123910-b2p-sub-credd-suggestion-page-3

Page 1, Page 2, Page 3, Page 4, Page 5
== Content ==
			
{| class="blockquote"
Previous evidence?! This is just so wrong...sorry...
You seem to be strongly fixated on what you   THINK   f2p/b2p/hybrid models look like!
 
What you list isn't evidence. There are games out there that prove your evidence to be wrong...
What you list is just based on a bad, personal experience. Nothing more, nothing less...
 
 
Aion has had MORE content-updates since it went f2p/hybrid.
Also said content-updates were HUGE.
They didn't just add a single, new zone. They introduced whole new continents.
On top of that they also added different types of pvp-arenas (1v1, 2v2, 10ffa etc), brought back rifting to endgame and introduced single-player and group "pve-arena-challenges" and what not...
 
They also added 3 new classes to the game. All while continueing to improve the already existing ones.
 
All of those updates/expansions came at no additional cost and didn't take longer to arrive in the NA/EU market, compared to when the game was still p2p...
And the optional sub is actually cheaper than the original one (~ €5 less).
 
I already said it....and I'll say it again:  It all depends on the publisher & developer and how they handle their game.
 
 
I get that you don't like f2p/b2p/hybrid models. And that's ok...
But please stop to sell a bad, personal experience as hard evidence.
 
 
There are f2p/b2p/hybrid models out that, that are pure evil (/wave Allods Online).
But there are also those out there, that are defenitely not...
 
You can't just measure everything by the same yardstick...
Because that's essentially like saying: All black people are criminals; all Germans are Nazis; women can't drive, etc...
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I'm one of those people that won't be here if it goes F2P, because I played the original Guild Wars and disliked it.  I'm the dollars that essentially leave if this game goes F2P.  However, the only F2P game I ever heard brought up in comparison to Wildstar is Guild Wars 2.  People don't even compare ESO to it anymore.
 
I'm sure NCSoft's people noticed.  If someone jumps fro GW2 to Wildstar, NCSoft makes no money.  From what I hear, most people who say they're "waiting for Wildstar to go F2P" went to GW2 as well (Mirtha being a good example here).  NCSoft didn't lose any money that way, but won't make any conversely.
 
I never see people saying they'll come here from Tera or ESO if it goes F2P.  Almost every single time, it's Guild Wars 2.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I'm one of those people that won't be here if it goes F2P, because I played the original Guild Wars and disliked it.  I'm the dollars that essentially leave if this game goes F2P.  However, the only F2P game I ever heard brought up in comparison to Wildstar is Guild Wars 2.  People don't even compare ESO to it anymore.
 
I'm sure NCSoft's people noticed.  If someone jumps fro GW2 to Wildstar, NCSoft makes no money.  From what I hear, most people who say they're "waiting for Wildstar to go F2P" went to GW2 as well (Mirtha being a good example here).  NCSoft didn't lose any money that way, but won't make any conversely.
 
I never see people saying they'll come here from Tera or ESO if it goes F2P.  Almost every single time, it's Guild Wars 2.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I'm sure NCSoft's people noticed.  If someone jumps fro GW2 to Wildstar, NCSoft makes no money.  From what I hear, most people who say they're "waiting for Wildstar to go F2P" went to GW2 as well (Mirtha being a good example here).  NCSoft didn't lose any money that way, but won't make any conversely.
 
I never see people saying they'll come here from Tera or ESO if it goes F2P.  Almost every single time, it's Guild Wars 2.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
There are also many people who said "I'll switch from GW2 to ESO if it goes F2P" that are playing ESO now. These are the two games that seem to be compared most, as they're both aesthetically similar fantasy games with action combat and a PVP-centric Elder Game.
 
People who are looking for an Elder Game of raiding aren't going to be satisfied with GW2 or ESO.  People who are looking for traditional party roles aren't going to be satisfied with GW2. People who are looking for a SF game, a cartoony style, or more traditional MMO elements aren't going to be satisfied with GW2 or ESO.
 
There are plenty of people who don't specify what game they're currently playing who say they'd play WildStar if it went B2P/F2P. The population of GW2 players that would play WildStar instead if it went F2P/B2P is probably nowhere near as large as the population in general that would play WildStar if it went F2P/B2P.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Mirta did not went to GW2 she was already there same as me I sometimes hop on GW2 as well to do some things mainly pvp. At the moment I only raid in wildstar and this will not change if wildstar will go free to play.
 
GW2 and Wildstar are two very different games, they have nothing in common, not a single thing besides NCsoft.
We could as well worry about Mario Kart players stop playing that game because of Gran Turismo...
 
WS has a lot more to worry about WoW.
 
 
ps. what MadBlue all said ;)
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Except according to this, there is still development lag between Korea and the NA/EU region.  There has always been.  To the tune of about five months.  In fact, the updates were coming on a rough 5/2 interval, which meant you are getting one more "update", all certainly smaller than what Wildstar and FFXIV:ARR are getting.  And their quarterly drops are listing essentially things like installing the Breakthrough system.  For one quarter.  The game has been out for over six years; it should have dropped quite a bit as far as landmass goes if that is their systems benchmark.
 
Do you think Carbine will be able to match that if allowed to develop through 2020?  I'd say they're on par to break that by next year
 
Color me unimpressed.  If you didn't like what they were developing during the sub days, that's fine.  If you're holding Aion up as the prime example I should hope to see if this game follows the F2P transition, I think you've chosen something that's fairly well hardened my resolve.  We're getting MUCH better batches out of Carbine right now.  I wasn't in Aion to know if the Crucible Challenge drop was markedly better than Empyrean Calling (for those following along, the patches before and after the transition), but if that's the rate we get to look forward to, there will be a LOT of games that look more appealing than Wildstar.
 
None of which answers the direct challenge that there's a better model out there for all involved, since you could install a free option with ads that DOESN'T require that transition, and would allow us to keep the game we have.  Between that and what you've presented, why on Earth am I supposed to find your Aion example more appealing?
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
The time delay has ALWAYS been there and stems from the game having to be translated into 6 different languages (iirc).
That's nothing that has anything to do with the game going f2p....lol
 
I'll just make a quick list of what was added in the last patch that I have played (4.0):
 
2 new classes (Bard and Gunner)
7 new skills for each of the old classes
3 new, BIG, contestant overland zones
11 new dungeons (ranging from single player to 12-man instances)
8 of which are always accessible
3 of which are dependant on which faction owns the fort
1 new Battleground
introduction on "base battles" in the new overland zones (capture points, that you need to take to get access to daily quests)
level cap increase to lvl 65 (and with that new PvP gear)
 
That's not even touching all the housing, crafting and QoL changes that came with that patch...
 
I wouldn't call that "unimpressive" tbh...
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I think we've already gone over earlier in this discussion what I ascribe value to, and it's fairly broad.  It roughly translates to 2 new classes, 3 new overland zones (which Wildstar is already approaching), 11 dungeons (3 of which you don't always have access to, but 11 dungeons), 1 new BG, some kind of RVR, and a base level jump.
 
In a year and a half (since 4.0 came out in NA, if you count it from development, it's been two years).  And this is all expansion work, the base game has been out since 2009.  Their Drop 3s are in the past.  And in a role locked game (so there are two reliable tanks and two reliable healers, and you can maybe get away with some backup from the others).  How impressed should I be?  In a year and a half, WoW would give us more than that, and I don't even consider their expansion years to be more than passable.
 
It might be I'm harder to impress.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
 
Errrm.....The list I made is JUST patch 4.0........That's just one patch...
Aion is currently on patch 4.7 and approaching 5.0 in Korea. There have been lots of content addition to the game since 4.0...
 
Edit:
 
For example 4.7 added:
 
Another 3, big, overland zones
3 new instances (1 solo instance and 2 "battlefields" [not battlegrounds])
Invasions (á la Rift)
 
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I stand corrected.  If that is one quarterly patch, that would be impressive, especially for a free release for an F2P game.
 
4.0 is an expansion pack, so maybe it's not so impressive, but three zones, a solo dungeon, and those would be very good for a free content patch.
 
I don't withdraw my F2P argument, however, I withdraw the assertion that all F2P released content is insubstantial if you pay nothing for those patches and that is considered to be the standard volume for a patch.  Is that the standard volume?  Aion's last patch was entirely built around the Breakthrough mechanic, which seems substantially less impressive.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Not quaterly...more like 4-6 month-ish.
Once a year you have an expansion, like 4.0, and then some more content updates in between.
 
4.5 added a 3rd new class (Some type of mecha-warrior hybrid) and some more pvp related additions.
 
That patch with the breakthrough-combat changes is just an "in-betweener" not a real content update. The next, HUGE content update is coming later this summer probably and looks to be the size of 4.0...
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Hmmm.  Well, I'll maintain my detraction despite that, then.  That may not be as good as any sub game I have played, but it's probably the best non-sub development rate I've heard of as far as non-monetizing content.  They probably deserve less of my direct ire.
 
Unless subscribers need to purchase dungeon keys or access to this content above and beyond their rate.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Well...the Korean updates are quaterly...
For NA/EU it always depends on how much there is to translate, so the patches can have a delay of 1-2 months.
But it's always been like that, even in p2p-times...
 
No need to purchase dungeon keys. Here in EU, all you need to buy is the gold-pack-sub. Then you have the regular lockout timers.
Free players have 2-4 times longer lockouts, but also access to all the content.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I have no problem with free players having to buy access to content as long as subscribers have limitless access.  I think I've covered that in here.  Personal accountability.
 
I'd hate to have lockout timers on a game I already dropped my subscription to cover the cost of development on.
----
			
I'd be happy if they just dropped the box price more. Keep it at $19.99 the way it was just before Drop 4 dropped. Maybe put it on sale for $10 now and again. But keep the sub fee.
 
Personally, I played both TSW and LOTRo before and after their B2P and F2P conversions.
 
TSW didn't ever really bother me. I spend far too many points, and the rare cash purchase, on cosmetics from the cash shop. There's no in game stuff blocking me (but I do have a lifetime sub, so I wouldn't really notice it). The issue pack stuff is blocked if you haven't bought that issue, and you get  a little icon when you get a quest for something you haven't bought that lets you know you need to buy that issue. There's no massive ads in your face or shoving the store at you every time you turn around. Population wise, there is a tiny tiny population there now compared to launch, or even a year ago. There's also very little content being put out, and things that were promised (like a new dungeon, new raid and lair overhaul) have been put off with no timetable of if they may ever happen. We do get lots of new costumes and more complex dances to learn, though... (Thriller anyone?)
 
In Lotro - by the time I stopped playing, there was a GO TO THE STORE NOW sign flashing in my face every time anything happened - I earned points in a dungeon STORE! I finished a quest. STORE! I was PVPing STORE! And I was still sub'd! So yea, that was super annoying (and a huge reason I stopped playing. That + no more raids was more than I could handle)
 
A sub model change would not make me insta-quit,but I don't really think it's quite the savior some believe it is. Small numbers of people spend a lot on the game, and I believe those numbers are even more catered to than people think "raiders" are now. (I use that as an example I see on the forums. I don't think any one is particularly catered to.)
 
I prefer whatever model encourages the devs to continue developing new, interesting and innovative content for players to experience because I think players rarely know what it is we would really like to see next. We are only good at knowing what we have liked and what we don't like (once we experience it). I think Carbine has shown they are very willing to be flexible about improving things we don't like, and they've put out some pretty cool and innovative stuff as well (such as the way their telegraph system works - one of my favorite parts of the game).	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I'd be happy if they just dropped the box price more. Keep it at $19.99 the way it was just before Drop 4 dropped. Maybe put it on sale for $10 now and again. But keep the sub fee.
 
Personally, I played both TSW and LOTRo before and after their B2P and F2P conversions.
 
TSW didn't ever really bother me. I spend far too many points, and the rare cash purchase, on cosmetics from the cash shop. There's no in game stuff blocking me (but I do have a lifetime sub, so I wouldn't really notice it). The issue pack stuff is blocked if you haven't bought that issue, and you get  a little icon when you get a quest for something you haven't bought that lets you know you need to buy that issue. There's no massive ads in your face or shoving the store at you every time you turn around. Population wise, there is a tiny tiny population there now compared to launch, or even a year ago. There's also very little content being put out, and things that were promised (like a new dungeon, new raid and lair overhaul) have been put off with no timetable of if they may ever happen. We do get lots of new costumes and more complex dances to learn, though... (Thriller anyone?)
 
In Lotro - by the time I stopped playing, there was a GO TO THE STORE NOW sign flashing in my face every time anything happened - I earned points in a dungeon STORE! I finished a quest. STORE! I was PVPing STORE! And I was still sub'd! So yea, that was super annoying (and a huge reason I stopped playing. That + no more raids was more than I could handle)
 
A sub model change would not make me insta-quit,but I don't really think it's quite the savior some believe it is. Small numbers of people spend a lot on the game, and I believe those numbers are even more catered to than people think "raiders" are now. (I use that as an example I see on the forums. I don't think any one is particularly catered to.)
 
I prefer whatever model encourages the devs to continue developing new, interesting and innovative content for players to experience because I think players rarely know what it is we would really like to see next. We are only good at knowing what we have liked and what we don't like (once we experience it). I think Carbine has shown they are very willing to be flexible about improving things we don't like, and they've put out some pretty cool and innovative stuff as well (such as the way their telegraph system works - one of my favorite parts of the game).
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I'm sure NCSoft's people noticed.  If someone jumps fro GW2 to Wildstar, NCSoft makes no money.  From what I hear, most people who say they're "waiting for Wildstar to go F2P" went to GW2 as well (Mirtha being a good example here).  NCSoft didn't lose any money that way, but won't make any conversely.
----
			Imho if Carbine continues the sub model, they must remove completely the box cost. In a game that has a very low population and suffers from it and in a market that almost every game is F2P/B2P/Hybrid anymore, its way too much asking for box price + sub. Maybe this can be ok for games like WoW or FFXIV, but certainly not for WS.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
From Mirta
 
as you know, I have no sub, so I can't reply. If anyone wants to send a message to Vic for me, then tell him that I'm able to pay for multiple MMOs at once. At the moment I'm throwing money in both Rift and Guild Wars 2. So I'm paying Uncle Ben and Tommy. If Wildstar was F2P perhaps I would be throwing my money at Guild Wars 2 and Wildstar. Meaning that I would be investing in Ben and Ben. There's competition out there and people can choose Tera, Rift, or ESO, or any other MMO that's not owned by Ncsoft. It's in their best interest that MMO hoppers stay within Ncsoft bounds.
----
			
Well I personally know no one who would leave if it went free to play except a few that are vocal here on the forums, i do know 7 people that will come back to wildstar if it will go free to play.
Does that answer your question
 
For me personally when i'm done with the raid or bored with that i might cancel my sub as well, what other reason is there to stay here if you have done the content?
Your friends of course but i just drag them to another game :P	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Well I personally know no one who would leave if it went free to play except a few that are vocal here on the forums, i do know 7 people that will come back to wildstar if it will go free to play.
Does that answer your question
 
For me personally when i'm done with the raid or bored with that i might cancel my sub as well, what other reason is there to stay here if you have done the content?
Your friends of course but i just drag them to another game :P
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
This is everything wrong with the players in this genre right now.
 
Was the cost really the barrier to this people supposedly quitting? Are they likely to play a game they don't like even if its free?
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Well I personally know no one who would leave if it went free to play except a few that are vocal here on the forums, i do know 7 people that will come back to wildstar if it will go free to play.
Does that answer your question
 
For me personally when i'm done with the raid or bored with that i might cancel my sub as well, what other reason is there to stay here if you have done the content?
Your friends of course but i just drag them to another game :P
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
This is everything wrong with the players in this genre right now.
 
Was the cost really the barrier to this people supposedly quitting? Are they likely to play a game they don't like even if its free?
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I personally know a LOT of people in my guild who outright stated they'd leave if it went F2P.  And unlike your 7 people, all mine are definitely contributing on some level to the game's development (mostly via their own subscriptions).  So your 7 people will have to pay more than 15 dollars a month for each of mine, just ten right off the top of my head and without asking again.
 
That's NCSoft's calculation, because even having more people play that don't pay more overall isn't worth it to them.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Well I personally know no one who would leave if it went free to play except a few that are vocal here on the forums, i do know 7 people that will come back to wildstar if it will go free to play.
Does that answer your question
 
For me personally when i'm done with the raid or bored with that i might cancel my sub as well, what other reason is there to stay here if you have done the content?
Your friends of course but i just drag them to another game :P
----
			
another plus side is that all the things i put into wildstar now will still be accessible if it went free to play and if decide to cancel my sub, then at least it doesn't feel like a waste of money ;)
Now every 15 euro is another 15 euro and it does add up in terms of investment, sure we are getting things back for that but we loose all of that the moment we stop paying	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I will agree with Anvh.
 
Lethal you don't get the point. We are not 10 years before, when ppl was committed only in 1 mmo. We all done that in the past, but in the current market most ppl don't do it anymore. I love WS and i m playing it casually. I also like to play from time to time WoW, Rift, TERA, SWTOR, FFXIV, GW2 and ESO and so are many of my friends. Excluding WoW and FFXIV we can play when we want as long as we want any of the other mmo's. This is something you cant do in WS. Its not that game is that bad that doesn't justifies a sub. Its that ppl like to play more than one mmo at a time and a B2P model offers that.
 
I know that a conversion to B2P doesn't make a game better, but on the other hand brings a ton more players. I was there when Rift, SWTOR, TERA etc mmo's were ghost towns and now most of them are thriving. Even Rift which has the lowest pop, is WAY more populated than WildStar. And you know something? Its better to play a game casually with your friends, even if its not your or their main mmo, than play in a ghost town and i m sorry to say that WS in non peak hours is a ghost town.
 
I m not suggesting F2P. I m suggesting let ppl who own the game (and i have MANY friends who own it and will play again) login and play. Let the sub + credd as an option with extra features and let a huge influx of ppl help the game and the community. Btw if ppl doesn't come or return with a B2P+Sub+CREDD system, then there isn't even the slightest possibility doing it as it remains a sub game.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Well the cost is the reason they went away for 100% since they felt they didn't play the content as much to warrant the sub.
I'm sure they would still log on almost every day just to check how things are going and if i would ask them outside the game to do a dungeon i'm sure they would hop on to play since those are the part most of them liked.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
So, they don't want to pay for content they like, but will come back if it was free. And there was plenty of content that they never completed.
 
How can developers ever satisfy that customer?
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I Lethal you don't get the point. We are not 10 years before, when ppl was committed only in 1 mmo. We all done that in the past, but in the current market most ppl don't do it anymore. I love WS and i m playing it casually. I also like to play from time to time WoW, Rift, TERA, SWTOR, FFXIV, GW2 and ESO and so are many of my friends. Excluding WoW and FFXIV we can play when we want as long as we want any of the other mmo's. This is something you cant do in WS. Its not that game is that bad that doesn't justifies a sub. Its that ppl like to play more than one mmo at a time and a B2P model offers that.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
More like, how can *this* developer satisfy that customer? A bunch of others already have.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Nope, it's a player problem, not a game problem.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
It's so amusing to see someone with such an indefensible position still manage to be so condescending.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
If any of your last 3 posts had *any* substance or content whatsoever, you might have a point. But since they didn't.
 
I've more than demonstrated my position: players have become so entitled that even products or services they like -- chock full of content that they haven'd done -- should be free of charge.
 
We will stop having games at all unless players change their attitude.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Free to play did not emerge from a vacuum, it was a conscious decision, an economic zeitgeist propogated by DEVELOPERS AND PRODUCERS, not some bizarro world grass roots movement from the playerbase up. Don't blame the marketplace for giving people more options with creative monetization. Companies are competing for attention and giving players more options than ever before, not the other way around.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I don't mean to inject myself into your debate (but I am doing it, sorry for that). I just don't really buy this. I'm not going to argue that F2P is always bad or anything, but I'm pretty sure its rise was at least to a significant degree the result of mobile gaming and crap developers/publishers who wanted to make money faster. The number of generic/low quality F2P games vs. unique/high quality titles is pretty staggering.
 
Again, I'm not trying to paint it as bad. I just don't agree that "creative monetization" is quite accurate.... unless you want to divest that of all ethical connotation. :P
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Creative and devious are not mutually exclusive.
 
As my edit to the post above indicates, there are prudent and obviously predatory ways to approach the model. Throwing it all under the bus on principal alone is willful ignorance.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Creative and devious are not mutually exclusive.
 
As my edit to the post above indicates, there are prudent and obviously predatory ways to approach the model. Throwing it all under the bus on principal alone is willful ignorance.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
The issue is that prudence almost never takes precedence with that shift in monetization.  When you have no steady cash flow and rely on purchases to generate revenue, you invariably change the mindset of the studio in question from "develop pertinent content" to "develop money-making content."  Argue against that all you want, but that's what happens.  The progression of work stops being about game experience and shifts into being about how much money will be made with every new item put in the store.
 
Like it or not, that's how it works.  And I think a lot of people fail to argue this point:  Carbine is focused on improving the core game right now, and their track record indicates they will continue that focus.  Shifting into F2P/B2P would change that focus to be more about a player's cash flow than a player's experience.
----
			
There is no issue with content as long as it is quality content. To reverse your argument, if the chance to make money on a per-purchase basis wasn't so strong, there would not be incentivie for developers to make MORE quality content than is necessary.
 
IE, skins in MOBAs. If there was a sub model, where people were completely okay paying the sub just to play, what incentive does the developer have to make MORE quality content than the absolute minimum? Instead, we get a host of really quality character skins, which enable the developer to give the core experience away, and encourage them to make more, better content. Suddenly they have competition in their market from another game, so they ramp that up even more.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
This was echoed by no less than Dave Georgsson earlier this week on the MOG Nation Podcast.
 
Subscription is the best revenue model for the players and developers. It lets developers focus on game design and not monetization design.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
There is no issue with content as long as it is quality content. To reverse your argument, if the chance to make money on a per-purchase basis wasn't so strong, there would not be incentivie for developers to make MORE quality content than is necessary.
 
IE, skins in MOBAs. If there was a sub model, where people were completely okay paying the sub just to play, what incentive does the developer have to make MORE quality content than the absolute minimum? Instead, we get a host of really quality character skins, which enable the developer to give the core experience away, and encourage them to make more, better content. Suddenly they have competition in their market from another game, so they ramp that up even more.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
There is no issue with content as long as it is quality content. To reverse your argument, if the chance to make money on a per-purchase basis wasn't so strong, there would not be incentivie for developers to make MORE quality content than is necessary.
 
IE, skins in MOBAs. If there was a sub model, where people were completely okay paying the sub just to play, what incentive does the developer have to make MORE quality content than the absolute minimum? Instead, we get a host of really quality character skins, which enable the developer to give the core experience away, and encourage them to make more, better content. Suddenly they have competition in their market from another game, so they ramp that up even more.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
 
The reason a subscription game has a HUGE incentive to do more than the minimum is because they aren't funded by a portion of their playerbase who has money and will buy things, they are rewarded by how many people play the game.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
There is no issue with content as long as it is quality content. To reverse your argument, if the chance to make money on a per-purchase basis wasn't so strong, there would not be incentivie for developers to make MORE quality content than is necessary.
 
IE, skins in MOBAs. If there was a sub model, where people were completely okay paying the sub just to play, what incentive does the developer have to make MORE quality content than the absolute minimum? Instead, we get a host of really quality character skins, which enable the developer to give the core experience away, and encourage them to make more, better content. Suddenly they have competition in their market from another game, so they ramp that up even more.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Yes, but, there's your issue. In a world where there's literally dozens of options, only very few products can get away with the subscription model. When that occurs the subscriber tends to take ownership of that game as their identity. Very few will pay a sub fee for two games at once, and will at every opportunity seek to justify their sunken costs.
 
Developers discovered that in a market where consumers tend to buy one cow and milk it exclusively, they could instead sell their own milk piecemeal, in different flavors, to the same people, instead of trying to convince them to get a whole new cow.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I really like sub games, because i dont get these childish players, that like to troll or wipe groups etc...
Sub brings a friendly playerbase, B2P and F2P doesnt.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I've brought up ads before, and will continue to do so, because they're simply superior to F2P/B2P in almost every way.  Let's say you don't want to pay to play Wildstar, but won't play enough to get a CREDD.  Install an option where they run a pair of unblockable ad banners on your screen, show 30 second or so videos during loading screens, put some cycling icons on the menus, etc.  You could do that through Google Ads; they'll do that for a website and you could essentially tune and install it into the game afterwards.  Now, one player seeing one ad isn't going to pay for anything.  But with the banners cycling every minute or two, the ads playing on every loading screen, and with the menu ads cycling per every five minutes, you could generate some pretty decent revenue.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Ads?! Please keep that junk out of the games for ever! Better to pay a sub, B2P, F2P, P2W, TLA TLA TLA TLA than ever ever ever use that
junk in game, just look at all that junk in mobile games (one of main reason I'll never play one).
 
Closing down a game is even more preferable than that.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Care to expand on why you believe that?  I did a pretty thorough synopsis on why they're a good idea.  Not that you'd have to worry about them if you're subscribed or CREDD-using anyway.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Just like any other payment models will push game design towards generating more money (ad display), ads will to the same, putting content behind them,
finding a way even in sub parts (product placement anyone?), and they will get more intrusive with time -- just look at the mobile market,
even bought games have way of pushing them in again until you pay more and more and more, becoming in the end miscrotransaction hell.
 
Monetization will drive game design for sure regardless of the model including P2P.
----
			
Please Vic, go play Guild wars 2 for a month or so and tell us what you think of their B2P model, sadly they don't have living story anymore so you can not experience new content every 2 weeks because they are working on the expansion.
If you have played games with a good business model then you might read your own comments in a different light because so far it's mostly doom and destruction.
“Yes, a Jedi’s strength flows from the Force. But beware of the dark side. Anger, fear, aggression; the dark side of the Force are they. Easily they flow, quick to join you in a fight. If once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny, consume you it will, as it did Obi-Wan’s apprentice.”
 
To get to the point, regardless the model if people don't like the game(play) then people won't play it even if you give them money and you need to keep your player base happy to keep them playing.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
None of that has to be true. Content won't be hidden. Extra resources won't go into "displaying" them.
 
THIS is how the future of ads in video games should be done. I don't mind them at all this way.
 
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14532-Galactic-Guide-Accelerated-Mass-Design
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
None of that has to be true. Content won't be hidden. Extra resources won't go into "displaying" them.
 
THIS is how the future of ads in video games should be done. I don't mind them at all this way.
 
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14532-Galactic-Guide-Accelerated-Mass-Design
----
			The moral of the story is that the only way to truly win is have a game subsidized by the federal government, that way everyone gets to play for free, and the government will leave its content creators alone as long as there's some kick backs. The best part? Fund it through tax hikes on obese people.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Just like any other payment models will push game design towards generating more money (ad display), ads will to the same, putting content behind them,
finding a way even in sub parts (product placement anyone?), and they will get more intrusive with time -- just look at the mobile market,
even bought games have way of pushing them in again until you pay more and more and more, becoming in the end miscrotransaction hell.
 
Monetization will drive game design for sure regardless of the model including P2P.
 
And in the end, with how ad revenue works, if the get that many people looking at the ads (playing),
they'll get 100x more if they just use "standard" B2P or F2P models.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
or like this
----
			I also strongly dislike the idea of ads in games. Gaming is my escape from that crap, and I'd prefer to keep it that way!	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I also strongly dislike the idea of ads in games. Gaming is my escape from that crap, and I'd prefer to keep it that way!
----
			I should also mention that, even as a subscriber, I wouldn't mind access to that /pizza idea they had in EQ.  That was absolutely awesome!	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I also strongly dislike the idea of ads in games. Gaming is my escape from that crap, and I'd prefer to keep it that way!
----
			
(sorry for short-ish answers but this forum editor is major PITA, at least with FF)
 
{| class="blockquote"
You're arguing something that doesn't exist (that subs will always absolutely see ads, which hasn't been how Hulu or Pandora have worked out), based on how successful they might be?  By that notion, we would be able to take as read that all F2P will eventually turn into a P2W shop with a crap game in front of it, and even I'm not prepared to go that far.  If we're looking at F2P versus ads, ads are by definition self-contained where F2P becomes a monetary drag on the entire population.  In the mobile market, they exist because the games are, by definition, not going to sell enough items.  But you're looking at a profitable model whereby you can generate plenty of ads.
 
I mean, I refuse to play a F2P game; it's predatory and its target is me even though I'm a paying player.  An ad game, that targets the free player who is not paying, and leaves the game experience intact.  And that, in and of itself, would be an asset.  It's a free option in a CREDD/subscription game.  Maybe they won't gain as many players, but if people are really serious about wanting to play for free and being ready to take any option, that's a far better option than asking other players to pay the cost.  And they won't lose people already paying if they don't *cupcake* them off, like bleeding the ads into their part of the game.
 
So I don't find your concerns to have an awful lot of merit.  You're asking me to consider a logically worse payment model, especially for me, based an idea not in evidence.  Ad-free subscription services now are that, ad-free.  They know they can monetize by saving us the inconvenience.
----
			
We could just go the TOR route and make F2P so incredibly gimped and expensive that the only sensible thing to do is subscribe.  Seems to have worked for them, love it or hate it.
 
Note:  I am not seriously suggesting any form of F2P.  I will never do that.  I am, in fact, dishing on TOR's horrible F2P system.  $10 for a skill bar, EA?  Really?	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Hey, keep paying your sub or eating a CREDD, and you wouldn't have to see them.  It's only for the people who aren't paying to play or playing to pay.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Somethings gotta give. Players have to pay somehow for the entertainment they're being given.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
(sorry for short-ish answers but this forum editor is major PITA, at least with FF)
 
 
 
Sadly, "pure" F2P in the end do get power creep -- P2W is too broad to define but power creep trough store is there and I too stay away from them.
 
But in the same sense, why then do not use F2P (or B2P) for the players that want it and leave sub for others, ads do not bring anything except known pushy ad companies while using mentioned mode gets best from both worlds.
SWTOR, TSW, LOTRO all have that and it works -- IMHO TSW's model is best of them, pay sub and get all or buy just what you want.
 
 
 
Fan sites do not dictate game direction and content while advertizing in game will.
 
 
F2P or B2P is far better than empty or closed game tho.
 
Ads for in game stuf I hate just a little less than real ones and awoid games like that too (looking at you SWTOR and LOTRO).
 
Also, as I said before, ad revenue require eyeballs, lots of them so to have that number of views require that game already has tons of active players (like 1m+)...
----
			
I actually think that if hasn't doubled the q4 report by the end of 2015, then they should most definitely switch to a B2P/Sub model. However, if they are say...at 9-12 million by mid to end of this year, then stay a sub/credd model, but, you know what it's easier this way.
 
Wildstar Goes B2P IF:
Q1 2015: $5.5 Million
Q2 2015: $6 Million
Q3 2015: $5.9-6.1 Million
Q4 2015: $5.9-6.2 Million
 
If the Report is ANYTHING Like this, if it's a little better, little worse, I don't care, anywhere in that general numbers, the game HAS to transition.
 
Wildstar stays Sub/Credd IF:
Q1 2015: $6.0-7.0 Million
Q2 2015 $6.8-7.9 Million
Q3 2015: $7.5-8.5 Million
Q4 2015: $ 8.3-10.00 Million
    If Wildstar manages to increase at a very good level like this or anything similar to it, than stay a sub model because that means the game is increasing in players.
 
 
(this is a repost of what I posted on the concerns for Wildstar post, but it counts sense I think it is reasonable.)	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
You're missing the entire point. F2P isn't just for the players that want it, F2P and B2P targets the players that don't, people willing to pay money for the game anyway. Players who want to pay for free are not confined in a F2P system, they need paying players to pay more. That doesn't exist in a vacuum.
----
			I have been subbed since launch, but i havnt played in months. I cant bring myself to drop the subscription out of stubbornness to see this game succeed. But honestly i have come to welcome the idea of free to play, i just want more people into this game, and i think that the IP of wildstar with all its customisation systems, housing etc: Perfectly lend itself to a clever cash shop.I dont want to be nickle and dimed, but if there was a sub option that gave me everything i got now, with other players being able to play for free with conditions attached to that.Then i think i would enjoy the game more.Also, wildstar is one of the few games i would actually bother buying cosmetic items with real money for. Which is saying alot if you now me!	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I actually think that if hasn't doubled the q4 report by the end of 2015, then they should most definitely switch to a B2P/Sub model. However, if they are say...at 9-12 million by mid to end of this year, then stay a sub/credd model, but, you know what it's easier this way.
 
Wildstar Goes B2P IF:
Q1 2015: $5.5 Million
Q2 2015: $6 Million
Q3 2015: $5.9-6.1 Million
Q4 2015: $5.9-6.2 Million
 
If the Report is ANYTHING Like this, if it's a little better, little worse, I don't care, anywhere in that general numbers, the game HAS to transition.
 
Wildstar stays Sub/Credd IF:
Q1 2015: $6.0-7.0 Million
Q2 2015 $6.8-7.9 Million
Q3 2015: $7.5-8.5 Million
Q4 2015: $ 8.3-10.00 Million
    If Wildstar manages to increase at a very good level like this or anything similar to it, than stay a sub model because that means the game is increasing in players.
 
 
(this is a repost of what I posted on the concerns for Wildstar post, but it counts sense I think it is reasonable.)
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
This is everything wrong with the players in this genre right now.
 
Was the cost really the barrier to this people supposedly quitting? Are they likely to play a game they don't like even if its free?
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Well, the devs promised new monthly content. In fact, they used new monthly content as a justification for paying a monthly subscription fee. Then they dropped back to a quarterly release. So, it's not so much the price barrier as it is the company taking away the main thing they said would make the game worth paying a subscription for - and still charging a subscription fee. It's not surprising that players, who took the devs at their word, would feel they weren't getting their money's worth.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Well, the devs promised new monthly content. In fact, they used new monthly content as a justification for paying a monthly subscription fee. Then they dropped back to a quarterly release. So, it's not so much the price barrier as it is the company taking away the main thing they said would make the game worth paying a subscription for - and still charging a subscription fee. It's not surprising that players, who took the devs at their word, would feel they weren't getting their money's worth.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
And a lot has changed since launch. You'd be one seriously vindictive person if, after all of these admissions of mistakes and change in development focus, you still wanted the devs to give what they recognized couldn't be (or wasn't) delivered.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
People aren't expecting the devs to deliver what they admitted they couldn't deliver. They're wondering why they're still charging a monthly fee for it.
----
			
This is NCSoft we're talking about, be *cupcake*ing real.
Wildstar is completely EU/US the only reason lineage 1/2 and any others are still around is because china and korea are still balls deep in that shit.
Wildstar won't go F2P or B2P, NCSoft would cut its losses and ditch the whole shitbang, the amount of money and time and effort put into Wildstar cannot be made back with either.
 
P2P 5ever pls	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
To ensure they can keep delivering and focus on game content, not monetization content.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
That isn't the point. Look, if the devs hadn't justified the monthly subscription fee with:
people wouldn't have had a problem with Carbine having to adjust their schedule. But you can't make a promise like that and then adjust your release schedule to quarterly and not expect many people to balk at the idea of paying a sub for the game.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
That isn't the point. Look, if the devs hadn't justified the monthly subscription fee with:
people wouldn't have had a problem with Carbine having to adjust their schedule. But you can't make a promise like that and then adjust your release schedule to quarterly and not expect many people to balk at the idea of paying a sub for the game.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
It is exactly the point.
A subscription fee is a steady, guaranteed income for the Developer.
They know exactly what is comming in, and the predictions for what is going to come in the next months are a lot easier then dealing with the F2P model.
 
When your revenue comes from what is being sold in your cash shop, then this is what your main focus is going to be, because you want to ensure whatever revenue you have coming from there remains stable, or increases.
Anything that has to be developed that does not directly improve this revenue is pushed on the backburner, because no sane manager is going to risk his revenue flow with something.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Dear Olivar, like it or not, monthly content updates was the No1 reason for Carbine to show ppl they are not the same with other mmo's and under in what circumstances a sub has a point. They criticized other mmo's by saying its not fair (or something like that) paying a monthly sub and not getting monthly content. This was Carbine's and Devs moto.
So what they MUST do, is admit to the ppl that both monthly content updates and ofc sub are out of the question, because according to them sub was justified ONLY if you pay monthly and receive monthly content.
They didn't promise it as something in the future. They said they had content to release for the next 1-1.5 year post launch, in order to justify the sub. This is the truth and if Carbine wants to be fair, sub must go away.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
The sub fees for these games has *always* been about the service, of which the content updates are only a part of. Every game.
 
So adjusting the frequency is irrelevant - the subscription fee is for the service and what comes with it, including any content updates. But you'd be hard pressed to find that defined in any terms of service. Because it shouldn't be.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
So it would be okay to pay them 15 euro quarterly instead of monthly?
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Under no condition is Carbine required to drop the subscription fee for changing their delivery rate.
There's not a single contract signed between them and you stating they have to deliver every month.
This was an idealistic promise at best, which was already being questioned during beta if that was even possible, and sceptically accepted by a few.
----
			
Yeah in the US maybe....
That won't float anywhere else	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
When your revenue comes from what is being sold in your cash shop, then this is what your main focus is going to be, because you want to ensure whatever revenue you have coming from there remains stable, or increases.
Anything that has to be developed that does not directly improve this revenue is pushed on the backburner, because no sane manager is going to risk his revenue flow with something.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I'd argue that player retention rate is even bigger concern in F/B2P game than P2P as if one do not enjoy playing the game there is 0% chance to buy something from it.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I find WS is providing more than enough for me to feel plenty justified in paying them $15/mo, both in terms of content now and in terms of content in the future.
----
			It really doesn't feel that way at all. Felt like a typical MMO launch after which devs continued to respond to player feedback.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
@Nesh: Calling WS as it is now a "paid alpha" is disingenuous at best. WS is in a very good position at the moment in terms of game design, with the exception of PvP (and that's getting some much-needed love in the next two drops).
----
			When are you playing? o.0 I don't ever feel like I'm alone in a map nowadays - even when leveling alts.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
When are you playing? o.0 I don't ever feel like I'm alone in a map nowadays - even when leveling alts.
----
			
I actually got in a queue for blade and soul in japan last week...
 
But yeah for the low level zones, there is no reason to go back and actually interact with lower level players...
Maybe they should introduce drops that you need for crafting and such that you can only earn there or give you glory points at least for dungeons.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I actually got in a queue for blade and soul in japan last week...
 
But yeah for the low level zones, there is no reason to go back and actually interact with lower level players...
Maybe they should introduce drops that you need for crafting and such that you can only earn there or give you glory points at least for dungeons.
----
			Helping guildies is a different discussion. 	
----
			
We are getting a Nexus report before Drop 5, I've a bad feeling about this one.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Helping guildies is a different discussion. 
----
			
Thanks for telling?
Not sure how that helps someone who is saying he doesn't see many players in the level 20 zones, but great that you do.
 
 
As for contracts what kind of quests do they give out?
Sounds more like it's a 2 minute thing that people quickly do and that you need to be level 50 for it.	
----