Originally posted by Istavaan Wow went 8 months without any new content updates, so 8 x 15$ = no content.
I would rather a game rob me right up front with a sub than try to be sneaky about it with crap from a sub shop.
at least you have a choice to be robbed or not.
How so?
If the games time requirements are increased to funnel you to the cash shop, then you've been robbed of time.
If the games fun has been locked behind a pay wall, then you've been robbed of fun.
If both are to harsh and you leave a game you would have otherwise have liked, then you've been robbed of a game.
Though, cash shops like TSW, GW2, and PS2 aren't bad at all and some that I can live with. These however are not the standard when it comes to cash shops sadly.
The same thing applies sub-locked games. If you don't pay extra for the Rift xpac you are left behind. They gate and lock instance rewards to require you to sub longer. They implement artificial time sinks to ensure your recurring fee is in place. P2P games are just as "pay to win" as most B2P or F2P games.
I voted B2P, but any sub-free option would be good. TSW has a great hybrid model. I also like the B2P model in GW2. I like how STO has it's F2P set up as well.
The longer I go without sub-locked games the more convinced I am that I won't rent access to a game again. I've spent over $300 in Rift and when my sub ends in March/April then all that will be down the drain. I spent $60 on GW2, $30 on TSW, and $20 on Tera. I haven't spent over $100 across all my games in the cash shop for the last year. I get to enjoy those games and access the content I paid for (without requiring additional fees) until they close the servers. No P2P game offers that and none of them offer me a better experience for the heavy restriction of paywall access.
I disagree with you. Rift offers a great deal for the initial purchase and sub fee. It's a game that allows for extended play sessions for extended periods of time. You get far more with rifts monthly fee than you do with F2P's and even B2P's. It simply warrants a monthly fee. The Expac isn't exactly content locked behind a pay wall, it's additional content. Thats not exactly the same thing. A great deal was added with the expac for rift, in fact you could not get the same amount of additional content from any f2p while spending the same amount or even double the cost of Storm Legion.
GW2 and TSW are good games and both fit the Buy to Play model pretty well. They offer games that don't have the extended play potential of a game like Rift but they do offer quality and polish as well as a decent amount of content. Unfortunately neither would really make it as a pay to play due to the lack of extended game play potential.
I'm not against any business model, I just prefer the model be appropriate for the game.
I am hoping ESO warrants pay to play. I'm hoping for a game with a great deal of polish and quality. I'm hoping for a game with a great deal of content and variety in content as well as a game that warrants extended play sessions for extended periods of time. I'm hoping for a game that offers a great deal of content and features in it's expacs.
I'm actually fine with ESO using a buy to play business model, I just want it to be a game that warrants a pay to play business model. Though if it is, that is the model they will likely use.
As far as free to play goes, theres an issue there. The IP and the developer behind the game has potential to bring in a great deal of players, especially if the game is well done. Its going to require a large number of players buying off of a cash shop to make the game profitable. The larger the player base the more people they need spending money. A game like PS2 can have the type of cash shop it has because its appeal isn't excessive. They don't need as many paying players to support the game. For a game like ESO to be profitable with a free to play model it would require a great deal of funneling players to the cash shop which would simply detract from the game.
Business-wise, you cannot go wrong with B2P and Cash Shop.
Other than the fact that you're missing out on six to eighteen months of hundreds of thousands of players dropping $15 monthly on top of having paid for the box (in multi-levels as you suggested).
That's a large pile of cash. From there, do a TSW... drop the mandatory sub and crank up item shop, optional sub, and/or unlockable content.
Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now working in Network Security. I don't Forum PVP. If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident. When I don't understand, I ask. Such is not intended as criticism.
Originally posted by safire312 Pay as much, as u play, with cap payment methodBecause a player who plays 400 hours a month might end up paying more than the original $15 a month and if you base pricing off of that much playtime then most players would be paying little compared to before.I would suggest something like $0.25 an hour played per month up to say 60 hours and then it caps off at $15.
That model is very popular in Asia. Interesting how it can work in Asia but not other places..
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
Having played all of F2P like LotRO and DDO, P2P like EVE and WoW, B2P like GW2 I can say I think B2P is the most preferred method.
People who say that P2P has more mature players as it limits the kiddos and asshats or that it ensures better quality content are smoking crack. None of this is true from what I've seen, In fact both F2P and B2P games I have seen much much higher maturity than WoW. Then again that might be unfair comparison as WoW has that enormous popularity which is what attracts the asshats. As far as quaity? Cata and MoP.... need I say more? GW2 is producing quality content as a non-sub game.
In F2P games I feel that quality is where you'll see where it is lacking greatly. Mostly my experiance is based of DDO. DDO and Turbine are AUTROCIOUS when it comes to content, development, and just plain simple bug fixes. Content is so stagnant it's ridiculous, then they rehash age old content that players can do blindfolded with epic levels instread of producing quality content like raids or adding a wide array of quests instead of the typical 3-5 quests that one can do in a few hours time. Turbine produces a raid that is a mere fraction of a single raid that other MMOs produce on a major patch cycle while Turbine produces it on a paid expansion cycle time frame. As for development... archery's severe gimpness that is ignored and the numerous year old promise of completing the enhancements that is repeatedly delayed... And bug fixes... total incompetance as they always break more crap than they fix or how when they release stuff it is so god aweful bug ridden that it feels like an Alpha build.
B2P I really think is what will replace the P2P format. How many MMOs have successfully pulled a P2P format? The vast majority get converted to B2P or more frequently F2P in desperation. GW2 I think showed developers that B2P with a legitiment cash shop is a very sound buisness model and if not the most ideal.
Now if the game is worth it I would definately pay a P2P game as 15 bucks is well worth it if it keeps my attention. The problem is that no game has ever really kept my attention span for an extended period of time. Cata lasted me a month or 2 before calling it quites.
Originally posted by Istavaan If you don't pay your 15$ a month you can't win.
Your not making any sense with your abstract quotes now. Can you put that into some context?
You know exacly what i am talking about. it doesn't matter what way you pay if you don't pay you can't win, and this is true for p2p as much as it is for f2p.
Originally posted by safire312 Pay as much, as u play, with cap payment method
Because a player who plays 400 hours a month might end up paying more than the original $15 a month and if you base pricing off of that much playtime then most players would be paying little compared to before.
I would suggest something like $0.25 an hour played per month up to say 60 hours and then it caps off at $15.
That model is very popular in Asia. Interesting how it can work in Asia but not other places..
There are plenty of F2P games that these free loaders can enjoy, why do they need another?
There are plenty of shallow, banal Themepark games that you all can enjoy. Why do we need another?
See what I did there?
Tried: EQ2 - AC - EU - HZ - TR - MxO - TTO - WURM - SL - VG:SoH - PotBS - PS - AoC - WAR - DDO - SWTOR Played: UO - EQ1 - AO - DAoC - NC - CoH/CoV - SWG - WoW - EVE - AA - LotRO - DFO - STO - FE - MO - RIFT Playing: Skyrim Following: The Repopulation I want a Virtual World, not just a Game. ITS TOO HARD! - Matt Firor (ZeniMax)
I always chuckle when people say "Lifetime subs" hahaha. That is a garaunteed indication the game is a failure. Don't say Lotro, TSW, or any other Lifetime sub game is successful because they are not. Those games are barely hanging on.
"The King and the Pawn return to the same box at the end of the game"
Originally posted by Fearum Originally posted by NitthOriginally posted by safire312Pay as much, as u play, with cap payment method Because a player who plays 400 hours a month might end up paying more than the original $15 a month and if you base pricing off of that much playtime then most players would be paying little compared to before.I would suggest something like $0.25 an hour played per month up to say 60 hours and then it caps off at $15.
That model is very popular in Asia. Interesting how it can work in Asia but not other places.. I would love that pay model.
In a perfect world i suppose the more payment models available to the consumer the better.
But i guess as someone else said, Developers and publishers already know in advance how much overhead they need to make up for and how much profits need to be produced in a given time frame.
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
I went with a sub model. I just do not like being nickle and dimed for every little thing. Extra character slot? Pay up please, need more bank space or another backpack? Open that wallet... Hate that sh*t.
As an aside, is it possible for developers to have their F2P model and include a sub model, like most games do, BUT, make it so the person that subs has the game as it was before the F2P? If I am paying a sub I want it to be like it was, I don't want to get my Game Company Bucks each month to spend in the game store, I don't want ads in-game, just giveme the game I am paying for like it was before all this F2P BS came about...
That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!
TSW LTers will vastly disagree. LT subs are retarded as one can never know the future of a game.
I don't think I would ever buy a LT sub, what happens if 1 year into the game they change a major core gameplay element you don't like so the game would be ruined for you? MMO's are always changing so a LT sub really doesnt make sense.
For me, the player, I'd much rather see a game released worthy of charging a sub with no cash shop.
But you asked us to "think like Zenimax." Business-wise, you cannot go wrong with B2P and Cash Shop. B2P is all the rage now so people will accept that it is great from the get-go. You avoid going F2P from a sub when your game fails to keep the players' interests, so all looks fine from the outside when numbers start to drop. Also, creating cool items for the cash shop is much more profitable than creating actual content, which is now a by-product just to keep players playing so they may pay more. For box sales, I would create about 4 tiers of boxes to make people with money feel special. I would tack on some in-game assets for those who pre-purchase.
After all, the whole reason I (being Zenimax) am creating TES:O is for cash, right?
P2P games also utilize the cash shop, everyone utilizes the cash shop. I remeber back when I would be a pet on WoW's anniversery. Now if you want a spiffy pet or mount then you have to pay via a cash shop unless you can earn it in game. Long ago companies where like "Hey.... we can stop rewarding our players for free and put these cosmetics in a cash shop and people will buy it!"
Originally posted by Torvaldr Originally posted by NitthOriginally posted by IstavaanIf you don't pay your 15$ a month you can't win.
Your not making any sense with your abstract quotes now. Can you put that into some context?Not to speak for him, but I have an outlook that comes to a similar conclusion.
The cash shops and box fees in sub-free models are often criticised as "pay to win". P2W is one of those horrible idiotic marketing slogans like "cloud" and "web 2.0" that don't really mean anything or rather are so subjective as to be useless for communicating a point.
From my perspective every game is pretty much pay to win. In other words you must pay at some point or you will be restricted from content, restricted from leveling, held back, or excluded. The fact is to enjoy any game to its fullest potential you will need to spend money. Don't pay the sub - you're out of luck. Don't buy the content in the cash shop - you're out of luck. The money people have it over those that don't regardless of the model.
Sub-free games have mechanisms in place to encourage cash shop visitation (as do most sub-locked games now). Games locked behind sub-only paywalls also have mechanisms in place (raid locks, limited dungeon token rewards, time sink grinds) to encourage you to sub longer.
The difference, to me, is that in a sub-free game the money I spend can be enjoyed without having to spend more money or losing access to the stuff I buy (content, items, boosts, cosmetics, etc). In a sub-locked game I only get to enjoy what I've spent if I'm spending more (keeping my sub active).
I stopped enjoying Rift last fall. My sub expires this March/April. All the money I've spent ($300) on the game will be useless and restricted under the current model. Not only that but the sub time I've paid for is wasted because I'm not playing the game a lot anymore.
In the end it all comes down to a couple factors. What is the total cost of game play and what do I get (or lose) if I pay or stop paying. So far all my sub-free games have been less expensive than my sub-locked games and I'm getting as good of an experience or better. Sorry that was long winded.
I hear what your saying, But in reality all 3 models are the same in the regard that if companies don't make money and shutdown, You will never see your characters and items again?
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
Well I can see there's no shortage of "p2p zombie" idiots commenting on these forums, apparently 2012 hasn't taught them a single thing.
Not only does P2P often crash as we've seen time and time again in 2012 but it certainly does NOT guarantee quality people as we've all seen from games like WoW. So My suggestion to those who are holding onto that dream in this continuing economic crisis is, dream on.
"The elitism is strong with this one", is what came to mind when I saw the first few comments on this thread.
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.
For me, the player, I'd much rather see a game released worthy of charging a sub with no cash shop.
But you asked us to "think like Zenimax." Business-wise, you cannot go wrong with B2P and Cash Shop. B2P is all the rage now so people will accept that it is great from the get-go. You avoid going F2P from a sub when your game fails to keep the players' interests, so all looks fine from the outside when numbers start to drop. Also, creating cool items for the cash shop is much more profitable than creating actual content, which is now a by-product just to keep players playing so they may pay more. For box sales, I would create about 4 tiers of boxes to make people with money feel special. I would tack on some in-game assets for those who pre-purchase.
After all, the whole reason I (being Zenimax) am creating TES:O is for cash, right?
P2P games also utilize the cash shop, everyone utilizes the cash shop. I remeber back when I would be a pet on WoW's anniversery. Now if you want a spiffy pet or mount then you have to pay via a cash shop unless you can earn it in game. Long ago companies where like "Hey.... we can stop rewarding our players for free and put these cosmetics in a cash shop and people will buy it!"
What you typed right there is a far cry from some of these games with cash shops that sell obvious enhancers that affect gameplay. There is nothing in the shop at Blizzard that gives anyone an advantage over anyone else. To me that is a HUGE difference.
That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!
Originally posted by Slampig I went with a sub model. I just do not like being nickle and dimed for every little thing. Extra character slot? Pay up please, need more bank space or another backpack? Open that wallet... Hate that sh*t.
Yeah I know, losing a set amount on a regular basis is so much better than having a choice to spend or not. I mean, why spend $2 for a backpack slot once and $4 for bankslots once when I can pay $15 a month, every month for as long as I play. /boggle
P2P is dieing, only 1 single P2P game has had more people playing than B2P games like GW1, GW2 is nearing that...and F2P games has made Nexon the second largest game maker on the planet, only EA makes more money and most of that is from console games.
Sure,there are plenty of MMOs with subs that are subpar with low amounts of players...but that is dropping. There have been too many SWTORs in the last 5 years. The quality just isnt there...and once western companies actually learn how to make a GOOD cash shop, with tons of vanity items, mounts and the like, they will be able to match Asian based F2P games in terms of income.
I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson
For me, the player, I'd much rather see a game released worthy of charging a sub with no cash shop.
But you asked us to "think like Zenimax." Business-wise, you cannot go wrong with B2P and Cash Shop. B2P is all the rage now so people will accept that it is great from the get-go. You avoid going F2P from a sub when your game fails to keep the players' interests, so all looks fine from the outside when numbers start to drop. Also, creating cool items for the cash shop is much more profitable than creating actual content, which is now a by-product just to keep players playing so they may pay more. For box sales, I would create about 4 tiers of boxes to make people with money feel special. I would tack on some in-game assets for those who pre-purchase.
After all, the whole reason I (being Zenimax) am creating TES:O is for cash, right?
P2P games also utilize the cash shop, everyone utilizes the cash shop. I remeber back when I would be a pet on WoW's anniversery. Now if you want a spiffy pet or mount then you have to pay via a cash shop unless you can earn it in game. Long ago companies where like "Hey.... we can stop rewarding our players for free and put these cosmetics in a cash shop and people will buy it!"
What you typed right there is a far cry from some of these games with cash shops that sell obvious enhancers that affect gameplay. There is nothing in the shop at Blizzard that gives anyone an advantage over anyone else. To me that is a HUGE difference.
And neither does CS like GW2. Time efficency is not advatage P2W items, there are purely cosmetic Cash Shops.
Originally posted by Torvaldr Originally posted by NitthI hear what your saying, But in reality all 3 models are the same in the regard that if companies don't make money and shutdown, You will never see your characters and items again?
Yes, that's very true. I really believe that any payment model or hybrid of them still requires them to put out a good game or people won't pay.
The latest evolution of the model I'm watching now is Funcom with TSW. I think it's brilliant to combine box fee, no required sub, a premium status sub option, and the ability to buy permanent premium status. How they do expacs in the future and how they monetization evolves could heavily influence the industry even if the title is very niche. I have a huge amount of respect with how flexible and quick they have been to adjust to the market to make their game successful.
A payment model won't make a bad game good and successful, but the wrong payment model could hamper and hinder its success.
Can agree entirely with that.
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
Well I can see there's no shortage of "p2p zombie" idiots commenting on these forums, apparently 2012 hasn't taught them a single thing.
Not only does P2P often crash as we've seen time and time again in 2012 but it certainly does NOT guarantee quality people as we've all seen from games like WoW. So My suggestion to those who are holding onto that dream in this continuing economic crisis is, dream on.
"The elitism is strong with this one", is what came to mind when I saw the first few comments on this thread.
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.
So the thing everyone complained about swtor at launch was the payment model? Nope it was lack of end game, ilum slide show, no ui customisation, no lfg, poor engine etc.
Hardly anyone complained about the payment model until people started realising the quality of the game wasnt worth the payment due to them releasing the game in alpha shape.
So no swtors faults had nothing to do with payment model and had more to do with releasing an unfinished game on an engine that couldnt handle what they wanted players to use it for.
If subs weredead then no one would be using that model let alone the most succesfull game in the genre
Comments
I disagree with you. Rift offers a great deal for the initial purchase and sub fee. It's a game that allows for extended play sessions for extended periods of time. You get far more with rifts monthly fee than you do with F2P's and even B2P's. It simply warrants a monthly fee. The Expac isn't exactly content locked behind a pay wall, it's additional content. Thats not exactly the same thing. A great deal was added with the expac for rift, in fact you could not get the same amount of additional content from any f2p while spending the same amount or even double the cost of Storm Legion.
GW2 and TSW are good games and both fit the Buy to Play model pretty well. They offer games that don't have the extended play potential of a game like Rift but they do offer quality and polish as well as a decent amount of content. Unfortunately neither would really make it as a pay to play due to the lack of extended game play potential.
I'm not against any business model, I just prefer the model be appropriate for the game.
I am hoping ESO warrants pay to play. I'm hoping for a game with a great deal of polish and quality. I'm hoping for a game with a great deal of content and variety in content as well as a game that warrants extended play sessions for extended periods of time. I'm hoping for a game that offers a great deal of content and features in it's expacs.
I'm actually fine with ESO using a buy to play business model, I just want it to be a game that warrants a pay to play business model. Though if it is, that is the model they will likely use.
As far as free to play goes, theres an issue there. The IP and the developer behind the game has potential to bring in a great deal of players, especially if the game is well done. Its going to require a large number of players buying off of a cash shop to make the game profitable. The larger the player base the more people they need spending money. A game like PS2 can have the type of cash shop it has because its appeal isn't excessive. They don't need as many paying players to support the game. For a game like ESO to be profitable with a free to play model it would require a great deal of funneling players to the cash shop which would simply detract from the game.
Subsciption with Lifetime Subscription option.
If it offereed LT sub I would take it.
Star Trek Online - Best Free MMORPG of 2012
Your not making any sense with your abstract quotes now. Can you put that into some context?
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
Other than the fact that you're missing out on six to eighteen months of hundreds of thousands of players dropping $15 monthly on top of having paid for the box (in multi-levels as you suggested).
That's a large pile of cash. From there, do a TSW... drop the mandatory sub and crank up item shop, optional sub, and/or unlockable content.
That model is very popular in Asia. Interesting how it can work in Asia but not other places..
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
Having played all of F2P like LotRO and DDO, P2P like EVE and WoW, B2P like GW2 I can say I think B2P is the most preferred method.
People who say that P2P has more mature players as it limits the kiddos and asshats or that it ensures better quality content are smoking crack. None of this is true from what I've seen, In fact both F2P and B2P games I have seen much much higher maturity than WoW. Then again that might be unfair comparison as WoW has that enormous popularity which is what attracts the asshats. As far as quaity? Cata and MoP.... need I say more? GW2 is producing quality content as a non-sub game.
In F2P games I feel that quality is where you'll see where it is lacking greatly. Mostly my experiance is based of DDO. DDO and Turbine are AUTROCIOUS when it comes to content, development, and just plain simple bug fixes. Content is so stagnant it's ridiculous, then they rehash age old content that players can do blindfolded with epic levels instread of producing quality content like raids or adding a wide array of quests instead of the typical 3-5 quests that one can do in a few hours time. Turbine produces a raid that is a mere fraction of a single raid that other MMOs produce on a major patch cycle while Turbine produces it on a paid expansion cycle time frame. As for development... archery's severe gimpness that is ignored and the numerous year old promise of completing the enhancements that is repeatedly delayed... And bug fixes... total incompetance as they always break more crap than they fix or how when they release stuff it is so god aweful bug ridden that it feels like an Alpha build.
B2P I really think is what will replace the P2P format. How many MMOs have successfully pulled a P2P format? The vast majority get converted to B2P or more frequently F2P in desperation. GW2 I think showed developers that B2P with a legitiment cash shop is a very sound buisness model and if not the most ideal.
Now if the game is worth it I would definately pay a P2P game as 15 bucks is well worth it if it keeps my attention. The problem is that no game has ever really kept my attention span for an extended period of time. Cata lasted me a month or 2 before calling it quites.
You know exacly what i am talking about. it doesn't matter what way you pay if you don't pay you can't win, and this is true for p2p as much as it is for f2p.
I would love that pay model.
There are plenty of shallow, banal Themepark games that you all can enjoy. Why do we need another?
See what I did there?
Tried: EQ2 - AC - EU - HZ - TR - MxO - TTO - WURM - SL - VG:SoH - PotBS - PS - AoC - WAR - DDO - SWTOR
Played: UO - EQ1 - AO - DAoC - NC - CoH/CoV - SWG - WoW - EVE - AA - LotRO - DFO - STO - FE - MO - RIFT
Playing: Skyrim
Following: The Repopulation
I want a Virtual World, not just a Game.
ITS TOO HARD! - Matt Firor (ZeniMax)
TSW LTers will vastly disagree. LT subs are retarded as one can never know the future of a game.
I always chuckle when people say "Lifetime subs" hahaha. That is a garaunteed indication the game is a failure. Don't say Lotro, TSW, or any other Lifetime sub game is successful because they are not. Those games are barely hanging on.
I would love that pay model.
In a perfect world i suppose the more payment models available to the consumer the better.
But i guess as someone else said, Developers and publishers already know in advance how much overhead they need to make up for and how much profits need to be produced in a given time frame.
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
I went with a sub model. I just do not like being nickle and dimed for every little thing. Extra character slot? Pay up please, need more bank space or another backpack? Open that wallet... Hate that sh*t.
As an aside, is it possible for developers to have their F2P model and include a sub model, like most games do, BUT, make it so the person that subs has the game as it was before the F2P? If I am paying a sub I want it to be like it was, I don't want to get my Game Company Bucks each month to spend in the game store, I don't want ads in-game, just giveme the game I am paying for like it was before all this F2P BS came about...
That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!
Subscripton/p2p.
Cash shops are a cancer.
I don't think I would ever buy a LT sub, what happens if 1 year into the game they change a major core gameplay element you don't like so the game would be ruined for you? MMO's are always changing so a LT sub really doesnt make sense.
P2P games also utilize the cash shop, everyone utilizes the cash shop. I remeber back when I would be a pet on WoW's anniversery. Now if you want a spiffy pet or mount then you have to pay via a cash shop unless you can earn it in game. Long ago companies where like "Hey.... we can stop rewarding our players for free and put these cosmetics in a cash shop and people will buy it!"
Not to speak for him, but I have an outlook that comes to a similar conclusion.
The cash shops and box fees in sub-free models are often criticised as "pay to win". P2W is one of those horrible idiotic marketing slogans like "cloud" and "web 2.0" that don't really mean anything or rather are so subjective as to be useless for communicating a point.
From my perspective every game is pretty much pay to win. In other words you must pay at some point or you will be restricted from content, restricted from leveling, held back, or excluded. The fact is to enjoy any game to its fullest potential you will need to spend money. Don't pay the sub - you're out of luck. Don't buy the content in the cash shop - you're out of luck. The money people have it over those that don't regardless of the model.
Sub-free games have mechanisms in place to encourage cash shop visitation (as do most sub-locked games now). Games locked behind sub-only paywalls also have mechanisms in place (raid locks, limited dungeon token rewards, time sink grinds) to encourage you to sub longer.
The difference, to me, is that in a sub-free game the money I spend can be enjoyed without having to spend more money or losing access to the stuff I buy (content, items, boosts, cosmetics, etc). In a sub-locked game I only get to enjoy what I've spent if I'm spending more (keeping my sub active).
I stopped enjoying Rift last fall. My sub expires this March/April. All the money I've spent ($300) on the game will be useless and restricted under the current model. Not only that but the sub time I've paid for is wasted because I'm not playing the game a lot anymore.
In the end it all comes down to a couple factors. What is the total cost of game play and what do I get (or lose) if I pay or stop paying. So far all my sub-free games have been less expensive than my sub-locked games and I'm getting as good of an experience or better. Sorry that was long winded.
I hear what your saying, But in reality all 3 models are the same in the regard that if companies don't make money and shutdown, You will never see your characters and items again?
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
Speak for yourself.
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
Well I can see there's no shortage of "p2p zombie" idiots commenting on these forums, apparently 2012 hasn't taught them a single thing.
Not only does P2P often crash as we've seen time and time again in 2012 but it certainly does NOT guarantee quality people as we've all seen from games like WoW. So My suggestion to those who are holding onto that dream in this continuing economic crisis is, dream on.
"The elitism is strong with this one", is what came to mind when I saw the first few comments on this thread.
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.
What you typed right there is a far cry from some of these games with cash shops that sell obvious enhancers that affect gameplay. There is nothing in the shop at Blizzard that gives anyone an advantage over anyone else. To me that is a HUGE difference.
That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!
Yeah I know, losing a set amount on a regular basis is so much better than having a choice to spend or not. I mean, why spend $2 for a backpack slot once and $4 for bankslots once when I can pay $15 a month, every month for as long as I play. /boggle
P2P is dieing, only 1 single P2P game has had more people playing than B2P games like GW1, GW2 is nearing that...and F2P games has made Nexon the second largest game maker on the planet, only EA makes more money and most of that is from console games.
Sure,there are plenty of MMOs with subs that are subpar with low amounts of players...but that is dropping. There have been too many SWTORs in the last 5 years. The quality just isnt there...and once western companies actually learn how to make a GOOD cash shop, with tons of vanity items, mounts and the like, they will be able to match Asian based F2P games in terms of income.
I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson
And neither does CS like GW2. Time efficency is not advatage P2W items, there are purely cosmetic Cash Shops.
The latest evolution of the model I'm watching now is Funcom with TSW. I think it's brilliant to combine box fee, no required sub, a premium status sub option, and the ability to buy permanent premium status. How they do expacs in the future and how they monetization evolves could heavily influence the industry even if the title is very niche. I have a huge amount of respect with how flexible and quick they have been to adjust to the market to make their game successful.
A payment model won't make a bad game good and successful, but the wrong payment model could hamper and hinder its success.
Can agree entirely with that.
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
So the thing everyone complained about swtor at launch was the payment model? Nope it was lack of end game, ilum slide show, no ui customisation, no lfg, poor engine etc.
Hardly anyone complained about the payment model until people started realising the quality of the game wasnt worth the payment due to them releasing the game in alpha shape.
So no swtors faults had nothing to do with payment model and had more to do with releasing an unfinished game on an engine that couldnt handle what they wanted players to use it for.
If subs weredead then no one would be using that model let alone the most succesfull game in the genre