Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

How Can MMOs Be Monetized Fairly? a Column at MMORPG.com

1246710

Comments

  • RavensworthRavensworth Member UncommonPosts: 76
    I really like the way LOTRO has done it. You can earn in game currency to buy what you need. YES it takes a really long time. Or you can subscribe. You have many options. Subscribe while you are playing often and don't when you aren't.

    image
  • holdenhamletholdenhamlet Member EpicPosts: 3,756
    edited August 2016
    Sub-only with a possible cosmetic-only cash shop is the only fair thing for players.

    Blizzard built an empire on it. FFXIV is doing fine using it. To say it's no longer financially viable is innacurate imo.

    Of course, the game actually has to be good enough to warrant remaining subscribed, too, which is a big pain in the butt for devs. They have to bother with things like creating engaging content over long periods of time. What a pain!

    BDO is by far the worst monetized MMO I've ever seen. From the ground-up, it's designed to push you to the shop (the most expensive shop ever envisioned). Starting from the fact that it's a grinding game forcing you to buy 4 pets to simulate an "auto-loot" feature, it's chock full of institutionalized inconvenience that can only be alleviated through the cash shop. For example, for the first time ever in an MMO, your gear doesn't change looks much as you get new gear. Want to have a new look? That's $30.

    This is the exact opposite of what we should be looking for in an MMO. Instead of coming up with new ways to interest us, Devs are spending time and energy devising new ways to annoy us, and then selling the remedy in the shop.

    This was somewhat excusable since at least the game was not p2w until recently. But with the new soft-subscription and p2w, there's no way it can possibly be tolerated.
  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 12,908
    Quizzical said:
    Iselin said:
    Torval said:
    Iselin said:
    Quizzical said:
    Most MMORPG players agree on what the business model should be:  only someone else should have to pay, but they shouldn't get any advantage from doing so.
    That's just cutesy cynical crap that passes as old fart wisdom around here.

    Pay for the game because it's the type of game you enjoy (with or without grind,) pay a reasonable monthly fee because you want to keep playing it and everyone pays no more and no less.

    That would be ideal from a game player's perspective.

    Of course people can put their wannabe game capitalist hat on and praise ingenious, seductive schemes that produce ever increasing ROIs... maybe there should be a separate forum for them?
    That's a bit harsh and glosses over all the problems and baggage that system carries that I mentioned earlier. Gross advantages for those with a lot more time to spend or account sharing, third party rmt gold sales, etc.

    Why do we need a monthly fee? In what world did we convince ourselves that renting access to games was a good idea? That might be ideal for some gamers, but the larger gaming populace has not agreed that this is the best or subs + box fees wouldn't have failed.
    "Fail" is relative though isn't it? Dark Age of Camelot is still going with a sub fee today last time I looked. Does box + sub make as much money as F2P + cash shop and all the mixes of the two systems? Obviously not. FB and the app store have shown that.

    There's fail as in "we can't pay salaries anymore and have to shut down" and there's faux-fail as in "we can make more money doing it the other way" and that's without even getting into the forum troll's use of "fail."

    Time factor? Yeah... that argument again. It's just part of simulated 24/7 worlds. Never was a type of game for everyone.

    Gold sellers and buyers? Yup. Used to be just a shady underground thing right along with bots and hacks. All of those will always be with us. It took a while for some companies to adopt it as part of their BM (SOE was first in the West I believe) but eventually they did... some of us even defend it as a good thing now.

    Harsh reply to Quiz?  Well I do get tired of seeing that thrown around here as truth. No I don't think players are freeloaders that want others to pay. Some I'm sure are, just like there are gold buyers, botters, hackers, etc. But you don't use that to dismiss all gamers and their opinions about what feels fair... emphasis on feel.
    Outside of whales, most people's perceptions of what is fair skews toward themselves paying less and others paying more.  For example:

    1.  People who want to play betas and early access sometimes get upset about being charged more to play early.  People who wait until well after launch often think it's fair that people who want to be first to play should pay more for it.

    2.  People who play for 30 or 40 hours per week tend to think it's fair if everyone pays a flat subscription fee.  People who only play a few hours per month commonly think it's unfair that they should have to pay just as much for that as someone who plays vastly more.

    3.  People who like the leveling process and avoid endgames don't particularly mind if the endgame is heavily pay to win.  People who want to rush to endgame and get the best gear and so forth tend to be far more upset about models that heavily favor whales at endgame.

    4.  People who don't care what they look like tend to favor pushing monetization of purely cosmetic things.  People who love to decorate their characters with many different outfits get upset if they have to pay vastly more than everyone else just because they like to look good.
    I'm not sure where you're digging up these "people" from :)

    1. People getting upset about paying more to play in betas is a a bit of legacy thing since monetizing betas has only become common in the past few years. Before betas were done by invitation only, then they added it as a perk of pre-ordering and now it's a full-on additional costs even with tiers of access. People complain about THAT.

    2. I've never heard anyone complain about that, tbh, although the Korean "labor point" system could be seen as a form of that. Can't say I care one way or the other. I'm sure some people get more out of their Netflix sub than I do... doesn't bother me in the least.

    3. Most people dislike P2W...period.

    4. I've never heard cosmetic junkies whine about paying for it... c'mon surely you made that one up.
    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED
  • MandaloreMandalore Member UncommonPosts: 121
    B2P + 12-14 $/€ Sub. with NO shop of any kind. And I am willed to pay for full Expansion extra.

    In Addition ever subscriber with more than 3 month playtime will get a free 7 Day welcome back period after he didnt had a sub in the last 3-6 month.

    Thats the largest problem in sub games, bc ppl that left are not willing to sub for a full month just to have a look what changed.

    Currently most games are designed to be free 2 play. Hit the market, grab what you can and then milking the whales. They dont expect that their players will stick more than 6 month with their game.

    -------------------------------------
    Overwatch: Playing
    WAR, DAoC, RIFT, GW1/2, TSW, Age of Wulin, Black Desert, Blade & Soul, Skyforge: inactive

  • laseritlaserit Member LegendaryPosts: 6,157
    Maybe they should start showing commercials.

    Ya know, like just as you come up to a boss fight....

    "Now for a message from our sponsors"

    I'm in my 50's, I've got tons of disposable income and these game companies just keep pushing me further away.

    Think I'll go buy myself a muscle car.


    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • ScorchienScorchien Member LegendaryPosts: 6,871
    Mandalore said:
    B2P + 12-14 $/€ Sub. with NO shop of any kind. And I am willed to pay for full Expansion extra.

    In Addition ever subscriber with more than 3 month playtime will get a free 7 Day welcome back period after he didnt had a sub in the last 3-6 month.

    Thats the largest problem in sub games, bc ppl that left are not willing to sub for a full month just to have a look what changed.

    Currently most games are designed to be free 2 play. Hit the market, grab what you can and then milking the whales. They dont expect that their players will stick more than 6 month with their game.
    B2P and sub .................................. thats a new one ..
  • feztoniofeztonio Member UncommonPosts: 60
    With the cash shop games it feels like the devs spend far too much time and resources developing new shinies for the shop every few weeks than they do on content every few weeks.

    As a paying subscriber to SWTOR for instance, we haven't seen a new raid in two years give or take. But they're sure to release two new RNG loot packs for sale on their micro transaction cash shop every 3 weeks or so. It's chock full of brand new weapons and armors and mounts and pets and weapon mod crystals / weapon visual effects.

    I'm paying $15 bucks a month to still be raiding EV / KP for instance which were the two original raids that vanilla launched with, they just boosted the hit points and character level of the mobs and bosses - not even adding any different mechanics or ramping up any difficulty level.

    My guild all quit and we were hardcore play every nighters but the story updates that they are going with this "expansion" you mow through in about 20 minutes. Do the only real content the devs seem to be churning out are cash shop shinies.
  • marksteelemarksteele Member UncommonPosts: 59
    What I want to know is whatever happened to the free to try model that games like runescape were built off. Limited content for on a free basis with a full game behind some sort of paywall (subscription or purchase).

    I've seen a few games starting to go this route (atlas reactor from trion comes to mind), however I've never see it discussed as a viable middleground in the F2P vs B2P debate.
  • CyraelCyrael Member UncommonPosts: 239
    Subs are the only way to monetize fairly. All of the F2P options are exploitative in some way.
  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 12,908
    laserit said:
    Maybe they should start showing commercials.

    Ya know, like just as you come up to a boss fight....

    "Now for a message from our sponsors"

    I'm in my 50's, I've got tons of disposable income and these game companies just keep pushing me further away.

    Think I'll go buy myself a muscle car.


    You're a few years behind the curve. I bought my Celica GTS when I was mid 40's... best time to have a mid-life crisis :)
    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED
  • ZariakZariak Member UncommonPosts: 20
    For years I was an avid World of Warcraft player, after real life got busy and I had little time for gaming I cancelled my sub and stuck with single player or ftp games. After switching back and forth, not really finding anything worth what little time I had to play I decide to put some cash into a few of the cash stores. First was Swtor, fun game, great story telling, terrible business model. Next was Tera, similar story, game is fun, but just odd community and game play choices just wasn't my thing. Next was ESO, awesome game, fun all around, interesting classes but totally destroyed by smothering business model, even as a subscriber I felt like I wasn't getting everything, end up spending so much more than I had on any other game in a single month. I moved on..... Back to World of Warcraft, still best bang for my bucks..
  • VorthanionVorthanion Member RarePosts: 2,641
    I want to play the game and be rewarded for it, not by spending money in the cash shop, even cosmetics are part of the reward for playing the game. I'll take a game designed to be fun with a regular charge over one designed to manipulate you with roadblocks and addiction mechanics that break immersion and shove the cash shop in your face.

    image
  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 12,908
    I want to play the game and be rewarded for it, not by spending money in the cash shop, even cosmetics are part of the reward for playing the game. I'll take a game designed to be fun with a regular charge over one designed to manipulate you with roadblocks and addiction mechanics that break immersion and shove the cash shop in your face.
    I just saw an article in Forbes about Overwatch loot boxes from a writer, Paul Tassi, I don't usually like but this time I think he got it right:

    "The main counter-argument to all this is that all of these unlocks are cosmetic, that they don’t affect the game at all. This is true, and if it wasn’t, if you could “buy power,” we would be having a very different conversation. It wouldn’t even be a debate, as that would be a thousand percent wrong and Overwatch may have bombed outright if that system was in place.

    And yet I don’t really buy the argument that cosmetics are “meaningless” either. Jim Sterling did a good video on this recently where he talks about when they only “goal” in Overwatch other than just winning is to level up and get loot crates, that is a hugely important part of the game. And we have to stop pretending that cosmetics aren’t “important,” at least psychologically, as players love dressing up their characters in every kind of title from shooters to RPGs. Cosmetics do matter, and unlocking them is an important part of the player experience."

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2016/06/10/the-math-behind-why-overwatchs-loot-boxes-are-exhausting-to-unlock/#662e5a5074fd

    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED
  • NitthNitth Member UncommonPosts: 3,904
    Cyrael said:
    Subs are the only way to monetize fairly. All of the F2P options are exploitative in some way.
    It's not that simple, Subs don't work well for people with little time.

    The problem is you need a system that works well for people with lots of time OR money that provides a healthy profit for the business.

    image
    TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development

  • AlomarAlomar Member RarePosts: 1,188
    I prefer the old school method of p2p with a subscription, with no cash shop at all. Each player invests equally and it's a continuous string of revenue for the developer. Of course, we've strived for "better" in recent years with b2p and f2p models that almost always come with a cash shop favoring whales over the average gamer. Even when there isn't game breaking/p2w content in those stores, I'd still prefer none over the immersion breaking and convenience items often sold.

    Yet, to be fair I'd take anything over the shady business practices of selling images of pixels not even fully finished/created for money before a game is even launched, cough"Star Citizen"cough.
    Fortes Fortuna Iuvat

    18 year MMO veteran 
    Retired PvP Raid Leader 
    Lover of The Witcher & CD Projekt Red

  • Righteous_RockRighteous_Rock Member RarePosts: 1,234
    Warcraft is fair , so I'm good to go.
       
  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,062
    edited August 2016
    Nitth said:
    Cyrael said:
    Subs are the only way to monetize fairly. All of the F2P options are exploitative in some way.
    It's not that simple, Subs don't work well for people with little time.

    The problem is you need a system that works well for people with lots of time OR money that provides a healthy profit for the business.
    What possible way would a sub not work for people with little time?   Can they play 1 hour a week?  Well then that's a whopping $3.75 for an hour play based on $15 a month sub.

    Give me a break...

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

    My ignore list finally has one occupant after 12 years. I am the strongest supporter of free speech on here, but free speech does not mean forced listening. Have fun my friend. Hope you find a new stalking target.

  • lugallugal Member UncommonPosts: 668
    Here is my idea for a payment model that is fair and take into account people time, which is valuable.

    4 Hours per day estimated an average player would play.
    7 Days   30 Hours   Sub Fee: $5 a month
    14 Days   60 Hours   Sub Fee: $10 a month
    30 Days   120 Hours   Sub Fee: $15 a month
    Sub Fee: $1   Maint Fee (not required). This is per month.  Has to pay full price for Xpac's.
    Sub Fee: $5   This is per month. Unused hours roll over.  Has to pay full price for Xpac's.
    Sub Fee: $10   This is per month. Unused hours roll over. Has to pay half price for Xpac's(Have this sub for 6 continuous months prior to purchase).
    Sub Fee: $15   This is per month. Unlimited time, but the user gets 120 hours, if they go over, no charge, it will however, consume roll over hours. What doesn’t get used, rolls over to next month. Xpac's free(Have this sub for 6 continuous months prior to purchase).
    $1 monthly maint fee option is for when a player cancels the sub but wants to save the time accrued and the character information. Example:  Player canceled sub, has 200 hours saved. As long as the player pays the $1 fee, the player can keep playing till the hours are used up. Example: Player is leaving town for 6 months, putting thier sub on the $1 monthly maint fee will ensure all the hours accrued and character info is saved.
    If a player has used up all their hours prior to the next billing date, they can purchase hours. Same rate and hours as the subs.
    Players are free to give time saved (rollover hours), up to 120 hours, to another player within a single billing cycle. The player giving the hours can only perform this action 1 time per billing cycle. Players purchase hours for another player(can perform this action as much as the player wishes), same rates and hours as the subs.
    A player that has received hours from another player, will not be allowed to trade any hours. This freeze ends when the hours received from other players are used up.
    Changing sub plans prior to the new billing cycle will not go into effect until start of new billing cycle.


    Roses are red
    Violets are blue
    The reviewer has a mishapen head
    Which means his opinion is skewed
    ...Aldous.MF'n.Huxley

  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,062
    lugal said:
    Here is my idea for a payment model that is fair and take into account people time, which is valuable.

    4 Hours per day estimated an average player would play.
    7 Days   30 Hours   Sub Fee: $5 a month
    14 Days   60 Hours   Sub Fee: $10 a month
    30 Days   120 Hours   Sub Fee: $15 a month
    Sub Fee: $1   Maint Fee (not required). This is per month.  Has to pay full price for Xpac's.
    Sub Fee: $5   This is per month. Unused hours roll over.  Has to pay full price for Xpac's.
    Sub Fee: $10   This is per month. Unused hours roll over. Has to pay half price for Xpac's(Have this sub for 6 continuous months prior to purchase).
    Sub Fee: $15   This is per month. Unlimited time, but the user gets 120 hours, if they go over, no charge, it will however, consume roll over hours. What doesn’t get used, rolls over to next month. Xpac's free(Have this sub for 6 continuous months prior to purchase).
    $1 monthly maint fee option is for when a player cancels the sub but wants to save the time accrued and the character information. Example:  Player canceled sub, has 200 hours saved. As long as the player pays the $1 fee, the player can keep playing till the hours are used up. Example: Player is leaving town for 6 months, putting thier sub on the $1 monthly maint fee will ensure all the hours accrued and character info is saved.
    If a player has used up all their hours prior to the next billing date, they can purchase hours. Same rate and hours as the subs.
    Players are free to give time saved (rollover hours), up to 120 hours, to another player within a single billing cycle. The player giving the hours can only perform this action 1 time per billing cycle. Players purchase hours for another player(can perform this action as much as the player wishes), same rates and hours as the subs.
    A player that has received hours from another player, will not be allowed to trade any hours. This freeze ends when the hours received from other players are used up.
    Changing sub plans prior to the new billing cycle will not go into effect until start of new billing cycle.


    Ridiculously overly complicated.


    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

    My ignore list finally has one occupant after 12 years. I am the strongest supporter of free speech on here, but free speech does not mean forced listening. Have fun my friend. Hope you find a new stalking target.

  • acidbloodacidblood Member RarePosts: 851
    Not sure there will ever be a 'fair' system... even before WoW had a cosmetics shop / account services the $15 a month didn't seem fair as a non-raider (a lot of the updates were raid-only content). And the problem with anything but a pure sub is that you start to negatively affect gameplay / in-game content.

    I don't know... maybe a sub model (i.e. $15 a month) but you can 'refund' certain content (like the latest raid instance you have no interest in). Also, I really think expansions (e.g. WoW style major content update expansions) should come with a month of game time.

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 20,989
    Iselin said:
    Quizzical said:
    Iselin said:
    Torval said:
    Iselin said:
    Quizzical said:
    Most MMORPG players agree on what the business model should be:  only someone else should have to pay, but they shouldn't get any advantage from doing so.
    That's just cutesy cynical crap that passes as old fart wisdom around here.

    Pay for the game because it's the type of game you enjoy (with or without grind,) pay a reasonable monthly fee because you want to keep playing it and everyone pays no more and no less.

    That would be ideal from a game player's perspective.

    Of course people can put their wannabe game capitalist hat on and praise ingenious, seductive schemes that produce ever increasing ROIs... maybe there should be a separate forum for them?
    That's a bit harsh and glosses over all the problems and baggage that system carries that I mentioned earlier. Gross advantages for those with a lot more time to spend or account sharing, third party rmt gold sales, etc.

    Why do we need a monthly fee? In what world did we convince ourselves that renting access to games was a good idea? That might be ideal for some gamers, but the larger gaming populace has not agreed that this is the best or subs + box fees wouldn't have failed.
    "Fail" is relative though isn't it? Dark Age of Camelot is still going with a sub fee today last time I looked. Does box + sub make as much money as F2P + cash shop and all the mixes of the two systems? Obviously not. FB and the app store have shown that.

    There's fail as in "we can't pay salaries anymore and have to shut down" and there's faux-fail as in "we can make more money doing it the other way" and that's without even getting into the forum troll's use of "fail."

    Time factor? Yeah... that argument again. It's just part of simulated 24/7 worlds. Never was a type of game for everyone.

    Gold sellers and buyers? Yup. Used to be just a shady underground thing right along with bots and hacks. All of those will always be with us. It took a while for some companies to adopt it as part of their BM (SOE was first in the West I believe) but eventually they did... some of us even defend it as a good thing now.

    Harsh reply to Quiz?  Well I do get tired of seeing that thrown around here as truth. No I don't think players are freeloaders that want others to pay. Some I'm sure are, just like there are gold buyers, botters, hackers, etc. But you don't use that to dismiss all gamers and their opinions about what feels fair... emphasis on feel.
    Outside of whales, most people's perceptions of what is fair skews toward themselves paying less and others paying more.  For example:

    1.  People who want to play betas and early access sometimes get upset about being charged more to play early.  People who wait until well after launch often think it's fair that people who want to be first to play should pay more for it.

    2.  People who play for 30 or 40 hours per week tend to think it's fair if everyone pays a flat subscription fee.  People who only play a few hours per month commonly think it's unfair that they should have to pay just as much for that as someone who plays vastly more.

    3.  People who like the leveling process and avoid endgames don't particularly mind if the endgame is heavily pay to win.  People who want to rush to endgame and get the best gear and so forth tend to be far more upset about models that heavily favor whales at endgame.

    4.  People who don't care what they look like tend to favor pushing monetization of purely cosmetic things.  People who love to decorate their characters with many different outfits get upset if they have to pay vastly more than everyone else just because they like to look good.
    I'm not sure where you're digging up these "people" from :)

    1. People getting upset about paying more to play in betas is a a bit of legacy thing since monetizing betas has only become common in the past few years. Before betas were done by invitation only, then they added it as a perk of pre-ordering and now it's a full-on additional costs even with tiers of access. People complain about THAT.

    2. I've never heard anyone complain about that, tbh, although the Korean "labor point" system could be seen as a form of that. Can't say I care one way or the other. I'm sure some people get more out of their Netflix sub than I do... doesn't bother me in the least.

    3. Most people dislike P2W...period.

    4. I've never heard cosmetic junkies whine about paying for it... c'mon surely you made that one up.
    One can readily tell which side of those divides you're on from your replies.

    1)  Do you really think that people who aren't in a rush to play a game get upset if those who are have to pay extra?  It's pretty well established by now that games get a surge of incoming players when they go "free to play".  Do you think all those people who waited months or years after launch are hopping mad that people paid more to get into the beta than if they had waited until launch?  Only people who want to get in first get upset about having to pay more for the privilege.

    2)  Casuals who don't play much tend not to be especially vocal.  But in most games, an overwhelming majority of the people who play the game don't play it very much.  The reason that the rise of "free to play" brought so many more players into MMORPGs is precisely because of people who weren't willing to pay a subscription fee, sometimes because they couldn't justify it with how little they play.

    3)  Do you really think that people who know that they'll never meaningfully participate in a game's endgame really get upset if that endgame that they'll never take part in is pay to win?  Most people tend to focus more on the experience that they'll have in a game than on things they know full well they'll never see.  The recent Black Desert incident is a good example:  volcanic rage from some small portion of the playerbase and a shrug from the rest.

    4)  Part of why people so commonly say that games should charge for cosmetic stuff is precisely because so few people care about it.  But do you think that people who do like having a lot of costumes appreciate being treated like whales and expected to heavily subsidize everyone else?  There are games that give you a lot of costumes for free, you know.
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 20,989
    feztonio said:
    With the cash shop games it feels like the devs spend far too much time and resources developing new shinies for the shop every few weeks than they do on content every few weeks.

    As a paying subscriber to SWTOR for instance, we haven't seen a new raid in two years give or take. But they're sure to release two new RNG loot packs for sale on their micro transaction cash shop every 3 weeks or so. It's chock full of brand new weapons and armors and mounts and pets and weapon mod crystals / weapon visual effects.

    I'm paying $15 bucks a month to still be raiding EV / KP for instance which were the two original raids that vanilla launched with, they just boosted the hit points and character level of the mobs and bosses - not even adding any different mechanics or ramping up any difficulty level.

    My guild all quit and we were hardcore play every nighters but the story updates that they are going with this "expansion" you mow through in about 20 minutes. Do the only real content the devs seem to be churning out are cash shop shinies.
    To a considerable degree, it's not the same people.  Bug fixes and new mechanics are the job of programmers.  New shinies for the item mall are the job of artists.
  • kaiser3282kaiser3282 Member UncommonPosts: 2,759
    acidblood said:
    Not sure there will ever be a 'fair' system... even before WoW had a cosmetics shop / account services the $15 a month didn't seem fair as a non-raider (a lot of the updates were raid-only content). And the problem with anything but a pure sub is that you start to negatively affect gameplay / in-game content.

    I don't know... maybe a sub model (i.e. $15 a month) but you can 'refund' certain content (like the latest raid instance you have no interest in). Also, I really think expansions (e.g. WoW style major content update expansions) should come with a month of game time.

    This is why I always like DDOs model, which i believe has been used in a couple other games as well. Basically you could either pay a sub and have access to ALL content, or you could choose not to sub and instead buy the adventure packs as desired. If there were ones that didnt interest you, you could just choose not to buy them.

    Along with that you could also earn currency for purchasing the packs, or any other items in the shop, simply by completing certain feats in the game without having to pay a cent. Of course it did get a bit grindy, but you could easily supplement spending just a small amount of money combined with the free stuff to get by pretty easily.
  • MoiraeMoirae Member RarePosts: 3,318
    I'd rather pay $15 a month and have access to everything than be nickle and dimed in the f2p model or never see any real expansions like in the b2p model.
  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,062
    acidblood said:
    Not sure there will ever be a 'fair' system... even before WoW had a cosmetics shop / account services the $15 a month didn't seem fair as a non-raider (a lot of the updates were raid-only content). And the problem with anything but a pure sub is that you start to negatively affect gameplay / in-game content.

    I don't know... maybe a sub model (i.e. $15 a month) but you can 'refund' certain content (like the latest raid instance you have no interest in). Also, I really think expansions (e.g. WoW style major content update expansions) should come with a month of game time.

    Are you kidding me? Divide $15 by the number of hours you played WoW in an average month. That is somewhere between a low and ridiculously low cost per hour of entertainment.  And you want some kind of refund system for any content you don't like?


    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

    My ignore list finally has one occupant after 12 years. I am the strongest supporter of free speech on here, but free speech does not mean forced listening. Have fun my friend. Hope you find a new stalking target.

Sign In or Register to comment.