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!

How do you guys like this idea for new Subscription Model?

MyrdynnMyrdynn Beaumont, CAPosts: 1,518Member Uncommon

I posted this in a TESO thread but was curios to what others thought in the general area

 

you know, someone needs to come up with a new sub model.

History lessons of MMORPGS show that games once started as pay by the HOUR.  I believe Shadows of Yserbius was something like $3 an hour, which would be ridiculous now, but back then we also used to run from store to store getting aol.com hours.

A Subscription model following something like this would be great

$4.99- 50 hrs monthly (12 hrs a week approx) intended for the casual, fulltime student/worker/family person

$9.99- 120 hrs monthly (30 hrs a week approx) for some with a little more time on their hands, you get more then double the previous scale

14.99- Unlimited hours.

seems like this would be a pretty popular idea imo.  Every subscriber is automatically charged 4.99 a month, and when you hit 48 hrs it notifies you you're monthly time is about to run out, click yes to automatically goto the next level, hit 120 hrs bam same thing

Its a win for gaming companies, cause I would keep a 4.99 sub to 3 different games if this was an option and I wouldnt feel like I have to log in

This is not intended to be a B2P vs F2P vs P2P thread

Comments

  • botrytisbotrytis In Flux, MIPosts: 2,567Member
    Nope - not going to happen. It is nothing new, others have done that in the past and walked away from that model.

    image

    "In 50 years, when I talk to my grandchildren about these days, I'll make sure to mention what an accomplished MMO player I was. They are going to be so proud ..."
    by Naqaj - 7/17/2013 MMORPG.com forum

  • fat_taddlerfat_taddler Wanaque, NJPosts: 286Member
    It's a good concept,  you could also add a free to play option with maybe 5-10 hours a month.   I think that would be a much better alternative to the current content / feature restrictions that most companies are putting on F2P. 
  • Four0SixFour0Six Missoula, MTPosts: 1,181Member Uncommon
    It isnt pricing model that needs to be changed. It is the quality of the games released that is messing with a companies ability to keep subs. Again look at WoW, sell a product folks like they will pay for it.
  • ScambugScambug TortugaPosts: 389Member

    Sure, why not. That's more or less how the Asians do it I believe and it seems to work for them.

    For me it wouldn't change anything since I only ever play 1 MMO at a time and I don't want my playing time to be limited so I'd go for the 15 dollar option. For casual players or multi-mmo players however I could see this being very attractive.

     

  • TorvalTorval Oregon CountryPosts: 7,221Member Uncommon

    It's not the cost of the subscription that puts me off the sub-locked games.  It's the renting of temporary access to my gaming.  I'm just not doing that anymore.  I'm subscribed to a sub-free game right now solely because I like what it offers and more importantly when I stop paying that sub I still have full access to the game and my characters.

  • Eir_SEir_S Argyle, NYPosts: 4,623Member
    Originally posted by Torvaldr

    It's not the cost of the subscription that puts me off the sub-locked games.  It's the renting of temporary access to my gaming.  I'm just not doing that anymore.  I'm subscribed to a sub-free game right now solely because I like what it offers and more importantly when I stop paying that sub I still have full access to the game and my characters.

    Exactly this.  I can afford $15 a month, but no one's giving me a great reason why I should pay it.  The myth about high server costs was already debunked.  Companies can't justify the forced cash extraction.

    The really awful ones are ones like EQ2 where if you stop paying, you go F2P with access to only some of your characters. 

    To answer your question though, I don't like the idea.  Paying $5 less for a limited amount of time is even more corrupt and unfair.

  • TorvalTorval Oregon CountryPosts: 7,221Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Eir_S
    Originally posted by Torvaldr

    It's not the cost of the subscription that puts me off the sub-locked games.  It's the renting of temporary access to my gaming.  I'm just not doing that anymore.  I'm subscribed to a sub-free game right now solely because I like what it offers and more importantly when I stop paying that sub I still have full access to the game and my characters.

    Exactly this.  I can afford $15 a month, but no one's giving me a great reason why I should pay it.  The myth about high server costs was already debunked.  Companies can't justify the forced cash extraction.

    The really awful ones are ones like EQ2 where if you stop paying, you go F2P with access to only some of your characters. 

    To answer your question though, I don't like the idea.  Paying $5 less for a limited amount of time is even more corrupt and unfair.

    What I really hate about EQ2's revenue model is if I buy an expac (and they are $40 - $80 depending on the version) I still have to subscribe to have all that the expac offers or I have to pay again to unlock gear for that expac.  At least in LotRO, GW, GW2, and other games where you basically buy the expansion you get access to all the features.  Double dipping and renting temporary access are a couple of my most hated things.

  • DamonVileDamonVile Vancouver, BCPosts: 4,818Member

    I'd rather pay a by the hour/day with a cap at $15 than pre buying an amount of time. Like most people I have no issue with paying for a game. It's not the money, it's what you're getting.

    PAying $15 a month then being asked to pay $40-60 for an expack seems unfair to me. Wasn't my $15 for new content ? I mean that is what people always say when they list reasons why p2p games are better...you get regular content. Why do you have to pay twice then ? Free to play often charge for new content but, you'r eonly paying once.

    I'm not a huge fan of being locked out if you don't want to pay for a month because you only have a limited time for whatever reason. You may lose some perks in a f2p game if you stop paying but you can still log in and goof off.

    I think paying per hr/day with the cap would work for a lot of people. You play less you pay less. But it really comes down to what you're paying for.

  • NadiaNadia Canonsburg, PAPosts: 11,866Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Eir_S

    The really awful ones are ones like EQ2 where if you stop paying, you go F2P with access to only some of your characters. 

    offtopic but thats been changed - now have access to all your characters w no sub

  • waynejr2waynejr2 West Toluca Lake, CAPosts: 4,481Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Myrdynn

    I posted this in a TESO thread but was curios to what others thought in the general area

     

    you know, someone needs to come up with a new sub model.

    History lessons of MMORPGS show that games once started as pay by the HOUR.  I believe Shadows of Yserbius was something like $3 an hour, which would be ridiculous now, but back then we also used to run from store to store getting aol.com hours.

    A Subscription model following something like this would be great

    $4.99- 50 hrs monthly (12 hrs a week approx) intended for the casual, fulltime student/worker/family person

    $9.99- 120 hrs monthly (30 hrs a week approx) for some with a little more time on their hands, you get more then double the previous scale

    14.99- Unlimited hours.

    seems like this would be a pretty popular idea imo.  Every subscriber is automatically charged 4.99 a month, and when you hit 48 hrs it notifies you you're monthly time is about to run out, click yes to automatically goto the next level, hit 120 hrs bam same thing

    Its a win for gaming companies, cause I would keep a 4.99 sub to 3 different games if this was an option and I wouldnt feel like I have to log in

    This is not intended to be a B2P vs F2P vs P2P thread

     You are only looking at this from the poor customer point of view.  The business needs to make money month after month and what you offer is peanuts.  

  • Superman0XSuperman0X San Jose, CAPosts: 1,606Member Uncommon

    Online Games started as pay per MINUTE. This was why the shift to subscription was seen as a good thing.

     

    Today they still sell timecards for games in Asia, as subscriptions are illegal (due to AOL style scams). This is the income source for most free to play (and pay to play) games in Asia

     

    I, personally, would appreciate the return of the use of timecards in the west. This would help make games feel more 'fair' to players who have both a little, and a lot of time to play.

  • BahamutKaiserBahamutKaiser Hyattsville, MDPosts: 306Member
    I can tolerate subscriptions only if there is no retail cost for the game and expansions, and no MT for digital goods because spending money to play a game or have digital goods which I don't have unrestricted access to is simply unacceptable.

    The most I would pay for retail if subscription was included is $30 and $5 subscription, with a possibility of $30 expansions and absolutely no MT. Any increase to any other cost would have to exclude subscription or retail.

    I would rather pay $60 retail and $60 more every year for expansions and not have any other costs. MT would be OK if it was done respectfully. And subs around $10 a month would be OK if there were no other costs ever, even with AAA gameplay and quality expansions. That's $120 a year...

    Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes.
    That way, if they get angry, they'll be a mile away... and barefoot.

Sign In or Register to comment.