Maintenance for the week of November 11:
• [COMPLETE] Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – November 13, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – November 13, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – November 13, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – November 13, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
The Xbox Live™ service interruption has been resolved. Thank you for your patience.
Why are people so against monthly fees?
-
Ohioastro✭✭✭✭knightblaster wrote: »
Well, so far we have FF XIV, ESO, and Wildstar all launching with sub fees (I'd count WS as a simple variant on a sub fee, with the option to farm a ton of in-game gold instead; if past practice in other games is any guide this will be extremely tedious in practice...) If they pull it off then we'll have 3. If they don't, we won't. Previously Rift, SWTOR, and The Secret World switched. It isn't as if there are dozens of examples of one pattern, no?
0 -
Yasha✭✭✭✭knightblaster wrote: »The pay to win idiots are console kids. With 15$ a month, per person, they are only making 6.50$ not including what they pay their staff. So for that 15$, very little goes to their pockets. With a server game, it isn't like a console game. It is ever expanding, therefore, they are always working on it. You physically can not just pay one time and expect free content for life as well as perfect server maintenance and all that. Though I guess the free to play children would much rather take Mommy's credit card and buy endgame items so they have a chance against real players.
GW2 says hello- just saying.
I agree, but GW2 was built from the ground up as a B2P game. This impacts the whole design. In GW2, the drops you get/find are usually not great for you. So you sell them on the global AH (the trading post) to generate cash to buy stuff that other people have posted, and if you don't have enough cash ... you buy some from Anet in the gem store via buying gems and then converting into in-game gold. That supports their revenue stream as a B2P game without a sub. It works, but it also has design implications. Due to the gear equalization (for the most part, leaving aside Ascended gear, which is not really needed and not a huge disparity, and in any case something that can't be easily purchased), it isn't really buy to play, but the drop system encourages people to buy gold so that they can gear their character. The design and revenue model are linked.
That doesn't mean it isn't a fun game -- I've had fun in it, as well. But doing the B2P thing in a way that is NOT an easy slapdash P2W model takes some up front design and planning, rather than patching it in if the sub model "goes wrong".
Well I just mentioned GW2 because it is a popular mmo game that seems to be going fine without charging a $15/month game tax. Obviously once you have played a game that gives you everything that a sub-based game gives you but only for $60 it feels relatively expensive to pay a box price and a $15/month sub.
0 -
Shimond✭✭✭✭Well I just mentioned GW2 because it is a popular mmo game that seems to be going fine without charging a $15/month game tax. Obviously once you have played a game that gives you everything that a sub-based game gives you but only for $60 it feels relatively expensive to pay a box price and a $15/month sub.
They'd have shut down by now if it wasn't for the Gem store. There's always a maintenance fee or other cost involved in these kinds of games, and the money has to come from somewhere.0 -
Atheris✭I personally have no problem with a monthly fee. The company has to earn the fee tho, and this means good customer service with rapid response times. And with them developing and publishing new and well done content while keeping up on bug fix's. For me it will come down to how the pvp is, I have not done any of yet in ESO although wanting to jump in currently I am a lowbie at 26 or 27.
That being said their customer service started off horrible, was one of the worst examples I had ever seen. How ever it appears they are changing in a positive way. ESO_ShannonM did a fine job helping me get a friend help. Not sure that the issue has been resolved although she has been happy that progress is being made.
So right now I see a monthly fee as a great idea for the game. And I am also happy to see that they are offering other items as a way to generate income like the $14 horse. I hope they do more things like this as the server and bandwith alone is a large expense not to mention having the ability to retain talented programmers, and customer service agents all adds up.0 -
knightblaster✭✭✭knightblaster wrote: »
Well, so far we have FF XIV, ESO, and Wildstar all launching with sub fees (I'd count WS as a simple variant on a sub fee, with the option to farm a ton of in-game gold instead; if past practice in other games is any guide this will be extremely tedious in practice...) If they pull it off then we'll have 3. If they don't, we won't. Previously Rift, SWTOR, and The Secret World switched. It isn't as if there are dozens of examples of one pattern, no?
FFXIV ARR is one, not yet at the first year mark, but I'd allow that one.
ESO and Wildstar don't count, because they just launched or are just about to launch, so they are in the "try the sub model" mode. We'll see what they do.
Previously, LOTRO, DDO, AOC, RIft, TOR, TSW, Aion, EQ2 all went freemium after launching with the sub model. WAR never switched, but EA simply canned the game after five years citing the GW license (which would surely have been renewed/renegotiated if the game didn't have a very small population).
Simply put, there hasn't been an MMO released in the last ten years that has successfully implemented the subscription model over the long term. That doesn't mean it is literally impossible to do so, but it does mean that the odds are against it. ARR may pull that off. Perhaps this one will. Perhaps Wildstar. But the history weighs against that.1 -
Yasha✭✭✭✭Well I just mentioned GW2 because it is a popular mmo game that seems to be going fine without charging a $15/month game tax. Obviously once you have played a game that gives you everything that a sub-based game gives you but only for $60 it feels relatively expensive to pay a box price and a $15/month sub.
They'd have shut down by now if it wasn't for the Gem store. There's always a maintenance fee or other cost involved in these kinds of games, and the money has to come from somewhere.
I don't see what that has to do with, well anything really.
GW2 proves that a AAA game can be enjoyed without a sub. There are other very good games with f2p and/or optional/flexible payment models that also do well. You can choose how much money you want to spend, and with the best of these games most of what is for sale is cosmetic.
So on one hand one mmo offers $90 box +$15/month sub, and another similar quality mmo offers the game for $60 flat. The box-price +sub is relatively more expensive and seems unjustified considering what else is on the market.0 -
I'll continue to pay the fifteen dollars per month to play TESO as long as I can do so basicly folks!0 -
halflight2Soul Shrivenjakethefat1_ESO wrote: »Halflight2 you don't quite understand what I'm saying I'm not against paying the $60 just not monthly they don't need to keep charging people. An example of this is GTA online their not constantly charging people I will gladly pay the up front fee but not monthly for console your already paying for online services
This I wouldn't mind ether I have no problem with the btp style with a store option I just relay don't want it to go FREE to play beaus It usually ruins the game lol and the chat would be more full of pre ten's spouting garbage
0 -
The pay to win idiots are console kids. With 15$ a month, per person, they are only making 6.50$ not including what they pay their staff. So for that 15$, very little goes to their pockets. With a server game, it isn't like a console game. It is ever expanding, therefore, they are always working on it. You physically can not just pay one time and expect free content for life as well as perfect server maintenance and all that. Though I guess the free to play children would much rather take Mommy's credit card and buy endgame items so they have a chance against real players.
15 a month is ok for a game that works and is moderated with live events and free expansions.*Policing the MMO community since 1997*0 -
Monthly fees don't instantly mean a good community is guaranteed. A community is only as good as who decides to play the game in the first place. Anyone who thinks otherwise is foolish.
Natural Selection 2 has a far less toxic community than ESO, mostly due to the steep yet satisfying learning curve and its independent nature. And it's 25$, no monthly fees. Warframe is free to play. The community is very vocal with feedback, and the developers welcome and encourage it.
TESO is still early in its life cycle, so we'll see how it all turns out.Edited by Boatsniper on April 25, 2014 2:37PM0 -
Nefar✭✭The pay to win idiots are console kids. With 15$ a month, per person, they are only making 6.50$ not including what they pay their staff. So for that 15$, very little goes to their pockets. With a server game, it isn't like a console game. It is ever expanding, therefore, they are always working on it. You physically can not just pay one time and expect free content for life as well as perfect server maintenance and all that. Though I guess the free to play children would much rather take Mommy's credit card and buy endgame items so they have a chance against real players.
You have the source information to backup your claims of Zenimax profit margins on a subscription based subscription model? If not, only thing you have here is fact supported by your opinion.0 -
Chili✭✭Another sub game people seem to forget about is Eve Online. Even with it's niche crowd it has yet to go F2P.0 -
Shimond✭✭✭✭I don't see what that has to do with, well anything really.
GW2 proves that a AAA game can be enjoyed without a sub. There are other very good games with f2p and/or optional/flexible payment models that also do well. You can choose how much money you want to spend, and with the best of these games most of what is for sale is cosmetic.
So on one hand one mmo offers $90 box +$15/month sub, and another similar quality mmo offers the game for $60 flat. The box-price +sub is relatively more expensive and seems unjustified considering what else is on the market.
If that was your only point it was proven well before GW2. I don't think anyone anywhere is saying F2P isn't a viable business model.
The problem with F2P is in the end for the average player it costs far more money than a flat sub model. THIS is why the shift is going to F2P, not because it's consumer friendly - because it's company friendly.0 -
Eris✭✭✭✭I find that even when I am playing a F2P game I am usually subscribing anyways. The way I see it... if I'm not willing to subscribe to the game, I'm probably not that interested in it anyways.Side effects of reading messages on forums can cause nausea, head aches, spontaneous fits of rage, urination due to intense laughter, and sometimes the death of your monitor or other object in throwing range. If you find that you are reading forums more than 24 hours a day, please consult your nearest temporal physicist.1
-
MaeraB✭I'm perfectly happy (actually prefer) to pay a monthly fee. In most games that are f2p or b2p you end up spending more than the $14.99 in the cash shops anyhow, especially if you want to stay competitive or level at a normal pace etc.1
-
I would prefer a one time payment of $60. That's what I'm used to. I'm really cheap and tend to wait for games that I'm not desperate to play to be <$20 on steam. This is also the first MMO I've played, so I'm only here as an Elder Scrolls fan. Although I've been thoroughly enjoying myself, I have a feeling that once my character is done with all 3 alliances, spends a little time in PvP, and tries Craglorn, I'll consider the game kinda finished. At the moment, PvP is really repetitive and gets old fast. Unless they add lots of new stuff quickly, I may be done in another month. Not because I am unhappy, just that I will have done everything that interests me (at least for a while).0
-
Gix✭✭✭✭I was looking for a larger, more detailed article but this one is more to the point:
<<
Square Enix believes that a subscription model is a better long term solution than free-to-play for supporting a massively multiplayer online games like Final Fantasy XIV Online: A Realm Reborn.
"A lot of games look at the first two months of subscription numbers, think that's not going to be a feasible business, and switch over to free-to-play,” producer on Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn Naoki Yoshida told GamesIndustry International. “I don't think it's necessarily because free-to-play is a better form, though. It's more about people making a rash decision to switch over and chase a quick buck."
Yoshida explained that subscription-based route provides a stable flow of income that allows Square Enix to keep good developers on staff, who can update the game and make it better. He added that players might not like paying for subscriptions, but that with free-to-play, developers need to design content with potential revenue sources in mind. “It brings up a question of who we're making happy in the end," Yoshida said.
>>1