Just give me a box fee and a sub. Make the sub a reasonable number to sustain the game. Don't be afraid to crack the $14.99 barrier. Charge $25 a month (or more). I'd pay $50 a month sub for a great game without blinking an eyelash.
And it would be FAIR... nobody buying advantages...
While I agree in principle, I wouldn't be willing to pay $50 a month for any single video game. I mean, it would have to be so incredibly mind blowing for that kind of fee that I don't think it could even be made.
Not only that, but as soon as you were able to charge $50 a month for a sub based game, then every goddamn game on the planet would invent a reason to be sub based or they'd quadruple their prices. These companies would go "No shit, they're paying $50 a month for a sub? Ok, charge $200 for the next Assassin's Creed" The next Elder Scrolls would absolutely charge $50 a month. The Call of Duty Franchise would be hot on the heels of it.
I would be willing to pay, at a very maximum, $25 a month sub without any kind of cash shop whatsoever, for a really good game.
Subs are the only way to monetize fairly. All of the F2P options are exploitative in some way.
It's not that simple, Subs don't work well for people with little time.
The problem is you need a system that works well for people with lots of time OR money that provides a healthy profit for the business.
What possible way would a sub not work for people with little time? Can they play 1 hour a week? Well then that's a whopping $3.75 for an hour play based on $15 a month sub.
Give me a break... You cant turn back the clock, Most mainstream gamers don't want to have to grind shit and rather just pay for it.
That's why were in this mess in the first place.
Weather your pro-sub or pro f2p these people represent a large share of the market and should be represented in a "fair" model.
No. Fair has nothing to do with people who "don't want to grind shit and rather just pay for it".
The question wasn't which is the best model but which is the fairest. Nothing about P2W can be considered "fair".
The thing is P2W is not a clearly defined term, so without a consensus on what p2w is exactly - we can't speak to its fairness.
To make matters worse, fairness in itself is a very subjective thing so we have a situation where an unclear term is being evaluated for a very subjective value - yeah good luck with that.
Have to disagree here. P2W is pretty obvious. Anything that you can purchase that gives you an advantage verses other players. Cosmetic items do not count. That is a that is pretty clearly a definition that most will agree is P2W.
To the question what is an acceptable way to monetize a MMO, I would have to say I prefer a subscription model, but will accept other models as long as they are not P2W and that they avoid the dreaded RNG nonsense in the store. To say that I am very disappointed in Matt Friors latest announcement is an understatement. I though Zenimax had more class.
Sub is the only fair option but that leaves those players who cannot afford to sub out in the cold. The solution is simple really. Players that sub get access to the entire game without needing to spend another penny until next months sub is due, while free players have the f2p with cash shop option. The cash shop however should never include items that give an unfair advantage and should never throw rng gambling at the gullible. It is these last two requirements that companies appear to have trouble with.
3. Shop that has cosmetic items only (e.g., armor skins, not armor); and
4. Expansions cost extra.
I instantly have to think about Guild Wars 1 when I read your post. I personally can't play it anymore due to it being so outdated but at least it had a near perfect business model
Netflicks is cheaper because they don't develop or create anything. They leverage what others have put the time/money into. So yes it is cheaper for them. The closest to them would be a company who offered multiple MMOs created by other companies in some sort of right of use agreement.
Uhhh pretty sure netflix developed their proprietary streaming technology. . .also they do produce content, have for quite some time now. . .
Not sure there will ever be a 'fair' system... even before WoW had a cosmetics shop / account services the $15 a month didn't seem fair as a non-raider (a lot of the updates were raid-only content). And the problem with anything but a pure sub is that you start to negatively affect gameplay / in-game content.
I don't know... maybe a sub model (i.e. $15 a month) but you can 'refund' certain content (like the latest raid instance you have no interest in). Also, I really think expansions (e.g. WoW style major content update expansions) should come with a month of game time.
Are you kidding me? Divide $15 by the number of hours you played WoW in an average month. That is somewhere between a low and ridiculously low cost per hour of entertainment. And you want some kind of refund system for any content you don't like?
Not saying I didn't enjoy it for the time that I played, but the main reason I finally quit was because $15 a month was simply too much for the privilege of being able to login occasionally... if the cost was lower (refund for 'dead on arrival' content was just an idea off the top of my head) then I would have hung around a bit longer, helped friends (of which I had quite a few IRL friends still playing), leveled an alt past 30, etc.
For me it would be free-to-play game with a cash shop.
Before I get shouted at: cash shop that offers vanity items only . Rainbow monkey, pink Darth Vaders's robe or fancy glittering roof - here you are, select your payment method. Absolutely no item that gives any advantage in game world, like +0,1% crafting or +1 damage to your ranged weapon.
One can readily tell which side of those divides you're on from your replies.
1) Do you really think that people who aren't in a rush to play a game get upset if those who are have to pay extra? It's pretty well established by now that games get a surge of incoming players when they go "free to play". Do you think all those people who waited months or years after launch are hopping mad that people paid more to get into the beta than if they had waited until launch? Only people who want to get in first get upset about having to pay more for the privilege.
2) Casuals who don't play much tend not to be especially vocal. But in most games, an overwhelming majority of the people who play the game don't play it very much. The reason that the rise of "free to play" brought so many more players into MMORPGs is precisely because of people who weren't willing to pay a subscription fee, sometimes because they couldn't justify it with how little they play.
3) Do you really think that people who know that they'll never meaningfully participate in a game's endgame really get upset if that endgame that they'll never take part in is pay to win? Most people tend to focus more on the experience that they'll have in a game than on things they know full well they'll never see. The recent Black Desert incident is a good example: volcanic rage from some small portion of the playerbase and a shrug from the rest.
4) Part of why people so commonly say that games should charge for cosmetic stuff is precisely because so few people care about it. But do you think that people who do like having a lot of costumes appreciate being treated like whales and expected to heavily subsidize everyone else? There are games that give you a lot of costumes for free, you know.
Speaking from my own point of view (obviously):
2) As Slapshot (I think) mentioned... 1 hour a week is $3.75 per hour for the normal sub.. I think what you're saying has merit, but it's really as much a perception problem for the subscription model as it is a prohibitively expensive model. Folks don't like that they're paying the same as the power leveler who plays exponentially more... Without realizing that for even the most casual of players, the subscription is stupid cheap in terms of cost per hours of entertainment. We're talking unprecedentedly cheap in the entertainment business before services like Netflix came along (that, ironically enough, use subs).
3) Absolutely; what the developers do within the game, even if it isn't specifically with content I'm experiencing at the moment, speaks loads to their overall vision of the game (and, more recently, their overall vision of monetization).. No, it doesn't affect me NOW, but it will dissuade me from putting large amounts of time or effort into the game when it's obvious the direction of the game and/or its monetization is distasteful to me. To act as if that vision won't, many more times than not, permeate itself throughout the game is wishful thinking at best. Gamers that defend developer missteps with "well it's not MY class/level/zone/what-have-you they're changing for the worse!" are like ostriches with their heads in the sand, oblivious to the oncoming sandstorm because it isn't right in front of their faces at that moment.
Netflicks is cheaper because they don't develop or create anything. They leverage what others have put the time/money into. So yes it is cheaper for them. The closest to them would be a company who offered multiple MMOs created by other companies in some sort of right of use agreement.
Uhhh pretty sure netflix developed their proprietary streaming technology. . .also they do produce content, have for quite some time now. . .
Here's How Involved Netflix Is In The Production Of Its Series
Once Holland's team helps Netflix choose and
purchase a show, the exec says it's "a balancing act" trying to
help guide production while also granting plenty of creative
freedom. Holland explains to THR:
"We view our job as helping support the creators to fulfill
their vision,
Business Insider.
More of a backer setting up exclusive rights or the best deal.....hence the "Original" creates the optics of being part of the creative process.
I like the GW2 model. They should experiment with the sub models. How about a week sub or just a weekend sub.
You mean like some games do? The problem with that is the idiots. In the past, people have suggested daily rates and here is where they go stupid. They suggest Monthly Fee/30 as the daily rate. So 15.00 would be 50 cents per day. Just plain stupid.
Make it 2 dollars per day Or some interesting choice they have to make between the various rates offered.
I remeber many years ago EQ2 tryed something out like 7 days subscription or even shorter if I remember correctly.
My FFXIV ARR referral code for new EU accounts: 5JPF7ZQ3 Step into the amazing world of Eorzea! Use this reference code on a new account and we'll both get goodies for it!
Netflicks is cheaper because they don't develop or create anything. They leverage what others have put the time/money into. So yes it is cheaper for them. The closest to them would be a company who offered multiple MMOs created by other companies in some sort of right of use agreement.
Uhhh pretty sure netflix developed their proprietary streaming technology. . .also they do produce content, have for quite some time now. . .
Here's How Involved Netflix Is In The Production Of Its Series
Once Holland's team helps Netflix choose and
purchase a show, the exec says it's "a balancing act" trying to
help guide production while also granting plenty of creative
freedom. Holland explains to THR:
"We view our job as helping support the creators to fulfill
their vision,
Business Insider.
More of a backer setting up exclusive rights or the best deal.....hence the "Original" creates the optics of being part of the creative process.
I'm pretty sure you meant that as a rebuttal, but what you posted actually strengthens the fact that netflix produces content. . .
For a medium that is expected to be updated, bug fixed, balanced, etc. on a continual basis over time the only monetization model that makes sense long term is sub IMO. Want to add optional ways to spend after that, such as outfits and non-combat pets? Fine but you need a solid base first.
"But if it has a sub it shouldn't also have a store."
If I like and want to play a title that means I would like the development income to be healthy so that I can, in turn, enjoy a healthy stream of updates. If that doesn't happen and I'm paying a sub then I leave anyways so that's a non-issue.
I play MMOs to enjoy playing them, not play moral police about the inner workings of thier financials, which I would not have the full context of anyhow. As long as the implemented monetization doesn't mess with the game economy I don't care and if I tried to care I would probably ruin enjoyment for the game myself for no reason.
How can you say that about gw2? It's the best system out of the lot of them lol. Goes to show even the "experts" don't have a clue what's good for us. BDO is cancer, box price, preorder packs and a cash shop? Like I knew BDO would go P2W because that's the nature of it but I honestly thought we would have gotten node wars/sieges for a few months at +15 but they totally fucked the game, it was built on some frankenstien build and they said sieges weren't ready yet? Wat? They cheaped out on servers was the real reason, the servers would have melted if they'd done sieges at the start. I felt totally ripped off by that game. There was 0 decent pvp. Never again.
Bottom line, you get what you pay for. If you do not want/like it, move on or do not play.
I am loving BDO. Only MMO for years that kept my attention for more than 2 months.
The funny thing, and I mean funny, is people think the store is buy to win. Its laughable to me actually. That being said, I have put enough time, albeit not that much, into getting on the leader boards for a couple categories, one of them is wealth.
So I can get in game currency equal to what people pay $20 for on the cash shop in about...2 hours maybe.
Honestly, I am not a hard core player. I just watched videos from people that knew how to play the game and took advantage of it.
All that being said, they can charge whatever they want...I do not have to pay it. I paid for a game, as it was, with the implied promise of updates. They could have come or not, but I got the product I paid for. Yall get the same thing.
I really, really think people have translated a very unhealthy entitlement mentality to mmos. The developers owe you nothing. Please try to realize that.
You know what is fair? Whatever they want to charge. Its their product. We are paying for it. If you do not like the terms, move on. But you do not deserve anything except what was promised at the time of purchase. This is the type of product/service that will change over time.
Now, when I got BDO there were some things not yet available that are now. Various content patches for example, that had yet to be released. So...if I paid X for the game, they release content, and someone else buys the game for X...did I get ripped off? They got more for the same money....how is that fair?
We both got what we paid for, that is why.
To assume that the above situation is unfair is like saying its not fair that I paid X and the 2nd person did not get charge the greater price of Y.
Anyhow, back to main point, you get what you pay for. What they charge, and you agree to, which you do by default of paying it, is how the whole buying and selling thing works.
If you do not like what you are getting...then find something that works for you. Fair has absolutely nothing to do with it.
Netflicks is cheaper because they don't develop or create anything. They leverage what others have put the time/money into. So yes it is cheaper for them. The closest to them would be a company who offered multiple MMOs created by other companies in some sort of right of use agreement.
Well they do create both Movies and series, called Netflix originals
while I understand that this is a MT Everest sized issue to some, to me it is not even a molehill.
In ye olden days when there were a handful of MMORPGs on the market and only one payment model I was having the time of my life playing these games.
Fast forward to today with the plethora of MMORPGs and their multiple monetization setups available and I'm still having the time of my life.
Because I still play games for fun, and if I'm having fun I dont care if others pay less or more or we all pay the same. It's my money, it's my time and it's my fun. . .
. . .and if people come and tell me "you're the reason this genre is going to hell in a hand-basket." Well ok, I'll just ignore you and continue what I've always done. . play games and have fun.
I think there is a pretty simple system that will both 1) have zero influence on the game play and 2) player will have huge incentive to buy. And its not something new, some non-MMOs use similar systems with extreme success. Games like LOL, Dota2 and TF2 use similar systems.
All game items (and i mean ALL) share same basic view model. For relatively small fee (say from .05$ up to say 0.5$ depending on the rarity/strength) players buy the "real" view of that new upgrade item they just got dropped.
Every cosmetic only shop will do the job. It is just the out-of-the-box thinking that's needed to make those cosmetics highly desirable. There are infinite ways to achieve that if they don't stick to cookie cutter models out of fear of the unknown.
Most MMORPG players agree on what the business model should be: only someone else should have to pay, but they shouldn't get any advantage from doing so.
Path of exile was my favourtie monitization to date.... You can play everything just fine for free. You have sufficent bag and bank space for free but after serveral characters your gonna wanna buy some bank tabs and but 5-10$ and your good to go again. The store only offers cosmetics and when the game first launched the armour in game was pretty bland but they soon fixed that and now the armour in game is super cool. You have to pay for transmogs that are called skin transfers but I'm cool with that especially seeing how you can get a bunch for like 1$ and they have all kinds of sales where you can get a bunch of cool stuff for cheap and sometimes buying items gives you free boxes that can roll for some expensive items. Every expansion there supporter packs but it doesn't lock any thing just all cosmetic but they are limited time so I usually grab the bottom or mid tier ones. All in all I think it's a great system and it feels really fair so fair that it makes you want to support the company and I've actually spent more money on that game then almost any other... with the exception of maybe LOL way back when.
Most MMORPG players agree on what the business model should be: only someone else should have to pay, but they shouldn't get any advantage from doing so.
Spot on.
Not my view. Everyone should pay the same, and they should get no power / feature advantages apart of getting access to the game. Sub works best if you have a game good enough to keep people playing. I dont mind if name change, race change, and other services like that have to be paid for. You can even sell cosmetic items as long as theres a wide, constantly increasing choice of cool cosmetic options already obtainable by everyone in game (kind of like it is with mounts in WoW).
R3d.Gallows said: Not my view. Everyone should pay the same, and they should get no power / feature advantages apart of getting access to the game.
But you are reinforcing his point completely - you are proposing an unsustainable model where developers, or someone else, would need to keep funding the game to keep it going.
Sub model worked back in the days when there were just few titles on the market, it does not work today. With more titles to chose from, people want to hop from one game to another, playing different games depending on their mood and subscription is huge obstacle with that.
There is no point debating how players should behave and how they should treat games. You won't change them, you can't force them.
All you can do is follow them and provide them a service or goods that fit their needs and desires - currently the best option we have now is F2P and micro-transactions.
Separate monetization from game play. After that, charge a fair price for the service. It's not hard.....really, it's not.
What seems to be hard is creating a game where players want to keep returning to.
I think the problem is that development is not making enough content for certain games that have customers that want to pay for a sub or in their cash shop.
So part of the problem seems to be in development, and it could be mmo engine related or just that its not that easy for developers and it does take too much time and money, and only big games like WoW can push enough content to keep players as 'content locusts' and generate enough revenue.
For me subbing is being part of an alive world - and sure players add to that with pvp, and even pve at a basic level,
but i find that pve, or npcs, or AI, are not advanced enough to have a game that feels alive. there should be NPC politics, mods as dms creating events, and from that even have different server types with conquests that allow for certain escalations of the game to come to a conclusion in a short duration.
So while more content is needed in general, i think, the worlds in mmos need more interaction and consequence and a mod or dm, rather, can add to that experience, and it doesnt just have to be a raid which would be a similar exp, but the whole mmo/game.
so to sum up, imo, mmos lack something extra to justify that monthly sub with it being more engaging content or just more content. And just having more content, doesnt compare to something like WoW.
Write bad things that are done to you in sand, but write the good things that happen to you on a piece of marble
Comments
Not only that, but as soon as you were able to charge $50 a month for a sub based game, then every goddamn game on the planet would invent a reason to be sub based or they'd quadruple their prices. These companies would go "No shit, they're paying $50 a month for a sub? Ok, charge $200 for the next Assassin's Creed" The next Elder Scrolls would absolutely charge $50 a month. The Call of Duty Franchise would be hot on the heels of it.
I would be willing to pay, at a very maximum, $25 a month sub without any kind of cash shop whatsoever, for a really good game.
We're really going to blame the players not the folks with the actual dragon sickness? Okay then.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
To the question what is an acceptable way to monetize a MMO, I would have to say I prefer a subscription model, but will accept other models as long as they are not P2W and that they avoid the dreaded RNG nonsense in the store. To say that I am very disappointed in Matt Friors latest announcement is an understatement. I though Zenimax had more class.
I instantly have to think about Guild Wars 1 when I read your post. I personally can't play it anymore due to it being so outdated but at least it had a near perfect business model
Uhhh pretty sure netflix developed their proprietary streaming technology. . .also they do produce content, have for quite some time now. . .
Before I get shouted at: cash shop that offers vanity items only . Rainbow monkey, pink Darth Vaders's robe or fancy glittering roof - here you are, select your payment method. Absolutely no item that gives any advantage in game world, like +0,1% crafting or +1 damage to your ranged weapon.
http://www.mmoblogg.wordpress.com
2) As Slapshot (I think) mentioned... 1 hour a week is $3.75 per hour for the normal sub.. I think what you're saying has merit, but it's really as much a perception problem for the subscription model as it is a prohibitively expensive model. Folks don't like that they're paying the same as the power leveler who plays exponentially more... Without realizing that for even the most casual of players, the subscription is stupid cheap in terms of cost per hours of entertainment. We're talking unprecedentedly cheap in the entertainment business before services like Netflix came along (that, ironically enough, use subs).
3) Absolutely; what the developers do within the game, even if it isn't specifically with content I'm experiencing at the moment, speaks loads to their overall vision of the game (and, more recently, their overall vision of monetization).. No, it doesn't affect me NOW, but it will dissuade me from putting large amounts of time or effort into the game when it's obvious the direction of the game and/or its monetization is distasteful to me. To act as if that vision won't, many more times than not, permeate itself throughout the game is wishful thinking at best. Gamers that defend developer missteps with "well it's not MY class/level/zone/what-have-you they're changing for the worse!" are like ostriches with their heads in the sand, oblivious to the oncoming sandstorm because it isn't right in front of their faces at that moment.
Here's How Involved Netflix Is In The Production Of Its Series
Once Holland's team helps Netflix choose and purchase a show, the exec says it's "a balancing act" trying to help guide production while also granting plenty of creative freedom. Holland explains to THR:
"We view our job as helping support the creators to fulfill their vision,Business Insider.
More of a backer setting up exclusive rights or the best deal.....hence the "Original" creates the optics of being part of the creative process.
I remeber many years ago EQ2 tryed something out like 7 days subscription or even shorter if I remember correctly.
My FFXIV ARR referral code for new EU accounts: 5JPF7ZQ3
Step into the amazing world of Eorzea! Use this reference code on a new account and we'll both get goodies for it!
. . .you do know what produce means, right?
"But if it has a sub it shouldn't also have a store."
If I like and want to play a title that means I would like the development income to be healthy so that I can, in turn, enjoy a healthy stream of updates. If that doesn't happen and I'm paying a sub then I leave anyways so that's a non-issue.
I play MMOs to enjoy playing them, not play moral police about the inner workings of thier financials, which I would not have the full context of anyhow. As long as the implemented monetization doesn't mess with the game economy I don't care and if I tried to care I would probably ruin enjoyment for the game myself for no reason.
I am loving BDO. Only MMO for years that kept my attention for more than 2 months.
The funny thing, and I mean funny, is people think the store is buy to win. Its laughable to me actually. That being said, I have put enough time, albeit not that much, into getting on the leader boards for a couple categories, one of them is wealth.
So I can get in game currency equal to what people pay $20 for on the cash shop in about...2 hours maybe.
Honestly, I am not a hard core player. I just watched videos from people that knew how to play the game and took advantage of it.
All that being said, they can charge whatever they want...I do not have to pay it. I paid for a game, as it was, with the implied promise of updates. They could have come or not, but I got the product I paid for. Yall get the same thing.
I really, really think people have translated a very unhealthy entitlement mentality to mmos. The developers owe you nothing. Please try to realize that.
You know what is fair? Whatever they want to charge. Its their product. We are paying for it. If you do not like the terms, move on. But you do not deserve anything except what was promised at the time of purchase. This is the type of product/service that will change over time.
Now, when I got BDO there were some things not yet available that are now. Various content patches for example, that had yet to be released. So...if I paid X for the game, they release content, and someone else buys the game for X...did I get ripped off? They got more for the same money....how is that fair?
We both got what we paid for, that is why.
To assume that the above situation is unfair is like saying its not fair that I paid X and the 2nd person did not get charge the greater price of Y.
Anyhow, back to main point, you get what you pay for. What they charge, and you agree to, which you do by default of paying it, is how the whole buying and selling thing works.
If you do not like what you are getting...then find something that works for you. Fair has absolutely nothing to do with it.
Well they do create both Movies and series, called Netflix originals
while I understand that this is a MT Everest sized issue to some, to me it is not even a molehill.
In ye olden days when there were a handful of MMORPGs on the market and only one payment model I was having the time of my life playing these games.
Fast forward to today with the plethora of MMORPGs and their multiple monetization setups available and I'm still having the time of my life.
Because I still play games for fun, and if I'm having fun I dont care if others pay less or more or we all pay the same. It's my money, it's my time and it's my fun. . .
. . .and if people come and tell me "you're the reason this genre is going to hell in a hand-basket." Well ok, I'll just ignore you and continue what I've always done. . play games and have fun.
All game items (and i mean ALL) share same basic view model. For relatively small fee (say from .05$ up to say 0.5$ depending on the rarity/strength) players buy the "real" view of that new upgrade item they just got dropped.
Every cosmetic only shop will do the job. It is just the out-of-the-box thinking that's needed to make those cosmetics highly desirable. There are infinite ways to achieve that if they don't stick to cookie cutter models out of fear of the unknown.
Sub model worked back in the days when there were just few titles on the market, it does not work today. With more titles to chose from, people want to hop from one game to another, playing different games depending on their mood and subscription is huge obstacle with that.
There is no point debating how players should behave and how they should treat games. You won't change them, you can't force them.
All you can do is follow them and provide them a service or goods that fit their needs and desires - currently the best option we have now is F2P and micro-transactions.
I think the problem is that development is not making enough content for certain games that have customers that want to pay for a sub or in their cash shop.
So part of the problem seems to be in development, and it could be mmo engine related or just that its not that easy for developers and it does take too much time and money, and only big games like WoW can push enough content to keep players as 'content locusts' and generate enough revenue.
For me subbing is being part of an alive world - and sure players add to that with pvp, and even pve at a basic level,
but i find that pve, or npcs, or AI, are not advanced enough to have a game that feels alive. there should be NPC politics, mods as dms creating events, and from that even have different server types with conquests that allow for certain escalations of the game to come to a conclusion in a short duration.
So while more content is needed in general, i think, the worlds in mmos need more interaction and consequence and a mod or dm, rather, can add to that experience, and it doesnt just have to be a raid which would be a similar exp, but the whole mmo/game. so to sum up, imo, mmos lack something extra to justify that monthly sub with it being more engaging content or just more content. And just having more content, doesnt compare to something like WoW.
Write bad things that are done to you in sand, but write the good things that happen to you on a piece of marble