@ Partisan I value the intent of these revenue features which help the community and developers each direct and support the game. Your idea seems like a very good example, and I would mostly just want to ensure that the community and developers take notice and consider the potential. It maybe hogwash, I said nearly as much in my own post, but it defiantly sounds intriguing to strike this balance with players who want subscription and more development as well as with players who want pay-to-play with no pay-to-win. As far as I'm concerned, I don't see why a variety of styles couldn't each be implemented, enabling even more community supporters to find their niche of exactly how they would prefer to support development.
@Partisan. Personally i would not even touch that, if the Bhvr team sees black templars as something very profitable as in a lot of people want them then they should add them in game at their own accord and sell the packages, feels like i am kickstarting content for a released game, it feels wrong for me though. However as beast mentioned above me, we will have loads of people playing the game hopefully and something like this could be nice for those who want more control, you could have let us say as you said with the number 50,000dollars for black templars, and a normal package for that would be 20 bucks, now if i can buy the package using 20 bucks like a preorder option yet, i get those 20 dollars converted into in game cash, so if the black templars arrive i can use my converted 20 dollars to pay for the race with ingame cash, or if i decided to spend my ingame cash because i found something awesome that i wanted, i can still pay another 20 bucks to get the templars at an latter date. TL;DR The money i spent at that point was directed towards the faction, and i have the ingame cash to buy it once it comes out, but if i decide to spend that money i can do so, and i can buy the faction with another 20 bucks if i so wish when it comes out. Hence either i save the ingame cash until it comes out or buy more ingame cash later on to get stuff and the faction. If this was the case i would accept it and give money towards interested things that i might like and wish to see in game.
Slightly off-conversation at the moment, but I figured I'd post this thought anyway and see what people had to say about it. Before you continue reading I caveat this with that I know people are bound to get upset about whether or not they personally believe a certain MMO is good or not; that's not my intention and that's not the point I'm trying to make. So, here goes: I'm confused as to why people think a subscription model wouldn't work. I think we can all agree that World of Warcraft was the last game that has launched and has stayed successful under the subscription model. I know some people will automatically get defensive at the mere mention of World of Warcraft, but please, bear with me. Off the top of my head here's some of the MMOs which have launched post World of Warcraft: City of Heroes / Villains - Dead. The Matrix Online - Dead. Tabula Rasa - Dead. Vanguard: Saga of Heroes - Dead. Age of Conan - Dead. Warhammer: Age of Reckoning - Dead. Darkfall - Dead. Fallen Earth - Niche. Extremely small player base. Dying. Aion - Extremely small player base. Dying. Dragon Ball Online - Dead. Final Fantasy XIV - Initial incarnation dead. Star Wars: The Old Republic - Also known as the TORtanic. Extremely small player base. Dying. All of the above games have had a variety of different payment methods; some were freemium, some were pay to play, some were free to play with a cash shop, and some transitioned between all of those things before finally dying. The one thing I realized about all of those games? They all sucked (in their own ways). It wasn't the payment method which stopped me playing those games. It was the games themselves. There's been some successes in the MMO market since World of Warcraft too. Not many, but a few. Again, off the top of my head, EverQuest 2, Dungeons and Dragons Online, Lord of The Rings Online, Guild Wars 2 and EVE have all been relative successes (in the shadow of World of Warcraft, of course). Similarly, all of those games have had a variety of different payment methods and some of them have transitioned though payment methods as time has progressed; and again, it's not the payment method which is the reason why I either played or stopped playing those games. You know what EverQuest 2, Dungeons and Dragons Online, Lord of The Rings Online, Guild Wars 2 and EVE all have in common? They don't suck. (Some people will disagree with me here. That's OK. Opinions. My point is about their relative commercial success and not going tits up, which is the important part of this discussion.) What can I conclude from this? It's not the payment method which determines the success or failure of a game. It's whether or not the game is worthwhile playing. I'm reiterating a statement that I made earlier; make a good game and people will come. I firmly believe that a great game which requires a reasonable subscription would still be highly profitable in today's market; I see no reason why it wouldn't. Seven and a half million people (allegedly) still pay and play World of Warcraft. That's a subscription model MMO which has over seven times more people than it's closest competitor, and the reason World of Warcraft has lost players recently has nothing to do with it's subscription model. So help me out here. Why do people believe a subscription model wouldn't work? The way I see it, all a cash shop does it benefit developers who want to practice morally questionable customer milking for worthless content.
Truth to be told i am sick and tired of paying monthly, and there are plenty of other games that do not have a sub to go to, i have a lot of options for games that do not ask for monthly subs, and many who had subs have converted into F2P, there is a reason for that and they have seen boosts far exceeding that which is subscription based, swtor was already dying during subscription but f2p saved it. F2P has been a more viable and more profitable plan in the long run many games see a great boost towards this, but Eternal crusade is B2P and will be gaining money on the game purchase so its not a f2p game in the long run its just as a normal game as it was in the past, you buy your game and there you have it. If one truly believes sub is the way to go so in a later date other games come that are just as awesome but dont ask for money monthly, they will choose to stop paying monthly and with todays eceonomy some are just looking at how to save that 1 dollar extra in anything one might buy whatever the product or grocery it is. And many dont have steady incomes, you might say 15 bucks is nothing but you got to tighten the belt and find ways through it. In the end if it takes The Inquisitional Race to appear 4 months of development and we get it for free when it arrives, i have then paid 60 bucks in only subs, while in cash shop it might be at 20 bucks or 30 bucks. every penny counts for me and i wish to decide when i want to spend money, sub is not viable in the long run, world of warcraft has been declining over the time, its like titanic it just takes time to sink from 12 mil players to 7 million something players. As one would say opinions Vigil, everyone has them but in this situation both sides are not right neither wrong because they both are questionable, except the difference is F2P or B2P is a one time purchase and you have the freedom to choose what you want afterwards and can let people play the game and spend money when they have it or dont have it.
I can see where you're coming from Araghast, but I just don't buy (no pun intended and for example) when people say "I can't afford $10 a month". There are literally junkies who live outside my apartment who receive nothing but government benefits and spend their fortnightly payments nothing but methylamphetamines who could STILL (and do, by court order due to convictions) afford $10 a month. I'd go so far to say that if someone can't afford ~33 cents a day for a piece of luxury entertainment, they probably can't afford to purchase a game at recommended retail price, or the PC to play it on, and perhaps they may need to consider other life priorities other than a form of luxury entertainment. Free to play is naturally going to attract more players. There's no entry fee. You just walk though the gate. The reality is that the game has to support itself somehow and I know I'd rather pay a small subscription than be constantly unsure if Behaviour Interactive plans on bending its community over a barrel though their cash shop.
I understand that support game argument, but B2P with cash shop f2p has shown to be more viable of a business model across many games who switched from subscription, they had an increases in revenue, player base by a large quantity of numbers. Subscription serves to gate people, if you have other ways making one pay monthly making it optional i am all ears, but a clean cut just 15 dollars a month to play the game, i my self wont fly for that and many others will probably not either. That said Miguelo has not given us an subscription option because he needs the playerbase, Bhvr wants to implement the game for PS4 and Xbox one cross platforming with PC all in one server. The amount of costumer base one reaches out with that is gigantic and to boot being f2p once bought with cash shop is a fantastic business model, if one wants a sub you got to make it pleasant to buy your self into.
As i said before, adopting a mandatory montly subscription isn't the right way to go. With a cash shop you can get a much higher income without alienating half your possible playerbase. I would think twice about playnig if i had to play€40-60 for the game AND €15 in monthly fees, since it makes me feel like i'm paying twice for the same thing. In the end, the two most successful games as of now (LoL and DOTA2, since while WoW has more players than DOTA, it has been slowly dying) have a F2P model with a cosmetics shop and are both incredibly profitable. I think the model proposed for EC is a pretty good one: you have a F2P option to attract many players and a "premium" option for those who want the full experience.
I usually don't ask for this but I'm genuinely interested. Source? It's great for the company but it's awful for the consumer. I don't want a glorified iPhone application. Again with focus on profit. What about making a good, fair game that people intrinsically want to play? It's like everyone has Stockholm Syndrome where they're so used to being treated poorly by games companies these days that they have just come to accept it. I don't expect Behaviour Interactive to run off fumes, but nor do I want Eternal Crusade to end up anything like any game which currently has a cash-shop. Yeah, the employees at Behaviour Interactive have to make a living. Absolutely. No question. I'm just concerned that any form of cash shop gives them every opportunity to place the focus on bleeding their customers with content rather than implementing it and making a good game.
One example. http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/05/10/swtors-average-monthly-revenue-has-doubled-since-going-f2p/ Second example. http://massively.joystiq.com/2011/01/06/turbine-lotro-revenue-tripled-since-going-f2p/ Third example. http://elder-geek.com/2011/11/revenues-increase-by-700-after-dc-universe-online-goes-f2p/ Fourth example. http://venturebeat.com/2013/03/20/t...ay-game-than-when-it-required-a-subscription/ Tera this one actually has a subscription based service alongside the f2p switch still running, and they actually gained more subscribers this way and more revenue then being only subscription. Fifth example. http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/27416/ Sixth example. http://massively.joystiq.com/2011/0...-gains-profits-and-players-as-a-free-to-play/ ...... There are more games like this but i cant think of any more for now, i have missed probably a lot more or can not remember them currently. That is the point you just said "company needs to earn money to maintain it self", cash shop has always been optional you pick if you want to buy or not, the question is how Bhvr choose to restrict us, will they be fair or will they be bastards? I want this game to stay alive and i see the potential and it has been proven that the P2P model has been severely lacking, and F2P has brought near death games back to new life and vigour. Sorry to say but P2P subscription is not viable vigil, if you want to maximize revenue then you got to go a certain F2P route, a game is and always will be a business of entertainment and money is in their interest, what we can do is show them how they can gain our money by catering to our interest.
Thanks for the sources, Araghast. Still, you categorically say that pay to play subscription is not viable. Seven and a half million World of Warcraft subscribers disagree with you. I'm not saying that the free-to-play cash shop model isn't profitable either, because we all know it is (some companies have made fortunes from in-game iPhone purchases); all I'm saying is that taking the latter option gives developers every incentive to bleed their customers dry. There's no reason for me to trust or support a developer who's sole intention is making money over implementing content and making a good game. These two concepts should't be mutually exclusive, and who knows, maybe Behaviour Interactive will be the first to get it right; but I can't think of a game with a cash shop that hasn't cocked it up. Greed eventually seeps in and before you know the developers are completely taking the piss and you're looking at $70 monocles and $500 mechs. People mention MOBAs, but the prices in DOTA and LoL reach absurd levels. Miguel used the golden Mech for $500USD as an example, but there's items for sale in DOTA and LoL worth just as much. These are not good examples of how monetization of content should happen, but they are prime examples of how monetization does happen. (Before you ask me to provide a good example of content monetization in a cash shop form, I can't. That's my point. Content patches and expansions are how, in my opinion, content should be added to the game.) Again, thanks for the links Araghast. I'll do some reading.
