Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

If the B2P model proves to be successful, will you still be willing to pay for subcription based MMO

KyleranKyleran Tampa, FLPosts: 19,996Member Uncommon

Saw a thread in the GW2 forums discussing whether or not it is an industry changer. 

Got me to thinking, if GW2 releases to huge success and acclaim, and they really do deliver and sustain a full featured MMORPG using the B2P model, how willing will you be to pay a subscription fee in the future.

Or will you be more inclined to expect/demand the B2P model?  Perhaps you'll be willing to still pay a sub if they provide something beyond what GW2 does, if so, what might that be?

 

In my day MMORPG's were so hard we fought our way through dungeons in the snow, uphill both ways.
"I don't have one life, I have many lives" - Grunty
Still currently "subscribed" to EVE, and only EVE!!!
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon

«134567

Comments

  • CaldrinCaldrin CwmbranPosts: 4,533Member Uncommon

    sub for the win

  • BeansnBreadBeansnBread PshPosts: 5,501Member Uncommon

    If it's really good and doesn't have a cash shop.

  • FredomSekerZFredomSekerZ Long Beach, CAPosts: 1,156Member

    if it's themepark-ish and to play for a few months, no problem.

    if it's sandbox-ish and i want to invest in and keep playing, give me a sub, no cash shop.

    While i don't mind F2P and CS and will play (like The Repop), i don't like it. Also, i'd prefer to have a sub option to have access to all CS items. 15$ is nothing, compared to the fact that you waste far more to get all that's in the store. And of course, i don't competly trust them. 15 is clean, pure and simpe.

  • unfetteredunfettered philadelphia, PAPosts: 93Member

    pokemon is B2P(as are virtually all video games)...what's this topic about?

    well in this "mmo" space i guess GW is out by techincality but it's more succseful than most mmo's as far as sales, how long players played it and how much they liked it. i guess this is obviously another GW2 prediction/supposition thread since that's an actual mmo.

    anyway, heed this, the game will do much better than alot of other mmo's for sure, but it won't make a billion daollars a year so no impact on the genre there. people who like it will like it, people who don't will find other angles of attack once the game's "success" is no longer in question and life goes on. 

     

    as far as how sub based games stack up in attractiveness....if they are good no problem, no matter what anyone says. people already say they would play [insert blundered mmo here] if it were B2P or F2P. that's just because the game is bad or not totally bad but not good enough. with panetside 2 and GW2 sure some games will look like a worse deal but the payment model is a throwaway consideration for many gamers. no big deal.

     

    if i like a mmo and it had a sub, i'd pay it and that's that. if archeage turns out good, i'll pay for it.

  • dllddlld GöteborgPosts: 541Member Uncommon

    Well GW2 is already delivering for the initial box, but wheter it will get the same amount of attention afterwards without a sub is unknown but if we suppose that it does have regular and significant content patches after launch on par with a sub mmo or atleast close to then no I don't see myself jumping on another sub mmo unless it's trulely awesome.

  • Mike-McQueenMike-McQueen Enfield, CTPosts: 243Member
    I like subs with no cash shop in that it keeps the playing field even, but like above poster said, it'd have to be a AAA sandbox at this point.

    I'm a unique and beautiful snowflake.

  • GrixxittGrixxitt New Orleans, LAPosts: 543Member

    If its a game I really want to play I would pay far more than the standard 15$ a month for the privelege.

    The above is my personal opinion. Anyone displaying a view contrary to my opinion is obviously WRONG and should STHU. (neener neener)

    -The MMO Forum Community

  • travamarstravamars Dallas, TXPosts: 417Member Common

    F2P games have been completely free and been successfull, so why would someone pay for a box and still have to deal with a cash shop dependant game?

    I'd much rather pay $15 a month a have it all instead of constantly get my cc out.

  • unfetteredunfettered philadelphia, PAPosts: 93Member
    Originally posted by Grixxitt

    If its a game I really want to play I would pay far more than the standard 15$ a month for the privelege.

    yea, this is what most normal folks think.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member

    For me it depends a lot more on the game itself, without regard to the payment model. If I try a game, and I want to play it, the payment model doesn't have that much impact on whether I'm going to play it or not. It is a consideration...if I'm paying a sub for a game, it feels like I'm wasting money when I'm not playing. I only tend to play one game at a time anyway, but it's still a consideration.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • KilsinKilsin NSWPosts: 345Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Grixxitt

    If its a game I really want to play I would pay far more than the standard 15$ a month for the privelege.

    ^This.

    I voted for Sub only if it's a:

    Sandbox, fully supported with continued updates, patches, content releases and a subscription model, I would be willing to pay a lot of money per month, $30-$50 would not bother me in the slightest if it was worth it and continued to be worth it.

    As soon as the level of support or content drops, most likely so will my Subscription(s).

    That is the type of game and payment model I prefer though.

    Community & Web Manager | Visionary Realms, Inc.
    Visit our Development Website.

  • KingGatorKingGator Tampa, FLPosts: 428Member Uncommon

    I prefer subs over cash shops, what i am really afraid of is TSW model, cash shop and sub, now that pisses me off. I do think subs should be lower. The cost of maintaining servers is 1/4 of what it once was. Sub fees should reflect this, they should be charging 9.99 for subs.

  • rygard49rygard49 Huntington Beach, CAPosts: 975Member

    I'm neutral.

    I have an intense aversion to cash shops for some reason. I think it's a wiley and clever way to capitalize on a gamer's shorter attention span nowadays, and those companies are capturing as much $$ from us as they can before we lose interest with their creation.

    With some of the more recent B2Ps, they charge you full box price for a game that is just inconvenient enough to make you want to spend more money in their shop for perks or upgrades. When I buy a game and pay full box price for it I don't expect to be inconvenienced just so they can squeeze me for more cash. It seems dishonest.

    The sub model is just as bad though, having to pay full box and then an additional fee every month. I guess the potential is that you'll pay less with the sub model, depending how crazy you get with cash shops.

     

  • KyleranKyleran Tampa, FLPosts: 19,996Member Uncommon

    At first I thought I would pick the very likely category, but after thinking about it, I probably would only do so for well built, fully featured titles as opposed to some of the 2nd tier games that I've played recently (such as TERA)

    I'm going to expect more from sub based games, but am more than willing to pay the fee if I feel it's worth it.

     

    In my day MMORPG's were so hard we fought our way through dungeons in the snow, uphill both ways.
    "I don't have one life, I have many lives" - Grunty
    Still currently "subscribed" to EVE, and only EVE!!!
    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon

  • FredomSekerZFredomSekerZ Long Beach, CAPosts: 1,156Member
    Originally posted by KingGator

    I prefer subs over cash shops, what i am really afraid of is TSW model, cash shop and sub, now that pisses me off. I do think subs should be lower. The cost of maintaining servers is 1/4 of what it once was. Sub fees should reflect this, they should be charging 9.99 for subs.

    Actually, i think that if Funcom announces that the cash shop is popular and makes money for them in TSW, it will be the ultimate green light for devs to use cash shop and sub together right from the start.

    I hate it, but that's business. All devs need is to know the masses are wiling to pay for it, just like DLC or anything, and it catches on like willfire.

  • KingGatorKingGator Tampa, FLPosts: 428Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by travamars

    F2P games have been completely free and been successfull, so why would someone pay for a box and still have to deal with a cash shop dependant game?

    I'd much rather pay $15 a month a have it all instead of constantly get my cc out.

    You have no grasp of how a business functions if you believe this. There is no such thing as a "free" successful game. If a company can't make money they won't do it. It is proven that f2p costs more on average than a sub fee game. Its just that so many gamers are slackers or in college and can't afford subs that makes this model popular.

     

    To the OP, I prefer sub games, I will always play a sub game before i will a f2p game because f2p often ends in p2w.  I do think that sub fees are too hgih, server maintainence is about 1/4 what it was back in the day, subs should be 9.99 a month not 14.99.

  • VesaviusVesavius BristolPosts: 7,643Member Uncommon

    Yes I would.

    B2P is really just F2P with a box cost thrown on. I don't get the excitement about it at all... the only reason I love Gw2 is because of the acutal game, not the revenue model. The game is good enough for me to tolerate the model is all.

    Subs are more honest, transparent, and generally deliver more content, especially playable content, for less money.

  • markt50markt50 DarlingtonPosts: 132Member

    Definately Subscrption all the way for me.

    I've yet to experience anything good from any F2P game, and I'm very very doubtful GW2 and B2P can exist for any length of time without altering gameplay mechanics to 'encourage' people to use the ingame store.

    I sure hope I'm wrong and that 3 or 4 years from now I can still enjoy GW2 and be competitive without ever having spent a penny in the ingame shop.

  • KingGatorKingGator Tampa, FLPosts: 428Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Vesavius

    Yes I would.

    B2P is really just F2P with a box cost thrown on. I don't get the excitement about it at all... the only reason I love Gw2 is because of the acutal game, not the revenue model. The game is good enough for me to tolerate the model is all.

    Subs are more honest, transparent, and generally deliver more content, especially playable content, for less money.

    winner

  • GrixxittGrixxitt New Orleans, LAPosts: 543Member
    Originally posted by Kilsin
    Originally posted by Grixxitt

    If its a game I really want to play I would pay far more than the standard 15$ a month for the privelege.

    ^This.

    I voted for Sub only if it's a:

    Sandbox, fully supported with continued updates, patches, content releases and a subscription model, I would be willing to pay a lot of money per month, $30-$50 would not bother me in the slightest if it was worth it and continued to be worth it.

    As soon as the level of support or content drops, most likely so will my Subscription(s).

    That is the type of game and payment model I prefer though.

    I'm right there with you.

    Cash shops on the other hand just leave me with the feeling that I'm getting bilked, and I avoid them like the plague. Its not that I care about the 2 or 5$ transaction itself, I just want to pay a flat fee and have access to all of the content, addons, whatever.

    Once I get the feeling that I'm being nickle-and-dimed my first inclination is to leave. This transfers to/from my personal life as well.

    The above is my personal opinion. Anyone displaying a view contrary to my opinion is obviously WRONG and should STHU. (neener neener)

    -The MMO Forum Community

  • KingGatorKingGator Tampa, FLPosts: 428Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by markt50

    Definately Subscrption all the way for me.

    I've yet to experience anything good from any F2P game, and I'm very very doubtful GW2 and B2P can exist for any length of time without altering gameplay mechanics to 'encourage' people to use the ingame store.

    I sure hope I'm wrong and that 3 or 4 years from now I can still enjoy GW2 and be competitive without ever having spent a penny in the ingame shop.

     

     

    You're of course correct, if there is no sub they have to get their money somewhere, expansions won't be enough all games do expansions, NCsoft being involved will make that happen for sure. They HAVE to compell you to buy from the CS, that their revenue stream. The term free to play should be abolished.

  • MMOGamer71MMOGamer71 Pittsburgh, PAPosts: 1,930Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Kyleran

    Saw a thread in the GW2 forums discussing whether or not it is an industry changer. 

    Got me to thinking, if GW2 releases to huge success and acclaim, and they really do deliver and sustain a full featured MMORPG using the B2P model, how willing will you be to pay a subscription fee in the future.

    Or will you be more inclined to expect/demand the B2P model?  Perhaps you'll be willing to still pay a sub if they provide something beyond what GW2 does, if so, what might that be?

     

    OP, your post misses the fact that GW1 a B2P game has already been, in most peoples minds a "success".

  • KingGatorKingGator Tampa, FLPosts: 428Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by MMOGamer71
    Originally posted by Kyleran

    Saw a thread in the GW2 forums discussing whether or not it is an industry changer. 

    Got me to thinking, if GW2 releases to huge success and acclaim, and they really do deliver and sustain a full featured MMORPG using the B2P model, how willing will you be to pay a subscription fee in the future.

    Or will you be more inclined to expect/demand the B2P model?  Perhaps you'll be willing to still pay a sub if they provide something beyond what GW2 does, if so, what might that be?

     

    Your post misses the fact that GW1 a B2P game has already been, in most peoples minds a "success".

    GW1 wasn't a reall mmo, this one is trying to be, we'll see how it goes, one thing they have going for them is the lack of subs to track will make it hard to prov ide factual data as to who's actually playing, so they'll be able to point to boxes sold as their only measure of success, even if no one is playing.

  • ZorgoZorgo Deepintheheartof, TXPosts: 2,226Member
    Originally posted by Kilsin
    Originally posted by Grixxitt

    If its a game I really want to play I would pay far more than the standard 15$ a month for the privelege.

    ^This.

    I voted for Sub only if it's a:

    Sandbox, fully supported with continued updates, patches, content releases and a subscription model, I would be willing to pay a lot of money per month, $30-$50 would not bother me in the slightest if it was worth it and continued to be worth it.

    As soon as the level of support or content drops, most likely so will my Subscription(s).

    That is the type of game and payment model I prefer though.

    I had an idea for a payment model.

    What if a game were run kinda like a country club for gamers. You pay membership dues at a much higher rate, like you guys are saying. You have to have a sponsor to get into the game, you have to be voted in as a member, and then you pay your monthly dues.

    Of course, there'd be a lot of details to hash out on making it work, but, the goal would be to have an exclusive gaming community who have a sense of 'ownership' in their game (club) and a voice in game development, direction and membership. 

    Essentially, if WoW is the Wal-mart/McDonald's of mmo's, create a game which is the Saks 5th Ave/Four Seasons of mmo's. There are a lot less people, but the people invest more money to make a higher quality product.

    I thought of the idea due to a business model lesson I had in an economics class in college. The class was divided into different 'businesses' to make writing pens. Most of the businesses monkeyed with their costs so they could provide a low cost pen to the masses. And they ended up destroying each other through their competition. My group sunk all our money into r&d and then sold the pen for like $100 bucks a pop. We made money hand over fist. We didn't sell even 20% of the other groups, but our quality attracted those with the money to spend on the product.

    Anyway, so I've been trying to figure out a way to apply that concept to payment models for mmo's - and your comments reminded me of it.

  • travamarstravamars Dallas, TXPosts: 417Member Common
    Originally posted by KingGator
    Originally posted by travamars

    F2P games have been completely free and been successfull, so why would someone pay for a box and still have to deal with a cash shop dependant game?

    I'd much rather pay $15 a month a have it all instead of constantly get my cc out.

    You have no grasp of how a business functions if you believe this. There is no such thing as a "free" successful game. If a company can't make money they won't do it. It is proven that f2p costs more on average than a sub fee game. Its just that so many gamers are slackers or in college and can't afford subs that makes this model popular.

     

    To the OP, I prefer sub games, I will always play a sub game before i will a f2p game because f2p often ends in p2w.  I do think that sub fees are too hgih, server maintainence is about 1/4 what it was back in the day, subs should be 9.99 a month not 14.99.

    Yes i agree with with what you said so i dont know if you understood what i wrote. There are many F2P games that have been out for years and are still here so they are making money from their cash shop. GW2 wants box sale money on top of their cash shop.

    Everybody knows F2P games are not "free" so i hope that was not where you were going.

    GW2 is no differant than any F2P game out there, they want to make money from the cash shop. But other F2P games dont charge you for a box sale. People that cant afford a sub will buy GW2 thinking they'll just buy the box and thats it, never spend a dime. But the reality is they will be in the cash shop as much as anybody would if they were playing a F2P game.

    So there is no "Buy to Play" and never spend anymore. Unless you want to be inconvienanced to the point the games not fun.

«134567
Sign In or Register to comment.