General Discussion

It seems Microtransactions are finding a place in the MMORPG market more and more these days so I wanted to ask the community how you feel about the idea and which business model you prefer:

Free to play – generally much lower production value and less support

Free to play with microtransaction support – allowing advantage to players who wish to pay for in game items and buffs

Standard subscription based – everyone pays the same monthly rate and has equal opportunity.

Low Subscription based with microtransaction support – costing less per month than the standard mmorpg’s and allows advantage to players who wish to pay for in game items and buffs.

Microtransactionz! neva! Neva! NEVER!!

Unless it’z just "flavour" stuff like different coloured mountz or whateva. I’ll neva play a game where da quality of your itemz dependz on ’ow much youI’z willin’ to spend.

Microtrasactions in a competetive environment just feels wrong to me. Sorta like the 3 balls for a dollar at the carnival/fair. That's the themepark, this is an MMO. Instead of "pay to play " it's feels more like "pay to win", and i don't dig that even if it comes out to the same amount paid. I would imagine it could (and probably does) work in some cases, but as it stands now i don't want it in an MMO.

In my experiences a micro-pay model can keep a game competative and make its money off simply giving players fun things to have.

That being said I think the game really needs to be designed around the micro-pay model and not just tacked on at the end.

In the mmorpg I am designing with a team, we aim to acheive ways for players to spend money on two different types on ingame items.

1 is cosmetic and fun items. For example a pet, a tuxedo, a mask. Silly things like that. Pop in a dollar or two and get somthing silly and fun, both to distiguish yourself, and to support the game you play.

The second is Game progressing. In our game "guilds" have the option of adding special "non mandatory" parts to their guild "areas" (wow how much more generic can I make this).
There will be a broad selection of addons you can get through game means, but we hope to add the fun/game ones. Or entertaining seasonal areas for a cost.

In terms of compeition, Its not going to be a deciding factor. For example a tavern. We may say 5 dollars and a tavern or other social gathering place would be tacked on. Another example is a statue. There are statues you can earn, but there are also statues that are only available for periods of time that can be bought.

Ideally we dont want people feeling pressured into paying money just so they can play the game. What we are aiming for is that people who like the game can put some money in to distiguish themselves and or add little extras to feel like they are contributing the game (which they are)

Its a fine line, but when part of your target audience doenst have a job, its a lot easier to get them interested if they can start out just downloading a program and playing rather then having a parent buy the game for them and fork out a monthly fee from the get go.

Free to play – generally much lower production value and less support

Free to play with microtransaction support – allowing advantage to players who wish to pay for in game items and buffs

Standard subscription based – everyone pays the same monthly rate and has equal opportunity.

Low Subscription based with microtransaction support – costing less per month than the standard mmorpg’s and allows advantage to players who wish to pay for in game items and buffs.

In general, I prefer Free to Play games because the designers care more about the game. They designed it because it was something THEY liked to play. And I don't feel bad about leaving right away.

Free to Play with Micro<blah-blah> is a sucker's bet. It is actually crippleware with endless payments that generally exceed standard fee based service in almost all cases.

Also microtransaction support breeds massive hostility when it can be used to buy power in the game. Not to mention there can be some legal issues because when I PAY for a sword +3 then it can be considered a contract to use. I'm not sure a clicky-EULA would get you out of that one.

I wouldn't consider playing anything with microtransaction support. Even if they were only fluff items, they'd boil the toad. Soon there would be transactions for everything. Nope. No chance.

Standard subscription based games are the standard currently, but I feel they're going to begin to fade in popularity because of a cookie-cutter obsolescence issue. The devs are no longer trying to make a game they liked (unlike UO and the original EQ) but are under the control of asshole suits that ruin everything they touch without exception.

Low subscription microtransaction support sounds like the absolute worst model. You're going to pay to get crippleware and then be lead by the nose to purchase other stuff just to get even... The only thing you're going to do is lose.

That way you're guaranteed to pay the most money for the least entertainment all the while hooking yourself deeper into the game with microtransaction investment.

I would put people that would use that game model into the same boat as the poor idiots that payed for virtual cards in an on line CCG. (My head still hurts at that one.)

I agree with microtransaction when it just allows you to get faster any content in the game, not exclusive content

In general, i don't mind about F2P (with microtransactions) or standard monthly fee. But just because the games where you must pay each month usually have better content than F2P games (and usually there are less kids shrieking at any time)

Well, yeah. I guess there are howling kiddies in f2p games, but is it really a greater number than Vanguard or WOW?

Certainly the maturity level in vanguard is equal. I haven't played wow, but judging from the wowzers coming to vanguard lately I'd say they can't be much worse.

In fact, I'd think that the more obscure f2p games would be more mature having expended some effort in many cases to locate them. This assuming the kiddies get their games via word of mouth or a pretty box in walmart.

I think microtransaction games can be decent or really bad. I haven't seen one I'd actually call good yet. It all depends on how the microtransactions are handled. If the amount of experience you get from monsters and quests is reduced, and therefore the grinding is increased, and the only way to get a "normal" gaming experience is to spend money in the cash shop for experience enhancing items, then that's very bad.

On the other hand, if most of the items in the cash shop are just fluff that don't really impact the game or most importantly your progression through the game, and if the cash shop items can be sold through player shops so you can still get them without having to spend any actual money, then that's not as bad.

One game system that hasn't been discussed yet is tiered games, where the base game is free, and then they have an option for $5 a month that unlocks more content, then perhaps another option for $10 a month that unlocks even more content, such as Dungeon Runners and Anarchy Online. Again, this is partially dependent on how well it's implemented, but I think it's a good way for a big money high level game to offer free content and reasonable prices without necessarily unbalancing anything.

      Item malls would only work if your purchasing limit per month was equal to an average amount of P2P monthly subscription,the items were not tradeable,and the items didnt give any sort of advantage over other players end game.

This would prevent people with deep pockets getting an edge over you,.unless of course you have 0 income or still live at home as a sibling.

I love exp rate pots from item malls..if you wanna pay more to level cap faster and your willing to pay, why not?