I was given all expansions as a early Christmas gift
Subscription model for better multiplayer experience... Would you pay for it ?
- Thread starter Jim Panse
- Start date
I was given all expansions as a early Christmas gift
You mean the one most early backers and everyone up to the end of Premium Beta already secured? Already bought it.
As for the OP. Why does everyone assume that a paid server model is in any shape or form better then the current p2p system? For that matter, why do you assume that it's the server that is at fault, and not someone's ISP? You can sub for a game and still have terrible latency and you can have f2p games that have rock solid connections. Paying for a game does not magically alter your network conditions.
DDO is the same experience whether I'm a gold member or not. Firefall is exactly the same whether I paid for 90 days of premium status or not. Just because I'm a paying customer, they won't get better servers and lines.
Also someone already mentioned it, but I leave it here as well. Guild Wars 2 manages just fine with one time purchase and store purchases, and that game has a LOT of players. So why couldn't Elite.
1) no problem with monthly fee IF there would be substantial multiplayer component fleshed out. Living universe for players to interact with.
2) so far this is single-player game with rudimentary multi, so sub will be a killer.
3) Yes there is this problem of those not interested in multiplayer experience, and just stick with space trucking (seems to be quite a few here) ... It seems there are user tiers already, why just not acknowldge it as fact - especially that space truck sim is almost done, and multi seems to be not very developed. Different strokes for different folks. For me without substantial MP-interaction, it is already getting boring. If multiplayer-related stuff require more development time - well sub is way to support that. Just make it an option to general F2P model, like say , SOE "all access" program.
2) so far this is single-player game with rudimentary multi, so sub will be a killer.
3) Yes there is this problem of those not interested in multiplayer experience, and just stick with space trucking (seems to be quite a few here) ... It seems there are user tiers already, why just not acknowldge it as fact - especially that space truck sim is almost done, and multi seems to be not very developed. Different strokes for different folks. For me without substantial MP-interaction, it is already getting boring. If multiplayer-related stuff require more development time - well sub is way to support that. Just make it an option to general F2P model, like say , SOE "all access" program.
there is a massive difference between a one off payment for an expansion that is not required to play the existing game and a monthly fee to be able to play the game at all. if some one wants to buy an expansion it can wait for a Christmas/birthday present or even be saved up for with spare change over a period of months or years, if there was an additional charge for online play that wouldn't be the case as you couldn't play unless you had the money to pay.
I would if it would pay for better network infrastructure and the removal of P2P. Gaming, model rocketry and amateur astronomy are my hobbies, so I personally wouldn't mind. Then again, I pay for 4 EVE accounts so I'm biased on that. 
But the multiplayer gameplay would need to be expanded upon though. I already have fun when it works and how it is now -- interdicted a player that was wanted earlier, an expanded upon system like player-issued bounties and whatnot would make it more appealing.
A traditional mode is what, €13? That's €0.43 a day.
But the multiplayer gameplay would need to be expanded upon though. I already have fun when it works and how it is now -- interdicted a player that was wanted earlier, an expanded upon system like player-issued bounties and whatnot would make it more appealing.
A traditional mode is what, €13? That's €0.43 a day.
Last edited:
Weeelll ...
On the one hand I'm so anxious for this game to be a resounding success that I'd be willing to fly from Australia to the UK and personally shower David Braben with my money
... but to be sensible, even though I was an early backer if the devs thought subs were in, then I'd pay up regardless of prior promises etc. However, I realize that many others aren't able to afford to do that and would consider it a betrayal of the original game pitch. So for that reason I'd have to say, on reflection, no - stay with monetization through microtransactios, but keep them to vanity items.
One thing that has surprised me, in connection to this, is the lack of merchandising. I REALLY don't get why FD aren't already shovelling T-shirts, mugs and other paraphenalia out the door, both as a source of income and a source of publicity.
That's the real lost opportunity.
On the one hand I'm so anxious for this game to be a resounding success that I'd be willing to fly from Australia to the UK and personally shower David Braben with my money
... but to be sensible, even though I was an early backer if the devs thought subs were in, then I'd pay up regardless of prior promises etc. However, I realize that many others aren't able to afford to do that and would consider it a betrayal of the original game pitch. So for that reason I'd have to say, on reflection, no - stay with monetization through microtransactios, but keep them to vanity items.
One thing that has surprised me, in connection to this, is the lack of merchandising. I REALLY don't get why FD aren't already shovelling T-shirts, mugs and other paraphenalia out the door, both as a source of income and a source of publicity.
That's the real lost opportunity.
The absolute joy I felt when I stumbled upon the kickstarted for this game (nearly 2 years ago now ) would have completely evaporated if I'd seen that there was to be a monthly sub, and I certainly wouldn't have backed the development of this game.
Will never pay a monthly fee for a game (or a mobile, TV or film service). It's not a financial thing for me, but the casual nature of the way I use these things means I can't justify it, logically. I will buy the odd skin here and there, t-shirts, and hope there will be more non-P2W goodies in the store.
I'm also very much in favour of in-game non-immersion breaking advertising, Blade Runner style. This would enhance my emerson if done well, and boost the FD coffers too.
) would have completely evaporated if I'd seen that there was to be a monthly sub, and I certainly wouldn't have backed the development of this game.Will never pay a monthly fee for a game (or a mobile, TV or film service). It's not a financial thing for me, but the casual nature of the way I use these things means I can't justify it, logically. I will buy the odd skin here and there, t-shirts, and hope there will be more non-P2W goodies in the store.
I'm also very much in favour of in-game non-immersion breaking advertising, Blade Runner style. This would enhance my emerson if done well, and boost the FD coffers too.
FD is run by business people....I don't think we need to worry about "how FD will shoulder this"...if its plans weren't a profitable buiness model they wouldn't pursue it.
Remember there will be expansion packs folks will pay for, new people buying the game, skins for ships, tee-shirts, etc...
That's entirely besides the point. Your determination of someone's ability to play doesn't necessarily translate to that same persons desire to pay. This is an entirely discretionary expenditure and therfor not planned to be supported in an ongoing monthly plan.
Would love this!
Totally agree - it's as though FD think this sort of thing is vulgar
Why would you assume that "noone is going to buy any expansions"!?
Alpha and Beta backers will not have to since we've paid upfront for the expansions. Others that buy into the game after the Beta closes out will purchase expansions...this is part of FD's LTBP...
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Exactly....I love how some has an idea and then presumes everyone else should buy into their premise since "it makes sense in their head"....good gravy....
Eh No! I don't mind paying for expansions though.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Indeed - a player's ability to pay has no bearing on whether they would consider a subscription to be "value for money" - if that player is time constrained and can only play for a few hours a week, why would they want to pay a subscription?
FD cannot start charging for a subscription now. This would exclude those who cannot pay and those who do not have the means to pay. Exclusion of people would be very bad for the game.
EDIT: I really would like it if FD gave me the opportunity to donate money to them. A little donate button somewhere. I want nothing in return for this donation.
EDIT: I really would like it if FD gave me the opportunity to donate money to them. A little donate button somewhere. I want nothing in return for this donation.
Last edited:
No! Subscription is just milking the user and creating a bias in their minds that they have to learn everything about the game, cut their time with friends in real life to justify their subscription.
Buy to play model (b2p) is the fairest model of them all. It actually encourages developers to work hard on expansions and justify the costs of it. Also, it encourages developer to work on those things that we would like to buy (currently paint jobs). But why stop there? There could be more things they could add in the store yet not creating advantage except in visual sense (better internals, different HUD, engine trails, laser colors...).
As for earning money and income, spare me with subscription models! Take this article for example:
http://www.polygon.com/2014/10/24/7061573/how-league-of-legends-is-upending-the-video-game-business
League of legends is free to play game and earned most money of them all! World of Warcraft is there too of course but it is the only subscription based online game on the list! So spare me of "longevity of the game with subscription and maintenance costs".
Buy to play model (b2p) is the fairest model of them all. It actually encourages developers to work hard on expansions and justify the costs of it. Also, it encourages developer to work on those things that we would like to buy (currently paint jobs). But why stop there? There could be more things they could add in the store yet not creating advantage except in visual sense (better internals, different HUD, engine trails, laser colors...).
As for earning money and income, spare me with subscription models! Take this article for example:
http://www.polygon.com/2014/10/24/7061573/how-league-of-legends-is-upending-the-video-game-business
League of legends is free to play game and earned most money of them all! World of Warcraft is there too of course but it is the only subscription based online game on the list! So spare me of "longevity of the game with subscription and maintenance costs".
Last edited:
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
It also neatly deals with the threat of player pressure (stating that they will stop their subscriptions) if Frontier does not modify the game to suit them - Frontier already have the money....