Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Monthly pay models
seraphol
Member Posts: 33
Why do they almost all have to be $15? Why not less? Wouldn't a $5 charge for some games be fair? Why do corps have to stick to the magic 15? I think a lot more people could swing 5 or 10. Would they lose money on that without cash shops?
Comments
Why would you ask less for something that people are otherwise paying more?
While I believe 15/month is an extremely cheap price for entertainment and it has been at that price for seemingly a decade, I think older games that start to bleed subs could benefit from a cheaper sub. Most F2P models are absurd and cash grabs, but maybe a cheaper sub on older games can be a nice option.
Even if it did increase the playerbase size then you have to factor in the additional cost of supporting them.
At the end of the day I think most people willing to actually pay a sub fee don't find 15 dollars too much to bear and for those who prefer to play multiple games the F2P model has proven more successful.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Right. It has nothing to do with consumer price bias or perception. If it did, then whenever the box price of an MMO dropped you'd see people making crazy posts on gaming forums like... ohhhhh, let's see.... this one.
But that never happens.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I'm looking at other countries though, especially Asia, where nearly every premier game is paid for...They have differing payment models, and a hybrid system including cash shops. of course I'm not promoting greedy pay2win models, but rather something like Trion has made for Rift, where you can choose to pay in various tiers monthly for extra benefits.
I also feel that payment tiers should be aimed at different levels of casual and hardcore player. regardless of whether you think $15 is fair or not, the system is based around a payment structure developed over 10 years ago at the dawn of MMOs. I think it's time to, as the other commenter said, think outside the box for a change and consider aiming payment models at different demographics. I played WoW for 10 years, and am very possibly done with it completely. WoD may bring some returners, but unless they go back to their former brilliance, they're going to have to consider changing how they manage subscriptions. Some people may be willing to pay a few bucks during quiet times before patches/expansions for a few premium benefits, but we're beginning to feel like Blizzard runs a Kickstarter every couple of years, where they expect players to fund their new expansion.
So you're implying they charge something in order to convey a premier perception of their product, much like Beats, Apple, Prada, the list goes on and on? Do you have data? Do mmo gamers work that way?
HUH? My point is that games like Rift , Defiance or SWTOR should of NEVER been a full sub $15 a month model to begin with.. They look at WoW that charges as much and think they deserve the same respect.. WRONG.. Rift as the prime example I'll use is in no way an equal to WoW.. IMO.. Rift is a F2P or B2P game at most.. Maybe toss in a $5 monthly subscription option..
Marketing is a funny thing.. but yeah, consumer perception is everything.. IMO too many game companies fall in love with their own product and believe it's just as good as the competitors, there by justifying charging some stupid fee it doesn't deserve.. LOL I remember when STO came out and how big of a flop that turned out to be.. LOL
I think the current formula now is "HYPE" the shit out of the game and charge some outrageous fee at launch.. Then once the honeymoon is over, you are forced to downsize your payment model to where it should of been in the first place.. Then hope and pray it survives.. he he he
I just linked you an example from these boards on how MMO gamers work that way. If a news blast went out right now that an MMO was dropping its price to less than the consumer accepted price point, within minutes there would be posts on the forums (probably within seconds here) about how the game is dying.
A lot of people like to point to Steam as an example of lowering the price but making it up in quantity, however that's apples and oranges. People are more price sensitive to a one-off price. There's also the matter of impulse buys. Neither of which applies to subscriptions.
Tiered subscriptions, however... Fallen Earth seems to have had success with that. Very few others have tried it. It was either SOE or Turbine that tried that as well, but I'm not sure it panned out for them. It seems an area that could use more exploration.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I agree with this very much.
My impression is that there are some cultural and personal issues over how people like to spend money. Some people value uniformity as in everyone pays the same and the percieved fairness it brings. Some people compare games as products and assume price is an indication of quality. Some people compare more critically what they get for their money's worth in games and don't like to spend for anything else. Some don't care about the money at all while to some it's the very obstacle whether they play or not.
Even if you completely ignore, what the games actually have to offer, and combine different spending tendencies with global income differences, it shouldn't be that hard to come up with the idea that perhaps the 15$/month is not a universal solution. To my knowledge, it isn't widely used in Asia, but there are certainly arguments for trying to appeal to other spenders in other regions too. It might be wise to compromise over it, while there still is clear demand for subs. That's what the exploration means: compromising over uniformity and getting closer to what the people who like to choose-what-they-pay-for want.
It's a good thread so far btw, so thx:)