Subscription model for better multiplayer experience... Would you pay for it ?

BigPickle

B
Jim Panse said:
Greetings Commanders & Frontier Team,

i don´t know if this was discussed already but i´ve had it on my mind for longer now. To be honest, i´m not pleased with the actual networking system. I know its beta but the instancing dosen´t work very well. So my question to you all out there and Frontier:

"Would you pay a monthly fee if there would be a change at the networking system ?"

I would definitly do it. Everyone is talking about the multiplayer experience... but the actual system dosen´t give it to us. 10 bucks/Euro/dollar/whatever would be fine from my side.

What are your ideas or suggestions ?


Hope to read a lot :)

Cmdr. Jim Panse
Click to expand...

Absolutley not!
1. Why make the common mistake of thinking because you pay for it it will be better.
2. I dont like threads made by people who dream up more ways for developers to charge their customers more money.
 

Strykor

Strykor
If it was a direct benefit in helping regular themed releases of content etc and OPTIONAL then yep I personally would gladly pay a monthly sub

I prefer the idea of more deep, less frequent expansion content though. One that you pay for OPTIONAL if you want to participate
 

WiseDuck

WiseDuck
ED is not an MMO. It's a simulator that just so happens to support multiplayer, badly. Why would anyone pay a monthly fee for a single player experience?

Don't take me the wrong way though, I would love ED to be more MMO-like. But alas, this will never happen.
 

MorkFromOrk

Banned
MorkFromOrk
BigPickle said:
Absolutley not!
1. Why make the common mistake of thinking because you pay for it it will be better.
2. I dont like threads made by people who dream up more ways for developers to charge their customers more money.
Click to expand...

Why is it a common mistake to think something paid for might be better? In the case of networking here it would be interesting to see your explanation as to why the current "free" model would be better than a subscription server based model for multiplayer.

Sure it is possible to take money and make a bad product but I would argue that in most areas of life, for a given similarity, paid is better than free.

It is completely your right to dislike threads that discuss ways for FD to make more money. Shall we also expect to see you direct your distaste at threads discussing expansion packs and vanity items? Also, if free is better, why is it OK for FD to charge for ED at all?

It's just a balance. If there is a cost it should be justified. At this stage it is extremely difficult to justify an exclusive switch from the current pay model to the subscription model. However if a certain type of content or an optional playing model that allowed multiplayer without the P2P limitations could be funded this way without impacting existing customers, then why shouldn't it be considered? We have paid for what was promised. None of us have paid for what has not been promised (expansion pass being an exception).
 

FatCat

FatCat
Mad Mike said:
What are the general differences between "Elite: Dangerous" and "Eve Online"?

Elite: Dangerous is pay once and play, therefore does not have a periodic subscription like Eve Online.

Another major difference is that in EVE everybody within a star system is in one big instance and when there are too many people within it they slow down the update rate of the game.
Click to expand...

The difference between EVE online and Elite is that they are completely different games that happen to both be set in space.
 

[VR] Mad Mike

[VR] Mad Mike
FatCat said:
The difference between EVE online and Elite is that they are completely different games that happen to both be set in space.
Click to expand...

I think the point just wooshed straight over your head! my post was taken directly from the FAQ and was regarding the subs cost ie the statement that ED WONT have them!

PS everyone seems to have forgotten that the game is not even finished yet!!! it took BF4, a game which was really just an update for BF3 so nothing that new, 6 months AFTER launch to get their online remotely working ok......... and that was a server based game.

PS new updated Beta 3.04 supposedly aimed at improving multiplayer
 
Last edited:

Dalkeith

Dalkeith
I would pay but I think its unrealistic for them to change the payment model

The kickstarter said they wouldn't charge so they've really got to honour that. Plus they would have to retrofit with security which doesn't sound workable.

I can see that in the future when they really have virtual worlds nailed you will pay subscriptions to get into the world. I truly believe that. I suspect that is 10 years away though and I really think a space game would have to be massively online and have absolutely no problems with latency to justify that.
 
Last edited:

Thygrrr

Thygrrr
What about optional subscription for a value added service .

Namely, cheat proof, constant latency and reliable performance game play on dedicated virtual server instances for your island.

They can even rent this stuff out, Amazon EC2 has features for this as a resale thing. So alliances could chip in for one or two such machines to use, shared by them. Alliance members can't touch the software but they have access to it in game.
 
Last edited:

Tar Stone

Banned
Tar Stone
Thygrrr said:
What about optional subscription for a value added service .

Namely, cheat proof, constant latency and reliable performance game play on dedicated virtual server instances for your island.

They can even rent this stuff out, Amazon EC2 has features for this as a resale thing. So alliances could chip in for one or two such machines to use, shared by them. Alliance members can't touch the software but they have access to it in game.
Click to expand...

I'll pay schfifty million pounds a month for that, when's it coming out.
 

FatCat

FatCat
Mad Mike said:
I think the point just wooshed straight over your head! my post was taken directly from the FAQ and was regarding the subs cost ie the statement that ED WONT have them!

PS everyone seems to have forgotten that the game is not even finished yet!!! it took BF4, a game which was really just an update for BF3 so nothing that new, 6 months AFTER launch to get their online remotely working ok......... and that was a server based game.

PS new updated Beta 3.04 supposedly aimed at improving multiplayer
Click to expand...

My point was you can't compare the two because other then having space ships the two games are nothing alike. Eve was conceived as a MMOG, Elite was not. Elite is basically a first person shooter with multiplayer capability. I see the game getting smoother and more things to do as they wrap it up but it will never be a MMOG and that's OK. But like a lot of other people, I won't pay a monthly fee to play a single player game.
 

OldSalt

O
It seems to me that it is way too early to be having these discussions. All through beta we have obviously been pushed into limited areas of space and I don't think it is unreasonable to think that we have been testing the multiplayer system to destruction because of that. There is a new update out targeting network issues, I say let this stage of the game play out and look at this if there are issues post release.
 

Recon022

R
I have only been playing for about a week. I am glad they have the single player option, but from what I have read in topic so far this game doesn't seem to be as "multi player" as I thought it was advertised as.

Which is a little disappointing for me personally, but not a whole lot, I still love it so far.

But no, it should never have a sub, unless it is going to be a true "mmo".
 

Gods3nt

Gods3nt
I would never pay monthly for a game. I don't care how amazing it is, that alone is a rip off. Besides, I've already spent $150 on the game. If you want more stability play either solo or with friends.
 

Thygrrr

Thygrrr
Gods3nt said:
I would never pay monthly for a game. I don't care how amazing it is, that alone is a rip off. Besides, I've already spent $150 on the game. If you want more stability play either solo or with friends.
Click to expand...

It is unstable and random as hell with friends, and we also want PvP against others.
 

Gédéon_Lecanard

Gédéon_Lecanard
I have never paid, and will never pay a monthly subscription for any game. Never. I specifically support ED for that reason. I'd rather pay for some cosmetics every now and then (and that, I did and will).
 

Babalawo

B
OldSalt said:
It seems to me that it is way too early to be having these discussions. All through beta we have obviously been pushed into limited areas of space and I don't think it is unreasonable to think that we have been testing the multiplayer system to destruction because of that. There is a new update out targeting network issues, I say let this stage of the game play out and look at this if there are issues post release.
Click to expand...

This brings to mind an interesting point... do you think they are going to randomize starting systems when the game goes live? If they continue in the current process, the current "core" worlds are always going to be MUCH higher population than the fringes of the pill (however big the pill happens to be), simply because many people are not inclined to head out into the Big Dark, at least not without a strong motivation. Without such an exodus, the lag in the starter systems is, and will always be, so crushing that many people will never get the resources together to head outwards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom