114676-on-f2p-the-possibility-of

Page 1, Page 2, Page 3, Page 4, Page 5, Page 6
== Content ==
			
This is to address the possibility of Wildstar going free to play— which has not been raised by devs, so this is speculation. For clarity purposes let's assume the timeline for this possible change is from now to six months in the future. Anything beyond that isn't worth discussion. The purpose of this thread is to give the devs an idea of the community's attitude toward the topic, in light of recent announcements. Don't be a jerk! :P
 
The premise is this: Wildstar is a sub game. This fact was much discussed before the game was released, lots of controversy about the "archaic" pay to play concept surfaced on media sites. But the bottom line with most followers of Wildstar and with the devs was simple— the game will not go F2P, ever, and many of us have seen the recent resurface of Frost's correlation of monthly content releases to the sub model.
 
However, it's obvious that the plan changes when it comes to a game as large as Wildstar. Promises will be broken. Tables get flipped. Some folks have begun to directly question the fairness and rationale behind a sub model that no longer produces the advertised pace and structure of content releases (though we can't make assumptions about the amount of content or the quality).
 
This is the current situation. So the question now emerges: How do we feel about the possibility of Wildstar going free to play within the near future? Please consider this in the context laid out and refrain from flames.
 
 
Personally, while I think that people have the right to point out when promises are broken, my stance is firm: I don't care for F2P in an MMO. I would probably stop playing if the sub model changed (especially if it was something like SWTOR's). So in case anyone at Carbine is wondering... I really don't care that the game is no longer living up to its original standard for sub model fees. Drek happens. All I ask is that you create a new standard of service (interaction with community) and a new standard of quality (which you're working on). It seems to me like the CREDD model is working for the player base, and hopefully paying well, so don't feel pressured to change this aspect of the game because of (albeit fair) criticism.
 
/2 cents
 
Anyone else?	
----
			I would leave if the game went F2P and find something else to do with my time.	
----
			As much as I love this game, I would not stick around if it became any sort of F2P model. I pay my Sub every month and I, too, don't care that they've had to change their goals on content release times. I enjoy this game, and I'd rather have quality content instead of new bugs every month. Drek does happen.	
----
			
I would also be leaving if it turned f2p. Because I have never seen a f2p model I agree with.
 
Content in a game should be available to all players, for the exact same fee.	
----
			CREDD needs to made more appealing, made more flexible. Path rerolls (even if having it set to level 1) And faction, appearance(name change included) and race changes (even if said class was still locked to the current race choices) That'd be a good start and give both ends a reason to buy it.	
----
			
Oh look, it's this thread again.
 
I'll respond because it can't be said enough - I will leave if it goes F2P. 
 
It's a poisonous business model that separates devs from the customer base and results in a toxic community and stagnant game development.  I won't go more into it then that, or this thread will turn into a debate and get deleted (again), but count me firmly in "I'm leaving if it happens" crowd.	
----
			
Uhm this game is free to play... Not sure why this old argument keeps coming back.
 
Games been out 3 months and I haven't spent a penny on it besides the initial game purchase	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Oh look, it's this thread again.
 
I'll respond because it can't be said enough - I will leave if it goes F2P. 
 
It's a poisonous business model that separates devs from the customer base and results in a toxic community and stagnant game development.  I won't go more into it then that, or this thread will turn into a debate and get deleted (again), but count me firmly in "I'm leaving if it happens" crowd.
----
			I love playing the game, and will continue to do so.  At this point, I support whatever model will create a robust player base and have more folks logging in.  If that means I pay a sub for added features but F2P, if it's all F2P, if it's sub plus cash shop for cool vanity items, I couldn't care.  I just want to keep playing rather than see a Tabula  Rasa debacle, and I want to see the player base strengthen.	
----
			It wouldn't surprise me if we see a change in the model &/or box price with this next major drop, or following into early 2015.  I don't see drop 3 making much of a difference in bringing back players.	
----
			If it goes F2P and follows a hybrid model similar to Rift's, that wouldn't be so bad. Give subscribers ongoing loyalty benefits for subscribing, as well as benefits for having bought the game (and time subbed) for those coming back, while not unduly penalizing F2P players.  I'd rather it not follow a model similar to SWTOR's or LOTRO's, where F2P players are severely restricted and/or the cash shop is designed to rope in people who are already subscribing.	
----
			
Hm, I wonder how long before this thread mysteriously vanishes like the last one did. 
 
Of course people here are going to scream that they won't play if it goes F2P, because they're all willing to pay subs (or let other players buy them for them with CREDD) or they wouldn't be able to post on this board. Other forums have all the "I'm waiting for it to go F2P," "I would play the hell out of this game if it went F2P but I'm not paying a sub, no way" and "Love to try it if it were F2P, sounds interesting, but not gonna do the sub thing" people, and there are a lot of them. So obviously while a lot of folks would quit in protest if the change happened, a lot more would come on board to see what the game is like. Whether or not they'd actually fork over cash for it is hard to say, but getting them in the door to look at the merchandise is the obvious first step toward making a sale. 
 
It's hard to tell at this point which way the balance would tip in terms of player loss versus player gain with a business model shift, but as I said in the other vanished thread: ultimately it's going to come down to whether or not NCSoft is happy with the current revenue.  If they're not, Carbine will be told to either change the game's business plan in hope of salvaging its profitability, or to close up shop.  Carbine is wholly owned by NCSoft and NCSoft owns the Wildstar software, the servers, and all the licenses -- they call the shots, and no one else, and they will make the call based on the game's current and expected revenues, and not on any other basis.  
 
Mind you, a transition to B2P or F2P (more likely B2P) isn't a guarantee of increased profitability by any means, but if the game's not making the money it needs to make right now, the choice will be to change the business model or to power down the servers. NCSoft doesn't run MMOs as a charity.  
 
A more interesting topic would be not, "Will you leave if the game goes F2P?" but, "If the game needs to change its business model in order to survive, what would you find least objectionable?"  There are several approaches to monetizing an MMO aside from the straight box-and-sub model, and we were having a pretty interesting discussion of the pros and cons of the various models out there in the other thread. 
 
Of course stating your opinion about this probably won't make any difference either, as any business model change would be made on the basis of hard data we don't have and on leveraging the software already in place to make a smooth transition, but I would still be interested in learning what concessions, if any, you "Sub or DIE!" folks would make to assist Wildstar in improving its profitability profile and thereby improving its chances for long-term success.  	
----
			
Oddly enough, Wildstar may be the one game that suffers player loss from going F2P.  Let's face it, they get the benefits of F2P with CREDD already, and a LOT of us will leave if they shift incentive on us.
 
That's sort of why, as well.  Unfortunately, there isn't a F2P model out there that makes developers want to make a game that is fun to log in on.  Carbine, right now, cares that we're in.  If we paid by the box or expansion, they'd already have their money.  IF they made their money off a cash shop, they'd be trying to force us to buy their stuff to skip months of painful grind.  If they made a F2P option with severely restricted tools, why wouldn't those people be using CREDD?  But if they go with any of those three, their focus will be off of, "Let's give them something for that sub money" and into "How do we get them to buy this..."  It's a shift from content development to using the game as advertising space for whatever they're really making money from.
 
So Wildstar, possibly in a class only with WoW and EVE, stand to actually lose subscriptions if they go free to play.	
----
			
If you think SWtOR didn't suffer MASSIVE player loss when it went F2P, I have no idea what server you were on at the time.
 
When games that launch on a "premium service" model go bargain basement, people who expected to roll "I pay you steadily, you deliver steadily" don't have much tolerance for "New plan: we'll nickel and dime you to death..."	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
 
 
If you think SWtOR didn't suffer MASSIVE player loss when it went F2P, I have no idea what server you were on at the time.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Uhm this game is free to play... Not sure why this old argument keeps coming back.
 
Games been out 3 months and I haven't spent a penny on it besides the initial game purchase
----
			
I'd stay. I love Wildstar too much to pack up and leave permanently just for that.
 
Though, perhaps it would depend. When I think F2P, I think of TERA's business model, which as far as F2P goes is pretty good, I think. There are no restricted features (unlike, say, PSO2, which requires that you to sub for the ability to trade), and the optional subscription is pretty rewarding. If Wildstar went with such a model that doesn't punish players for not paying (which, if F2P happened, I would expect them to), I'd have no reason to leave.
 
Though of course, I'd prefer it to remain P2P. It's fine with me if things slow down a bit, so long as something is being done. It should be about the content, not the cash shop.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Anything beyond that isn't worth discussion. 
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I'd stay. I love Wildstar too much to pack up and leave permanently just for that.
 
Though, perhaps it would depend. When I think F2P, I think of TERA's business model, which as far as F2P goes is pretty good, I think. There are no restricted features (unlike, say, PSO2, which requires that you to sub for the ability to trade), and the optional subscription is pretty rewarding. If Wildstar went with such a model that doesn't punish players for not paying (which, if F2P happened, I would expect them to), I'd have no reason to leave.
 
Though of course, I'd prefer it to remain P2P. It's fine with me if things slow down a bit, so long as something is being done. It should be about the content, not the cash shop.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
If you think SWtOR didn't suffer MASSIVE player loss when it went F2P, I have no idea what server you were on at the time.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Uhm this game is free to play... Not sure why this old argument keeps coming back.
 
Games been out 3 months and I haven't spent a penny on it besides the initial game purchase
----
			Perhaps I was unclear. I didn't say Star Wars went under or stopped making money. I'm saying a huge portion of the initial subscription oriented customer base left. The chart you offer shows their total income, not their subscription income/ratio of subscribing players vs. free to play folks. The selling points they had at launch are not the selling points they decided were within their grasp moving forward.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I'm with Pax.. will leave for sure if it went completely free to play (AKA Pay to win)
 
Those of you that cant pay the 15 a month, and are too lazy to buy CREDD in game... get a job.
 
Or hell, come mow my lawn each month and I'll pay for your sub
----
			
F2P always is pay to win,  pay for bag space,  that means you stay out in the world longer earning money while the person who didn't pay  has to run back and forth more often,  meaning you get to win because you paid for that extra space in order to get more money generated per hour compared to the person who doesn't pay.    Money walls are all over F2P games and they do nickel and dime you to death.   
 
I am gone from gaming if this goes F2P.   This is my last game I'll be in.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
F2P always is pay to win
----
			
I don't believe for a second even 5% of the people asking for f2p have any intention of even spending a dime in a hypothetical Wildstar cash shop.Everyone's just trying to get Wildstar to let them play for free while it's still young and impressionable.
The day Wildstar goes f2p is the day their profits come to a halt. Star Wars and WoW had profitable cash shops because they were already established IPs with addicted fans throwing money at anything they came up with. Wildstar is still trying to tell us what its story is.
 
To answer the question, I wouldn't have to wonder if I'd keep playing, the game would shut down and make the decision for me.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Perhaps I was unclear. I didn't say Star Wars went under or stopped making money. I'm saying a huge portion of the initial subscription oriented customer base left. The chart you offer shows their total income, not their subscription income/ratio of subscribing players vs. free to play folks. The selling points they had at launch are not the selling points they decided were within their grasp moving forward.
----
			
I will also have to agree that I have never played a good F2P MMO (and I have tried quite a few of them in the past). The model itself gives a hit to the actual quality of the released content (imho).
 
Besides, with Credd as an option the game literally is masterfully combining the best of everything..you can play the game for Free if you gather in-game gold.. so I don't undestand why this same thread needs to be opened again (and again and again..).	
----
			
For the people saying they will leave there will be literally hundreds of new players to replace each of you. The correct way to go about it is to support the game if you like it and you aren't being forced into trap purchases(Pay to win/Pay to Raid). There are people running around in Rift with mounts that are only available in a 150 dollar package. You don't even need to pay for the expansion. They love the game THAT MUCH!(some of it is flexing but there's definitely some love there ha).
 
 
P.S. I'm not for or against F2P. I work(I was actually a Patron in Rift). I just want to knock you guys down a few pegs. Your 15 a month is not a make or break in a F2P transition. A few games actually end up being more profitable.	
----
			
I wouldn't be too bothered by a F2P model that was similar to the SWTOR shop, as long as it didn't pose the same play limitations as SWTOR.  I continued to be a paying customer to SWTOR, the shop offerd the vanity items to purchase either with real money to sell on the AH to make ingame money, or if you have a lot of ingame money to purchase those items off the AH.  People love to customise their toons to look different from the other players, I being one of those people. 
 
Unfortunately I've not played WS in the last six weeks due to the fact all my friends left within the first couple of months, their issues varied and a few have said they'll come back once those issues are sorted.  Great game, but when I lost my friends who I've been gaming with for the past six years there wasn't a lot to keep me going.  :)	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I don't believe for a second even 5% of the people asking for f2p have any intention of even spending a dime in a hypothetical Wildstar cash shop.
Everyone's just trying to get Wildstar to let them play for free while it's still young and impressionable.
The day Wildstar goes f2p is the day their profits come to a halt. Star Wars and WoW had profitable cash shops because they were already established IPs with addicted fans throwing money at anything they came up with. Wildstar is still trying to tell us what its story is.
 
To answer the question, I wouldn't have to wonder if I'd keep playing, the game would shut down and make the decision for me.
----
			Count me in as another who would quit immediately if it went F2P. Not sure where I'd go... maybe back to XIV, as horridly boring as its story is. But hopefully I don't have to make that kind of decision.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
A more interesting topic would be not, "Will you leave if the game goes F2P?" but, "If the game needs to change its business model in order to survive, what would you find least objectionable?" 
----
			having played games that went free to play.I would just leave, It basically just murders everything I like about mmo'sthe communities turn toxic as hell, everything worth doing gets put behind pay-gates, all the cool cosmetics become cash transactions instead of earned achievements"free" games cost 10x as much as subscriptions for a similar experience anyways. Why anyone would desire it is just beyond me	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Oh. God. No.
Tera's model is complete pooper dooks, with all the cash events and cash boxes and cash cash cash-edy cash dinero.
 
If it did end up F2P, I'd REALLY prefer something a little like SWtOR/Rift without the horrendously TERRIBAD limitations on free players that I hear about in SWtOR.
 
Let's hope it doesn't go free, seein' as that ain't rightly part o' the "grand plan" and seems like it'd be a last ditch effort to recoup losses.
----
			
I am in the camp of NO to F2P.  I would most likely leave if it goes to F2P since, for the games I have seen go F2P (e.g. SWTOR) it turns into a nickel and dime model and in my view the "community" turns even more toxic.  All that said, it's not up to me to determine the monetary direction of the game.  If the publisher and or the developer deems that F2P will net an increased return on investment, then it is their product and they have to look out for their employees.  I don't like F2P games as a general rule.  I do play some to "dabble" but, I only play them Free.  I don't invest anything in them because I don't believe that the overall "community" is of the caliber that I would like to interact with.  I tend to find, in my experience that subscription games tend to foster communities that are more stable, and cooperative (even with those that will be toxic ).
 
If WS goes F2P and the "community" turns to be that of say the "community of SWTOR" I won't stay.  I didn't stay in SWTOR.
 
I think that those that are clamoring for F2P should pay more attention to becoming one that can generate C.R.E.D.D. for themselves to elevate their personal expenditures and stop "whining".  WS (like EVE) has an alternative method for generating currency in game to offset IRL expenses.  Again, I encourage all F2P seekers to investigate this.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
F2P always is pay to win,  pay for bag space,  that means you stay out in the world longer earning money while the person who didn't pay  has to run back and forth more often,  meaning you get to win because you paid for that extra space in order to get more money generated per hour compared to the person who doesn't pay.    Money walls are all over F2P games and they do nickel and dime you to death.   
 
I am gone from gaming if this goes F2P.   This is my last game I'll be in.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I don't believe for a second even 5% of the people asking for f2p have any intention of even spending a dime in a hypothetical Wildstar cash shop.
Everyone's just trying to get Wildstar to let them play for free while it's still young and impressionable.
The day Wildstar goes f2p is the day their profits come to a halt. Star Wars and WoW had profitable cash shops because they were already established IPs with addicted fans throwing money at anything they came up with. Wildstar is still trying to tell us what its story is.
 
To answer the question, I wouldn't have to wonder if I'd keep playing, the game would shut down and make the decision for me.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Despite its chronic subscriber loss, World of Warcraft managed to generate $213 million in micro-transaction sales in 2013. Similarly, Star Wars: The Old Republic earned $139 million in additional revenues, suggesting that both titles’ change to a hybrid monetization model succeeded to stem a more drastic revenue loss.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Revenue does not equal good experience for players. In fact, in the case of SWTOR, quality went down when revenues went up.
 
My experience from a number of F2P games is that the priority shift from "making a game worth subscribing to" to "how can we sell more stuff in the cash shop?"  is catastrophic for my enjoyment of the game.
 
I will add my voice to the "will not tolerate F2P" camp. CREDD is good enough.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
F2P always is pay to win,  pay for bag space,  that means you stay out in the world longer earning money while the person who didn't pay  has to run back and forth more often,  meaning you get to win because you paid for that extra space in order to get more money generated per hour compared to the person who doesn't pay.    Money walls are all over F2P games and they do nickel and dime you to death.   
 
I am gone from gaming if this goes F2P.   This is my last game I'll be in.
----
			
I would hate it if this game went B2P or F2P for the myriad of reasons associated with each model.
 
 
The only types of players who win if the model is successful, 
 
1)Are those who are too cheap to spend $15 a month.
 
-Most of the time, it means the little kids you hear swearing with their high pitch voice in a game of COD.
 
2)Are those who's priorities are so bad that instead of using the money they have to reinvest to make even more money, would rather spend a LOT more than $15 a month.
 
-There was a study done for mobile games and found a rough estimate that only 2.2% of the player base actually paid for anything. Since this is not a mobile game, lets just say that 10-15% (I even think these numbers are pretty high, I would say more like 5-10%) are those actually paying up in traditional desktop F2P games. The biggest F2P game right now is World of Tanks and has an average revenue per user of $4.51 (as of August 2013). A quick google (actually used Bing), I found that WoT had 40 million registered users as of 2012. Basically long story short...these guys are paying obscene amounts of money. Regular Joes who are smart with their money can't possibly compete with that. I wanted to paste the links to the info I posted but for some reason, WS website doesn't play nice with IE...all can be looked up on google or Bing though.
 
3)The rich ones who have a lot of money.
 
-If you can buy a Lamborghini without having to save up for it, then you belong in this category.
 
 
The regular Joe, like most of us, will all lose. We know the value of money. We know that $15 a month for hours of entertainment is actually a very smart choice. If this game goes B2P, I will still play it, but I will stop once all the core content (which I do not expect there to be any new after going B2P) has been completed. I did the same with GW2. I played the crap out of it, had great potential, but ultimately since its a B2P, no new core content was introduced, and I quit. Before anyone nitpicks, please note I said "core" content...not just any kind of content.
 
I'm willing to still wait for WS devs to get up on their feet. Its plainly obvious they stumbled out of the gate. I can see they are trying to fix the wrongs. Drop 3 is where its at. I see Drop 3 as fixing the hole in the hull of a ship.....though if the fix fails, then I will have to think real hard if I want to stick around for the ship to sink completely.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Wildstar's profits will come to a halt? What profits? The revenue earned has been in a crazy nosedive since the first month, as evidenced by the earnings reports NC Soft has published publicly. And that's just revenue, not profit. This is the worst performing game NC Soft is publishing. People are not trying to scam the publisher into letting them play for free, they just see the game as destined for failure and don't want it to disappear.
----
			
There are good and bad F2P models. It would be highly dependent on what route Carbine would go in terms of F2P, if I would stay or not.
 
Theoretically speaking the game is already F2P with the exception of an entry barrier (money attunement?! #doh). Getting necessary creed in time to pay the monthly fee is not such a big deal for those who invest some good time in the game. Of course, some are left to pay and thats good otherwise this game would face other issues.
 
A bad example of F2P would be for me another model like DCUO uses. I'm all in there with houndreds of money which turns out to be anything but F2P, its simply a long-term cash grab. Then I played for a while STO which feels the opposite as you can (similar to the WS creed system) finance stuff via the market system. It feels fair play and will let ppl more pay in honesty rather feeling threaten to pay to actually continue to play.
 
As stated, the game itself is already been set up for a full f2p way. With the current state of the game and how it goes its just a matter of time that they are either forced to go f2p or shut it down. All this will be followed by shrinking the dev team size which slowly leads to less and less content (best example again: DCUO). Getting out of this kind of doom wheel is nearly impossible but we are already in it even though we don't realize it yet.	
----
			
This game is perfectly set up to go free to play. They could simply convert 1 CREDD into 100 new CREDDCOINS and add a vendor selling a range of cosmetic, vanity and flair items.
 
It seems pretty optimistic to ask players to pay $45 per drop (at their current 'hopeful' speed of quarterly content releases). Box price with optional sub and micro transactions seems to be inevitable. It wouldn't really affect the speed of releases, just as much as paying a sub didn't guarantee we got monthly content. In fact, if we paid per drop it may speed it up!	
----
			I wouldn't mind if it used CoH or TSW's hybrid f2p model. A month payment was enough for new content(when it came out), and the most "P2W" item was an exp booster.	
----
			I have played two F2P games where I haven't felt like I am being ripped off; World of Tanks and Team Fortress 2. I didn't mind playing those games at all even tho they were F2P. Then again all the other F2P games I have played, I have dropped very fast due to how the "feeling" of the game was, as they felt like cash grabs.If Wildstar went F2P, I would most likely drop the game.	
----
			
P2P = make quality content that keeps people continuously playing the game
F2P = make content that gets people to spend as much money as possible 
 
That's how I see it at least. There is always a dumb cash shop involved that tries to drain your money with items that gives you an edge over non-paying players and that I find much worse than P2P model. 
It can be done right, but it rarely is. 	
----
			 I would leave as well if it went F2P.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
 
 
Or hell, come mow my lawn each month and I'll pay for your sub
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I wouldn't be too bothered by a F2P model that was similar to the SWTOR shop, as long as it didn't pose the same play limitations as SWTOR.  I continued to be a paying customer to SWTOR, the shop offerd the vanity items to purchase either with real money to sell on the AH to make ingame money, or if you have a lot of ingame money to purchase those items off the AH.  People love to customise their toons to look different from the other players, I being one of those people.
----
			
One thing for sure, WildStar changing to a F2P model would cost a lot of money. The big question is thatfore will do NCSoft would like to invest so much in an unsafe property to change it fo a possible but also usure model?
 
As far as I know NCSoft, they're rather going to shut it down that to invest so much money. Sad but true.
 
Thatfore Frost is right, Wildstar won't ever go F2P ever. ;)
 
 
 
{| class="blockquote"
The problem with SWTOR's cash shop is that, rather than being pitched primarily towards F2P players, it's designed around 1)  a constant flood of items as a money sink for subscribers to spend their monthly Cartel Coins on and 2) enticing subscribers to spend money on more Cartel Coins to buy items that are just a bit more expensive than their monthly bonus.
 
----
			
F2P is always bad, because it changes the relationship between me and the game.
 
In P2P I pay for a service and the devs deliver the service.
 
In F2P I am a mark, someone to con as much money as possible from. Even is I never spend a single cent in the cash shop, it still leaves a bad taste in my mouth.   
 
And to all of you saying "it's only vanity items"; I happen to enjoy housing and customizing my appearance a lot. For me that is just as much progression as downing bosses or getting BiS gear. Vanity items on the cash shop devalues that experience. Even if the items can be aquired with gold or something else other than cash.     
 
There is no other value than percieved value. And for me, with a cash shop, anything it touches will lose value.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
And what is the bad thing about this, as long as it works out for both sides? Still, the prob with WildStar is, it is not yet designed to work that way. It could be, no raguing about this particular thing, but it'll cost a lot to change it. There is a lot of additional developement to make it work.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
F2P is always bad, because it changes the relationship between me and the game.
 
In P2P I pay for a service and the devs deliver the service.
 
In F2P I am a mark, someone to con as much money as possible from. Even is I never spend a single cent in the cash shop, it still leaves a bad taste in my mouth.   
 
And to all of you saying "it's only vanity items"; I happen to enjoy housing and customizing my appearance a lot. For me that is just as much progression as downing bosses or getting BiS gear. Vanity items on the cash shop devalues that experience. Even if the items can be aquired with gold or something else other than cash.     
 
There is no other value than percieved value. And for me, with a cash shop, anything it touches will lose value.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
In a subscription game, you are a hamster. You have to be on a time-gated, grind wheel for as long as possible. The minimum amount of content must last the maximum amount of time so the subscribers stay subscribed.
----
			Really? You think its a coincidence that the Crimson Badlands and Northern Waste rep-grinds are designed to take two days longer than you can possibly clear in a single monthly billing cycle?	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Really? You think its a coincidence that the Crimson Badlands and Northern Waste rep-grinds are designed to take two days longer than you can possibly clear in a single monthly billing cycle?
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Uhm this game is free to play... Not sure why this old argument keeps coming back.
 
Games been out 3 months and I haven't spent a penny on it besides the initial game purchase
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
 
 
In a subscription game, you are a hamster. You have to be on a time-gated, grind wheel for as long as possible. The minimum amount of content must last the maximum amount of time so the subscribers stay subscribed.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
The bad thing is, rather than that kind of cash shop being primarily designed to get F2P players to spend money on the game, it's designed to get people who are already subscribing to spend more money. The majority of the items in the cash shop are only there to give subscribers something to spend their monthly cash shop currency on. And the monthly cash shop currency primarily serves the purpose of getting subscribers to spend real money to get more cash shop currency to buy more expensive things from the cash shop.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
 Either you're trolling with that one or you didn't bother reading my OP, which describes why this topic has current relevance. The game is changing, the direction is changing, and it's entirely within reason that the community and/or its expectations have changed.
----
			I'd quit if it goes f2p, like I did with several other games.	
----
			
The discussion is novel because prior to this thread there was justification for a premium model.
 
While the author of this thread isn't exactly on the level of Faber or Marx, they raise the really obvious economics of the situation.
 
1) The monthly content drops are the value preposition behind the subscription fee.
2) There are no longer monthly content drops.
3) Does this mean there should not be a subscription fee?
 
Unfortunately, I'm having a hard time coming up with any reason that this game is worth continued dollars a month. For clarification, I don't pay a subscription fee and haven't since the first month. However, if I had to ask "what am I getting for $x / month" my answer now is "nothing". Granted, that was the answer when they decided to pretend daily zones and zone patches offered anything of value to anyone. They don't and are a waste of time.	
----
			For me it will depend on the type of F2P model. If most of their development efforts switch to the cash shop, leaving the actual gameplay content unchanged for longs stretch of time and offering nothing out of the shop, I will likely quit. Though, to be honest, I'd probably end up quitting if my friends quit before me regardless of what they do.	
----
			
There is a fundamental difference between F2P and B2p.
 
I believe in B2P for many reasons.
The devs worked on the initial content and deserve box sales for effort.
Initial box sales gives the initial game content open and ready to play as is with no nickle and diming to  open slots.
B2P allow devs to charge for content as fast as they can complete it and allow players to pay only when content is completed and only if they want to play the new content. This is a huge issue for me as initially, as I understood it, Carbine promised monthly content drops and that was a big part of why they deserved a monthly sub. If I remember correctly someone had stated that with a monthly sub players deserve to get a steady stream of content so that they can see what they are paying for and our sub would pay for the devs to keep that content coming. Since the monthly content drops are no longer coming the monthly sub is now paying for what exactly? CRED can still be in game and be used to pay for content updates rather than monthly subs and/or for monthly perk subs for people who want to keep paying without content.
B2P also offers a sort of gate/deterrent for random trolls, gold salesman, etc as each account starts with an initial investment, or another way, trolls and salespeople who are permabanned have to purchase another box to come in again. 
 
F2P, on the other hand...
F2P is just a mess of anyone with a borrowed computer can come in and create as many accounts as they want, so it really does create an issue with the more popular games. Right now, for example, Archage is have a terrible time with gold spammers. They cannot kick them out of the game fast enough and, of course, they are also taking advantage of an exploit so it makes it so much worse.
Having to pay for bag space, full active button skill slots, full xp earned, costume slots by item, use of housing by slot, opening up to allow full usage of game cash earned, etc etc.
Games that move from sub to F2P often to not take into consideration box purchases before the change and charge the same nonsense to open all the slots to the dude that through down cash for the box and any extras as the dude that walked in off the streets to pay for free, making every player that hung around for months through buggy material feel like a $ rather than a valued customer.
 
I have seen the decline of the community after F2P and as such I understand people not wanting to go there. Not everyone who plays F2P is a scrub or troll or gold spammer, far from it.. but just the basic logistics.. well you all know how it works.
 
On the other hand, do not be so quick to discount a B2P community, which is really similar to a subscriber community. B2P also allow the devs to get back to a near subscription model if they are able to "right the ship" and get back to putting out new working content on a regular basis. It also allows the community to acknowledge that things are going well, bugs are fixed or at an acceptable level and to give a sub for fluff.. kind of like giving your server an extra tip. When the game is going in the right direction more people sub to pay for up and coming content. when people are not sure or it is not paced correctly or whatever other reason they get paid when they deliver what was promised... It really puts the player base in a better seat. It lets us show the devs with our wallets how we really feel and allows them to do what needs to be done without a mass exodus of people who no longer want to pay monthly for no new content/buggy content.
 
 
Do those of you who oppose F2P feel the same about B2P? Why or why not? 
 
I have pretty strong positive feelings about B2P, some of the reasons I listed above and I am always curious to hear others who both agree and disagree with me and why.
 
Thanks for reading my post! :)	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I'd quit if it goes f2p, like I did with several other games.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Currently in Wildstar, I am able to pay $20 USD (CREDD) in exchange for 6 plats. I then use those 6 plats to increase my bag and bank storage space. So you saying Wildstar is also pay to win?
 
There are F2P games out there that doesnt require cash shop currencies as the only way to unlock things.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Lots of people have different definitions of P2W...the most common one is buying a "sword of +10 to ass kicking" from the online store when the highest version you could ever acquire in game from drops is "sword of +5 to ass kicking".  A lot of people wouldnt consider bag space P2W even if you played the neckbone is connected to-the-head bone game and even if your connection made a bit of sense.  Star Trek Online is P2W, but it's P2W optional.   The gear can be bought with real money, but it can also be bought by spending time in game and gathering up the in game currency to buy it.  Then a lot of the content is tuned in such a way where people will claim that you can do end game content in a level 1 ship with level 1 white gear (and apparently for those people every video game in existence is also too easy).
 
Now as far as WS going f2p? i would first have to wait and see what it is they plan on having us pay for.  If they do something similar to SWTOR where if you want to use more action bars you buy it, or if you want to hide your helm you buy it or if you want to do dungeons, raids and pvp you buy 'passes' then i probably wont stick around.  However if they were to go with something like STOs f2p model i will probably stay.  Someone on page 1 mentioned that WS is already F2P.  It is true that you dont have to spend any money on a sub but you still have to spend time earning in game currency to buy that CREDD.  Whether getting that currency is hard or easy isnt really the point.  I can log onto STO for 30 days in a row and just afk in my ship all 30 days but i can still play the next month.  I can pretty much do whatever i want to and not worry about whether what i do is enough to earn next months sub money. I can do dungeons, i dont have to worry about picking up loot to sell, i dont have to worry about playing the market, i can play 'spin the camera' i can do whatever, and i wont have to worry about getting next months sub.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I said  F2P games are all pay to win.    Stop trolling  
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
F2P games are not all P2W. Blade and Soul offers nothing but aesthetics in their F2P version; last I checked SWTOR didn't have any ability increasing items in their shop; they went with a content gate approach instead of a P2W approach to F2P.
 
It is very possible and there are examples of F2P games that are not P2W...
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I did not realize  Blade and Soul was out in America already.   also  stopped playing  SWTOR  so it's possible  then I shall change it to,   Almsot ALL F2P games are  Pay to win!  > :D    bet people will ignore the 'almost'  or not know what that word means :P
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
It isn't, but the Chinese version is F2P with out a P2W scheme (we in NA are getting it in 2015 with the Chinese implementation)
 
I didn't see an 'almost' in your post I replied to, so if you had said it before than cool, you would be more accurate then. 
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
F2P games are not all P2W. Blade and Soul offers nothing but aesthetics in their F2P version; last I checked SWTOR didn't have any ability increasing items in their shop; they went with a content gate approach instead of a P2W approach to F2P.
 
It is very possible and there are examples of F2P games that are not P2W...
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
To those who value aesthetics, it is buy to win. You buy the cool stuff instead of getting them in the game. The coolest gear is not raid gear in SWTOR - it is cash shop gear. And you can bet that if Wildstar went F2P, the coolest gear and housing stuff would be found in the cash shop. It doesn't matter if the same stuff can be found in the game, it still removes all value from the act of getting it.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
This is a rather disingenuous post. P2W specifically refers to games where purchasing items / unlocks / abilities for real money gives your character a GAMEPLAY advantage. 
 
Aesthetics may be your thing; but that has nothing to do with an MMO being P2W.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
So housing is not part of the game? Costumes are not part of the game?
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Do these make any aspect of the game easier? No? Then it's not P2W. You're going to pull something if you keep reaching like this lol
----
			
In the matter of fact Drebble is right, from a point of view. Remember, all those unlocks are things you want in the game. it is quite the same motivation as having good items to kick somebodys arse or unlocking a dungeon, or what else not. All the same side of the coin. The only difference is the difference you people would like to feel. "Ohhh! Buying esthetic stuff. What a whoosie, he's not playing the game, blabla!" vs "Not immersing into the game but wanting to beat the shit out of everything, what a CS-kiddie, blabla."
 
Well actually all features we'd be willing to pay for are gamecontend. And by buying the content we are willing to play the game, so we f***ing play the game and contribute to it!  B)	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
In the matter of fact Drebble is right, from a point of view. Remember, all those unlocks are things you want in the game. it is quite the same motivation as having good items to kick somebodys arse or unlocking a dungeon, or what else not. All the same side of the coin. The only difference is the difference you people would like to feel. "Ohhh! Buying esthetic stuff. What a whoosie, he's not playing the game, blabla!" vs "Not immersing into the game but wanting to beat the shit out of everything, what a CS-kiddie, blabla."
 
Well actually all features we'd be willing to pay for are gamecontend. And by buying the content we are willing to play the game, so we f***ing play the game and contribute to it!  B)
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I did not realize  Blade and Soul was out in America already.   also  stopped playing  SWTOR  so it's possible  then I shall change it to,   Almsot ALL F2P games are  Pay to win!  > :D    bet people will ignore the 'almost'  or not know what that word means :P
----
			
Not sure if this game will go F2P, but if it does I have no worries because some F2P out there are actually better than some P2P. You really can't escape toxic communities because of "internet" if that's really fearing many.
 
Look at WoW for an example.
Toxic community
Expensive cosmetic products for a p2p unlexx name change.
 
So no matter where you go you'll face these obstacles. It all really depends on the management when it comes to mmorpgs. As I said before it wouldn't bother me one bit if does goes f2p and to believe it or not I think future incoming mmorpgs product will follow that style.
 
If it happens to be p2p, then it has to be really good, organize, fixing bugs before release content,  great services and lots of cosmetics that you don't have to pay for unless it's a special deal.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Revenue does not equal good experience for players. In fact, in the case of SWTOR, quality went down when revenues went up.
 
My experience from a number of F2P games is that the priority shift from "making a game worth subscribing to" to "how can we sell more stuff in the cash shop?" is catastrophic for my enjoyment of the game.
 
I will add my voice to the "will not tolerate F2P" camp. CREDD is good enough.
----
			It will not. It's not a topic.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
To those who value aesthetics, it is buy to win. You buy the cool stuff instead of getting them in the game. The coolest gear is not raid gear in SWTOR - it is cash shop gear. And you can bet that if Wildstar went F2P, the coolest gear and housing stuff would be found in the cash shop. It doesn't matter if the same stuff can be found in the game, it still removes all value from the act of getting it.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
It will not. It's not a topic.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
It will not. It's not a topic.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
The thing is, you have to put things in a cash shop to make F2P viable. I'd much rather they only have items that you can acquire in-game available in the cash shop than have items that can only be acquired through the cash shop. Would it really matter that someone was able to buy that Bronze-Plated "Crippler" Model that dropped out of a Boom-Box for you?
 
Obviously there are good and bad ways of doing things. They shouldn't put things in the cash shop that give an advantage, like Runes, Signs or Elder-Game gear. They could have all kinds of in-game armor in there as cosmetic versions, though. For example, cosmetic versions of quest reward or world-drop armor. You can acquire it in-game, but if you just like the look, you can buy it in the cash shop. Sure, there will be people who say "that quest is just for Dominion and I'm Exile" or "I missed out on that armor piece because I picked a different reward," but let's face it, how many pieces of in-game armor go completely unnoticed because characters are wearing costumes when they equip them?
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
It already is for the most part (a good 3rd of my GA group is not subbed and using CREDD), and it is a topic. Burying your head in the sand doesn't change facts.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
It might. It is.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
CREDD is a sub, hate to break it to you. Someone is paying for your sub.
 
THis game doesn't need free to play because of the business model. It is ALREADY free for those who want it to be.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
F2P always is pay to win,  pay for bag space,  that means you stay out in the world longer earning money while the person who didn't pay  has to run back and forth more often,  meaning you get to win because you paid for that extra space in order to get more money generated per hour compared to the person who doesn't pay.    Money walls are all over F2P games and they do nickel and dime you to death.   
 
I am gone from gaming if this goes F2P.   This is my last game I'll be in.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Nope.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
WoW has a cash shop and it's p2p. 
Mini pets
mounts
name change
race change
realm transfer
Epic Helmets
Faction change
Reprint stance models which cost over $100.
The same might happen here to earn more support for the franchise.
 
I really see no difference between the two. If you like the game you'll support it as well.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Rift also has something similar to CREDD and it moved to a hybrid P2P/F2P model.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Er, it didn't have that prior to being F2P. And REX isn't like CREDD precisely. It doesn't give you a sub; it just gives you loyalty points that can unlock the various levels of loyalty rewards. Subscribing to Rift gets you an entire set of other goodies beyond the loyalty tiers.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
If I remember correctly you could use REX to buy patron scrolls in RIFT's cash shop. I think both  patrons and f2p can earn loyalty rewards. 
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Not in the least. P2W specificity and explicitly refers to games where RM purchases can give payers advantages in GAMEPLAY (increased combat ability, increased healing ability, increased tanking ability, etc). Buying aesthetics, regardless of housing / customization being a robust system, has no impact on a payers GAMEPLAY, and does not fall under the P2W distinction.
 
Just because some one enjoys housing and costumes (which we all do fyi) doesn't make it relevant to GAMEPLAY mechanics. Motivation has nothing to do with that distinction either. No one cares if some one prefers to do housing rather than raids or dungeons; but again, that doesn't make aesthetic pieces relevant to the P2W discussion.
 
This isn't to say people who focus on housing or customization aren't real players... obviously they are. But unless cash shop items give advantages in combat and actual gameplay mechanics then it isn't a P2W system. 
 
If a game does NOT sell  boosts for RPG gameplay (abilities, stats, etc) in their shop, it is not P2W.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Not sure if this game will go F2P, but if it does I have no worries because some F2P out there are actually better than some P2P. You really can't escape toxic communities because of "internet" if that's really fearing many.
 
Look at WoW for an example.
Toxic community
Expensive cosmetic products for a p2p unlexx name change.
 
So no matter where you go you'll face these obstacles. It all really depends on the management when it comes to mmorpgs. As I said before it wouldn't bother me one bit if does goes f2p and to believe it or not I think future incoming mmorpgs product will follow that style.
 
If it happens to be p2p, then it has to be really good, organize, fixing bugs before release content,  great services and lots of cosmetics that you don't have to pay for unless it's a special deal.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Faster content drops. 
----
			I love the game. Would quit if it went F2P, or basically locked anything behind a cash wall that wasn't covered by my sub.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I love the game. Would quit if it went F2P, or basically locked anything behind a cash wall that wasn't covered by my sub.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I don't get how you can love a game but leave based on how you support it.
 
 
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
 
 
the f2p business model means the developers are required to think about monetization first, and the game design becomes subservient to that.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
All commercial game design is subservient to that. Particularly MMO game design.  Without monetization all we'd get are free games on Steam. No one is making a free, fully-featured MMO and releasing it on Steam just for art's sake. 
 
It just now occurs to me that Wildstar might be in this jam because some of the top-level devs lost track of this point just as you seem to have.  You can make art for art's sake, but if you want to make a living off it, you must figure out how you're going to make it pay.  
 
 
"Good for players" is secondary to "makes enough money to keep the power on."  The worst thing for players is to have the game shut down.  
 
MMO players don't own MMOs and MMOs are not run for the benefit of the players. They are run to provide an entertainment service that people will, hopefully, be willing to pay for, because they find it fun.  I get the feeling from reading some of these posts that some players have the really bizarre idea that these games exist primarily to make them happy and satisfied and provide worth and meaning to their lives, instead of the reality, which is that MMOs exist to make money.
 
I think some players need to get real here.  It's not about "bad/good" for players.  What would be good for MMO players would be to have a perfect, amazingly fun, bug-free, rich, detailed, well-supported game world that gets regular new content updates, all handed to them absolutely free, out of the good of the hearts of the developers and publishers because all they want is to make us happy with their art and their skill (and their kids don't need to eat).  Heck, that wouldn't just be good -- it would be GREAT! I would play the snot out of that game, wouldn't you?!  If the devs and publishers really cared about the "good" of the players, this is what we would have, yes?  That's what would be good for us. Great for us. That's what they would give us if they really loved us!
 
But they don't love us.  This is a business relationship. They provide a service. We either buy it or don't.  If not enough of us buy it, the service won't be offered any more, or the service model will be changed.  It is not and never will be a decision made on the basis of "good for the players."  
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
 
I can assure you the biggest successes are the purest efforts -- focused on the fun, and not the money.  
 
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Really?  The top five selling video games of 2013 were all sequels on their fifth installment or more.  What's "pure" about another GTA, another COD, another FIFA, another Pokemon, another Assassin's Creed? 
 
I think we must have entirely different ideas of what constitutes a "pure effort" in video game development. 
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
 
 
Pure means - make the best game you can - without a thought as to how the money will come in (beyond the original business model - subscription, retail box, etc)
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
This sentence  says, "Make a game without thinking about how to make it pay-- except make sure you've thought about making it pay via subscription." You've contradicted yourself in the same sentence, man.  :huh:  :blink:  :wacko:
----
			
OMG.
 
Just leave it would you. Either:
 
1. The game will never go F2P, so stuff like this is pointless.
 
2. The game will go F2P, but so far in the future from now, that stuff like this is pointless.
 
I mean, look how long Megaservers are taking. You think that suddenly *bam* the game will become F2P overnight? Honestly, give it a rest.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
No, not at all. 
 
As a developer, you set out to make a game. THe monetization is up to the business side.
 
In a F2P scenario, the monetization design drives the game design. So the game is driven by business, not game design.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
"Good for players" is secondary to "makes enough money to keep the power on."  The worst thing for players is to have the game shut down. 
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
All commercial game design is subservient to that. Particularly MMO game design.  Without monetization all we'd get are free games on Steam. No one is making a free, fully-featured MMO and releasing it on Steam just for art's sake. 
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
OMG.
 
Just leave it would you. Either:
 
1. The game will never go F2P, so stuff like this is pointless.
 
2. The game will go F2P, but so far in the future from now, that stuff like this is pointless.
 
I mean, look how long Megaservers are taking. You think that suddenly *bam* the game will become F2P overnight? Honestly, give it a rest.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
OMG.
 
Just leave it would you. Either:
 
1. The game will never go F2P, so stuff like this is pointless.
 
2. The game will go F2P, but so far in the future from now, that stuff like this is pointless.
 
I mean, look how long Megaservers are taking. You think that suddenly *bam* the game will become F2P overnight? Honestly, give it a rest.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
No. The worst thing for player is a crappy gaming experience in the rotting husk of what was once a great game.
 
I prefer a game dies a dignified death before it goes F2P.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
No. When we talk about monetization in f2p MMOs, we're talking about microtransactions - cash shop sales. Subscription-based MMOs (like WildStar, or FFXIV) put their development efforts towards keeping players happy and subscribed, rather than luring players to spend money in a cash shop that is outside of the game.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I agree with you, although hybrid games can be done well. Rift is a good example. STO also has ongoing content in the form of Episodes. And I've given examples of good and bad approaches to cash shops.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I don't get how you can love a game but leave based on it's support system. We haven't even seen the model yet. I used to be all of you guys: "Free To Play is the Devil!!"
 
These aren't Year 200X Asian MMORPGs with shady figureheads. The model has improved greatly. Some months you'll spend money. Some months you won't. In either case you still get to play the game you "love".
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Please, leave the kids to their avant-garde anticapitalism. Apparently multimillion dollar games aren't supposed to be commercial.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Actually, I'm a little worried that the delay in drop 3 (which seems to be fully functional as near as anyone can tell) and lack of communication about it is because they are reworking it to be f2p.  This is NCSoft after all.
 
I really, really hope not and it's just CRB being stupid with their public relations again.  But... NCSoft.  Can never forget that.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
You should be worried because thats exactly what happened to City of Heroes. People seems to forget the real boss here is NCsoft which has a reputation of looking after investors, not gamers. Every MMORPG under NCsoft that started out as P2P has either been liquidated or went F2P.
 
 
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Yes and No. I played City of Heroes for 8 years. They changed their business model to something similar to Rift and ArcheAge actually.
 
They still had monthly subscription up until the game shut down. They also offered F2P with limited ability to do in game things such as market, hero/villain groups, bases, certain new content, new power set's and lot's more. That seems the best way to go IMO. It was working even for City of, the game was still profitable even when NCsoft decided to close up shop. Lot's of speculation was given as to why they shut the game down but we were never given an answer as to why. The new Games coming out (Wildstar was one of them) and AION NA loosing money was the best guess I read.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Last rumor I heard is CoX wasnt generating enough profits for NCsoft's liking. It is decision like these that makes Wildstar's future grim and uncertain.
 
Rift and AA are both F2P models.
----
			
If WIldstar ever went F2P, Madda would quit because Madda has experience with F2P games and will believe that all games that go this route suffer the same fate
 
/sarcasm
 
Wildstar may have to go F2P if they don't start catering to a wider audience as well as softening up from their hardcore appeal. While the entire "hardcore players only" gag was fun as an ongoing joke in the devspeaks and such, it should not be the main focus of any game. Many people don't think that they have the time to devote hours upon hours into a hardcore style game.
 
And if WS (Madda will never say W*.) ever does go F2P, Madda is certain that they'd treat it carefully. Madda doesn't really see the hate for a cash shop if it doesn't offer anything that's considered overpowered (Allods pre "Cata" patch). It could be used to loot boxes, very nice looking furniture, xp buffs, the usual stuff. Just because a game goes F2P doesn't mean that game will die off any time soon. Look at TOR. It's a good game that handles the F2P with a little care. You're limited, yes, but you can still buy everything you need that a sub gets from the cartel / AH (which sometimes should be free).
 
Plus, imagine a game full of hardcore players. The amount of toxicity that would exist in that game in a single day would make Chernobyl look like Candyland.	
----