Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Never heard of an alpha test with a subscription and $50 fee
Viper482
Member LegendaryPosts: 4,065
Am I reading this right? I am completely open to the possibility that I am understanding this wrong, but I think they wantme to pay $50 now, then $15 per month (after the first "free" month)....for a game they say is not in beta, but is finished with alpha, which tells me call it what you want but it is still in alpha.
I don't understand how they think this will ever be successful when big name titles are even going f2p/b2p due to failed sub models. I am not anti-sub, believe me....but for a game still in development?
Make MMORPG's Great Again!
Comments
You're going to probably get the argument that it needs that money for development since it's still in development, but if that is how they intend us to interpret this, then it is ludicrous. Now, fans of the IP that stretch way back, well they will probably be fine with this, but i'm not sure who else will pay for such an early state, specifically with a subscription. I just can't see it happening.
i was a bit thrown off really, reading that. Are companies pushing the envelope further and further to see just when we'll stop giving a shit? i don't know anymore.
It is always a bad sign when the IP doesn't throw some money at supporting their own product.
I am waiting for an MMO to come out asking for money for their next gen game with a tag line like "Your grandkids are going to love our game!"
Help support an artist and gamer who has lost his tools to create and play: http://www.gofundme.com/u63nzcgk
Hmmm lets not judge this until we see how it works..
Might end up a shameless cash-grab or the small, faithful community it builds around itself might actually produce a revolutionary, bug-free game.
I do have to say that I lean on the first though.
Show me one other MMO that required a subscription to test before you accuse me of not paying attention. The burden of proof is yours....I will even accept a beta. Your condescending attitude over something that is absolutely not the norm is absurd.
There have been plenty that charge a flat fee for early access alphas (and despite what they say that is what they have here), but I have never seen a sub for it.
Not judge it until we see how it works? What do you need to see? I don't care if the game ends up being the best MMO ever, charging a subscription fee during development is insane.
In about 5 weeks the KS 4 month time period will end. We will then see how many of the population opt out of resubscribing and or see how many new subscriptions come in.
I can not expect that a net loss of population will not occur considering the stage of development the game is in. Goblin Works will never reveal the numbers and the fanbois will continue to over hype the game in any state of development.
Played: E&B, SWG, Eve, WoW, COH, WAR, POTBS, AOC, LOTRO, AUTO.A, AO, FE, TR, WWII, MWO, TSW, SWTOR, GW2, NWO, WoP, RUST, LIF, SOA, MORTAL, DFUW, AA, TF, PFO, ALBO, and many many others....
Charging whatever the market will bear is called capitalism and if people are willing to pay this in order to support the game's development, really nothing wrong with it.
While the online gaming genre has suffered from a lack of real innovation in recent years, one area that probably has seen the greatest growth is in monetization models, we went from basically B2P with a sub to a plethora of payment model hybrids that range from "F2P" (but not really free) to B2P with sub, with cash shop, with F2P option with paid expansions along with early access to pay to test, sub to test, and the best one of all, just give them tons of money (SC) in exchange for promises before there is even a game made (Kickstarter).
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"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
I know people who are playing the real Pathfinder - they agree that this online version is simply shit.
Now see this quick cash grab "pay before you decide whether you like it" and you have your answer what to think of this game.
Most of the avid supporters of PFO as a game, or the vision of Ryan Dancey, have little or no experience with MMOs. What few have played sand box MMOs with a focus on PvP have disliked them and their communities calling them "toxic".
Right now they are in MMO Noob heaven because there is little to no risk and they don't have the experience to realize they are paying to play a game that is not only in early stages of alpha, but even when complete will still be 5 years behind other titles it will be competing with.
I have to admit I bought into this project too high, another learning experience, PFO being my first KS backing. I was much more conservative with my backing of Crowfall.
Played: E&B, SWG, Eve, WoW, COH, WAR, POTBS, AOC, LOTRO, AUTO.A, AO, FE, TR, WWII, MWO, TSW, SWTOR, GW2, NWO, WoP, RUST, LIF, SOA, MORTAL, DFUW, AA, TF, PFO, ALBO, and many many others....
Xsyon. I don't agree with it either, but you asked for another example.
I see you try and live up to your signature. I don't require your condescending lecture, I understand what capitalism is and I never said this was wrong, I said it was insane. Surely someone of your intellect can differentiate between the two. Maybe you should read my other posts where I stated big names are failing with the sub model, how does a game still under development expect to survive on it? I may be willing to spend $50 to support this game, but no way in hell will I pay monthly in addition to that to test their game for them.
Ask yourself if you really think I am in the minority on this...then revisit the capitism argument and see where I came up with the insane part. No way does this game succeed with a alpha/beta sub model.
You do understand the difference between a paid alpha and a subscription right? Ctrl+F4 the word sub or subscription on that page and you get NOTHING. Once again, list me the games that are in testing and require a SUBSCRIPTION. I was very clear on this point, my specific issue with this game is the subscription and that is something I have never heard of in an alpha.
Another poster named one called Xyson....that's one, and a game probably no one has heard of except this one poster lol.
To many of "us" the absurd part is paying to play an unfinished game... which you have no problem with at all... but dare tack on a subscription and all of a sudden it is now absurd to you?
Don't pay the subscription. Simple. Oh wait, then you don't get to play the game. "We" never entertained the idea of paying to play it in the first place... they could have asked us to donate a kidney before logging in... it wouldn't matter because the absurd part was in asking us to pay in the first place. The later is no more absurd than the former to "us".
Keep in mind though, that at this very moment, there are people who are paying a sub to this game... and they don't have a problem with it. Those people are who this game seeks to attract, not "us".
First of all show me where I have "no problem at all" with paid alphas. I am not a fan of them but I am not very outspoken against them either. What baffles you about someone who may not be against one time fee alphas but thinks requiring a sub is over the top? You make it sound as though this is irrational lol.
And for those willing to do this good for them, I just think it is a ridiculous business model. Or am I not allowed that opinion?
kickstart a cheap game idea /come up with a d2 clone), and then get it funded by people before they notice they pay for old ieas
yep, that's how it seems to work nowadays. i only hope star citizen will go to release some day, or those 80 million will be the biggest clou in history so far :P
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
Goblinworks has made no apologies for charging a subscription fee for players. It is a different development model for sure. I am in and paying a monthly sub for a game that is not complete, and I am okay with that. (Four accounts, in fact.) That does not bother me at all. I like seeing the game improve over time. I like that my voice and opinion is heard, and I can personally effect the direction certain things go in when there is a discussion or debate in the forums. I also like being able to vote on the development priorities for things like, "Which race should be next? Gnomes or Halflings?" (Gnomes won). Or the fact that settlement heraldry was so important to players heraldry art and implementation was pushed and should be available much earlier than previously anticipated. All that stuff is pretty innovative.
I can't say it is not a different model, or it is not popular with many players used to the F2P game. That's true. This is not a F2P game, and I hope it never becomes one. There are lots out there, and I have played most of them. They are fine, but not compelling. Pathfinder Online has the chance to be a very compelling game for a small segment of the MMO market. And that's okay.
All of those are either free or 1 time donations for test access (regardless of model at launch). none of the others listed charge a base cost + sub for testing phases. in fact i can't think of another case of it happening other then PFO, and ive playing mmos since the beginning and tested a huge number of mmos personally.
-charging a subscription for a incomplete service DOESN'T MAKE SENSE and is counter intuitive to there goal of raising money because it only scares away potential donors.
-further more.... calling it early enrollment then saying its not in a beta state throws up huge red flags about the companies cash flow.
The irrational part is in paying anything in the first place. Adding on additional fees doesn't make it any less irrational than just just a straight one time fee. The irrational part is in paying for something you know is not done in the first place. There are no levels of irrationality here... it's a global flat irrational across the board. You are the one who thinks adding a sub fee is irrational but paying a fee to enter is not irrational. That's where the disconnect is. The whole thing is irrational.
If the game is worth playing, it will still be worth playing in 2-3 years when it actually does release. That's what us rational people do... wait until a game is in release before actually putting money into it. Again, they aren't marketing this to the rational folks... they're seeking out the irrational... the impulse buyers... the people who are so bored out of their mind that they will give their left kidney to play a new game. If you aren't one of them, you aren't their target audience either.