Originally posted by deakon

Originally posted by Destai

Originally posted by Aeonblades
P2P Subscription. It's the best way to avoid 75% of MMO asshats.

Or set it up for failure. It's not viable, the proof is in the amount of failures we've seen. It's an unnecessary barrier to entry.

All that proves is that if your going with a sub you need to have your ducks in a row come launch, these failiers you mention didnt fail because of the pricing model they failed because the games weren't worth the pricing model, if the procing model was to blame those games would have failed right out the gate rather than sell well and not retain

It's the total package of the game that affects the behavior of the customers. There's more to maintaining subscriptions than "having your ducks in a row". A subscription implies a relationship, with a price floor. If a potential customer is already in a commitment with another subscription game, they might not want to leave that. Personally, I wouldn't want to. I certainly don't speak for all consumers, but I'm sure others share my sentiment and those people are also potential customers. If you remove that barrier to the game, consumers would be more comfortable buying a game, trying it out, and moving on. No other genre has such a dilemma with price models. 

i look at it this way there's 6 to 8 games coming out this year im interested in if they were all P2P i'd have pick and choose what i want to play since I can't afford to pay for several sub based games(unless they all dropped the sub price to like $5).. But if they all go the GW2 route i can happily get them all and play them as i please.. B2P with CS all the way for me

I only have time for one MMO but even so would prefer the GW2 model of payment.

To be honest, I'll go for P2P or B2P.  Those models would work best for me.  I prefer B2P, however since guild wars 2 showed their real colors, I won't mind P2P.

Originally posted by Vallista
To be honest, I'll go for P2P or B2P.  Those models would work best for me.  I prefer B2P, however since guild wars 2 showed their real colors, I won't mind P2P.

It seems that game companies don't dare to trust in their own ability to bring any entertaining longevity to their games. A lot of so-called "MMO" games are in fact for the most part single player games. And it seems that game companies don't even intend to create a game with a "living and breathing" world anymore. Instead they try to give a player a mostly single player experience with pretty stuff and all and try to get as much cash from them before they quit playing. Cash shops are a far better way to do this than subscriptions. Some of those companies don't even offer a real end-game and are perfectly fine with people buying the game - and quit playing and come back a year later for the next expansion (like GW2).

Some people may be perfectly fine with this. But there's also a lot of players that want to keep playing, form their own fun communities and games should provide them with a lot of fun, challenging things to do.
It seems that game companies really have major problems with that. "Endgame" seems to be THE ultimate challenge and most MMO games do it completely wrong - or not at all.

I hope and pray that TESO will have the confidence to make a game with longevity. That they will made an endevour to make a lasting game that people would want to play and enjoy for years.
And I'd consider a subscription fee business model a sign of confidence that they indeed intend to do this.

Originally posted by Fishmitts
P2P, poor people suck.

Yesssssssssssssssssssssssss, best model ever.

 

Originally posted by Findariel

Originally posted by Vallista
To be honest, I'll go for P2P or B2P.  Those models would work best for me.  I prefer B2P, however since guild wars 2 showed their real colors, I won't mind P2P.

It seems that game companies don't dare to trust in their own ability to bring any entertaining longevity to their games. A lot of so-called "MMO" games are in fact for the most part single player games. And it seems that game companies don't even intend to create a game with a "living and breathing" world anymore. Instead they try to give a player a mostly single player experience with pretty stuff and all and try to get as much cash from them before they quit playing. Cash shops are a far better way to do this than subscriptions. Some of those companies don't even offer a real end-game and are perfectly fine with people buying the game - and quit playing and come back a year later for the next expansion (like GW2).

Some people may be perfectly fine with this. But there's also a lot of players that want to keep playing, form their own fun communities and games should provide them with a lot of fun, challenging things to do.
It seems that game companies really have major problems with that. "Endgame" seems to be THE ultimate challenge and most MMO games do it completely wrong - or not at all.

I hope and pray that TESO will have the confidence to make a game with longevity. That they will made an endevour to make a lasting game that people would want to play and enjoy for years.
And I'd consider a subscription fee business model a sign of confidence that they indeed intend to do this.

for example EverQuest back in 1999-2004 days

Originally posted by leroysg

for example EverQuest back in 1999-2004 days

Yes. Well, if we get another moronic game with no endgame and a cash shop where you can buy gems or plex to buy gold from other players, I'm out.

I've lost faith in every B2P + cash shop game.

While the WoW community eventually got invaded on account of popularity and subsequently turned on it's head, it's a far stretch better than most F2P game communities out there. Let's not forget about the others, EVE is P2P and the community is generally mature... generally. LoTRO and Rift were P2P for a good while as well, and they had/have two of the best MMO communities out there.

Everquest I/II, DAoC, SWG, PS1, CoX, and Vanguard all had P2P structures and are also good community examples. Now that I think about it, almost all of the games with P2P payment options are those I would regard as having the better community. I think the decision is straightforward on this one.

Originally posted by Aeonblades

Originally posted by Istavaan

Originally posted by Aeonblades
P2P Subscription. It's the best way to avoid 75% of MMO asshats.

Have you played wow?

Yea, At first I was thinking closer to 50%, but my optimism got the best of me. Just can't stand the attitude of most F2P game jumpers.

Would love this methodology explained a bit better. What are "asshats" in your mind that you're avoiding? What do they do that makes them so?

 

I'd opt for the B2P with a cashshop. Particularly if it's a skill combat game (here I mean skill with controlls and not point-click-spam-gear, which many considor "skill").

GW2 proved that you could do a highly successful, triple A MMO game without a subscription model.  Game after game is converting from P2P to F2P just because the model is failing them.  If TESO knows what's good for them, they would build their game around a B2P model because it's much easier and profittable to develop the game to be B2P instead of several months after launch converting to F2P from a P2P model which is what is going to happen because WoW is still hungry, despite the plethora of carcasses that are rotting outside of it's cave.

I don't mind paying for a sub if i know i'll be playing that game for a very long time

Originally posted by slicknslim88
GW2 proved that you could do a highly successful, triple A MMO game without a subscription model.  Game after game is converting from P2P to F2P just because the model is failing them.  If TESO knows what's good for them, they would build their game around a B2P model because it's much easier and profittable to develop the game to be B2P instead of several months after launch converting to F2P from a P2P model which is what is going to happen because WoW is still hungry, despite the plethora of carcasses that are rotting outside of it's cave.

Or they build the infrastructure for a f2p cash shop, launch with a sub then if the subs work they can use the cash shop for special items like mounts and have the shop there in case their sub model doesnt work.

Why go B2P from the start when you can make more money from a sub the first few months then benafit from an influx of new players like every other game that has converted to f2p?

Best about Subscription is that it keeps the "bad crowd" out of the game.

Subscription based.

Subs don't keep all the asshats out, but it helps.  I noticed a sharp decline in the quality of the community when LOTRO and SWTOR  went freemium.

Originally posted by deakon

Originally posted by Remyi

Originally posted by Tayah

Originally posted by itgrowls

For all those who want another P2P marvel let me remind you of the last one we had, "May the force be with you". Yeah we saw how well that went didn't we, and please please don't insult our intelligence by suggesting it's not due to the payment model.

Let me remind you also that over a million people bought the game, fully knowing it came with a subscription fee. The problem wasn't the sub fee, it was that the game wasn't good enough for an mmorpg to warrant a sub fee. It was a B2P game from the start, only Bioware were too arrogant to realize that til it was too late. People will pay a sub fee if they enjoy playing an mmo and want to conitinue to play it.

 

Hell, my rich friend bought my copy, and was going to pay my monthly subscription, in order to get me to play it with him. I didn't even think that game was worthy of HIS $15 per month.

That isnt the sub fee's fault tho, its the quality of the game

Exactly. The game wasn't good enough to warrant a subscription fee.

Also, rich friend? Seriously? Buying a $60 game and paying a sub fee is considered rich? If that's the case for you, I think you should avoid games until they go into the bargain bin or something. You are the perfect candidate for Buy to Play or Free to Play games, just avoid anything with a subscription, it's not what you're looking for, since you can't afford it.

Originally posted by ikarrian

Best about Subscription is that it keeps the "bad crowd" out of the game.

You didn't play WoW/SWTOR/TERA, did you?

Originally posted by boxsnd

Originally posted by ikarrian

Best about Subscription is that it keeps the "bad crowd" out of the game.

You didn't play WoW/SWTOR/TERA, did you?

Lol...same thought occured to me.

Here's a radical new idea... how about a $5/month sub...why are they all $15? If Blizzard was only taking in $50,000,000 a month instead of $150,000,000 would the world economy collapse? Just curious...

PS...looking at your picture... was that you kissing Bar Rafaeli in the superbowl add?

Originally posted by Tayah

Originally posted by deakon

Originally posted by Remyi

Originally posted by Tayah

Originally posted by itgrowls

For all those who want another P2P marvel let me remind you of the last one we had, "May the force be with you". Yeah we saw how well that went didn't we, and please please don't insult our intelligence by suggesting it's not due to the payment model.

Let me remind you also that over a million people bought the game, fully knowing it came with a subscription fee. The problem wasn't the sub fee, it was that the game wasn't good enough for an mmorpg to warrant a sub fee. It was a B2P game from the start, only Bioware were too arrogant to realize that til it was too late. People will pay a sub fee if they enjoy playing an mmo and want to conitinue to play it.

 

Hell, my rich friend bought my copy, and was going to pay my monthly subscription, in order to get me to play it with him. I didn't even think that game was worthy of HIS $15 per month.

That isnt the sub fee's fault tho, its the quality of the game

Exactly. The game wasn't good enough to warrant a subscription fee.

Also, rich friend? Seriously? Buying a $60 game and paying a sub fee is considered rich? If that's the case for you, I think you should avoid games until they go into the bargain bin or something. You are the perfect candidate for Buy to Play or Free to Play games, just avoid anything with a subscription, it's not what you're looking for, since you can't afford it.

 

I never said that a $60 game and sub fee is considered rich. I said my friend is rich. A millionaire to be exact. And I told him I was done playing it two weeks into the free month, that I wouldn't play it even with his $15 a month. He ended up going back to WoW when ToR announced F2P, and convinced me to go play with him. I told him WoW wasn't enjoyable enough to pay for it again. He paid for my Pandaria, 8 months of game time, and 3 server/faction changes.

World of Warcraft had its fair share of problems at release too. That's the problem with subscription based games. They release with a lot of problems, and unstable servers. People get tired of it, quickly, and go running back to a stable game. ESO will have a lot of problems at release too. Will people stick around, paying for a bug filled game? Or will most of them jump ship like with ToR?

I hope for a freemium model, straight sub models are extinct and no longer work (look at any AAA mmo released in last 3-5 years). I will pay a sub, and I hope they have a f2p version that is greatly restricted like TOR