Howdy, Stranger!

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

Would a 3-stage Buy-To-Play model work ?

delete5230delete5230 Member EpicPosts: 5,793
edited February 12 in The Pub at MMORPG.COM
60 levels with a healthy amount of content. 
Healthy level of content needs a solid definition.  So here is my example, Vanilla WoW took 4>10 months of play time on average on the first character play through.  The only argument to this are extreme power players with "the gift",  so they can't count in the equation of 4>10 months.

1-30  = $60 with soft end game.  
31-50= $60 with soft end game.
51-60= $60 with FULL end game.
= $180

or

1-20  = $30 with a soft end game.
21-30= $30 with a soft end game.
31-40= $30 with a soft end game.
41-50= $30 with a soft end game.
51-60= $30 with a FULL end game.
= $150

Cash shop includes Level increments, and $30 additional character's.



The original World of Warcraft $59.99+one month free.  Add another 9 months.
total= $194.90

Con's are:
- Developers will not make a game this large (not even close)
- mmorpg's suck anymore... Many players wouldn't subscribe after level 30
- For a game of WoW quality, just as well charge the same a WoW.


Feel free to make variations :)
Gdemami

Comments

  • CryomatrixCryomatrix Member EpicPosts: 2,636
    Dont think it will work. The subscription model or f2p with cosmetic cash shop is way to go.
    Catch me streaming at twitch.tv/cryomatrix
    You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations. 
  • anemoanemo Member RarePosts: 1,749
    The market has kinda of driven prices to 3 things:  free, $10 to $20 Indy, or $70+ .   Most players have been pretty intolerant/untrusting of anything else.

    Practice doesn't make perfect, practice makes permanent.

    "At one point technology meant making tech that could get to the moon, now it means making tech that could get you a taxi."

  • iixviiiixiixviiiix Member RarePosts: 1,970
    How about just F2P ?
  • TheDarkrayneTheDarkrayne Member EpicPosts: 5,222
    This looks like something new.. but it isn't.

    This is basically what happens when an expansion launches. You have a soft endgame still if you don't buy the expansion. You need to pay for another 10 levels of progression. You have to pay for all the expansions to get the full endgame.
    I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
  • WizardryWizardry Member LegendaryPosts: 16,452
    edited February 12
    Trying to make sense of a good pay plan doesn't work because the publisher and developer only care about themselves and will always go for the greediest plan they can get away with.
    Then if their idea is met with harsh criticism they can always roll back to a less greedy one.Thing is the market seems to be decided on the first day,millions of copies sold then all the criticism begins but by that point the developer /publisher doesn't care anymore ,they already made their millions selling you a half baked game.

    There lies part of the problem,they don't need to fall back on anything,they only need to market their game to make those sales on the first couple days.Nobody will know if the game is half baked,unfinished,bugs until it is too late,millions already made>>>see FO76 as just one o the many examples.

    Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.

  • DMKanoDMKano Member LegendaryPosts: 21,177
    edited February 12
    Lol no.

    When it comes to payments - stick to simple and well established things that players are used to.

    3 stage payment model ... umm wtf no
  • delete5230delete5230 Member EpicPosts: 5,793
    Wizardry said:
    Trying to make sense of a good pay plan doesn't work because the publisher and developer only care about themselves and will always go for the greediest plan they can get away with.
    Then if their idea is met with harsh criticism they can always roll back to a less greedy one.Thing is the market seems to be decided on the first day,millions of copies sold then all the criticism begins but by that point the developer /publisher doesn't care anymore ,they already made their millions selling you a half baked game.

    There lies part of the problem,they don't need to fall back on anything,they only need to market their game to make those sales on the first couple days.Nobody will know if the game is half baked,unfinished,bugs until it is too late,millions already made>>>see FO76 as just one o the many examples.
    You make a point with:
    "publisher and developer only care about themselves"

    With this, It would be a cash flow gamble each and every three steps along the way. 
  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 27,050
    Wizardry said:
    Trying to make sense of a good pay plan doesn't work because the publisher and developer only care about themselves and will always go for the greediest plan they can get away with.
    Then if their idea is met with harsh criticism they can always roll back to a less greedy one.Thing is the market seems to be decided on the first day,millions of copies sold then all the criticism begins but by that point the developer /publisher doesn't care anymore ,they already made their millions selling you a half baked game.

    There lies part of the problem,they don't need to fall back on anything,they only need to market their game to make those sales on the first couple days.Nobody will know if the game is half baked,unfinished,bugs until it is too late,millions already made>>>see FO76 as just one o the many examples.
    You make a point with:
    "publisher and developer only care about themselves"

    With this, It would be a cash flow gamble each and every three steps along the way. 
    Yes, and players only care about themselves. See?

    Or, we can think of Developers as a company and we as the consumers and be smart about our purchases and not expect anything more from the developers other than they are a business.





  • danwest58danwest58 Member RarePosts: 2,011
    iixviiiix said:
    How about just F2P ?
    F2P does not work.  That is exactly why we are in the video game crash right now.   They built the games with F2P with Microtransactions where they sell you a fucking red dot on your screen and not players are feed up with that crap.  Either make the game a Subscription only game or let the game fail.   You can easily do a $2 - $5 a month sub for many games plus a cost and be successful.   Microtransactions need to be removed from the market period.  And any person who thinks Cosmetics alone will sell you are wrong, that is why there is P2W in game today because people dont buy cosmetics they buy power.   You can have Tokens in games for subscriptions and what not that is a good idea.   But when you are selling a Red Dot for a dollar or better armor for $50 there is a PROBLEM and these games are not made for us.  They are made for the Shareholders.  So no F2P should go to hell.  
  • LinifLinif Member UncommonPosts: 136
    edited February 12
    I think it comes down to... how the money is taken?

    Being charged a subscription every month, for however much it is in your currencies, is a far easier pill to swallow then something saying "Buy the next installment!" or however it'd be displayed in your examples.

    Recurring payments give the illusion of constant access whereas your proposed models actively remind the player "Drop another chunk of cash now for access."

    To summarise, £10 (I'm just guessing at the sub price right now) taken with minimal interference is easier to let run than breaking out your debit/credit card every 10/20/30 levels.
  • VrikaVrika Member EpicPosts: 5,782
    edited February 12
    No.

    People overestimate themselves. They would overestimate their ability and speed in reaching higher levels, and thus overestimate the short-term cost of playing that game.
     
  • MendelMendel Member EpicPosts: 3,278
    Well, @delete5230, this is one of your more coherent posts.  Good job on expressing your ideas.

    That said, I'm not sure your idea would work.  It appears to be nothing more than the base+expansion model, with or without subscription or cash shop.  Your examples are just more evenly distributed across player levels than most existing games have.  They tend to have about 50 levels in the 'base' set, and the expansions add 5-10 levels after that.  So, that's pretty much exactly the same as what we currently see in the marketplace.

    The bigger issue is from the developer's perspective.  They have been pushed, by greed, investors, or greedy investors, to make money faster.  The subscription model alone wasn't able to meet the desired revenue, so they moved to the cash shop model.  Expansions need to come frequently, to provide a bump in income, so that each expansion cannot take too long to develop.

    So, we see few major new features offered with expansions, only ways to leverage the original systems into a slightly new form.  For instance, the initial combat engine doesn't change significantly over the life of the game.  Changes to the 'base' game are costly to develop and are only considered for 'major' expansions.



    Cryomatrix

    Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.

Sign In or Register to comment.