|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I disagree with a few of his points, I feel this game can support a subscription model longer than say, SWTOR did, if not as long as WoW has, but it is a breath of fresh air to see relatively popular authors not bashing subscription models, even if it is not a shining review. What is your opinion on this? Please avoid a flame war, ESO is launching sub, this is just to discuss the merits of where that will lead it.
A flame war should never occur on this forum no matter what the subject is, it would be against our daggers out, not in policy.
i think I would rather pay a monthly fee and get all for free (if I want to grind it out) than having to pay per "item" that I want.
I've always preferred the sub model, if you look at older games like EQ and DAoC, the patches from week to week were generally focused on improvements to gameplay, bug fixes, and new content, with large expansions every year or so with massive new features, engine upgrades, and continents worth of content. Pretty much every free to play game I've ever played still does the bug fixing and balancing, but includes new cosmetic items, and tries to come up with ways to fleece your wallets that week. It's entirely understandable, and I've let LoL, Marvel Heroes, and Path of Exile fleece my wallet for probably thousands of dollars, but what I'm missing is that big surge of new content a true expansion brings.
Another side effect of subscription vs f2p, is it provides a gate against botting, hacking, market exploitation, and is healthier for the community. Think of league of legends, if all these trash talking, foul mouthed, wanna be tough guy brats had to sink 50 bucks into buying an account, and 15 a month to keep it going, it'd hurt a little bit more when they got banned. (or, at least, maybe mommy and daddy will wonder where there cash is going and finally act like a parent)
Yeah I totally prefer subscription based games for the above reasons that Weldon stated. I hate what some free to play games have become, especially when they sell stats or stuff that should be attainable in game. 15 dollars isn't that much money anyways (coming from someone who is on a very limited income) especially considering how much I spend on my cable bill every month.
That being said, there are games where the buy 2 play model and free to play model work better in the end for the company and ultimately for the players as it keeps the company going. If you can't afford a sub but can afford a little bit of currency every now and then I see it as an acceptable thing.
Guild Wars 2 was our first experiment with a Free-2-Play model and I have to say the drop off we experienced in players was much steeper than we've seen in any Pay-2-Play game. Free-2-Play may keep a wealth of players in the world because it's free but it suffers in brand loyalty. DAOC, WAR, RIFT all had their first drop in population between 9 months and 2 years. We didn't decline in RIFT until for over a year and a half. Guild Wars 2 population dropped in the first 3 months.
Each style offers some nice advantages but both have disadvantages too. So far from my experience I prefer the pay-2-play model as the content is focused around keeping people in the game and not focused around a peddling cash shop items.
sub models are fine as long as they have the support of the attendant gaming community, i have subbed to WoW since early vanilla with no more than a couple months missed in that whole time and havent regretted it. I have quite often spent more in a FtP games shop in the first month or 2 than i have on a sub game for example spent way more than intended on Neverwinter. The benefits ae obviously that there are no pay gates and the game is more stable and resourced by and large
On the other hand if you are going to sub then it kinda behooves you to play, it does me anyway, if i was subbed i would want to be online at least a few times a week. The good thing about FtP is that you can drop it and come back to it after a week or a month or whatever and not feel like you are wasting money whereas if i am subbed and not playing a game i start to slap myself round the back of the head a bit and certainly wouldnt resub just for a quick hour or 2 like you can with FtP
This then touches on community, i like FtP because you can step in and out. As part of a gaming community spanning multiple games its nice to be able to step in and attend a social event or a community event and show your fellow members a bit of support, with a sub game its a lot harder to do that
There are very much pros and cons on both sides, neither is a bad model or the right or wrong way to go. If Zenimax make a really good game it will be popular, if they dont it wont and i dont think personally that the sub model will be the deciding factor in it being a success or not
May want to be a little careful when saying things like "lies." Plans change, develops can't always afford things, etc.
Anyway. I prefer p2p. I like the fact that it usually bars trolls, bots, hackers, and others who don't want to waste the money for dumb stuff. But I enjoy being able to get on gw2 whenever I want.
I think for a game like ESO, where it has to be paid for to constantly evolve and improve, sub is a smart idea.
Each style offers some nice advantages but both have disadvantages too. So far from my experience I prefer the pay-2-play model as the content is focused around keeping people in the game and not focused around a peddling cash shop items.
This is exactly why I started becoming resentful toward Guild Wars 2. I loved that game at launch, it was truly amazing and I was quite content to purchase bank space, bag slots, character slots and transmutation stones. As time went on, they started throwing more and more at the cash shop and the actual game content was sub-par, the balance patches were quick fix bandaids, the living world content too fast and forgettable with absolutely no impact on the world. The Ascended tier was the beginning and the end for me. I gave it the benefit of the doubt from November 2012 right through till December 2013, over 12 months, but it just got worse and worse with each patch.
In conclusion, I'm done with buy to play and free to play games now. I thought Guild Wars would be different, and it was at first, but I'm subscriptions all the way now. I know with a subscription that I am getting a full game and they will be adding things to the game to keep me there.
For all the wonders of this site, a "like" button is nowhere to be found. My situation exactly echos Elth's. My pocketbook loved the idea of B2P with GW2, and I got likely 4 good months out of that game before I realized that's it, from now on content would be trickles and every new alt I rolled would have financial burdens attached to it. The "chests" are an important part of f2p and b2p model, you need something people have a reason to microtransaction on that isn't SWTOR's *resists the urge to be rude* permit system.
Honestly the article made me a tad mad near the end when it stated that basically ESO is going to fall into the same abyss that Bioware threw SWTOR, but oddly enough that article was the strongest encouragement I could find to combat the Newsweek article that basically said any game that launches sub is doomed. Not linking that here, Shoddycast does a good job lambasting it, but basically some folks that have likely never played games, just look at sales numbers, are trying to predict the end of subscriptions, thus my article saying they arn't dead, just strained.
I have a feeling that most people that support the sub model only have one or maybe two gamers to account for. When you are a household of four players needing accounts, the sub model becomes far, FAR less appealing. I love the model RIFT uses. Give me the option of playing for free with limited bag space, and character slots or a sub that gives me the full account freedom plus a bonus gift every day/week. That way my kids can play free to play while my wife and I pay a sub.
Aalwein, I grew up in a family of 8. We all played DAoC, and then moved onto WoW when DAoC died. I will say, situations vary for everyone. That's what we did, that's where our entertainment bill was, and I know most people don't do that. I'm in a family of extreme gamers. But my dad has been through a couple of layoffs, and we had to end subs. So I get it, and I'm still in favor of the p2p model.
But, like I said, all situations vary. What's important is finding something that works for each circumstance =)
I agree Ragmar, everyone is different and what works for the goose may put the gander in the poorhouse. Aalwein you keep a tighter leash on your kids than my brother in law, that's for sure. They managed to spend close to 150 dollars in Neverwinter the first month and he still keeps catching them converting any cash he gives them into gamecards instead of lunch or clothes. F2P and B2P are viable models, but my opinion is I would rather pay a set fee and have my limitation be time (playing the game I am paying to use as my entertainment) than not pay the fee and be limited by how much I am willing to spend that month on smaller things/access.
For me the subscription based payment method is my favored method, I can only concentrate on one or two games at a time and usually one of them is permanently occupied by Civilization games (Sid Meier holds my soul tightly in his clutches), so a subscription based game for me (especially one as vast and immersive as an Elder Scrolls game usually is) is extremely cheap entertainment.
The way I see it, Subs are the way games should have stayed, when Everquest went F2P they started locking gear you got in the world behind paygates which you had to buy unlockers just to use the gear or access the broker. I liked the way Rift did F2P it was a nice hybrid between the best of all 3 models, an optional Subscription allowed you to get bonuses that could increase progression capabilities such as faster leveling or more currency gain for a small portion of the day alongside daily and weekly bonuses that rewarded people with a little extra plat and a few items. while Buying a copy of the game unlocked the amount of bag and character slots you would have if the game never went F2P (5 bags 6 Char slots) as opposed to truly free (2 Bags, 2 char slots) while still allowing the top tier gear to be equipped by anybody who was able to get a group or raid and run the instances. the new souls (storm legion souls) well that was behind a paygate but it was always behind a paygate (you got them if you bought storm legion or just bought the souls from the store). Trion I believe had the idea that had the power to make the player base happy for that game and still bring in tons of money. I believe that Sub model will work well for TESO, for how long that is up to time itself to tell. I am hoping the sub model will last the test of time.
» Edited on: 2014-01-17 02:37:37
I would rather just pay a sub. Not a fan of cash shops when it contains stuff needed to fully enjoy the game.
I have canceled and started my WoW sub several times over the last 9 years or so. And even though they have a store none of the stuff in it is important to game play.
On the other hand, my WoW sub is still active and I have not logged in for months because I finally bought Skyrim with the xpacs and got hooked.
I will probably cancel WoW again once ESO goes live.
WoW was smart back when they did the year long sub with neat perks like "free copy of Diablo 2" or "Beta Access for Pandaria", I did that and I ended up playing wow maybe 5-6 months out of the 12. When you calculate the cost of Diablo in there I broke about even to if I had bought the game yet Blizzard knew they had their money and I knew if I felt like logging into WoW I could. Kind of wish more games would offer incentives to do year-long or 6-month other than saving a few dollars. There are ways to motivate people with sub models, it just takes time and effort while having a 10 dollar 12-slot inventory expansion is quick and dirty.
More lifetime subs if you ask me. Greatest thing LotRO ever did. If Blizzard offered a lifetime sub to WoW, I'd buy it even though I don't currently have a WoW sub. It's a game I often resub to just for a month or two at a time when I'm bored. Lifetime subs. $200-$250. Awesome. Pantheon is offering a limited buy lifetime sub for $250 if you back the Kickstarter. Bad timing since I don't have a job, but if I did, I'd jump on that in a second. Probably not the best deal for the developer, of course.
Gotta second that, Aalwein...
The lifetime sub option was GREAT...
Granted, I'm a gambler, so I'm willing to bet on a game sticking around and my attention being held long enough to make it worth it :)
I, for one, am a fairly outspoken proponent of sub fees.. Keeps the community more dedicated and tends to weed out some of the "I'm only here because there's nothing on tv today" people
That being said, I do feel there comes a time in the life of every decent MMO where they MAY want to reconsider... Hopefully, with ESO, after they've recouped their production expenses, the game has been around a couple of years, and populations are starting to dwindle, they will adopt a more "friendly to the masses" business model and change things up, as opposed to sticking to a "sub only" business model well past the time when it is the best idea... I don't like change, but I'd much rather see change than death :)
EDIT: Oh, and this is Z, not Nalini... Totally forgot I was logged into her account when I posted that :)
I concur with many of the previous posts made here and I'm surprised how much negative PR ESO's sub plan has gotten.
I still have an active WoW sub and have branched off to Warhammer and Rift both when they were sub based and never thought twice. To me a subscription is just naturally part of an MMO, like the article states, any F2P introduction only introduces new potential problems. Call me a gaming hermit, but the 1st time I saw a F2P game I was baffled. To me, a subscription really isn't that bad if you consider what your gaming budget would be if you had to pony up $50 every time you bought a new game because you played the previous one out.
As much as I don't like what Blizzard has done to their games, what they've done to lure players into subbing shouldn't go unmentioned. You can play up to level 20 but you only had access to vanilla content (not any expansion based content including character races) and you could pony up for the game and get 30 free days (B2P model); BUT in the end it always boiled down to a Sub.
I am thrilled that ESO is sticking to their guns and keeping a sub based system. Yes, F2P is nice, but F2P is only nice when you're waiting for a REAL game to come out that you want to pay for, like ESO. I just don't view F2P games as real games, they feel more like casinos to me... all flash, all superficial, no real content to keep you there, but the SHINIES!! Oh, the shinies are everywhere!!! It's all a distraction, and fabricated addiction, to get you to basically give handfulls of cash for non-existent things that could disappear at literally any moment.
F2P, to me, equates to greed. The devs making F2P games aren't making a game because they love games, they are making it because they are exploiting the addictive qualities of games and they want to make money.
Sub games have traditionally had full expansions once every year or two (EQ is still doing them even now!!), to breathe life into their games, expand the lore, expand the character options, and just expand and fill the world. F2P games give new ponies to ride, top hats to wear, sparkly squirrels to be your best friend forever (all for a price, of course), but did you see that pony over there, it's RAINBOW!! I want a rainbow pony! Oh, it's $20? Well, okay, it's really cool, I guess that's okay... I mean look at all the stats it gives me, and it's so sparkly and pretty!!
I'll stop now. :P
Good article. If a gam offers good value for a sub I don't mind paying, and I'm really looking forward to promised updates in ESO like thieves guild and dark brotherhood. By comparison, SWTOR delivered very little in the first few months to keep me playing. GW 2 is still a fun game but I really wish they would launch a big expansion vs oarceling out content.
It looks like I'm throwing my hat in with most of you that said they prefer P2P, and for the same reasons. As gaming is my entertainment - especially over the years where my situation hasn't allowed me the expense or ability of going out to socialise - I've never regretted spending that $15 a month.
Having said that, I really liked RIFT's style of F2P, I think they balanced things well. I've been burnt by a lot of F2P games though, less so by P2P.
I am all for subscription model. I believe in paying for a true quality MMO that continuously develop content for the future to come. However, saying that I am not sure how long ESO will be able to sustain subscription numbers with this payment model. Most MMO including GW2 have people maxing out levels in 1-2 weeks. Then you have your end-game or PvP participation. By 3-4 months a lot would have quit. In GW2, my friends massive quite by 6 months. And this is for a free Buy2Play game! Granted GW2 still retains quite a decent amount of players even right now.
I believe as long as Zenimax is realistic in maintaining X amount of subscribers they should be in good hands. Even if they eventually switch to F2P, RIFT has shown that they transitioned into a true F2P quite nicely. SWTOR on the other hand failed miserably because it expected too much. EA was boasting that SWTOR will beat WoW's subscription numbers, etc etc... All the while SWTOR was released fairly incomplete, no PvP, and missing lots of content. By the time major patches came in, most had already left.
So I still believe in monthly sub payment model. But seeing what GW2 has done, Zenimax better churn out high quality content fast and furious. If not they are going to lose subscription numbers fast and considering GW2 also offers "similar" WvW/AvA/RvR experience.
I'm a bit on both sides of the fence. I think I prefer the simplicity of "everything's included" in a sub plan, especially one with a lifetime option. I bought in on the LotRO lifetime sub and have never regretted it.
I'll admit, though, that it's nice to be able to drop in on a game now and then without having to pay a sub fee for it. There is a bit of a feeling of being nickle and dimed for everything though. I prefer that the cash shop focus on cosmetic and luxury items, not necessities like bag and bank space or character slot unlocks.
I'm a sub person myself, I mean I do play F2P games like LoL or Arkadia:CoS but like Xyanthra said those are just games you play while you wait for the next big game which will compel you to spend some money on it.
I really believe ESO will not "fail" if they can provide new content at the rate they promised, because so far I can tell you I'm in love with the game and all its mechanics, and also if they have to go F2P I trust they will not melt down to something like Arkadia:CoS which is literally a P2W.
With that said I'll be happily paying my 15 bucks as long as I can or the game allows it :D
