Subsciption games aren't meeting demands over a long period of time, maybe a few months but not years. Those games that charge a subscription also haven't had realistic projections of their sub base. So most have moved to F2P.

If I'm a subscriber to a game I like I'd rather it remain that way. Gambling or buying power in the cash shop bothers me. But for a game I'm not interested enough to spend anything on, F2P is a welcoming option even though I may not play for long.

Originally posted by Theocritus
Look at a game like WoW...Lets say you started on day 1 in Nov 2004....That means you've played over 8 years....So thats 8x12x15=1440 dollars...Lets say you bought all expansion packs when they were released at 40 bucks apiece...Thats another 160 dollars or so.....So that player has paid 1600 dollars or so (unless they did a year plan or something)......This is why p2p sucks......Everyone looks at it like "Its only 15 dollars" but if you're heavily involved in that MMO its going to end up being a heck of alot more than 15 dollars.....In the meantime you could have played f2ps without paying anything...So lets seee: 1600 dollars or a few dollars to nothing...That isnt a tough decision imo.

Now take that amount and divide by the number of hours of entertainment...a good TV pakage cost near $80+ a month and I watch TV maybe 6-8hrs a week, so MMO subs seem like a huge bargain to me.

Well I guess there are two way you can look at this:

1.  As f2p are increasing and p2p are decreasing it is fair to say that there is less demand for subscription based games.  In that vein any subscription plan than is meeting demand.

or

2.  People are leaving p2p games because they do not feel they are quality enough to bother paying for, so the quality of the game is not meeting demand.

Your poll has nothing to do with the question you asked.

For those who voted yes and aren't playing rift or Asheron's Call you are delusional.  Gotta love getting 2-3 patches per year for a normal MMObut spending money every month.

Theres a reason why most sub based games collapse, and its not because they are bad, its because the subscription is a barrier to growing a playerbase.  Those are facts that history has shown.

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

Well I guess there are two way you can look at this:

1.  As f2p are increasing and p2p are decreasing it is fair to say that there is less demand for subscription based games.  In that vein any subscription plan than is meeting demand.

or

2.  People are leaving p2p games because they do not feel they are quality enough to bother paying for, so the quality of the game is not meeting demand.

 

Your poll has nothing to do with the question you asked.

Incorrect, the players don't choose the payment models, the game creators do. History has revealed to us that they even change them without any qualms.

Don't give me any double talk about demand by players, LOTRO went micro-transaction after they got the box price and anywhere from 199.00 USD to 299.00USD for lifetime subs plus they lied to their playerbase ahead of it saying the game was fine and they had no plans to go that route CONTINUING to sell the lifetime subscription. Having enough operating cost was not a problem for them. They used those massive funds to then claim that their model was successful by sticking it out and waiting with all the money they had received. Sure was short term with an influx of a box price and lifetime subs paid, not sure why people haven't called them on their bull previously. They don't even release their financial reports because they aren't publicly traded, they just say - numbers are higher this year. Do you know what 15 x 0 is - still 0. They had people dedicated to the game that threw them hundreds of dollars, they had reason to stay - short of us hardheads that told them where they could put their game after lying. Those people (including me) invested in their big fat lie and every game after chases their dream with none of the ingredients they used expecting similar results. Who is surprised when the cake comes out of the oven without having risen.

Additionally, you have lord of the frickin' rings and dungeons and dragons as intellectual property - those titles are criminal to not make a profit with. Do you realize how many fans of those two IPs exist. That is cream of the crop branding. Lord of the Rings series is taught in schools! DDO was the grandaddy of all these games, the dice rolling superstar! If you fail with either of those 2 names - GTFO of the business world. You could put LOTRO on Kleenex and 40k people would buy it just to call it an adventure to throw it away.

My interest was as stated - to know if the players that responded to a preference was higher or lower than the percentage of subscription games in the list from this website. 

I think I still see my silver lining. The more games that use micro-transactions, the more they create scarcity for the games that stick to sub models. It's already becoming apparent that the latter is now the minority though the player interest is still high. All good signs for me.

The results of the poll are larger than I expected for subs - guess my type isn't a dead breed as some might think.

Here's a link to some good reading for those that participated if you like this topic.  My virtual Thank You lol, yes they focus on MMOs.

http://info.tse.fi/julkaisut/vk/Ae11_2009.pdf

"

http://virtual-economy.org/2009/10/26/virtual_consumption_the_thesis/

My PhD thesis on people who spend real money on virtual goods is now published. Thanks to everyone for your support! Here’s the publication info:

Vili Lehdonvirta (2009). Virtual Consumption. Publications of the Turku School of Economics, A-11:2009, Turku. ISBN: 978-952-249-019-3 (printed) 978-952-249-020-9 (electronic) ISSN: 0357-4652 (printed) 1459-4870 (electronic)

You can download the electronic version of the thesis from the university library here. The print version can be purchased from the university’s publisher: KY Dealing, tel. +358 2 481 4422, email ky-dealing(at)tse.fi. I also have some free copies to send to people, so drop me an email while they still last!

"

Originally posted by greenreen

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

Well I guess there are two way you can look at this:

1.  As f2p are increasing and p2p are decreasing it is fair to say that there is less demand for subscription based games.  In that vein any subscription plan than is meeting demand.

or

2.  People are leaving p2p games because they do not feel they are quality enough to bother paying for, so the quality of the game is not meeting demand.

 

Your poll has nothing to do with the question you asked.

Incorrect, the players don't choose the payment models, the game creators do. History has revealed to us that they even change them without any qualms.

Don't give me any double talk about demand by players, LOTRO went micro-transaction after they got the box price and anywhere from 199.00 USD to 299.00USD for lifetime subs plus they lied to their playerbase ahead of it saying the game was fine and they had no plans to go that route CONTINUING to sell the lifetime subscription. Having enough operating cost was not a problem for them. They used those massive funds to then claim that their model was successful by sticking it out and waiting with all the money they had received. Sure was short term with an influx of a box price and lifetime subs paid, not sure why people haven't called them on their bull previously. They don't even release their financial reports because they aren't publicly traded, they just say - numbers are higher this year. Do you know what 15 x 0 is - still 0. They had people dedicated to the game that threw them hundreds of dollars, they had reason to stay - short of us hardheads that told them where they could put their game after lying. Those people (including me) invested in their big fat lie and every game after chases their dream with none of the ingredients they used expecting similar results. Who is surprised when the cake comes out of the oven without having risen.

Additionally, you have lord of the frickin' rings and dungeons and dragons as intellectual property - those titles are criminal to not make a profit with. Do you realize how many fans of those two IPs exist. That is cream of the crop branding. Lord of the Rings series is taught in schools! DDO was the grandaddy of all these games, the dice rolling superstar! If you fail with either of those 2 names - GTFO of the business world. You could put LOTRO on Kleenex and 40k people would buy it just to call it an adventure to throw it away.

My interest was as stated - to know if the players that responded to a preference was higher or lower than the percentage of subscription games in the list from this website. 

I think I still see my silver lining. The more games that use micro-transactions, the more they create scarcity for the games that stick to sub models. It's already becoming apparent that the latter is now the minority though the player interest is still high. All good signs for me.

The results of the poll are larger than I expected for subs - guess my type isn't a dead breed as some might think.

Here's a link to some good reading for those that participated if you like this topic.  My virtual Thank You lol, yes they focus on MMOs.

http://info.tse.fi/julkaisut/vk/Ae11_2009.pdf

"

http://virtual-economy.org/2009/10/26/virtual_consumption_the_thesis/

My PhD thesis on people who spend real money on virtual goods is now published. Thanks to everyone for your support! Here’s the publication info:

Vili Lehdonvirta (2009). Virtual Consumption. Publications of the Turku School of Economics, A-11:2009, Turku. ISBN: 978-952-249-019-3 (printed) 978-952-249-020-9 (electronic) ISSN: 0357-4652 (printed) 1459-4870 (electronic)

You can download the electronic version of the thesis from the university library here. The print version can be purchased from the university’s publisher: KY Dealing, tel. +358 2 481 4422, email ky-dealing(at)tse.fi. I also have some free copies to send to people, so drop me an email while they still last!

"

My my hit a nerve did I.

I never stated nor implied anything about who chose a payment model.

You asked if there was sufficient demand.  I simply stated that the market ALWAYS responds to demand.  If more players demanded sub based models those would increase, that they are not you have to admit the possibility that more players are not demanding that model.

Or possibly that they feel the quality isn't there in those games.

Yes there are a few that will do things for other reasons both for  the consumers and the devs however the market itself is driven by the consumers choice.

Originally posted by greenreen

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

Well I guess there are two way you can look at this:

1.  As f2p are increasing and p2p are decreasing it is fair to say that there is less demand for subscription based games.  In that vein any subscription plan than is meeting demand.

or

2.  People are leaving p2p games because they do not feel they are quality enough to bother paying for, so the quality of the game is not meeting demand.

 

Your poll has nothing to do with the question you asked.

Incorrect, the players don't choose the payment models, the game creators do. History has revealed to us that they even change them without any qualms.

Don't give me any double talk about demand by players, LOTRO went micro-transaction after they got the box price and anywhere from 199.00 USD to 299.00USD for lifetime subs ...

By continuing to play LOTRO and by embracing the new payment model, the consumers chose the payment model. Had they rejected the new payment model, the game would have either gone under or reverted to subscription. We are talking about entertainment, not utilities. 

You claim to have a PhD in Economics and this is foreign to you?

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by greenreen

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

Well I guess there are two way you can look at this:

1.  As f2p are increasing and p2p are decreasing it is fair to say that there is less demand for subscription based games.  In that vein any subscription plan than is meeting demand.

or

2.  People are leaving p2p games because they do not feel they are quality enough to bother paying for, so the quality of the game is not meeting demand.

 

Your poll has nothing to do with the question you asked.

Incorrect, the players don't choose the payment models, the game creators do. History has revealed to us that they even change them without any qualms.

Don't give me any double talk about demand by players, LOTRO went micro-transaction after they got the box price and anywhere from 199.00 USD to 299.00USD for lifetime subs ...

 

By continuing to play LOTRO and by embracing the new payment model, the consumers chose the payment model. Had they rejected the new payment model, the game would have either gone under or reverted to subscription. We are talking about entertainment, not utilities. 

You claim to have a PhD in Economics and this is foreign to you?

 

Those quote marks around the text and the link to it identify that it is quoted text from the link. I never claimed to have that degree. My degree is IT based. What is your degree in since we are sharing. I don't actually care, let's end you and I. You can be my second block today, my patience is not up for you in yet another one of my threads with the inability to comprehend english.

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

Originally posted by greenreen

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

Well I guess there are two way you can look at this:

1.  As f2p are increasing and p2p are decreasing it is fair to say that there is less demand for subscription based games.  In that vein any subscription plan than is meeting demand.

or

2.  People are leaving p2p games because they do not feel they are quality enough to bother paying for, so the quality of the game is not meeting demand.

 

Your poll has nothing to do with the question you asked.

Incorrect, the players don't choose the payment models, the game creators do. History has revealed to us that they even change them without any qualms.

...snip

My my hit a nerve did I.

I never stated nor implied anything about who chose a payment model.

You asked if there was sufficient demand.  I simply stated that the market ALWAYS responds to demand.  If more players demanded sub based models those would increase, that they are not you have to admit the possibility that more players are not demanding that model.

Or possibly that they feel the quality isn't there in those games.

Yes there are a few that will do things for other reasons both for  the consumers and the devs however the market itself is driven by the consumers choice.

No, you tried to say that because there aren't as many sub games that meant that they weren't wanted. I showed you a genuine time when the players DID want it and contributed above and beyond enough money to make it last. So, are you claiming that my money is worthless or that my words are lies when I state that I want a sub game. Either way, it needed to be cleared up for you.

Again, the market is going where they think the money is - from LOTRO reports. After all, that is the only game that has ever gloated like they do with no numbers behind it. It's marketing selling the model, not happiness or contentment because one micro-transaction game isn't enough - we need 500+.

Originally posted by greenreen

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by greenreen

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

Well I guess there are two way you can look at this:

1.  As f2p are increasing and p2p are decreasing it is fair to say that there is less demand for subscription based games.  In that vein any subscription plan than is meeting demand.

or

2.  People are leaving p2p games because they do not feel they are quality enough to bother paying for, so the quality of the game is not meeting demand.

 

Your poll has nothing to do with the question you asked.

Incorrect, the players don't choose the payment models, the game creators do. History has revealed to us that they even change them without any qualms.

Don't give me any double talk about demand by players, LOTRO went micro-transaction after they got the box price and anywhere from 199.00 USD to 299.00USD for lifetime subs ...

 

By continuing to play LOTRO and by embracing the new payment model, the consumers chose the payment model. Had they rejected the new payment model, the game would have either gone under or reverted to subscription. We are talking about entertainment, not utilities. 

You claim to have a PhD in Economics and this is foreign to you?

 

Those quote marks around the text and the link to it identify that it is quoted text from the link. I never claimed to have that degree. My degree is IT based. What is your degree in since we are sharing. I don't actually care, let's end you and I. You can be my second block today, my patience is not up for you in yet another one of my threads with the inability to comprehend english.

The point still stands that the consumer of the entertainment product or service chose the payment model. 

I won't even touch the language skills dig. :)

Originally posted by Phry
It really boils down to whether a game is good enough, regardless of the payment model used, personally i prefer P2P, but that in itself could be because the P2P games are better than the ones that are f2p, i think the only way we'll see if the F2P model is overcomming the P2P one, is when we finally see a F2P game that is superior to P2P, which so far, has not happened.

Are graphics the primary area where the F2P seem to fall behind, or do you feel other aspects of F2P are still lagging behind subscription games in quality?

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by Phry
It really boils down to whether a game is good enough, regardless of the payment model used, personally i prefer P2P, but that in itself could be because the P2P games are better than the ones that are f2p, i think the only way we'll see if the F2P model is overcomming the P2P one, is when we finally see a F2P game that is superior to P2P, which so far, has not happened.

Are graphics the primary area where the F2P seem to fall behind, or do you feel other aspects of F2P are still lagging behind subscription games in quality?

The only game i've played that i thought had really good graphics, is Eve online, of the P2P games that i do play, i find the stylised graphics a bit disappointing, so i can't really say that P2P games have the edge graphically, although Eve is the exception but until they actually give some real meaning to the 'walking in stations' bit, something of an aberration. I would like to see better graphics, but overall i would say that f2p games main lack, for me at least, is in the gameplay, not the graphics. so its really a case of the game mechanics for me, i like crafting so games with a player driven economy work for me, i like exploration so, including large open areas with ocasionally things to be found, is good too, and i like games where players are encouraged to work as a team, though mixing solo and team based content is also, very desirable.. basically.. im picky

But i am prepared to pay for the gameplay i like

for instance, currently subbed to both Planetside 2 and SW;TOR, something of a surprise tbh, im not sure how long i will be subbed to both those games, but as an 'addition' to Eve they do sort of 'round out' my game time.. as in.. i now no longer have  time to even play the odd SPRPG, which usually means Skyrim or Oblivion.. Planetside 2, which despite it being a stripped down version of Planetside 1, and despite the game still being something of a buggy mess, it crashes to desktop far too frequently for my liking, and the game is susceptible to hacking, several times now have seen players using hacks, mostly aimbots, the game is pretty good if you are in an Outfit, i was lucky in that the Outfit i was in, in Planetside 1, is also in Planetside2 (Outcasters ftw!!)

overally im not sure what demographic i fall into.. i suspect.. i might be the banana in the orange bowl

I don't give a &$%@ if people don't like what I am about to say or not, they are my opinion and that is based on observation....

But I see 2 reasons...

1. Which was already brought up...people don't think the quality of games justify a monthly fee.

2. Companies realize they have the potential to make much more money off F2P with cash shops because a lot of players rather have vanity items and advantages (In some MMO's) they can pay for rather than work for, and get them fast. Sadly.

Originally posted by Goatgod76

1. Which was already brought up...people don't think the quality of games justify a monthly fee.

2. Companies realize they have the potential to make much more money off F2P with cash shops because a lot of players rather have vanity items and advantages (In some MMO's) they can pay for rather than work for, and get them fast. Sadly.

Yet, increasingly we're seeing people unhappy with F2P models. I won't name any names, but we've seen some recent threads about "offended by these packages"...clearly a lot of people who believed they were "getting a better deal" from F2P are waking up to how readily and efficiently monetized the model is. The real problem didn't turn out to be P2W, as initially feared, but rather PaP (Pay and Pay...and Pay...and Pay...) .

Anticipating some sort of lashback effect from gamers. But hell, this herd can be stampeded in nearly any direction Marketing wants it to go. Just part of the disillusionment with the industry.