore.
But all of the lies, half truths, and inaccurate information aside there is a fairly good analogy here. Let's say I subscribe to Netflix for $8 a month. And I watch 1 movie a week cause that's all the time I have to sit and watch a movie. But then I realize I could get the same movies from Redbox for $1 each, which would cut my cost in half. Why should I spend more than I have to? It's a waste. Even if it's just $4, it's MY $4 and I'll spend it any way I see fit. Cause that extra $4 will buy me a latte, or a sandwich, or after a year a new game. Or maybe I realize there is no good reason to pay $60 a month for cable because nearly all the shows I watch are on broadcast TV and all I have to do is put up an antenna and get them OTA for free? Or pay $75 a month for a mobile plan when I'm almost always in range of a usable wifi network which let's me talk and text for free? Or pay $50 a month for a gym membership when I could buy a bike, some basic equipment, and never pay another membership fee ever again?
So now instead of just saving $15 a month, I'm saving nearly $150, simply by switching from little-used paid monthly services to free and/or ala carte replacements. I mean, if a gas station offered you unlimited fill ups for $100 a month but you typically drive enough to only use $60 worth would you go for the unlimited option anyway instead of that other station down the street that let's you buy gas by the gallon? I mean, it's only $1.33 extra a day. A mere pittance to you, a working adult with plenty of disposable income, right? Do you think the gas you're getting is somehow better (it's not)? That you're going to get treated better by the station staff or that they'll pump it for you (they won't)? That they're going to put in amenities like a car wash, vacuum, and air pump and not make you pay extra for it (cause they will)? Or are you just going to be a sucker that pays more for something than they have to because it somehow makes them feel special and elitist and look down at all the cheapskates who pay by the gallon?
So if you like the sub model, if you like renting a game from month to month, hey, that's fine, carry on. Spend your money any way you see fit. But don't delude yourself into thinking you're getting some extreme value for your money, that your subscription-only product is better, or that your regular monthly payments are going to result in more content, better customer service, or more developer attention. Cause I'm sorry, that's horse manure. It may have been the case at one time, but that time is LONG gone.
The statistics tell you all you need to know. Games that have gone from a sub model to F2P or hybrid see a massive increase in revenue that's used to not only pay developers but to create new content more frequently than they would otherwise. Which is why virtually every MMO out there has abandoned the sub model, will abandon the sub model within the first year or so, or offers a F2P option in addition to the sub model. Because the sub model is a dying dinosaur that was viable when you had 3 games to choose from, but no longer the case when you have 30+.
Comments
I believe the problem is the $15 a month if your not even playing and even if you just want to pop in to see if anything has changed, you still have to pop $15 for that even if you don't log in for another month.
I prefer P2P my self, but the OP has some very valid arguments.
Good post OP
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
I've played some MMOs where, at the end, I kept on paying but I never bothered logging in. It cost me at least 3-4 months worth of subscription fees that I never even used while I was deciding if I wanted to even play the stupid game anymore. While I don't care about the money, I'd rather see the MMO refund the sub fee on any month that you don't actually log in at all.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
That is silly .. you really want to say that people don't have choices how to spend their money?
- You may choose to spend $5 on a Macdonald meal, or $50 on a steak dinner
- You may choose to see a IMAX move for $18 or a regular one for $15
see? Choices ...
The virtual goods in MMO stuff is so small (and also sub fee) that most people have choices.
I've read this thread and the above post is one of only 2 people in the entire thread who actually "gets it" - why, if given a choice - I prefer F2P or B2P over P2P and consistently vote that way with my wallet. Comparisons to "cable, internet" etc are the wrong analogies to use. I don't see an MMO's services in the same light as that of a car, internet, cable tv, eating out or a night at the movies (which I typically avoided as well for the past 12 years because it's become so expensive compared to the value received imo). That is not the kind of economic reasoning that goes through my mind when evaluating if a game is worth paying for.
The most correct one to describe my personal economic reasoning is the one he used above - a gym membership.
Neither is it true that F2P = mediocre game quality or lack of updates. Not even a few weeks ago someone at mmorpg forums had a rant about how WoW gets less content releases than GW2, Rift, SWTOR, STO, TSW, etc and they have nowhere near the player base that WoW does. And WoW is sub-only - what's their excuse? Can't use F2P business model for being the cause of lack of timely and quality content updates that drove that guy to post his rant and others here to post agreement with him.
But back to the subs=(to them defacto) higher quality take on things. Look at ESO. Lots of "I only play Subscription MMOs because F2P = suckitude" have come out hating ESO saying it's suckitude is so great it's not worthy of them subbing. Is being subscription-only a factor in ESO's supposed gaming suckitude? I saw the same kind of arguments when SWTOR first released and was sub-only as well. Sub-only gamers citing it not being worthy of them subbing.
My post is not meant to attack sub-preferring gamers. It's that the quality of the game and gaming population is similar to other manufactured/developed items. In every category you'll find superior to low-grade examples. F2P games are not by definition inferior in quality and content (or typically have a "trailerpark trash" fanbase) as a category. But that is exactly the angle many "sub-only" mmo-ers either say outright or imply in their posts for giving their defense of the superiority of sub-only mmos (they begin to weaken their own arguments if they start to hedge their bets. Thus the use of No True Scotsman reasoning).
I myself play mostly hybrid business model games. They offer cash shops + a subscription option. Or they offer box price + cash shop options. Or all 3. Which I *do* support financially. I've built up a small but decent cosmetic wardrobe in TSW for example (my primary MMO). No "free-loader" here but I don't cast blame on people whom don't pay since their presence often ups the value of the game itself for people whom *do* financially support the game. Also, some people are not in a position to support a game (out of a job, minimum-wage worker with kids to support, huge student loans, etc.) even though they like it and wish they could.
I've sat down and done some calculations. I've actually *saved* money over the long haul (while still financially supporting each and every one of the mmos I play) compared to going the subscription route. I'd be overpaying if I went the sub-route. And I definitely could not afford to sub to all the games I play. But going with B2P or F2P I have the chance to be happily gaming right alongside my "Subscriptions-Uber-Alles"-preferring friends with both of us also signalling via spending the relative value found in the product. And we are both happy.
It's not such a bad thing that companies are offering many avenues for supporting their product financially imo. There's room enough for everyone to find a business model and game they enjoy. May everyone at MMORPG have many future years of happy MMO-ing.
p.s. I'm admittedly on the fence about the 2 non-F2P/non-B2P games I'm considering playing because the time cards I'd use are for blocks of consecutive months rather than Pay-As-You-Go. Not much better than just subbing save for the publisher not having the ability to auto-draft a bank acct (a serious no-no with me. No auto-drafting for any reason with me). Which means the only advantage the cards have over the sub-route is no ability to auto-draft.
Playing Now: The Secret World, Guild Wars 2, Neverwinter
Playing soon: Landmark beta, Swordman beta
Because they can't be sure I won't turn into a whale?
Because I can be content for the whales?
Because I may know some whales and pull them into the game?
It's like a street performer with an offering basket at the side. People will pay the amount compared to the value they find in his/her performance.
Publishers obviously do prefer higher spenders compared to lower spenders. Who doesn't? But they'd also rather have some of my money than none at all just as I'm sure the busker on the corner would too. Why refuse my money since I'm willing to pay too even if it is less than that of subscribers?
Playing Now: The Secret World, Guild Wars 2, Neverwinter
Playing soon: Landmark beta, Swordman beta
Possible but that's an unknown quantity.
They "might" get you to spend money and that is certainly a hope. They might get you to pull in others and of course that's "a hope".
But they know that "whales" are always going to spend money and always going to spend a lot of money. So they are going to want to make sure they are always catered to.
Therefore they will make sure that their intended customer base is the one that is kept happy and healthy.
As a business owner who are you going to want to listen to: those who will always spend money and are going to spend the lion's share of money and be the lion's share of your income or those who "might" be? Because any investment is better spent on those who will as opposed to "those who might".
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
It is not mutually exclusive. They can listen to both ... and place more weights on whales. There are so few whales anyway that it is not like they are going to overwhelm the communication channels.
You say that like it's a bad thing. It's fine if they make sure the whales are happy and healthy. I get to decide if what they're providing to me is acceptable and fun. If it is, I play. If it isn't, I go somewhere else. I have no expectations in any game beyond whether I enjoy playing it. I am never going to buy anything from their cash shop. It's either fun without it or I just don't play.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
They don't care about any single persons opinion. Opinions only count when a large enough volume of them agree on something to make it seem like that is what a community wants. At that point they're just looking to see what's popular not what a single subscriber wants.
Your money votes for you and it doesn't matter if it comes as a sub in a p2p game or a cash shop purchase in a f2p game. You don't spend you don't vote.
^^ This!
Sure $15 a month isn't expensive until you look at it being $180 per year and then I see that as ALOT to spend on one game.
I at most play for 80 hours spread out throughout a year, that is around 6/7 hours a month. Am I really going to have to spend $180 to be able to play when I want? I have so many other games to play, so much else to do in my life, one MMO isn't all I play.
So if I have to pay a sub... I just wont bother.
Reading the comments, people keep saying it is a small amount.. it isn't $180 over 12 months and what if I play other MMOs? What if I pay for stuff like Netflix? I have house bills, I have tax, I have my mobile, my car and whatever else pops up.
What is the first to go? Subscription based MMOs.
Im fine with this if and only if subscription option gets you the entire game with no exceptions besides maybe cosmetic mounts, pets, and costumes if the game already has TONS of these available through gameplay. the incentive should be for developers to make you want to sub, not buy things.
F2P and cash shops have certainly had a negative effect on game design though.
The market agrees with you even if some people here don't. It doesn't matter why players don't want to pay subs ( game hoping I'm sure is a big one ) f2p isn't something that's getting smaller or less popular.
If you look at the future games being made this is really the dumbest thing people argue about. Nothing really seems to indicate either payment model is going to "die" both types are still being made. The past only shows that mmos that can't hold on to people go free to play. Subs are still viable for some games and f2p is going to be made. This is really like arguing what your favorite type of icecream is.
Because it is a small amount, regardless if you like to spend it or not.
And basically it all comes down to you. If you like something and it costs money, then you have to make that choice. You like Netflix? You are willing to pay the $8-$15 a month for it? That's your choice. Do you ask them why they charge you that subscription fee for the little of it that you watch a month? Probably not.
It's not a game developers problem if you pay for other things in life but cannot justify paying a subscription for their service. They need to pay their bills as well. Not everything in life can be free, and when they are they usually come with restrictions that make free kinda pointless.
You have to set priorities and make sacrifices in life. If you can't justify the expense, move on to something else. Surely you can find something more cost effective to fill those 6-7 hours a month. Or stick it out and wait for the game to offer some form of F2P/Tiered plan. or stick to F2P titles in general.
There are 3 types of people in the world.
1.) Those who make things happen
2.) Those who watch things happen
3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
The reason I hate subscription mmo's is the people that rant about how P2P keeps the trash out, how the cost barrier stops most kids from playing (at least the real troublemakers), and how P2P means a better game in general with more content, etc. etc. I just don't want to play an mmo with self righteous, child hating, entitled people.
Now I'm not saying that there is only that type of person playing P2P games, but it is definitely the majority of the representations that I see in forums.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I don't hate much, but I hate Apple© with a passion. If Steve Jobs was alive, I would punch him in the face.
Okay so because super casual guy thinks 50 cents a day is some how a financial burden, the market is flooded with trashy F2P games to keep you busy here and there.
Even if I only played 15mins a day or 2 hours a week, it would still make more financial sense on a fun per cost basis to play a sub game, verses a F2P where every minute of game play is annoying and tied around the ever constant cash shop mini mall deal of the day spam.
Seems like you should look at facebook games or somewhere else to get your gaming fix. 6-7 hours a month in any mmo you're not getting much out of it. The genre does not support that casual of play, atleast I wouldn't play an mmo that did.
I would think that there has to be a good balance between sub and b2p models. I dont mind a mostly cosmetic item shop and I would also be fine paying 5$ a month as a sub. I would even go up to 7$ a month for a decent game with a item shop that is mostly limited to non-game affecting purchases. At 15$ I simply feel like it becomes over priced and limiting. If I choose to play more than 1 mmo at once that 15$ becomes 30$ or 45$ pretty fast. Also, when you have more people in your house playing, I enjoy playing with my wife but she doesnt have much time to dedicate to gaming, thats 30$ for 2 people and one will hardly play. Then add in the 50$ box fee, 100$ for both of us. I see that as a high entry fee.
When a game sells expansions as well, I find it difficult to spend 15$ on a sub fee, especially if expansions are sold often. I can see a company making profit off of box fees, subs, and an item shop, but with most sub based games it seems as if the profits are high on all 3. WoW is a good example of having all 3 at the extreme. Now how does GW2 compete with profit considering its buy to play, with no sub, with an item shop that mostly doesnt effect play.
I would think that 5-7$ a month would cover server costs and what not while still giving profit. Having an in game shop thats mostly cosmetic would add into that profit as well. I would also think that there is a sweet spot for a sub that increases volume of players making up for lost profit which will also create more business for the item shop and box purchases.
While I understand where you are coming from, I do not agree with you. Specifically what I colored red. I don't think anyone, whether it is a casual or a hardcore player, should get any kind of cost reduction on a subscription for a video game. If you find that you do not get the most out of your money for the subscription you've paid for because you don't have enough time to play, then you really probably shouldn't play any MMO that requires a subscription. And that's on you if you want to- it's your perogative. I just don't think, "I'm grown, I'm busy, I can't be held to a subscription if I don't play that much 'cos it's too expensive" is really a good enough reason for anybody to receive any kind of price cut, discount, or anything else that is a monetary setback to the product you are purchasing.
I, personally, prefer Subscriptions. I, personally, would rather be part of a community that cares enough to pay to be there than to be stuck in a F2P hell where people can make multiple accounts to troll the community, smaller chances to catc hhacks/exploits, and anything else that comes along with F2P that I have personally seen and not wanting anything to do with.
Loves: SMITE, WildStar, Project Zomboid, PSO2, DCUO,
Worst Online Communities: WoW/WoD(the OG MMO Trolls), DayZ/WarZ, SMITE/LoL/DOTA, EVE Online, APB
"Im ready for
All the comparisons
I think its dumb and its embarrassing
Im switching off
No longer listening
Ive had enough of persecution and conditioning
Maybe its instinct- Were only animal" - Lily Allen, Sheezus
Well technically speaking I believe $15 a month for the 6 or so hours Tixylix gets to play would amount to $2.50 per hour, not 50 cents. He is someone who would find the value of his MMO(s) more equitable and fair using a Pay-for-what-you-actually-use model instead of subscribing. A similar analogy would be to a gym that advertised "pay only for the hour(s) you actually use our gym facilities" instead of shoehorning everyone into the one-size-fits-all offering of a yearly contract. The first is fee-per-use. The second is similar to having a lawyer on retainer. You aren't paying for the product..you're reserving the right to access the producer's product whether that access is financially excessive cost-wise to the game producer or not at all that month (in which case the excess cost is shouldered by the customer for that month of non-use, not the publisher). One customer is willing to accept that pay-to-not-use risk. The other is not. But both are actual paying customers though they are willing to pay for the same product but under different conditions. These are two different kinds of mmo-customer bases with 2 different paying-psychologies and needs.
The nice thing about the hybrid business model more and more western mmos are using is that it permits publishers to price discriminate among their actual player base. Compared to someone like me a subscriber is actually one of those "Whales" the MMO publishing industry keeps hoping to stack their player base with. Somehow though I don't see many P2P-lovers seeing themselves as "whales" and that's likely because they see the amount they pay for the product offered as fair and equitable (funny how that actually fits the probable self-reasoning of a F2P "whale" as he's buying from his favorite F2P mmo too but I digress).
The above also shows a lack of familiarity (or maybe just hyperbole?) with many hybrid model western mmos. Asian-owned grinders often do have the whole spam thing. If that bugs you continue to not play games doing this and don't pay. But there are plenty of F2P/B2P western mmos that don't do that at all. Neither TSW nor GW2 spam the playerbases' screens constantly with appeals to "buy our latest cash shop special" while you're busy playing. I typically only find out about it because I'm on those games' mailing lists. That's about it.
But there are people - like me - or the guy with the wife several posts above me - or Tixylix - whom will also pay for a publisher's product so long as that product is offered at a value that that customer finds fair and equitable. If it is not deemed so either the potential customer passes by or the publisher won't offer their product at that price (ie...we're priced out of the market).
To not capture the money of people like me when a publisher's financial reasons don't prevent it is a publisher whom is leaving money on the table they could and would otherwise receive.
Playing Now: The Secret World, Guild Wars 2, Neverwinter
Playing soon: Landmark beta, Swordman beta
OP a subscription fee on mmo is more then just game time a mmo with subscription fee mean basically that everyone have same condition get gear, weapon and see content no one is above anyone everyone and same right and condition get to end game and kill that nasty raid boss.
Then if someone spend 24 hours in game or 4 hours or 1 hours in game it dont matter for you have same right and condition as one that spend 24 hours in game.
The problem with F2P is that the ending up to be unfair in end take SWTOR if you are a F2P person you have spend more money in there cash shop get item to make game playable + you cant enter all end game content if dont pay extra so in the end it is easy and cheap to pay there subscription fee to unlock all thing you otherwise need to spend more money to buy from there cash shop. Many F2P mmo do restrict F2P player and also you end up spend more real money on those game.
So before you judge subscription model you reminder you spend more money on F2P mmo then on subscription mmo and think i end spend more $$$ on SWTOR then i did when i did when a subscribe hell i even got there expansion for free when i subscribe to SWTOR otherwise i need to pay extra to get as F2P player but if you think that is ok for you and you think you have extra money to spend on it fine but not all do have those type of money also patch on F2P mmo sometime take longer then on subscription mmo.
So subscription is not only how much time you spend in game it have with other thing to.
I'm not going to pick apart all the nonsense from the sub fanbois, cause it's just that, nonsense. It's like you're all stuck in 2006 where all sub games are superior and F2P games sucks (they don't -- in fact most sub games are inferior at this point to some F2P or B2P games), sub games give you everything for one price (they don't, they have cash shops too), and F2P games are pay-to-win (they're not). Oh, and that it's all about not having the money. It's not. Cause y'know, if it's just 50 cents then I'm sure someone here would be more than willing to pay for my WoW sub. I mean, it's just 50 cents a day, right? You have a decent job, right, so clearly you can afford to give a mere 50 cents away to a stranger, right? Or maybe you value that 50 cents a day in some way and aren't willing to just give it away to someone or something unless you feel as though you're actually getting your money's worth. Hmm... And what if you want to play more than one game at a time? What if there are 4 or 5 MMOs you really like? Then those monthly sub fees start adding up pretty quickly and it's sure not just 50 cents a day anymore, and the cost versus time spent playing ratio starts to not look so good anymore.
But all of the lies, half truths, and inaccurate information aside there is a fairly good analogy here. Let's say I subscribe to Netflix for $8 a month. And I watch 1 movie a week cause that's all the time I have to sit and watch a movie. But then I realize I could get the same movies from Redbox for $1 each, which would cut my cost in half. Why should I spend more than I have to? It's a waste. Even if it's just $4, it's MY $4 and I'll spend it any way I see fit. Cause that extra $4 will buy me a latte, or a sandwich, or after a year a new game. Or maybe I realize there is no good reason to pay $60 a month for cable because nearly all the shows I watch are on broadcast TV and all I have to do is put up an antenna and get them OTA for free? Or pay $75 a month for a mobile plan when I'm almost always in range of a usable wifi network which let's me talk and text for free? Or pay $50 a month for a gym membership when I could buy a bike, some basic equipment, and never pay another membership fee ever again?
So now instead of just saving $15 a month, I'm saving nearly $150, simply by switching from little-used paid monthly services to free and/or ala carte replacements. I mean, if a gas station offered you unlimited fill ups for $100 a month but you typically drive enough to only use $60 worth would you go for the unlimited option anyway instead of that other station down the street that let's you buy gas by the gallon? I mean, it's only $1.33 extra a day. A mere pittance to you, a working adult with plenty of disposable income, right? Do you think the gas you're getting is somehow better (it's not)? That you're going to get treated better by the station staff or that they'll pump it for you (they won't)? That they're going to put in amenities like a car wash, vacuum, and air pump and not make you pay extra for it (cause they will)? Or are you just going to be a sucker that pays more for something than they have to because it somehow makes them feel special and elitist and look down at all the cheapskates who pay by the gallon?
So if you like the sub model, if you like renting a game from month to month, hey, that's fine, carry on. Spend your money any way you see fit. But don't delude yourself into thinking you're getting some extreme value for your money, that your subscription-only product is better, or that your regular monthly payments are going to result in more content, better customer service, or more developer attention. Cause I'm sorry, that's horse manure. It may have been the case at one time, but that time is LONG gone.
The statistics tell you all you need to know. Games that have gone from a sub model to F2P or hybrid see a massive increase in revenue that's used to not only pay developers but to create new content more frequently than they would otherwise. Which is why virtually every MMO out there has abandoned the sub model, will abandon the sub model within the first year or so, or offers a F2P option in addition to the sub model. Because the sub model is a dying dinosaur that was viable when you had 3 games to choose from, but no longer the case when you have 30+.
"This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to. Relax....."