The days of subscribe to play MMO games are coming to an end. In the next couple of years I think we will see a lot more Buy to Play, and Microtransactional MMO games some of which will still have "premium access" for those willing to pay a monthly subscription.

You can see the shift already, casual and so called "social gaming" (a total misnomer since the games in this category are largely not social at all) trend is a large part of what is driving this change.

Originally posted by Strap

 

Hi Isabelle,

I normally agree with you but on this topic I strongly disagree.

 

"It might even mean games developers get to start concentrating on the fun aspect of their games rather than on ways in which to wring yet another month of subs out of people by extending the daily grind." This, in particular, strikes me as wishful thinking.

 

What I find most telling is how you originally refused to partake in RMT. You once hated the idea. So, what happened? The idea didn't change. You did. Or rather, I would suggest that you were gradually changed. From my experience - mainly with Turbine and DDO - you have been carefully manipulated and trained to the point of "making peace". For example, the practice of giving out some "free" coins so that players get accustomed to using the item shop is a fantastic form of manipulation. WoW's "trick" of mixing item shop with charity was also a stroke of marketing genius. These and other tricks have been very sucessful at manipulating players like you to "soften" you towards RMT.

 

I think you should trust your instincts more. You were initially leery of RMT, and even the subscription model. I think this is spot on. The subscription model serves the interests of the developers not the players.

 

People, you are being farmed. If you just accept everything these companies promote you are just sheep, bleating every now and again but ultimately following the crowd and doing as you are told, buying the products you are told to buy.

 

I've argued this before but what we really need is a site like this to stand up for the players, a kind of consumer protection perspective.

 

As far as I can tell, this site is really more about "protecting" the developers. And no, not because this site is being "paid off" but perhaps because the site managers are good friends with many developers, plus the perspective you get of players on these forums doesn't exactly win your heart towards them lol. Nevertheless, there is so little real criticism. It's a shame.

I'm so glad somebody notices and cares about that.

Ah to hell with you Parsley, and you're opinion on buying gold or item shops or whatever. I used to hate item shops and gold farmers and all that stuff, then I realized that the only reason I hated any of it was because I was jealous of those who could buy what I could not/ was not willing to. 

That right there is what all this "hating" comes down to... jealousy. It's about the "haves" and the "have nots". Peopel who buy gold for instance don't HURT developers... in fact they HELP them... because if you are playing you are paying. If you buy gold or whatever you are more likely to keep playing because you've invested real money into the game, beyond that of the subscription fee (assuming there is one). It's the developers fault if they don't see the opprotunity to sell gold themselves and cash in on it. They could completely cut out the middleman, make money, and put gold farmers out of business in one fell swoop... yet they don't. Their loss. 

You're little dream of e-communism, where everyone is electronicly equal and measured by their play time and not their bank account is cute... but not realistic. Fact is that people of means will always have an advantage over everyone else. It doesn't matter what you think about it, it simply is how it is.

if a game is designed well enough to pull excess funds out of the system for instance eve has the means by which you can turn the gold you earn in game into actual game time. it pulls chunks of money out of the economy and prevents it from piling up.

likewise you can do the same by buying the isk from someone in game as an exchange for giving them game time.

it does get rid of the gold farmers sort of but eve is unique in that the whole game econmy is built on the player you dont get NPC's that sell ore eventyhing has to be aquired.

most other games actually have merchants that sell things that you use to craft which at least part of the game economy is built on and as suhc gold in these systems quickly acumulate to epic propoortons. consider that daoc when it first started it was an achievment to reach a plat (1000 gold) but that in itself took until very close to end game and that money would soon be swallowed up by having to purchase items and gear. however the money never left game once it was farmed. yes horses and rez sickness and repairs took small amounts but never enough to really make a dent on the game.

unless your game is designed to pull gold out of the system then you cant really risk selling it in an RMT envriornment.

Problem is games are designed around the business model rather than the business model around the game.

So we get crap games most of the time. Proof in the pudding there.

Make a great game, then decide, depending on how people want to pay you, what your business model is. You get better games and more innovative business models. How bout that instead? Wouldn't that be better for gamers?

Originally posted by FikusOfAhazi

Problem is games are designed around the business model rather than the business model around the game.

So we get crap games most of the time. Proof in the pudding there.

Make a great game, then decide, depending on how people want to pay you, what your business model is. You get better games and more innovative business models. How bout that instead? Wouldn't that be better for gamers?

That's what is happening now, Fikus.

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by FikusOfAhazi

Problem is games are designed around the business model rather than the business model around the game.

So we get crap games most of the time. Proof in the pudding there.

Make a great game, then decide, depending on how people want to pay you, what your business model is. You get better games and more innovative business models. How bout that instead? Wouldn't that be better for gamers?

That's what is happening now, Fikus.

 New games are being designed like that?

Im pretty sure the business model is the first thing they decide. Then design a game to best monetize that model rather than a great game. You would think they would be one in the same, but unfortunately they're not. So we end up with poor games with extended grinds and withheld content.

Originally posted by FikusOfAhazi

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by FikusOfAhazi

Problem is games are designed around the business model rather than the business model around the game.

So we get crap games most of the time. Proof in the pudding there.

Make a great game, then decide, depending on how people want to pay you, what your business model is. You get better games and more innovative business models. How bout that instead? Wouldn't that be better for gamers?

That's what is happening now, Fikus.

 New games are being designed like that?

Im pretty sure the business model is the first thing they decide. Then design a game to best monetize that model rather than a great game. You would think they would be one in the same, but unfortunately they're not. So we end up with poor games with extended grinds and withheld content.

Are you saying that the companies are all changing their business models on some kind of unified lark? Isn't it more plausible that they are changing their business models based on how people want to pay them?

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by FikusOfAhazi

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by FikusOfAhazi

Problem is games are designed around the business model rather than the business model around the game.

So we get crap games most of the time. Proof in the pudding there.

Make a great game, then decide, depending on how people want to pay you, what your business model is. You get better games and more innovative business models. How bout that instead? Wouldn't that be better for gamers?

That's what is happening now, Fikus.

 New games are being designed like that?

Im pretty sure the business model is the first thing they decide. Then design a game to best monetize that model rather than a great game. You would think they would be one in the same, but unfortunately they're not. So we end up with poor games with extended grinds and withheld content.

Are you saying that the companies are all changing their business models on some kind of unified lark? Isn't it more plausible that they are changing their business models based on how people want to pay them?

 No, considering .05% pay all the bills.

I guess you could say that most want 'free' games if you wanna go there. But then like i said, we get crap games. Proof is in the pudding.

Are you saying companies just design great games, then decide what business model fits perfect with their game? Like Blizzard says they do?

I am not down with 15 bucks a month paying nothing more than account maint. For the most part, keeping an account on a server does not cost that much. Item shops not only charge customers for miniscule things, they strip already thin expansion packs of real content and pretty much remove free updates all together in many games.

Originally posted by FikusOfAhazi

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by FikusOfAhazi

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by FikusOfAhazi

Problem is games are designed around the business model rather than the business model around the game.

So we get crap games most of the time. Proof in the pudding there.

Make a great game, then decide, depending on how people want to pay you, what your business model is. You get better games and more innovative business models. How bout that instead? Wouldn't that be better for gamers?

That's what is happening now, Fikus.

 New games are being designed like that?

Im pretty sure the business model is the first thing they decide. Then design a game to best monetize that model rather than a great game. You would think they would be one in the same, but unfortunately they're not. So we end up with poor games with extended grinds and withheld content.

Are you saying that the companies are all changing their business models on some kind of unified lark? Isn't it more plausible that they are changing their business models based on how people want to pay them?

 No, considering .05% pay all the bills.

I guess you could say that most want 'free' games if you wanna go there. But then like i said, we get crap games. Proof is in the pudding.

Are you saying companies just design great games, then decide what business model fits perfect with their game? Like Blizzard says they do?

You're off by a few decimal points there. :)   5-10% typically spend money in F2P MMOs.

You've been writing 'Proof is in the pudding' a lot of your recent posts but you never explain what you're really talking about. A catchy phrase doesn't really prove anything, especially when F2P games have a much more impressive history of stable launches, regular updates, monthly in-game events and successful expansions over the past three years than subscription games have.

Companies look at how people choose to spend their money and build their business models accordingly. We could look just at MMOs or we could look at entertainment services in general. Most people currently like a base monthly fee plus the option for additional features and services. Your posts seem to infer that the older MMOs were made to provide enjoyment and the newer MMOs are made to provide cash flow. Do you really believe that the business model wasn't at the forefront of decisions when creating games like M59, UO, AC and EQ, and that the business model did not dictate a good portion of design decisions throughout development?

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by FikusOfAhazi

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by FikusOfAhazi

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by FikusOfAhazi

Problem is games are designed around the business model rather than the business model around the game.

So we get crap games most of the time. Proof in the pudding there.

Make a great game, then decide, depending on how people want to pay you, what your business model is. You get better games and more innovative business models. How bout that instead? Wouldn't that be better for gamers?

That's what is happening now, Fikus.

 New games are being designed like that?

Im pretty sure the business model is the first thing they decide. Then design a game to best monetize that model rather than a great game. You would think they would be one in the same, but unfortunately they're not. So we end up with poor games with extended grinds and withheld content.

Are you saying that the companies are all changing their business models on some kind of unified lark? Isn't it more plausible that they are changing their business models based on how people want to pay them?

 No, considering .05% pay all the bills.

I guess you could say that most want 'free' games if you wanna go there. But then like i said, we get crap games. Proof is in the pudding.

Are you saying companies just design great games, then decide what business model fits perfect with their game? Like Blizzard says they do?

You're off by a few decimal points there. :)   5-10% typically spend money in F2P MMOs.

You've been writing 'Proof is in the pudding' a lot of your recent posts but you never explain what you're really talking about. A catchy phrase doesn't really prove anything, especially when F2P games have a much more impressive history of stable launches, regular updates, monthly in-game events and successful expansions over the past three years than subscription games have.

Companies look at how people choose to spend their money and build their business models accordingly. We could look just at MMOs or we could look at entertainment services in general. Most people currently like a base monthly fee plus the option for additional features and services. Your posts seem to infer that the older MMOs were made to provide enjoyment and the newer MMOs are made to provide cash flow. Do you really believe that the business model wasn't at the forefront of decisions when creating games like M59, UO, AC and EQ, and that the business model did not dictate a good portion of design decisions throughout development?

 .05% pays all the bills. The rest doesnt spend enough to matter. Any other facts?:)

Legalize cheating to profit. Great game design. And just like thier design, they stole the idea from others.

Originally posted by kadepsyson

EVE Online is a pay to play, with a fully supported RMT system.  You can buy anything for real money and they allow it just fine - characters, ships, modules, it's all perfectly fine.

Probably the decision CCP made that I hate the most.

 Can you link me to that item shop? (A screenshot will do) All I can find is a place where I can buy game time from them.

An MMO publisher selling game time? THE HORROR!

---

Originally posted by Malcanis

---

Originally posted by kadepsyson
EVE Online is a pay to play, with a fully supported RMT system.  You can buy anything for real money and they allow it just fine - characters, ships, modules, it's all perfectly fine.
Probably the decision CCP made that I hate the most.

---

 Can you link me to that item shop? (A screenshot will do) All I can find is a place where I can buy game time from them.
An MMO publisher selling game time? THE HORROR!

---

You can buy a PLEX, which is game time, correct. But you can than turn that PLEX into an in-game item and sell that for in game ISK. Then you use that ISK to buy anything you want. RMT.

Originally posted by eoweth

 

---

Originally posted by Malcanis

---

Originally posted by kadepsyson
EVE Online is a pay to play, with a fully supported RMT system.  You can buy anything for real money and they allow it just fine - characters, ships, modules, it's all perfectly fine.
Probably the decision CCP made that I hate the most.

---

 Can you link me to that item shop? (A screenshot will do) All I can find is a place where I can buy game time from them.
An MMO publisher selling game time? THE HORROR!

---

 

You can buy a PLEX, which is game time, correct. But you can than turn that PLEX into an in-game item and sell that for in game ISK. Then you use that ISK to buy anything you want. RMT.

 You do not even need to covert it into ingame item...just go on the eve bazaar forum and sell it right there and send them the code in a secure trade.

"I usually try to see all sides when it comes to MMO debates, but when I wrote “real money transactions” I was thinking “item stores”; I entirely forgot about the less savory roots of RMT, which is gold selling. Let’s be clearer this time: I don’t approve of gold selling at all. I understand where it comes from and I know why some people feel compelled to use the service, but I think it’s directly detrimental to the games in which it happens and more indirectly bad for the community and industry as a whole."

    Problem I've always have with item malls is that if you investigate RMT (gold seller sites) You can get alot more off RMT then if you buy off a item mall.  Example this EXP buff potion for a week period is 10$ on this item mall , which is worth let's say 300 million gold in game BUT if you go to a RMT site for 10$ you can get 1 billion gold which is 3 EXP buff potions.  That is why I avoid F2P games and will always be in P2P , either give everything to the players on day 1 with a monthly fee or go back to the drawing board. That's my way on seeing things.

Originally posted by Palebane

 I agree. But that's the thing, our subscription money does go toward developing those things we do not care to purchase, just as your stadium ticket prices go up in order for them to buy jerseys to sell to people. The companies are making money on both ends, in my opinion.

 

Technically, your subscription money purchases access to the game as it exists for one month.  The company offering the game makes profit by providing a subscription service.  They can then invest that profit in the creation of fluff items, expansion content or whatever else they deem appropriate.  Simpy because the money you spend with a company may, at some point, be used for something you don't think it should be doesn't mean you're right.  The money you spent on that subscription stops being yours once the payment has been completed.  

Originally posted by eoweth

 

---

Originally posted by Malcanis

---

Originally posted by kadepsyson
EVE Online is a pay to play, with a fully supported RMT system.  You can buy anything for real money and they allow it just fine - characters, ships, modules, it's all perfectly fine.
Probably the decision CCP made that I hate the most.

---

 Can you link me to that item shop? (A screenshot will do) All I can find is a place where I can buy game time from them.
An MMO publisher selling game time? THE HORROR!

---

You can buy a PLEX, which is game time, correct. But you can than turn that PLEX into an in-game item and sell that for in game ISK. Then you use that ISK to buy anything you want. RMT.

As much as I hate RMT, CCP isn't quite crossing the line because it's not quite RMT.

Yes, you buy PLEX with real money, and yes you can turn around and legitimately trade that PLEX for ingame currency. The main thing is, you're trading with another player. More specifically, you're trading potential gameplay time (PLEX) with another player in exchange for some of their time played (the time they spend acquiring ISK).

Pretty much every other instance of RMT involves the developer creating items and/or bonuses out of nothing in exchange for real cash. In Eve however, CCP preserves the integrity of the game by having items still require tangtible effort to acquire.

Originally posted by killion81

Originally posted by Palebane

 I agree. But that's the thing, our subscription money does go toward developing those things we do not care to purchase, just as your stadium ticket prices go up in order for them to buy jerseys to sell to people. The companies are making money on both ends, in my opinion.

 

Technically, your subscription money purchases access to the game as it exists for one month.  The company offering the game makes profit by providing a subscription service.  They can then invest that profit in the creation of fluff items, expansion content or whatever else they deem appropriate.  Simpy because the money you spend with a company may, at some point, be used for something you don't think it should be doesn't mean you're right.  The money you spent on that subscription stops being yours once the payment has been completed.  

 Well that certainly is one way to look at it. Not saying you are wrong, but I feel differently. If I don't like what the developers are doing with my money, I'm free to stop giving it to them.

Originally posted by Palebane

Originally posted by killion81

Originally posted by Palebane

 I agree. But that's the thing, our subscription money does go toward developing those things we do not care to purchase, just as your stadium ticket prices go up in order for them to buy jerseys to sell to people. The companies are making money on both ends, in my opinion.

 

Technically, your subscription money purchases access to the game as it exists for one month.  The company offering the game makes profit by providing a subscription service.  They can then invest that profit in the creation of fluff items, expansion content or whatever else they deem appropriate.  Simpy because the money you spend with a company may, at some point, be used for something you don't think it should be doesn't mean you're right.  The money you spent on that subscription stops being yours once the payment has been completed.  

 Well that certainly is one way to look at it. Not saying you are wrong, but I feel differently. If I don't like what the developers are doing with my money, I'm free to stop giving it to them.

 

That's certainly true.  You lose access to the game they created when you stop paying though, meaning that's what you're paying for in the first place.  If you enjoy the game but disagree with a few things the devs do, it seems like a lose/lose if you cancel.  No more game enjoyment for you and one less sub supporting the ongoing development and operation of the game.

Also, cash shops are simply a revenue generation avenue for the developer.  If you really like a game, you should be happy the developers are able to continue to make money.  Once they stop making money, the game goes away.