Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Perks vs. Monthly Subscriptions
Jimmy_Scythe
Member CommonPosts: 3,586
Business model showdow:
Most of the games we talk about here use monthly subscriptions so I'm sure you're all familiar with it.
Most Korean games, on the other hand, charge nothing for the software or use of the servers. These games sell in-game perks like armor, weapons, character edits, etc.
There are pros and cons to each that I won't go into right now. I just want to know how you guys stand.
Comments
I'm all for diverse business models - after all, it is whatever the market will bear - but I will only play subscription based models. I prefer a flat based fee model to allow all players to have a level playing field so to speak (24/7 players granted).
I'm certainly interested in seeing how RV's [Roma Victor] business model works in practice.
Regards,
Riotgirl
"If you think I'm plucky and scrappy and all I need is love, you're in way over your head. I don't have a heart of gold or get nice. There are a lot nicer people coming up. We call them losers."
-adds the 10th vote to monthly subscription-
The 'cash shop' style games do make it unfair for a lot of the players, but I can't stop playing them. I don't buy the stuff myself, but right now I have more important things to spend my money on than a monthly subscription to a game I'm most likely going to get bored of in a few weeks. It still gets my vote though.
Runescape: Lv 107
MapleStory: Lv 52 // Assassin
FlyFF: Lv 62 // Blade
Gunbound: Dual Silver Axe
Martial Heroes: Lv 44 // Scimitar Warrior
Okay, quite a few of you have stated that the perks system is unfair and gives an advantage to the people that pay money for in-game cash and items. If you were to suddenly put EQ, AC, UO, or any other "western" style MMORPG onto a Perks-4-pay model, that would certainly be true. However, if you designed the game with this kind of business model in mind, wouldn't you be shooting yourself in the foot to make a game that did this?
I think of it like this, I could buy professional level sports equipment but without professional level skill, I'm still not going to be able to compete with pro athletes. I can purchase the fastest race car that money could buy but I'd still get my ass handed to me by Jeff Gordon, Mario Andretti, or any other professional race driver.
I also notice many people talking about how slow leveling is in Korean games, how they have nothing to do but grind, how everyone looks the same, etc. Much of this is just a cheap trick to get you to spend the bare minimum on perks. The main draw of these games is PvP, hence there's nothing to do but grind to the level cap and PvP. Quit a few Perks are nothing more than fashion accessories that do nothing in the game but add individuality to your toon, hence everone looks the same.
From a business perspective, the Perks model has a large number of advantages. If you make a game with a population of 1000 players and offer a subscription of $10 a month, you're getting about $10,000 a month or $120,000 a year. Meanwhile, your compitition with 1 million subscribers is also charging $10 a month and making $120 million a year. The little guy doesn't have as much money to develope or advance their game as the guy on top so players are more likely to go to the game with the bigger population since it cost the same amount of money and updates it's content more often. Also, with the monthly subscription model, there is usually a box price that the player has to shell out first before being allowed to subscribe. Even if you play the trial, you are still usually required to pay the box price for a "Key" before you can begin your subscription proper. With the Perks model, the client is free and play is free, so people are more likely to try your game rather than deciding that the box price isn't worth it.
Yes, with the Perks model you get a reverse 80/20 ratio of player support. In real economies, 80% of the population works to support the upper 20% of said population. In a perks payment system, 20% of the players will buy stuff, thus supporting the game and allowing it to grow, while 80% will contribute nothing monetarily. This works pretty well in Asia where major league bandwidth can be purchased for around $30 American. In the the US and Europe, bandwidth is expensive and a game that is funded by Perks purchases can become the victim of it's own success. This means that you have to carefully balance the real world pricing with the game effectiveness of the perks along with the in-game economy.
As long as you're dealing with a niche game (cyberpunk, American Western, Historical), The Perks system should keep you running and turning a profit just fine. It's not so great for mass market games like WoW and EQ.
||
Yup thats pretty accurate. Personally, I prefer perks over pay to play or a combination of the 2. Since alot of monthly subscription fee games attempt to make the player play longer with grinding; a perks game allows you to either grind alot worse then a monthly fee game or have an easy time buy paying for a premium account and stuff in order to level high.
I actually liked NavyFields model despite the game being unpopular; it rewards you for paying; and when your a descent level you have to pay. $7.99 for a normal none-uberfied account a month, or $11.99 a month for a premium account where you make an average of 5 times more per battle.
i vote for limited access trial type thing.
ie you get to play the game all you want for free, preferably not lvl caps but something non-crippleing.
I find it amazing that by 2020 first world countries will be competing to get immigrants.
I really could not vote in this poll.
"Perks" only describes the business model if the items that you can buy in the game give you a gameplay advantage over those that do not buy them.
For example, in Roma Victor, you can only buy currency and with that currency you can only buy the regular craftable items that everyone else can make or trade for within the game. Therefore, you do not gain any gameplay advantage with the currency that you purchase except that you save yourself some time.
A term that is being used frequently in the industry is "micro-transaction." But, as explained above, micro-transactions do not need to necessarily give those players that make them a gameplay advantage or "perks" that are not obtainable by those that do not buy them.
So, in your poll, I would have to vote for subscriptions, because "Perks" or advantages that can only be easily obtained by buying them is a bad idea. However, if you had called it "micro-transactions" then I would vote in the reverse, because a business model that is funded by micro-transactions that only give players the advantage of saving them time, more closely allows players to compete equally regardless of the amount of time they can dedicate to playing.
Further, if the game also has no subscription fee, then you only end up paying for the time that you play. Even when you take a break, your account is still active.
Roma Victor has got this down!
Actually, I kinda dig RV's model of selling the box and selling in game currency. Most of the "perks" that I talk about are usually limited time stuff, character consumable, or purely decoration. Being able to levl faster for 7 days, super health/mana regeneration potions, a pair of cat ears, etc.
I'm thinking that that a "Box plus optional perks" model is going to take hold. Especially with indie developers that want to get into MMOs in order to cater to niche markets. You pay a "box" price for the client, about $15 to $25, and then you can pay free forever with the option of buying in game currency or items. This brings the MMORPG genre very squarely into the realm of casual gamers, and that's where the real money is.
This also taps into the more traditional "fire and forget" approach to game marketing that publishers and retailers are used to. At the same time, it'll help indies fund projects through the early beta stages with direct download distribution and pre-orders allowing the project to float until gold. There are a few other advantages as well for indies, but those are the major ones.