It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Originally posted by Omali Originally posted by mmoguy43 For someone that plays a few of their F2P games this makes becoming a subscriber really enticing...more than any other F2P would. The thought to individually subscribe to 2 or 3 of their F2P games sounds terrible but this new model makes it a pretty good deal.
This isn't a new model. For quite a long time now, you could subscribe to all access for $20 which was great if you wanted to play at least two games in their library. What this does is lower the price to $14.99.
Lower prices are always better
It's not a really new idea, but they've retooled many of the benefits in their games to make the subscription more attractive (like the 2x tokens in EQ2). I think the significant thing here is that this is the same pricing structure as a single sub. It's not $20, $25, $30 or anything more than most any other sub. So now for the price of a single sub you can get sub benefits for multiple games.
Does any other publisher do this? I know these do not: Turbine, Trion, EA, NCSoft, or Funcom. Some publishers only have one title, like EnMasse. It's a good marketing move by SoE which has a large stable of games, and I like it.
Wait. Someone help me understand whats going on here. I am SOE All Access today and I can play any SOE game (except EQN because its not out) for 19.99. I get 500 SC ever month that stacks.
Then I got an email saying 500 SC was going away and I was getting 2000 SC which I could use for 1 item. This sounded stupid and there was a backlash but didnt hear the outcome.
Are we NOW saying that I pay 14/15.99 per month for SOE All Access (4-5 dollars cheaper than now) and I get to keep my 500 SC?
Their position is very confusing.
You now get to pay 15 bucks a month and pick an item worth up to 2000 credits instead of letting station cash build up. So you can't buy the new EQ games with built up Station Cash or buy several items with 2000 credits.
Why hasn't Smedley retired yet? /shakesfist
Originally posted by darkhalf357x Wait. Someone help me understand whats going on here. I am SOE All Access today and I can play any SOE game (except EQN because its not out) for 19.99. I get 500 SC ever month that stacks. Then I got an email saying 500 SC was going away and I was getting 2000 SC which I could use for 1 item. This sounded stupid and there was a backlash but didnt hear the outcome. Are we NOW saying that I pay 14/15.99 per month for SOE All Access (4-5 dollars cheaper than now) and I get to keep my 500 SC? Their position is very confusing.
Yeah, they could have handled that better. They originally were going to provide a voucher to purchase a single item per month worth up to 2000SC. It would have only been good for the month and only for one item. That wasn't entirely popular so now they are providing 500SC per month that can accumulate, but you must login every month to claim it. If you don't logiin for the month and claim it, then you lose it.
You can see the details here. Hopefully there will be a more concise summary soon. https://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/index.php?threads/2014-membership-update-from-smed.544446/
Originally posted by Lord-Kronk I love how people say this is a great idea for gaming companies to pick up. ...... And I guess Funcom with AoC and TSW, but that's pretty much it.
It's coming up occasionally on the forums as well, but I guess it's unlikely to happen. (sadly, I must add... it'd be awesome )
TSW has quite a lot grandmembers, giving away AoC (and AO) for free to them forever doesn't seem a good decision from a financial pov. The same with Turbine, LotRO is full of lifers, such an offer would made them lifer in DDO as well for free.
SOE already had the All Access, with this move they just made it a better deal. It doesn't affect me personally (I don't EQ, just occasionally dabbling with the Diplomacy in Vanguard, and DCUO, PS2 are under P7S1), so I just keep it on memo and check back when Landmark will approaching on the horizont - or until there's an update on Smed's point 5.
"5) European players - we have an idea on how to include you in this but we need to discuss with our partners.We have a pretty good idea on this though. give us a bit of time to suss this out."
Originally posted by firefly2003 Originally posted by Zaradoom Im gonna jump on that payment model for sure. Just need to pray that it applies to EU as well...
Different publisher...but who knows they may choose to do it as well
SMed said they want to include EU player in their All Access pass. That would mean we can skip the EU publisher... which would be GREAT in itself and worth the money alone :-)
MMOs finally replaced social interaction, forced grouping and standing in a line while talking to eachother.
Now we have forced soloing, forced questing and everyone is the hero, without ever having to talk to anyone else. The evolution of multiplayer is here! We won,... right?
They need to go the Turbine way when it come to the EU publisher: Cut them out of the equation.
Best thing Turbine ever did for DDO and LOTRO.
Originally posted by Torvaldr Originally posted by darkhalf357x Wait. Someone help me understand whats going on here. I am SOE All Access today and I can play any SOE game (except EQN because its not out) for 19.99. I get 500 SC ever month that stacks. Then I got an email saying 500 SC was going away and I was getting 2000 SC which I could use for 1 item. This sounded stupid and there was a backlash but didnt hear the outcome. Are we NOW saying that I pay 14/15.99 per month for SOE All Access (4-5 dollars cheaper than now) and I get to keep my 500 SC? Their position is very confusing.
Makes perfect sense now. I have what I always had, now just have to logon to get it where before it was automatic. I'm in EQ everyday so no change to me really.
Originally posted by hfztt They need to go the Turbine way when it come to the EU publisher: Cut them out of the equation. Best thing Turbine ever did for DDO and LOTRO.
?? best thing... lol.
It's off here, I just want to note that the wast majority of the playerbase favoured Codies instead of Turbine, any day, hands down. And even those few who welcomed Turbine's server-snatch move, had to deal with the increased lag. (*)
DDO, as far as I remember was always Turbine, so I'm not sure how it comes into the picture... it had a european server in the beginning, but that was shot way before the f2p conversion, when the game seemed on the death-row.
(*) edit: in the recent news Suzie posted about Sap's livestream, there's a line in the cmp article: "Many folk on Gilrain have fond memories of the various events that were held in the Codemasters days. I hope that Turbine and the community team capitalise upon this and hold more activities." And that's just one of the things we've lost with the server transfer...
ontopic again: so far I had no issues with P7S1, but I'd rather be with SOE again, just for the convenience.
A couple stand-out statements for me...
"He said, “Free-To-Play seems more dominant right now, but that does not mean subscriptions won’t work. Subscriptions do work for tent pole franchise games.”
So he's taken a step back and reconsidered his perspective from some time back, before SWTOR's launch. He'd predicted all MMOs would be F2P after TOR (source). He was also wrong, however, about how successful it would be and the impact it would have on the genre (a lot of people were, actually).
It's notable how his statements about TOR were made at the time that SOE was changing their games over to F2P, and his statements now come at a time that they're implementing a new subscription setup. Quaint. I'm sure the timing of each is purely coincidental. This is why I never take anything Smedley says to be anything but PR. You can see right through it.
Another stand-out remark:
“MMOs will continue to get more and more new genres. The innovation era of MMOs is really upon us. Everyone says the golden age of MMOs was in the past, I think it is right now.”
Optimistic, but naive, IMO. MMOs will not move forward and innovate until more developers (esp. the larger ones) begin actually innovating, and stop doing the "me-too" BS they've been pulling over the last decade. And that won't happen until the people making the decisions (the bean counters) lose their fascination with Blizzard's WoW numbers and stop chasing it around like a lost puppy-dog, or a little kid trying to emulate their bigger brother.
Props to SOE for being among the first to take that step - although of course, it all has to work in execution. Everything works in concept. And of course, I assume an ulterior motive for everything Smedley says... because, frankly, there always is.
For example, when he says "I can't wait to see what people come up with!", you can just hear the real thought going through his mind: "I can't wait to see how much money we make off of all these people creating and selling stuff!"
Originally posted by GeneralWulf sorry, NO.Just No. Smedley/SOE ? once bitten, twice shy (even i can't believe i'm taking this attitude so many years after SWg/NGE. I guess it still hurts too much)
Youve been blaming the wrong company for years.
The company responsible for the NGE is LucasArts, which no longer exists.
Originally posted by aspekx i think the subscription model is about to make a comeback and in the form described above. something like amazonprime that offers a package of benefits while not excluding others from basic services.
I believe that you are 100% correct!
Looking for a family that you can game with for life? Check out Grievance at https://www.grievancegaming.org !
Sub model is fine.
THE PROBLEM: When micro-transactions are offered along with paying a sub. I absolutely despise companies that do that. It reflects poorly and just reeks of greed. It makes the company look cheap, IMO.
It should ALWAYS either be 100% Sub OR 100% FTP with Cash Shop.
Yes such a good thing that their revenue dropped so low their investors sold them off to WB.
"People who tell you youre awesome are useless. No, dangerous.
They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/
Originally posted by Dauzqul Sub model is fine. THE PROBLEM: When micro-transactions are offered along with paying a sub. I absolutely despise companies that do that. It reflects poorly and just reeks of greed. It makes the company look cheap, IMO. It should ALWAYS either be 100% Sub OR 100% FTP with Cash Shop.
I don't mind the hybrid free and cash shop model, since they both can add enjoyment to the game.
To be honest, I find a couple of trends in cash shops quite alienating. The worst is the gambling box or bag of random goodies, which entice players to keep purchasing the box/bag until they have a complete set of armour/home decorations/pets. The other trend I don't like is very overpriced rare mounts. I think the best ways to ensure that mounts or other objects are rare, is to either restrict the period over which they're sold (rather than multiplying the price), or to let them be part of a complex gaming achievement. I actually went on a long break from MMOs because I didn't like those kinds of trends. Hopefully at some point it stops since it pretty much preys on impulse. Bottomline, I'd prefer games to not have casino type attributes, or if they do - they should put all possible items found in the bags/boxes on sale individually as well, for players who don't want to play spin the wheel.
Originally posted by TangentPointFor example, when he says "I can't wait to see what people come up with!", you can just hear the real thought going through his mind: "I can't wait to see how much money we make off of all these people creating and selling stuff!"
Frankly, people who run shops thru' Amazon also benefit from Amazon's infrastructure and widespread access to browsing customers. Just like players who make stuff for Sony's game cash shops benefit from the context and worldwide audience Sony games give their Player made items. Sony still has to tweak or finesse player items that get sold. I don't begrudge Sony making profit on this arrangement at all. The environment in which players have been enabled to make some money is all thanks to Sony.
Don't they have the station pass anymore?
I remember that from when I played EQ2 when it first came out, I looked at it and thought it was a pretty good deal if I'd want to play more of SWG or some of the other games they offered.
So yeah, does seem like a good idea, depending on the pricing of course.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
Originally posted by Lord-Kronk I love how people say this is a great idea for gaming companies to pick up. How it's the future plan for MMO's (being the sub for full game access).. But what company can really do this other than SOE? 99% of the MMO companies out there only have 1 game. I could maybe see CCP doing this with EVE/Dust/Valkyrie/WoDO... And I guess Funcom with AoC and TSW, but that's pretty much it.
This seems more like marketing smoke and mirrors to me. If you happen to want to play multiple SoE games at the same time I guess it's a good deal but how many would you want to even play and aren't they all pretty much F2P now anyway? So basically EQN is now a sub game and you get to play their other F2P games for free and still buy things in the cash shop? Nice Jedi Mind Trick there Smed.
If this had been announced in a slightly different way the F2P crowd would be having a fit but when you jazz it up with lots of "free" and "all access" marketing mumbo jumbo so somehow it's brilliant. Sorry but I doubt most people want to play EQ, EQ2 and EQN all at the same time anyway so I fail to see all this great value that is any different than what you get with a sub model anyway.
"If I offended you, you needed it" -Corey Taylor
Originally posted by Torvaldr Originally posted by Uhwop Would be nice if that would carry over to DCUO on playstation. I sub to DCUO on PS3, but I'm planning on getting a PS4 once sony gets around to releasing them for real. I'm not really sure if I would have to keep paying a sub once I start paying for playstation plus, something they said they didn't want people to do on the PS4.
This came up on the EQ2 forums when discussing Gold status changes. They want to work something out for the console players as well. I'm not sure why it's so tricky to figure that part out.
Because of playstation plus
1 We can already try other games with no worries,so SOE is offering nothing there.
2 This is a cash shop business,this means NOTHING is FREE.Their plan is not to combine games to give you a bargain.it is to hope you try other games and spend any amount on those cash shops,they figure their not going to get money from you on those games,this way there is hope.
That is the lame thing about developers and marketing speeches,they will NEVER tell you both sides of the fence only what sounds good to entice customers,in other words,misleading information.It is not right but there is no law against it,just immoral.
The only truth to it all is the wording "all-access",yes it gives access to all games but it is still cash shop generated.
I live by the same rule always,if a game is not good enough to sub,how does it make the game better just because i can access it for free?It is still the EXACT same game,only the pricing changes,i don't pick which games i play based on pricing,except that i want a straight forward price,nothing misleading.
When Smedley comes out and tell us the good AND BAD of SOE's pricing ideas,then i might believe him.I have already been a VERY good customer to SOE maybe spent as much or more than anyone on these forums,but i know when i am getting mislead and i don't like it,so i left SOE and most likely will never return.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.