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!

Are subscription games meeting player demand?

13

Comments

  • NikopolNikopol The ZonePosts: 626Member Uncommon

    The way I see it:

    If I don't enjoy a game enough to pay $15 a month for playing, I should probably be doing something else.

     

  • Arathir86Arathir86 CanberraPosts: 442Member Uncommon

    I've said it before, and I'll say it again:

    F2P does not equal a crap quality game.

    Sure, that used to be the case, and there are certainly games out there which still fall under this stereotype, but if the current trend in the market continues, you will be seeing a lot of new releases launching straight into a F2P model, and to a lesser extent returning to the B2P model, with P2P going the way of the dinosaur.

     

    F2P just makes sense these days, because it generates traffic to the game, which in-turn generates more revenue from any RMT or DLC those games may have.

     

    It also lets us, the Player, vote with our money. It used to be that once developers got the box price from consumers, they didnt care much about continueing support for the game, because that would cost money and they usually filled their 'quota' within the first few weeks of their release date. Now-a-days, if a F2P doesnt offer something which will keep players around for longer to increase the chances of getting them to spend money in their Cash Shops then people will try it and drop it like a $2 hoo-, well you get where im going...

     

    It's up to you as the Consumer to decide whether a game is worth investing money into, and until the average intelligence of the gamer rises above the market for Pay 2 Win schemes; we will still see the odd F2P game which abuses our thirst for 'becoming the best', regardless of whether we got there by skill or by coin.

     

    Having said that, I still believe there is a place for P2P model, but perhaps not in its current (and somewhat archaic) format...

    "The problem with quotes from the Internet is that it's almost impossible to validate their authenticity." - Abraham Lincoln

  • VesaviusVesavius BristolPosts: 7,641Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Nikopol

    The way I see it:

    If I don't enjoy a game enough to pay $15 a month for playing, I should probably be doing something else.

     

    Exactly.

    If it isn't good enough to make me want to pay money why on Earth would it be good enough for me to invest my (more) precious leisure time into it?

    These guys that tell me that this or that game isn't 'worth' a sub make me boggle... they blatantly don't even enjoy or even like what they are doing and are just looking for a free knitting simulator to kill time in until the next one comes along. Too many people that don't even like MMORPGs are steering the direction of the industry IMO.

  • IG-88IG-88 GrandosPosts: 143Member

    Im suprised by the results, i thought most wanted F2P theses days.

     

    If a MMO is good enough to play, i gladly pay the sub to keep it alive and support its devs for more content.

     

  • BoneserinoBoneserino London, ONPosts: 1,623Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by IG-88

    Im suprised by the results, i thought most wanted F2P theses days.

     

    If a MMO is good enough to play, i gladly pay the sub to keep it alive and support its devs for more content.

     

    And you consider that the results of roughly 80 people at present, on this forum, represents what is happening in the industry?

    Sorry  but the rest of those people are out playing their favorite F2P game and not worrying about what the whiners on this site have to say. 

    I have never met a more hypocritical group than the P2P crowd.

    FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!

  • VesaviusVesavius BristolPosts: 7,641Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Kreedz

    F2P does not equal a crap quality game.

    You are right, a good game will be a good game whatever the model it uses.

    BUT

    Cash shop funded gaming brings a wagon load of negative factors to the game in terms of core design, community building, and player manipulation (some of which I listed before in this thread) that a game that uses it has to be looked at far more carefully before investing time into it.

    With a  sub game I am like 'right, lets play', with a cash shop game I am like, 'right, let's see what tricks this is trying to pull on me in order to rinse me'.

    It also lets us, the Player, vote with our money. It used to be that once developers got the box price from consumers, they didnt care much about continueing support for the game, because that would cost money and they usually filled their 'quota' within the first few weeks of their release date. Now-a-days, if a F2P doesnt offer something which will keep players around for longer to increase the chances of getting them to spend money in their Cash Shops then people will try it and drop it like a $2 hoo-, well you get where im going...

    Hogwash.

    A good dev will support their game whatever the revenue model. Both cash shops and subs 100% rely on people being in game equally. I have seen a ton of F2P titles say screw it to things like customer service and concentrate 100% on the shop, because that's where the money is made.

    Subs are also 'voting with our money'. I resent the trick you are trying to pull here, making out that cash shops are a tool that are great for consumer rights or something. It's nonsense. Cash shops offer a horrible deal for the consumer. They are extremely expensive for those that are manipulated to spend in them and have their true costs hidden behind fake currencies and gambling scams.

     

    Your entire post is so full of trendy recieved wisdom thinking that it's scary.

  • PhryPhry HampshirePosts: 6,289Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Boneserino
    Originally posted by IG-88

    Im suprised by the results, i thought most wanted F2P theses days.

     

    If a MMO is good enough to play, i gladly pay the sub to keep it alive and support its devs for more content.

     

    And you consider that the results of roughly 80 people at present, on this forum, represents what is happening in the industry?

    Sorry  but the rest of those people are out playing their favorite F2P game and not worrying about what the whiners on this site have to say. 

    I have never met a more hypocritical group than the P2P crowd.

    and yet people say that gaming apps like xfire and raptor etc represent 'trends' even though only a fraction of the gaming community uses them image

  • IcewhiteIcewhite Elmhurst, ILPosts: 6,403Member
    Originally posted by Phry

    and yet people say that gaming apps (etc.)

    It's important to note which people and consider the source. "People" leads to a blanket statement which is every bit as false.

    Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.

  • DanitaKusorDanitaKusor AdelaidePosts: 549Member Uncommon
    Subscription games are generally better quality games but they are not meeting player demand for content. 

    The Enlightened take things Lightly

  • VesaviusVesavius BristolPosts: 7,641Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DanitaKusor
    Subscription games are generally better quality games but they are not meeting player demand for content. 

     

    But, to be fair, that is a design issue and not a revenue model issue.

    MMORPGs need to get that part right and not scapegoat the sub as an excuse.

  • OberholzerOberholzer Hasbrouck Heights, NJPosts: 498Member
    I think what hurts subs are that many of today's players don't care about staying with a game. They play a F2P game and when they tire of it or just don't like it move on to the next one. With so many they can just hop to a new game with the hope of loving it. What I always enjoyed about MMO's was growing my character as the game grows throug updates, spaces etc. not just getting to level 20 and thinking this sucks, time for the next free game! 
  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,650Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Boneserino
    Originally posted by IG-88

    Im suprised by the results, i thought most wanted F2P theses days.

     

    If a MMO is good enough to play, i gladly pay the sub to keep it alive and support its devs for more content.

     

    And you consider that the results of roughly 80 people at present, on this forum, represents what is happening in the industry?

    Sorry  but the rest of those people are out playing their favorite F2P game and not worrying about what the whiners on this site have to say. 

    I have never met a more hypocritical group than the P2P crowd.

    Considering the original post displays complete disregard for (or at least lack of knowledge of)  basic economics, it's probably a safe bet that of that tiny sample of people that responded it was mostly this forum's avid anti-F2P base that just saw 'prefer subscription' and hit YES.

    His intent is to use results to "Do you prefer subscription" to prove the question in the subject right, and there really aren't many people here that are going to see through that. If nothing else, it's clever.

     

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,650Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Vesavius
    Originally posted by Nikopol

    The way I see it:

    If I don't enjoy a game enough to pay $15 a month for playing, I should probably be doing something else.

    Exactly.

    If it isn't good enough to make me want to pay money why on Earth would it be good enough for me to invest my (more) precious leisure time into it?

    Holy cognitive bias, batman.

    Mind you, your reasoning is exactly why an MMO with a monthly fee cannot offer a price lower than $15.00 even if they wanted to. image

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • PhryPhry HampshirePosts: 6,289Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Icewhite
    Originally posted by Phry

    and yet people say that gaming apps (etc.)

    It's important to note which people and consider the source. "People" leads to a blanket statement which is every bit as false.

    which is actually unimportant tbh, as its not the source that is in question, but the comparation, tools like xfire, or raptr are as indicative of 'trends' as forums such as this one, each represents a very small portion of the userbase of any particular genre, or in this case, MMO's.image
     

  • KuinnKuinn MestaPosts: 2,093Member

    It's not that simple, I'd gladly pay a sub-fee if there were truly amazing game that I cannot wait to log in almost every day. So yes, I'd love to pay sub-fee. Since there is no such game, I'm not paying a sub-fee currently. If the quality and feature list stays the same what it has been for several years now, then I prefer F2P or B2P.

     

    It's definately not the payment method that makes or breaks the games, first comes the game and how much I like it, then we can see what kind of sub-model it has.

  • KuinnKuinn MestaPosts: 2,093Member
    Originally posted by Vesavius
    Originally posted by Nikopol

    The way I see it:

    If I don't enjoy a game enough to pay $15 a month for playing, I should probably be doing something else.

     

    Exactly.

    If it isn't good enough to make me want to pay money why on Earth would it be good enough for me to invest my (more) precious leisure time into it?

    These guys that tell me that this or that game isn't 'worth' a sub make me boggle... they blatantly don't even enjoy or even like what they are doing and are just looking for a free knitting simulator to kill time in until the next one comes along. Too many people that don't even like MMORPGs are steering the direction of the industry IMO.

     

    It's absolutely possible. I love playing EVE very casually, half-afk hi-sec mining, relaxing autopilot cargo hauling through dozens of jumps while cooking or doing some other semi-afk activity. I would love to keep doing that, but the sub-fee is too much for me to justify this semi-afk play style. If someone would pay for my monthly fee, I'd definately keep playing the game, or if it was B2P/F2P. Only the Sith deal in absolutes.

  • VesaviusVesavius BristolPosts: 7,641Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Kuinn
    Originally posted by Vesavius
    Originally posted by Nikopol

    The way I see it:

    If I don't enjoy a game enough to pay $15 a month for playing, I should probably be doing something else.

     

    Exactly.

    If it isn't good enough to make me want to pay money why on Earth would it be good enough for me to invest my (more) precious leisure time into it?

    These guys that tell me that this or that game isn't 'worth' a sub make me boggle... they blatantly don't even enjoy or even like what they are doing and are just looking for a free knitting simulator to kill time in until the next one comes along. Too many people that don't even like MMORPGs are steering the direction of the industry IMO.

     

    I love playing EVE very casually

    I would love to keep doing that, but the sub-fee is too much for me to justify this

     

    You 'love it', but you don't think it's worth pay £2.50 a week for...

    What on Earth does something have to do to justify itself to you in order for you to invest in it's continuance past offering a service that you 'love'?

    You would think supporting the company that makes the game would be enough, rather then expecting to freeload off them and others.

  • ice-vortexice-vortex Xenia, OHPosts: 951Member
    No subscription game offers $15 a month worth of content. That's four and a half expansions or three full games yearly.
  • ThorkuneThorkune Eastern, KYPosts: 1,828Member Uncommon
    I have always preferred P2P titles until recently. The reason they work for me is because I am a game hopper now that SWG is shut down. I am unable to find anything that will draw me in like that game did. So now, I guess I would actually prefer a B2P model like GW2. You get the P2P features without a sub.
  • VesaviusVesavius BristolPosts: 7,641Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by Vesavius
    Originally posted by Nikopol

    The way I see it:

    If I don't enjoy a game enough to pay $15 a month for playing, I should probably be doing something else.

    Exactly.

    If it isn't good enough to make me want to pay money why on Earth would it be good enough for me to invest my (more) precious leisure time into it?

    Holy cognitive bias, batman.

    Mind you, your reasoning is exactly why an MMO with a monthly fee cannot offer a price lower than $15.00 even if they wanted to. image

     

    Call it whaty you want, dosen't bother me really, but when people tell me it's not worth their money but it *is* worth their time I have to boggle.

    Time to me personally is way more valuable then money.

    That is obviously what I am saying in the full unedited version of my post. I do not think it is a case of cognitive bias to say that (thought I admit it may be a case of framing, though in fairness I am only talking about the subject from my own perspective... we all suffer from CB on a daily basis because it is such a broad umbrella, you could accuse just about every post here of it. This is derailing the subject though, so best just move on I guess).

  • ksternalksternal Hainesport, NJPosts: 81Member
    Originally posted by syntax42

    The majority of people who play F2P games without paying are people who don't have the money to pay for a game in the first place.  This usually consists of minors, college students, and otherwise low-income gamers.  As a result of the lower income per player, the F2P game market is forced to make games for as little cost on their part as possible.  This has evolved into a money-grab in most games, because they think paying money equates to allowing a player to win.

     

    The quality of subscription games is higher and the quality of the community is usually better.  A few F2P hybrid games have done well and cater to both types of gamers without compromising on quality.  Hybrid might not be the best payment model for every game, but it has the only future I can see in which both payment models co-exist.

     

    Couldn't agree more

  • jtcgsjtcgs New Port Richey, ILPosts: 1,777Member
    Originally posted by Kuinn

      Only the Sith deal in absolutes.

     That is an absolute, you are a stih.

     

    Anyway, sorry P2P defenders, your defense that one must pay a monthly fee if a game is good is an outdated closed minded view to defend a pay model based on the lie that a company must cover very high bandwidth and server costs. It has been proven to be false by a great many companies LONG before P2P games started going FREEMIUM.

    The MMO world is leaving you behind, I will now commence with the sheding of a tear for your losing arguments.

    “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

  • ksternalksternal Hainesport, NJPosts: 81Member
    Originally posted by jtcgs
    Originally posted by Kuinn

      Only the Sith deal in absolutes.

     That is an absolute, you are a stih.

     

    Anyway, sorry P2P defenders, your defense that one must pay a monthly fee if a game is good is an outdated closed minded view to defend a pay model based on the lie that a company must cover very high bandwidth and server costs. It has been proven to be false by a great many companies LONG before P2P games started going FREEMIUM.

    The MMO world is leaving you behind, I will now commence with the sheding of a tear for your losing arguments.

    I shed a tear for the crappy games and updates for games already out that are F2P.

  • KuinnKuinn MestaPosts: 2,093Member
    Originally posted by Vesavius
    Originally posted by Kuinn
    Originally posted by Vesavius
    Originally posted by Nikopol

    The way I see it:

    If I don't enjoy a game enough to pay $15 a month for playing, I should probably be doing something else.

     

    Exactly.

    If it isn't good enough to make me want to pay money why on Earth would it be good enough for me to invest my (more) precious leisure time into it?

    These guys that tell me that this or that game isn't 'worth' a sub make me boggle... they blatantly don't even enjoy or even like what they are doing and are just looking for a free knitting simulator to kill time in until the next one comes along. Too many people that don't even like MMORPGs are steering the direction of the industry IMO.

     

    I love playing EVE very casually

    I would love to keep doing that, but the sub-fee is too much for me to justify this

     

    You 'love it', but you don't think it's worth pay £2.50 a week for...

    What on Earth does something have to do to justify itself to you in order for you to invest in it's continuance past offering a service that you 'love'?

    You would think supporting the company that makes the game would be enough, rather then expecting to freeload off them and others.

     

    Love is only as strong a word as the context is. Right here it is a computer game that I play mostly casually and semi afk, since you choose to ignore that fact, I'm not even sure what you are trying to prove or force feed here. I said it's entirely possible to enjoy a game while not finding it madly awesome to justify a monthly payment, if you cant understand that then dont, but that's how it is, it's quite simple tbh.

     

    You should also understand that I'm not saying EVE should be B2P or F2P. I'm simply saying why different model would work in my case with this particular game. Why I personally would play it if it was B2P or F2P. But there's the monthly fee, and I'm not playing, and that's perfectly fine. The world isnt black and white, there's all shades of grey too.

  • daltaniousdaltanious waPosts: 2,144Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by madazz
    Originally posted by Paladrink
    Stop beating a dead horse...

    Agreed.

    Well ... partially I could agree. On the other hand, many new players join, younger one, .... so for somebody listening for the first time to Elvis can be pretty new discovery. :-))

Sign In or Register to comment.