F2P with in-game purchases or all-inclusive subscription?

neomouser · May 2013

I've quite enjoyed NW since I started playing. I do not care about the "broken" state of the economy due to exploits or the long waits in dungeon and skirmish queues. My issue is with basic MMO components costing real money to access, and the developers pushing these purchases on the player.

Really, it costs 600 Zen, or $6, to respec ONCE? This is the most frustrating part of this game for me. Hands down.
The inventory space is severely limited and I have to buy bags for $10 a piece? Sure there are a couple of in-game quests that reward (tiny) bags, but this is a ludicrous system. Furthermore, the "bank" is more like a small locker. Really, 16 slots? And buying 16 more costs $6? /sigh
The most aggravating part of this inventory/bank conundrum I find myself in is how much of my inventory is taken up by enchantments and runestones that I would like to keep and fuse to eventually have some powerful ones end-game. I suppose one could exchange Astral Diamonds for the Zen, but I see that as a massive waste of time.

Plenty of other MMO's that are subscription-based include all these features, but as rewards in-game for putting time in, not reaching into your wallet and paying for standard MMO features. Personally, I would be happy to pay $15 a month to play NW and see the entire Zen market taken out of the game. I know it's Perfect World's way of doing their F2P game model, but I think NW has the potential to be as good as WoW and possibly surpass it in the next couple of years if PW plays their cards right.

morbic · May 2013

F2P models are pretty much the methodology of the future for online games. The question is how they implement said F2P models. The current model that Neverwinter uses is kinda middle of the road as far as difficulty/acquisition of in-game content.

fasthands23 · May 2013

f2p models are ok, but are done wrong 99% of the time with the sole intention of milking games and not taking into account the integrity of the game at all.

pay to play models are better because the game itself is not compromised. also keeps out most of the 12 year olds, makes it harder to bot, etc.

elessym · May 2013

Anyone wishing for a $15 subscription is dreaming, I'm afraid. The market has shown that not enough people will pay $15 to make a subscription model viable.

The only subscription models that I think have a chance of working are a freemium model, or a niche model that charges a very hefty subscription.

traciatim1 · May 2013

I always liked the subscription model because the game design goal number 1 is "How can we make this game fun enough that peopel will pay 15 bucks a month for it" rather than the Free2Pay model of "How can we make this game annoying enough so people pay money but just not annoying enough that they quit".

akikisaragi · May 2013

F2P,B2P, Hybrid are where it's at.

taliahria · May 2013

I'd like a subscriber module a bit like SWTOR has now. Gives you options, subscribers get full content yet special items are available to purchase via in-game currency (or via the store).

neomouser · May 2013

elessym wrote: »

Anyone wishing for a $15 subscription is dreaming, I'm afraid. The market has shown that not enough people will pay $15 to make a subscription model viable.

morbic · May 2013

I'd like to see where some other games fit on that graph....

typocalypse · May 2013

Few things are more jarring than being reminded that you could ride faster, carry more loot, or be doing better in game if you had a better paying job or were willing to forgo a week's worth of groceries to get something you could potentially just earn by investing time into a fun game. I see the $15 as an immersion fee. The game exists outside of the realm of my real life, and I will continue to buy into it. Of course a hybrid is ideal, where your real life riches can get you luxury items in game, but knowing that someone wants to profit off your willingness to have a better playing experience creates a discomfort in both realms. That being said, I really do hope to keep playing this game for a long time and am excited to see how it evolves.

nevfe · May 2013

It's been my experience that games with subscriptions have much better communities. Every one is on an equal footing and have a sense of loyalty that you don't get in f2p games.

So far I've spent just $5 in this game, but after the recent chaos can't see myself spending any more until/unless there is a clear indication that some of the fundemental problems have been sorted out. Not just talking about the economy here, but things like the ridiculous add-swamped boss fights. Good luck getting a group for Lair of the Mad Dragon where someone doesn't leave before you manage a kill!

neomouser · May 2013

I definitely like where this discussion is going. Some valid points are being brought up, but keep in mind that NW is still in infant form. Charging a subscription for an Open Beta would be heresy! But when they plan on officially "launching" the title, I think that it would be better as a pay-to-play game.

chai23 · May 2013

morbic wrote: »

I'd like to see where some other games fit on that graph....

There are other ranges for that chart. Many MMOs hang around the 100k to 200k population mark.

s3pt · May 2013

I would much prefer an up-front fee that covers everything than to be nickle and dimed. This games cash shop is terrible with its ridiculous prices for most things and for even having re-specs in the cash shop. I won't spend any money here unless they drastically alter the pricing, which is unlikely.

ancientwolfgr808 · May 2013

elessym wrote: »

Anyone wishing for a $15 subscription is dreaming, I'm afraid. The market has shown that not enough people will pay $15 to make a subscription model viable.

The only subscription models that I think have a chance of working are a freemium model, or a niche model that charges a very hefty subscription.

Then all of the industry's heavy hitters and pros need to be informed that they are doing it wrong.

neomouser · May 2013

WoW is the king of MMOs. No argument, if you look at the numbers. If that game was F2P and you had to pay real money for inventory or bank space, or to respec or level your professions, I think it would have failed. The reason WoW's numbers are decreasing is because people are looking for something fresh. They reminisce about the vanilla days and want to experience that again. I could play WoW for a month or respec in NW 2 times (well 2.5).

Blizzard showed that if you provide a good enough product and new content, people will pay to be a part of it. PWE has some serious business plan issues going on here IMO.

s3pt · May 2013

neomouser wrote: »

WoW is the king of MMOs. No argument, if you look at the numbers. If that game was F2P and you had to pay real money for inventory or bank space, or to respec or level your professions, I think it would have failed. The reason WoW's numbers are decreasing is because people are looking for something fresh. They reminisce about the vanilla days and want to experience that again. I could play WoW for a month or respec in NW 2 times (well 2.5).

Blizzard showed that if you provide a good enough product and new content, people will pay to be a part of it. PWE has some serious business plan issues going on here IMO.

That's the key, a quality game. The only thing the market has shown is that people won't pay $15/mo for low quality bad games.

azzanhur · May 2013

I will not pay a monthly fee because:

that people won't pay $15/mo for low quality bad games.

...this

Not all is bad. But too much happened. Or should I say, too much did not happen? Open Beta w/o wipe. Come on. You don't pee up the wind^^

odainekromos · May 2013

People would quit after 1 month, because the game has only content for 1-2 weeks to offer...

neomouser · May 2013

keep in mind that it just got released in Open Beta less than a month ago. of course its not going to have full content. ffs every class only has one paragon tree available and all the classes aren't released yet. MMOs are constantly releasing new content. this game hasn't even been released yet. i'm just saying for the future, when they do finalize it and release a polished version, if it was to evolve into a high-quality game (which i believe it has the potential to) would you be willing to pay a monthly subscription or play bare-bones for free?

elessym · May 2013

ancientwolfgr808 wrote: »

Then all of the industry's heavy hitters and pros need to be informed that they are doing it wrong.

Who has succeeded with a pure subscription model? I'm unaware of anyone other than Blizzard, and if WoW launched today, they'd be going F2P in short order as well.

aftershafter · May 2013

I've watched game after game basically fail on the subscription model over the past five years and then switch to the free to play model and succeed. Some of those games are still going strong over five years later (Uncharted Waters Online, my previous game - 2 years, explored the whole game, never spent a dime).

Whatever people say in this thread, whatever they vote in this poll, gamers in general have already voted with their wallets - F2P attracts and keeps more gamers than subscription models, in all but a few cases.

Reality? A vast, VAST majority of you people claiming subscription is really what you want would have never touched this game if it required a subscription, or would have left after a month of whining about it anyways. Move on. Find a game you like. Leave those of us happy with this one alone.

neomouser · May 2013

babababump

erethizon1 · May 2013

neomouser wrote: »

WoW got in before the lock. Honestly, if/when WoW realizes that more money is made per player with a F2P model versus a P2P model we will probably never see another major P2P game again. If WoW were not sitting out there as a role model companies would stop wasting their time with P2P. How many games have we watched turn to F2P after their P2P did not work out well enough? Companies need to realize that if you are not WoW then P2P is probably not going to work out for you.

neomouser · May 2013

you have to buy bags, bank slots, and respec tokens. oh and spend money to get companions that can level past 15. and to increase mount speed. and to level professions.
these are gameplay necessities. seems to me like a p2p in disguise. the f2p model is supposed to cater to those who choose to pay, not put down those who don't by restricting such fundamental elements of MMOs. Zen shop should be for people who want cool looking mounts, or dyes, or weapon skins, not the bread-and-butter elements of RPGs.

impervium · May 2013

Personally? I'd prefer a freemium/hybrid model, with vet rewards and perks, but I say this as someone who almost always subscribes to games if there's an option. I don't think I'm the standard player anymore, and I think the model I prefer tends to leave the standard player feeling out in the cold these days. I think Neverwinter will do just fine, given that a $20 or $30 companion (for instance) costs pretty much the same as it would if half of its price had been absorbed by a standard subscription fee. Of course, those of you who don't want to pay ANYTHING to live large in a game that costs millions to make and manage, you've probably got a few inconvenient life lessons ahead of you.

xxxretsopmi · May 2013

I'll never pay a sub again. Just not worth it for anyone who has enough of a RL. 15$ a month for wasted time is a suckers deal. Devs are starting to realize this.

dragonani · May 2013

The current model is fine. You can get along fine in the game even if you don't buy. This game did a good job with their F2P setup, for those who disagree then you haven't played enough F2P games. More space, mounts, resets, all are often things people pay for in F2P games. Also all of those who are playing F2P will suddenly be unable to play, not everybody can afford subscription fees. And should people have to pay just to have fun with their friends online? A game needs to be really popular to be monthly subscription, and games recently have made more money going from P2P to F2P (Star Wars the Old Rublic & Guild Wars 2) .

zeuseason411 · May 2013

Sub all the way

nevfe · May 2013

I don't think it's that f2p games get more money per player that drives the model, it's the fact that most f2p games just aren't good enough to hold onto subscribers. Therefore some money from f2p is better than very little money from hardly any subscribers. It's the lazy way out for developers, instead of making compelling content.

F2P with in-game purchases or all-inclusive subscription?

Comments