[quote quote=3954]<blockquote> <div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/subscription-model/page/6/#post-2388" rel="nofollow">Hakuru wrote:</a></div> Thank you!!! Subscription Model is realy good.
I realy hate the f2p community. I think with a p2p system you get a more adorabel community. It is also way better to spend a set amount of money each mounth and than you get the full game and can play it in your time. No cash shop forcing.
It is nice to see that you truly profit from your expiriance as a gamer!
</blockquote> I already think the Ashes Community is pretty awesome !
[/quote]
Aye, it's turning out great already. A lot of people seemed to have accepted that it's P2P and it seems overall positive from what I've been seeing.
The P2P model often creates the "best" communities because there is an investment that people have put into play. You bought the box and pay month to month it really discourages poor behavior that might get you banned because to restarting isn't as simple as it is in the F2P games because there is a monetary investment just to get started.
[quote quote=3961]The P2P model often creates the “best” communities because there is an investment that people have put into play. You bought the box and pay month to month it really discourages poor behavior that might get you banned because to restarting isn’t as simple as it is in the F2P games because there is a monetary investment just to get started.[/quote]
I agree with this. I tend to find that the P2P communities are just generally more invested in the game itself which leads to a better experience overall. It also is a kind of motivating factor to keep logging in because "hey, I'm paying for it might as well" (though not quite the cavalier tone).
Plus, it's nice it's nice not ever having to have to consider you wallet.
I have truly not been so excited for a game since City of Heroes. And if you know that game...you know it has been along time. Wife and I are looking forward to jumping into the world.
We're all pretty hyped! Looking forward to the game play next week! The best model for me, after a somewhat interesting history of F2P games is P2P, all the way. F2P hardly ever truly works.. Well, at least not here - in the West!
Every f2p, just becomes having to sub to it "optionally" anyways so im fine with a p2p . . . though i think since it does have a cash shop could go cheaper than the typical(and failing (minus ff14)) price of $15
I will always prefer the subscription model, but only when it's like WoW's system. I get there's a lot of cross platforms players, so you get console players and f2pers that are used to buying the game outright and that's it. That's just not enough to completely sustain an mmo. Even TESO had to relent to this fact.
The problem is that most people do not want to sub, and this causes issues with the company having to make a monetary decision with the cash shop they provide. They'll have to add more pay to convenience items like weight and inventory expansions in order to sustain themselves. Perhaps this could be the game that defies that and brings the market back to its core. I don't know. I'd like to give the benefit of the doubt, but after being burned so many times before, I just can't. If the game is good enough, it won't matter to me how p2w it becomes or doesn't become, it won't hinder my gameplay nor support of it. Let's hope that this is that.
[quote quote=529]To be honest, the best and the most fair subscription model is the b2p one like in Guild Wars 1/2.
You pay the fulll price for the full game and You have only cosmetic items in the cash shop (Like costumes and stuff) and You even can exchange the gold for cash shop currency. The biggest downside of this model is the developer is depending on one time purchases and the percentage of ppl who leave money in the cash shop, which may not be that great considering this game and developer is not very well known (not to take away something from You guys), which can hurt the updates to the game.
But for the small, not well known team the sub model is the best i think. You don’t need to have millions of subscriptions to be profitable.
[/quote]
Precisely. It's been shown that a subscription model is really no more than a means to milk the low-intelligent consumer-base for cash and nothing to show for it, particularly in today's times when said low intelligent consumer-base is lead to believe that there is a substantial service-fee involved with maintaining a server.
As for content, content growth, enhancement and expansion has been a fake excuse to levy a subscription on a player-base, which is why just about every other mmo has went buy-to-play or free-to-play ~6 to 12 months post launch with purchasable future DLC and Cosmetics & Game-grind Easing E-stores.
@Cik Okay, first of all! Welcome to the community! Did you already check the <a href="https://discordapp.com/invite/v2Fwzaf">Discord</a> out? If not, do so! :) Nice having you around.
--- [quote quote=4189]<blockquote> <div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/subscription-model/#post-529" rel="nofollow">nehezbegar wrote:</a></div> To be honest, the best and the most fair subscription model is the b2p one like in Guild Wars 1/2.
You pay the fulll price for the full game and You have only cosmetic items in the cash shop (Like costumes and stuff) and You even can exchange the gold for cash shop currency. The biggest downside of this model is the developer is depending on one time purchases and the percentage of ppl who leave money in the cash shop, which may not be that great considering this game and developer is not very well known (not to take away something from You guys), which can hurt the updates to the game.
But for the small, not well known team the sub model is the best i think. You don’t need to have millions of subscriptions to be profitable.
</blockquote> Precisely. It’s been shown that a subscription model is really no more than a means to milk the low-intelligent consumer-base for cash and nothing to show for it, particularly in today’s times when said low intelligent consumer-base is lead to believe that there is a substantial service-fee involved with maintaining a server. [/quote]
Okay, this makes no sense. You can't quote someone and agree with him/her when your own reason for agreeing or you elaborating on the topic has nothing to do with said quoted post!
[quote quote=529] <strong>But for the small, not well known team the sub model is the best i think. You don’t need to have millions of subscriptions to be profitable.</strong> [/quote]
It is clearly stated that a subscription-base model is best for a game such as Ashes, since the studio isn't well known! It's literally the last sentence of your quoted post.
*** <strong>[OFF TOPIC]</strong>
[quote quote=529]To be honest, the best and the most fair subscription model is the b2p one like in Guild Wars 1/2. [/quote]
Well, Guild Wars 2 eventually went Free to Play. Which was such an utterly stupid idea. They should have stuck to Buy to Play. The restrictions placed on players who haven't bought the game is ludicrous. Furthermore the whole 'buy another account policy' a week before the announcement of going Free to Play was a major slap in the face! The reason why this whole concept (Buy to Play) worked was: - Guild Wars (A very well known franchise, they had a history and players were willing to pay) - A solvent backer. NCsoft. - There is a difference between publishing a game and/or developing!!!
***
[quote quote=4189] [...] particularly in today’s times when said low intelligent consumer-base is lead to believe that there is a substantial service-fee involved with maintaining a server. [/quote]
That's totally besides the point. A server or in that case servers have to be maintained. To do so, you have to pay money. It does not matter if the fee is 'substantial' or not, it's money which has to be paid solely for keeping the servers running, regardless of players being online or content being delivered or whatever! This is done by the publisher, not the developer!
[quote quote=4189] [...] As for content, content growth, enhancement and expansion has been a fake excuse to levy a subscription on a player-base, which is why just about every other mmo has went buy-to-play or free-to-play ~6 to 12 months post launch with purchasable future DLC and Cosmetics & Game-grind Easing E-stores. [/quote]
That has nothing to do with why games go Free to Play! It's mostly publishers who decide on the game's future not the content creators! So normally no one should claim a subscription-based-model is better or worse because of better/more frequent content/yada yada. But yet again, it's probably more beneficial to have a steady income instead of an arbitrary flow of money, but I might be wrong - no, not really!
I don't get why purchasable DLCs are better than a subscription, you have to pay regardless. Additionally, grind is something we don't want! Also, the whole 'Free to Play / Pay to Progress faster' idea is broken in itself.
You can't compare an Asian game coming to the West, with several years of content and thus being Free to Play, with a newly developed game, such as Ashes! And please differentiate between developers and publishers, it's often the publishers who are the 'bad guys' not so much the developers..
@Cik Okay, first of all! Welcome to the community! Did you already check the <a href="https://discordapp.com/invite/v2Fwzaf">Discord</a> out? If not, do so! :) Nice having you around.
---
[quote quote=4189]<blockquote> <div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/subscription-model/#post-529" rel="nofollow">nehezbegar wrote:</a></div> To be honest, the best and the most fair subscription model is the b2p one like in Guild Wars 1/2.
You pay the fulll price for the full game and You have only cosmetic items in the cash shop (Like costumes and stuff) and You even can exchange the gold for cash shop currency. The biggest downside of this model is the developer is depending on one time purchases and the percentage of ppl who leave money in the cash shop, which may not be that great considering this game and developer is not very well known (not to take away something from You guys), which can hurt the updates to the game.
But for the small, not well known team the sub model is the best i think. You don’t need to have millions of subscriptions to be profitable.
</blockquote> Precisely. It’s been shown that a subscription model is really no more than a means to milk the low-intelligent consumer-base for cash and nothing to show for it, particularly in today’s times when said low intelligent consumer-base is lead to believe that there is a substantial service-fee involved with maintaining a server. [/quote]
Okay, this makes no sense. You can't quote someone and agree with him/her when your own line of thought has absolutely nothing to do with what you've quoted!
[quote quote=529] <strong>But for the small, not well known team the sub model is the best i think. You don’t need to have millions of subscriptions to be profitable.</strong> [/quote]
It is clearly stated that a subscription-base model is best for a game such as Ashes, since the studio isn't well known! It's literally the last sentence of the post you've quoted.
***
[quote quote=529]To be honest, the best and the most fair subscription model is the b2p one like in Guild Wars 1/2. [/quote] Well, Guild Wars 2 eventually went Free to Play. Which was such an utterly stupid idea. They should have stuck to Buy to Play. The restrictions placed on players who haven't bought the game is ludicrous. Furthermore the whole 'buy another account' policy a week before the announcement of going Free to Play was a major slap in the face!
<em>And for HoT, I don't know. In my humble opinion it's okay-ish but that's all, but idk.</em>
The reason why this whole concept (Buy to Play) worked was / works is: - Guild Wars (A very well known franchise, they had a history and players were willing to pay) - A solvent backer. NCsoft. - There is a difference between publishing a game and/or developing!!!
***
[quote quote=4189] [...] particularly in today’s times when said low intelligent consumer-base is lead to believe that there is a substantial service-fee involved with maintaining a server. [/quote] That's totally besides the point. A server or in that case servers have to be maintained. To do so, you have to pay money. It does not matter if the fee is 'substantial' or not, it's money which has to be paid solely for keeping the servers running, regardless of players being online or content being delivered or whatever! This is done by the publisher, not the developer!
[quote quote=4189] [...] As for content, content growth, enhancement and expansion has been a fake excuse to levy a subscription on a player-base, which is why just about every other mmo has went buy-to-play or free-to-play ~6 to 12 months post launch with purchasable future DLC and Cosmetics & Game-grind Easing E-stores. [/quote]
That has nothing to do with why games go Free to Play! It's mostly publishers who decide on the game's future not the content creators! So normally no one should claim a subscription-based-model is better or worse because of better/more frequent content/yada yada. But yet again, it's probably more beneficial to have a steady income instead of an arbitrary flow of money, but I might be wrong - no, not really!
I don't get why purchasable DLCs are better than a subscription, you have to pay regardless. Additionally, grind is something we don't want! Also, the whole 'Free to Play / Pay to Progress faster' idea is broken in itself.
You can't compare an Asian game coming to the West, with several years of content and thus being Free to Play, with a newly developed game, such as Ashes! And please differentiate between developers and publishers, it's often the publishers who are the 'bad guys' not so much the developers..
i looove sub based model. it means they are actually going to put forth the effort to make a game worth paying a monthly sub to and not use the standard exploitative business tactics that take advantage of the less "mature" player base with parent's credit card on tap. my nephew, barely old enough to know anything bout that kind of thing (just turned 5) charged $250 bucks on an ipad game because my sis forgot to lock it back down lol. i wonder how many 100s of millions have been made using such tactics. business school....they should call the spade a spade and say professional con school. honesty and integrity seem to be antiquated ideals these days.
sorry, random thoughts while talking in discord with guildmates.
TLDR; love sub. and what's that saying? "if you build it they will come?" good games sell themselves. seems that has been forgotten over the past decade and some change. game geeks such as us on this forum are always looking around and searching for the next good mmo to play ( been a long time ). word of mouth from friends that share similar tastes in games have sold me more games than an trailer or advertisement.
My first MMO was Asheron's Call, and to me subscription models are the way to go. I feel like it brings in a better community of players. So thank you for not going with the P2W systems that most developers are going with today. It gives me real hope for a good game - and I haven't played one of those in some time.
[quote quote=4189]Precisely. It’s been shown that a subscription model is really no more than a means to milk the low-intelligent consumer-base for cash and nothing to show for it, particularly in today’s times when said low intelligent consumer-base is lead to believe that there is a substantial service-fee involved with maintaining a server.
As for content, content growth, enhancement and expansion has been a fake excuse to levy a subscription on a player-base, which is why just about every other mmo has went buy-to-play or free-to-play ~6 to 12 months post launch with purchasable future DLC and Cosmetics & Game-grind Easing E-stores.[/quote]
Games go free-to-play because they were terribly designed and the playerbase doesn't/can't continue to support a game that just isn't fun a year down the line. Developers then have a hard time letting their baby go, plus F2P lets them cast a wide net in hopes that someone will still pay for their game. Most developers these days skip the P2P model altogether and go to the F2P cash shop because it usually nets them more revenue. Aside from Guild Wars though how many of those MMO's have met success in the West?
Server costs aren't debilitating, but they aren't cheap either. Not to mention the continued salaries of the development team. Either through P2P or through cash shops, MMO's can't exist on a simple F2P enviornment. Even the original guild wars only existed through the release of numerous expansions, and it is about the only truly successful Western MMO (and it's sequel) that was B2P/F2P.
In any game in one degree or another have p2w, even if the game is not the shop for real money, everything can be bought on the black market, and what measures are not applied or where it does not go anywhere. If you ask me what model I like the most. I'm choosing b2p or p2p, but again, even if it is a f2p with p2w and if the game will be interesting, I'm still going to play it
On a side note I just do not understand those that bring up a cost issue of $15 a month in relevance to them not getting their absolute max monies worth every second of the month. It all sounds like excuses as you try and game the system, if the server is down for a couple hours for updates that does not entitle you to free stuff, if you choose to only play for a limited amount of time that does not entitle you to free stuff. Had to work overtime at your job which cut into your leisure time? That does not entitle you to free stuff! For $15 you are playing to have access to the game almost anytime you want during that month for how ever long you want.
If you honestly believe that $15 is not good value for your leisure/entertainment money then you should spend it where you believe it will have the most value.
Pay-to-play and free-to-play does not matter a lot as long as the game is good. =)
I've had free-to-play games where I spent more than normal because the game itself was generous with the in-game rewards. The loot was generous, had fun, pay for aesthetics.
I've had free-to-play game where I supported hoping for more from the game but it turned out to be disappointing in the end.
I've had pay-to-play game and the money was well-spent.
Overall hoping for a game generous to the players that can justify my monthly subscription plus more purchases from the cash shop.
Our philosophy is that Subscription based games<strong> should not </strong>employ cash shops that offer a pay to win atmosphere. We want to constantly be adding updates, expansions and new content in general, which is why we have decided to go with a subscription model.
[/quote] Has to be the best news for the genre in the last 10 years!
[quote quote=905]<blockquote> <div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/subscription-model/#post-448" rel="nofollow">Steven wrote:</a></div> Great comment Vincent!
Our philosophy is that Subscription based games<strong> should not </strong>employ cash shops that offer a pay to win atmosphere. We want to constantly be adding updates, expansions and new content in general, which is why we have decided to go with a subscription model.
</blockquote> I am very much against a subscription model. This upsets me and I’m sorry to say I’m no longer interested in the game.
Comments
<div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/subscription-model/page/6/#post-2388" rel="nofollow">Hakuru wrote:</a></div>
Thank you!!! Subscription Model is realy good.
I realy hate the f2p community.
I think with a p2p system you get a more adorabel community.
It is also way better to spend a set amount of money each mounth and than you get the full game and can play it in your time. No cash shop forcing.
It is nice to see that you truly profit from your expiriance as a gamer!
</blockquote>
I already think the Ashes Community is pretty awesome !
[/quote]
Aye, it's turning out great already. A lot of people seemed to have accepted that it's P2P and it seems overall positive from what I've been seeing.
I agree with this. I tend to find that the P2P communities are just generally more invested in the game itself which leads to a better experience overall. It also is a kind of motivating factor to keep logging in because "hey, I'm paying for it might as well" (though not quite the cavalier tone).
Plus, it's nice it's nice not ever having to have to consider you wallet.
The best model for me, after a somewhat interesting history of F2P games is P2P, all the way.
F2P hardly ever truly works.. Well, at least not here - in the West!
~ Zention
The problem is that most people do not want to sub, and this causes issues with the company having to make a monetary decision with the cash shop they provide. They'll have to add more pay to convenience items like weight and inventory expansions in order to sustain themselves. Perhaps this could be the game that defies that and brings the market back to its core. I don't know. I'd like to give the benefit of the doubt, but after being burned so many times before, I just can't. If the game is good enough, it won't matter to me how p2w it becomes or doesn't become, it won't hinder my gameplay nor support of it. Let's hope that this is that.
You pay the fulll price for the full game and You have only cosmetic items in the cash shop (Like costumes and stuff) and You even can exchange the gold for cash shop currency. The biggest downside of this model is the developer is depending on one time purchases and the percentage of ppl who leave money in the cash shop, which may not be that great considering this game and developer is not very well known (not to take away something from You guys), which can hurt the updates to the game.
But for the small, not well known team the sub model is the best i think. You don’t need to have millions of subscriptions to be profitable.
[/quote]
Precisely. It's been shown that a subscription model is really no more than a means to milk the low-intelligent consumer-base for cash and nothing to show for it, particularly in today's times when said low intelligent consumer-base is lead to believe that there is a substantial service-fee involved with maintaining a server.
As for content, content growth, enhancement and expansion has been a fake excuse to levy a subscription on a player-base, which is why just about every other mmo has went buy-to-play or free-to-play ~6 to 12 months post launch with purchasable future DLC and Cosmetics & Game-grind Easing E-stores.
Okay, first of all! Welcome to the community! Did you already check the <a href="https://discordapp.com/invite/v2Fwzaf">Discord</a> out? If not, do so! :)
Nice having you around.
---
[quote quote=4189]<blockquote>
<div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/subscription-model/#post-529" rel="nofollow">nehezbegar wrote:</a></div>
To be honest, the best and the most fair subscription model is the b2p one like in Guild Wars 1/2.
You pay the fulll price for the full game and You have only cosmetic items in the cash shop (Like costumes and stuff) and You even can exchange the gold for cash shop currency. The biggest downside of this model is the developer is depending on one time purchases and the percentage of ppl who leave money in the cash shop, which may not be that great considering this game and developer is not very well known (not to take away something from You guys), which can hurt the updates to the game.
But for the small, not well known team the sub model is the best i think. You don’t need to have millions of subscriptions to be profitable.
</blockquote>
Precisely. It’s been shown that a subscription model is really no more than a means to milk the low-intelligent consumer-base for cash and nothing to show for it, particularly in today’s times when said low intelligent consumer-base is lead to believe that there is a substantial service-fee involved with maintaining a server.
[/quote]
Okay, this makes no sense. You can't quote someone and agree with him/her when your own reason for agreeing or you elaborating on the topic has nothing to do with said quoted post!
[quote quote=529]
<strong>But for the small, not well known team the sub model is the best i think. You don’t need to have millions of subscriptions to be profitable.</strong>
[/quote]
It is clearly stated that a subscription-base model is best for a game such as Ashes, since the studio isn't well known! It's literally the last sentence of your quoted post.
***
<strong>[OFF TOPIC]</strong>
[quote quote=529]To be honest, the best and the most fair subscription model is the b2p one like in Guild Wars 1/2.
[/quote]
Well, Guild Wars 2 eventually went Free to Play. Which was such an utterly stupid idea. They should have stuck to Buy to Play. The restrictions placed on players who haven't bought the game is ludicrous. Furthermore the whole 'buy another account policy' a week before the announcement of going Free to Play was a major slap in the face!
The reason why this whole concept (Buy to Play) worked was:
- Guild Wars (A very well known franchise, they had a history and players were willing to pay)
- A solvent backer. NCsoft.
- There is a difference between publishing a game and/or developing!!!
***
[quote quote=4189]
[...] particularly in today’s times when said low intelligent consumer-base is lead to believe that there is a substantial service-fee involved with maintaining a server.
[/quote]
That's totally besides the point. A server or in that case servers have to be maintained. To do so, you have to pay money. It does not matter if the fee is 'substantial' or not, it's money which has to be paid solely for keeping the servers running, regardless of players being online or content being delivered or whatever! This is done by the publisher, not the developer!
[quote quote=4189]
[...]
As for content, content growth, enhancement and expansion has been a fake excuse to levy a subscription on a player-base, which is why just about every other mmo has went buy-to-play or free-to-play ~6 to 12 months post launch with purchasable future DLC and Cosmetics & Game-grind Easing E-stores.
[/quote]
That has nothing to do with why games go Free to Play! It's mostly publishers who decide on the game's future not the content creators! So normally no one should claim a subscription-based-model is better or worse because of better/more frequent content/yada yada.
But yet again, it's probably more beneficial to have a steady income instead of an arbitrary flow of money, but I might be wrong - no, not really!
I don't get why purchasable DLCs are better than a subscription, you have to pay regardless. Additionally, grind is something we don't want!
Also, the whole 'Free to Play / Pay to Progress faster' idea is broken in itself.
You can't compare an Asian game coming to the West, with several years of content and thus being Free to Play, with a newly developed game, such as Ashes! And please differentiate between developers and publishers, it's often the publishers who are the 'bad guys' not so much the developers..
~ Zention
Okay, first of all! Welcome to the community! Did you already check the <a href="https://discordapp.com/invite/v2Fwzaf">Discord</a> out? If not, do so! :)
Nice having you around.
---
[quote quote=4189]<blockquote>
<div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/subscription-model/#post-529" rel="nofollow">nehezbegar wrote:</a></div>
To be honest, the best and the most fair subscription model is the b2p one like in Guild Wars 1/2.
You pay the fulll price for the full game and You have only cosmetic items in the cash shop (Like costumes and stuff) and You even can exchange the gold for cash shop currency. The biggest downside of this model is the developer is depending on one time purchases and the percentage of ppl who leave money in the cash shop, which may not be that great considering this game and developer is not very well known (not to take away something from You guys), which can hurt the updates to the game.
But for the small, not well known team the sub model is the best i think. You don’t need to have millions of subscriptions to be profitable.
</blockquote>
Precisely. It’s been shown that a subscription model is really no more than a means to milk the low-intelligent consumer-base for cash and nothing to show for it, particularly in today’s times when said low intelligent consumer-base is lead to believe that there is a substantial service-fee involved with maintaining a server.
[/quote]
Okay, this makes no sense. You can't quote someone and agree with him/her when your own line of thought has absolutely nothing to do with what you've quoted!
[quote quote=529]
<strong>But for the small, not well known team the sub model is the best i think. You don’t need to have millions of subscriptions to be profitable.</strong>
[/quote]
It is clearly stated that a subscription-base model is best for a game such as Ashes, since the studio isn't well known! It's literally the last sentence of the post you've quoted.
***
[quote quote=529]To be honest, the best and the most fair subscription model is the b2p one like in Guild Wars 1/2.
[/quote]
Well, Guild Wars 2 eventually went Free to Play. Which was such an utterly stupid idea. They should have stuck to Buy to Play. The restrictions placed on players who haven't bought the game is ludicrous. Furthermore the whole 'buy another account' policy a week before the announcement of going Free to Play was a major slap in the face!
<em>And for HoT, I don't know. In my humble opinion it's okay-ish but that's all, but idk.</em>
The reason why this whole concept (Buy to Play) worked was / works is:
- Guild Wars (A very well known franchise, they had a history and players were willing to pay)
- A solvent backer. NCsoft.
- There is a difference between publishing a game and/or developing!!!
***
[quote quote=4189]
[...] particularly in today’s times when said low intelligent consumer-base is lead to believe that there is a substantial service-fee involved with maintaining a server.
[/quote]
That's totally besides the point. A server or in that case servers have to be maintained. To do so, you have to pay money. It does not matter if the fee is 'substantial' or not, it's money which has to be paid solely for keeping the servers running, regardless of players being online or content being delivered or whatever! This is done by the publisher, not the developer!
[quote quote=4189]
[...]
As for content, content growth, enhancement and expansion has been a fake excuse to levy a subscription on a player-base, which is why just about every other mmo has went buy-to-play or free-to-play ~6 to 12 months post launch with purchasable future DLC and Cosmetics & Game-grind Easing E-stores.
[/quote]
That has nothing to do with why games go Free to Play! It's mostly publishers who decide on the game's future not the content creators! So normally no one should claim a subscription-based-model is better or worse because of better/more frequent content/yada yada.
But yet again, it's probably more beneficial to have a steady income instead of an arbitrary flow of money, but I might be wrong - no, not really!
I don't get why purchasable DLCs are better than a subscription, you have to pay regardless. Additionally, grind is something we don't want!
Also, the whole 'Free to Play / Pay to Progress faster' idea is broken in itself.
You can't compare an Asian game coming to the West, with several years of content and thus being Free to Play, with a newly developed game, such as Ashes! And please differentiate between developers and publishers, it's often the publishers who are the 'bad guys' not so much the developers..
Edit: My post went rogue somehow :o
~ Zention
my nephew, barely old enough to know anything bout that kind of thing (just turned 5) charged $250 bucks on an ipad game because my sis forgot to lock it back down lol. i wonder how many 100s of millions have been made using such tactics. business school....they should call the spade a spade and say professional con school. honesty and integrity seem to be antiquated ideals these days.
sorry, random thoughts while talking in discord with guildmates.
TLDR;
love sub. and what's that saying? "if you build it they will come?" good games sell themselves. seems that has been forgotten over the past decade and some change. game geeks such as us on this forum are always looking around and searching for the next good mmo to play ( been a long time ). word of mouth from friends that share similar tastes in games have sold me more games than an trailer or advertisement.
My first MMO was Asheron's Call, and to me subscription models are the way to go. I feel like it brings in a better community of players. So thank you for not going with the P2W systems that most developers are going with today. It gives me real hope for a good game - and I haven't played one of those in some time.
As for content, content growth, enhancement and expansion has been a fake excuse to levy a subscription on a player-base, which is why just about every other mmo has went buy-to-play or free-to-play ~6 to 12 months post launch with purchasable future DLC and Cosmetics & Game-grind Easing E-stores.[/quote]
Games go free-to-play because they were terribly designed and the playerbase doesn't/can't continue to support a game that just isn't fun a year down the line. Developers then have a hard time letting their baby go, plus F2P lets them cast a wide net in hopes that someone will still pay for their game. Most developers these days skip the P2P model altogether and go to the F2P cash shop because it usually nets them more revenue. Aside from Guild Wars though how many of those MMO's have met success in the West?
Server costs aren't debilitating, but they aren't cheap either. Not to mention the continued salaries of the development team. Either through P2P or through cash shops, MMO's can't exist on a simple F2P enviornment. Even the original guild wars only existed through the release of numerous expansions, and it is about the only truly successful Western MMO (and it's sequel) that was B2P/F2P.
This model seems the most "fair" to me while also providing the developers the needed cash to keep the game alive and healthy.
If you ask me what model I like the most. I'm choosing b2p or p2p, but again, even if it is a f2p with p2w and if the game will be interesting, I'm still going to play it
Just throwing my support behind a sub based model.
cheers!
On a side note I just do not understand those that bring up a cost issue of $15 a month in relevance to them not getting their absolute max monies worth every second of the month. It all sounds like excuses as you try and game the system, if the server is down for a couple hours for updates that does not entitle you to free stuff, if you choose to only play for a limited amount of time that does not entitle you to free stuff. Had to work overtime at your job which cut into your leisure time? That does not entitle you to free stuff! For $15 you are playing to have access to the game almost anytime you want during that month for how ever long you want.
If you honestly believe that $15 is not good value for your leisure/entertainment money then you should spend it where you believe it will have the most value.
I've had free-to-play games where I spent more than normal because the game itself was generous with the in-game rewards. The loot was generous, had fun, pay for aesthetics.
I've had free-to-play game where I supported hoping for more from the game but it turned out to be disappointing in the end.
I've had pay-to-play game and the money was well-spent.
Overall hoping for a game generous to the players that can justify my monthly subscription plus more purchases from the cash shop.
Our philosophy is that Subscription based games<strong> should not </strong>employ cash shops that offer a pay to win atmosphere. We want to constantly be adding updates, expansions and new content in general, which is why we have decided to go with a subscription model.
[/quote]
Has to be the best news for the genre in the last 10 years!
<div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/subscription-model/#post-448" rel="nofollow">Steven wrote:</a></div>
Great comment Vincent!
Our philosophy is that Subscription based games<strong> should not </strong>employ cash shops that offer a pay to win atmosphere. We want to constantly be adding updates, expansions and new content in general, which is why we have decided to go with a subscription model.
</blockquote>
I am very much against a subscription model. This upsets me and I’m sorry to say I’m no longer interested in the game.
[/quote]
bye! :D