Make me an MMO thats fun enough, and I'll pay $30 a month, thats still a whole lot cheaper than any one of my many monthly entertainment bills.

Sadly,  there currently isn't an MMO i would pay $15 a month for, never mind $30. The sub fee isn't the problem, the games themselves have gotten really dull.  Maybe i've been playing them too long, maybe i expect too much, maybe developers don't want to take chances, I dunno. I don't have an answer for that one.

  I do know however, i personally don't have a problem paying (subscription) money for something i enjoy, i just have a problem finding it in the MMO world.

Originally posted by Tayah

Originally posted by Istavaan

Originally posted by Loke666

EA have the theory that TOR is a great game and that it is the payment model that is its problem.

I however think that the problem is the game itself, a good game will sell no matter the payment model and frankly have games that moved not made the huge impact that DDO and LOTRO did a few years back.

DDO did proved that there is room for a few good western F2P games, no doubt about that  but the problem with most MMOs is hardly how people pay for them, it is more that most of them have copied the mechanics from Wow but forgot to copy Wows coding and bugcrushing.

A great game can be P2P, B2P, F2P or freemium, it will get many players no matter what. A crap game might be hold on lifesupport easier as F2P but most of those players will be temporary players who never even reach levelcap (or skillcap).

EA will saying anything not to take the fall for TOR's failure. A scumbag company of the highest order and a good reason why they are the most hate corporation in America.

Aye, they tried to say the reason player numbers dropped off so bad was because people said they'd play it if it didn't have a sub. What they really said was It's not worth a subscription fee...Big difference, heeh.

They also blamed the players at one point.

Originally posted by Istavaan

Originally posted by Tayah

Originally posted by Istavaan

Originally posted by Loke666

EA have the theory that TOR is a great game and that it is the payment model that is its problem.

I however think that the problem is the game itself, a good game will sell no matter the payment model and frankly have games that moved not made the huge impact that DDO and LOTRO did a few years back.

DDO did proved that there is room for a few good western F2P games, no doubt about that  but the problem with most MMOs is hardly how people pay for them, it is more that most of them have copied the mechanics from Wow but forgot to copy Wows coding and bugcrushing.

A great game can be P2P, B2P, F2P or freemium, it will get many players no matter what. A crap game might be hold on lifesupport easier as F2P but most of those players will be temporary players who never even reach levelcap (or skillcap).

EA will saying anything not to take the fall for TOR's failure. A scumbag company of the highest order and a good reason why they are the most hate corporation in America.

Aye, they tried to say the reason player numbers dropped off so bad was because people said they'd play it if it didn't have a sub. What they really said was It's not worth a subscription fee...Big difference, heeh.

They also blamed the players at one point.

Aye, forgot about them doing that too.

Originally posted by Istavaan
Careful OP people in here might call you a communist. American paranoia at it's finest .

Actually f2p, freemium and other microtransaction models are more capitalistic than sub one. Yes even though sub one is pay only.   

Originally posted by Loke666

EA have the theory that TOR is a great game and that it is the payment model that is its problem.

I however think that the problem is the game itself, a good game will sell no matter the payment model and frankly have games that moved not made the huge impact that DDO and LOTRO did a few years back.

DDO did proved that there is room for a few good western F2P games, no doubt about that  but the problem with most MMOs is hardly how people pay for them, it is more that most of them have copied the mechanics from Wow but forgot to copy Wows coding and bugcrushing.

A great game can be P2P, B2P, F2P or freemium, it will get many players no matter what. A crap game might be hold on lifesupport easier as F2P but most of those players will be temporary players who never even reach levelcap (or skillcap).

true

While I understand there are Poor and Low Income gamers out there...The OP's stance of paying subs being an "oudtaded model" would imply that it's become "dated" and not used anymore...quite not true.

Quite the contrary it's the F2P people that are becoming dated and losing their voice valuing their dollar up and beyond the value of a dollar.

People do not seem to agree with you:

http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/367349/Poll-Which-payment-model-fits-you-best.html

Neither do I.

GL trying to change people's mind that are willing to spend the money they make on them so you can play them for free.

Originally posted by Istavaan
I would pay a sub fee if there was an mmo  worth the sub fee but no mmo out there is worth 15 a month, after paying 60 dollars for the box aswell. wow charges players 15 dollars a month and they had no update for 8 months, then they charge people another 60 dollars for an xpac and you have to pay a subcription of 15 dollars to even play the xpac that you just bought..ridiculous, i no i won't be buying into that scam anyone more.

Proof in the pudding to my prior statement. They "value" their dollar too highly.

Originally posted by TigerAero

While I understand there are Poor and Low Income gamers out there...The OP's stance of paying subs being an "oudtaded model" would imply that it's become "dated" and not used anymore...quite not true.

 

Quite the contrary it's the F2P people that are becoming dated and losing their voice.

It has nothing to do with being rich or poor, it has to do with what you get back for your money and the current subscription model you get very little back. This is why i hate blizzard they make so much money and they don't even put 5% of it back into their game.

I persoanlly don't see a future for P2P either even though it has become all the rage in phone/tablet game apps as well: there is something that feels sleazy about that model when they prevent you from doing basic, useful things unless you give them cash. There's already quite a backlash trying to get iTunes to create a 3rd category of really, truly free games vs. the P2P that are lumped in the "free" category. People will get tired of having that nagging feeling of having been had.

B2P online games otoh, although not new (Diablo, GW, FPS, Sports games, etc.), is the wave of the future. Once upon a time in the MMO world it was only the lesser "near-MMOs" that had this model. But the line between "full-featured" subscription MMOs and B2P titles is getting blurry. GW2, regardless of whether you like it or not, is undoubtedly much more full-featured than any previous B2P title. Totally so, imho. Its impact on MMO business models can't be ignored.

And about cash shops--as long as they stay away from the F2P model with their purchase-only classes, races, dungeons, etc--are not even relevant in the B2P discussion. Everyone will have a different opinion on what is "needed" and some will hate cash shops no matter what, but there's a significant difference between having to buy the Drows in D&D online and the fluffy pirate suit or even more bank space in GW2. 

The difference in my mind is this: You can play and participate in all the features of GW2 without spending a penny beyond the original purchase price... you can't with the cash shops featured in F2P MMOs. Since that is their one and only F2P source of revenues and B2P games recoup their development costs and make a tidy profit off the original sale (just like single player stand-alone games do) the difference in cash shop content makes sense.

Originally posted by Iselin

I persoanlly don't see a future for P2P either even though it has become all the rage in phone/tablet game apps as well: there is something that feels sleazy about that model when they prevent you from doing basic, useful things unless you give them cash. There's already quite a backlash trying to get iTunes to create a 3rd category of really, truly free games vs. the P2P that are lumped in the "free" category. People will get tired of having that nagging feeling of having been had.

 

B2P online games otoh, although not new (Diablo, GW, FPS, Sports games, etc.), is the wave of the future. Once upon a time in the MMO world it was only the lesser "near-MMOs" that had this model. But the line between "full-featured" subscription MMOs and B2P titles is getting blurry. GW2, regardless of whether you like it or not, is undoubtedly much more full-featured than any previous B2P title. Totally so, imho. Its impact on MMO business models can't be ignored.

 

And about cash shops--as long as they stay away from the F2P model with their purchase-only classes, races, dungeons, etc--are not even relevant in the B2P discussion. Everyone will have a different opinion on what is "needed" and some will hate cash shops no matter what, but there's a significant difference between having to buy the Drows in D&D online and the fluffy pirate suit or even more bank space in GW2. 

 

The difference in my mind is this: You can play and participate in all the features of GW2 without spending a penny beyond the original purchase price... you can't with the cash shops featured in F2P MMOs. Since that is their one and only F2P source of revenues and B2P games recoup their development costs and make a tidy profit off the original sale (just like single player stand-alone games do) the difference in cash shop content makes sense.

So you are angry that they are ensuring that not a single perosn can freeload? Maybe they are doing it well then, I didn't think they were honestly.

Originally posted by Tayah
I think Blizzard is proving the Subscription based model is far from outdated too btw. Haven't played WoW in almost 3 years now, but it was well worth the monthly sub I payed, as was Asheron's Call, Ultima Online (Still paying a sub, cant lose my keep, lol), and Dark Age of Camelot. If an mmo is good people will pay. I don't think the subscription model is dead.

Oh my god do I wish for a DAOC RvRvR remake lol. All the crazy mixtures of classes and races... :*-(

This is a prime example of people using their own perspective as a rule.

Some people prefer FTP.

Some people hate FTP and want a monthly sub.

Not everyone is the same and there is enough room for both models if they are done correctly and are a food product. 

This is a single assessment on MMO Business models, not including all or Hybrids, just some of the major ones. Nothing anyone says, including myself is written in stone, however this is how MMO Business models have played out in my experience as a gamer and viewpoint of a "business person"

Buy 2 Play + Cash shop:   The beauty behind this is that the developers then have active incentive to continue creating content at a faster pace, not trash either since if they push out junk it wont sell (in theory) so they will also have to push out timely content with a solid quality to sell. 

Buy 2 Play + Subscriptions: The subscription model was great in theory, but so is communism...The company was making its money regularly and has no incentive to push out regular and quality content, or barely even fix issues in a quick manner. The subscription companies would only work harder when they were threatened by competition or losing revenue, effectively milking the system until they cant anymore. Not only that most subscription companies take it a step further and add in virtual item stores even though subscribers are paying alot of money per month. I used to love the sub model until I took a good look and compared it to the others. 

The only subscription that would be worth its value in todays markets would be if a large portion of the profits went towards active game/dungeon masters to make a dynamic and live world since then you would be paying for a professional admin to enhance the game with living NPCs, on demand customer service, or an army of programmers to push out content with rapid frequency. The whole server costs excuse is definitely no longer relevant for monthly fees.

Free 2 Play : The problem with complete F2P is that there is no initial revenue to float the company on release and they then have to nickel and dime players to make decent revenue streams. This usually leads to buy to win systems when the company needs big boost in revenues since this method of sales appeals to casual gamers who dont care for vanity items but will buy things to make their gaming more effective. There are times when it balances out, but when the Buy to win comes into play, even if it is a negligble advantage (Especially in PVP content), gamers have a knee jerk reaction...rightfully so imo as one of those gamers.

IMO B2P like ANET system is the realistically the most fair for gamers AND companies, subscriptions are completely fine but are mishandled by companies due to greed and customer complacency. Basically the B2P model is the closest thing to a free market business model for MMOs, demand for content will drive incentive to sell as long as the quality is there. The other models currently have their priorities in the wrong places such as B2P+Sub places "level grinds and.or gear treadmills" as content substitutes to extend subscriptions, or buy 2 win to highly incentivize cash shops for Free to Play games that cannot stabilize their cash shop for consistent revenue.

Also I love Roxtarr's sig, it shows a bit of how our MMO Gamer community argues on payment models and the mutual distaste for anything that isnt completely free AND AAA content

Originally posted by Istavaan

Originally posted by TigerAero

While I understand there are Poor and Low Income gamers out there...The OP's stance of paying subs being an "oudtaded model" would imply that it's become "dated" and not used anymore...quite not true.

 

Quite the contrary it's the F2P people that are becoming dated and losing their voice.

It has nothing to do with being rich or poor, it has to do with what you get back for your money and the current subscription model you get very little back. This is why i hate blizzard they make so much money and they don't even put 5% of it back into their game.

Blizzard is run by buffoons.

What a joke post by the OP:

Paying subs is the cheapest way to play a game these days; Well that is if you wan't to play the actual game and not just a mindless subset with no value.

People are starting to realise that , paying gets better quality and actually costs less. As the F2P games are getting weaker and weaker the bubble will busrst and the mindless hopefuilly will stay with the trash.

And the Employed and Educated will pay improving both the game and player quality.