test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

sub VS F2P

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
Ask yourself would sto do better with 1 million people, probably paying 5 dollars average a month on c store items?

or 50k people paying 15 dollars a month? :)
Post edited by Unknown User on
«13

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    I am not a big fan of F2P, just my opinion. I would rather pay for sub, and get any items I prefer on the C-store.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    If we ever get an economy implemented they could sell GTCs for in game money. Only the high rollers would typically be able to pay for them and the high rollers are usually end gamers anyways so its a nice reward to them.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    If it ever goes Free to Play before my Lifetime sub pays for itself (that is before 20 months from launch is up), I would definitely want to be compensated for the extra that I paid over non life subs. Otherwise, I'd be fine with it (especially considering that it would get my friends to actually play the game).
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    if its free 2 play and gets more people playing, how doest that affect you? other than saving you money of course.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    If this game goes F2P, it's back to WoW I go. I've never met a F2P game that was even worth looking at, much less playing. I'd be happy to never touch STO again if that happens.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Cryptic isn't considering a pure F2P model.

    If they did consider any change, it looks like they'd look at DDO/LOTRO's hybrid model. This has both a free option and an "access to everything" subscription option.

    For those who want a flat fee, they can choose - others could play freely but have to pay to access the content the subscribers get. F2P is slightly misleading.

    However, dstahl said they'll be looking at LOTRO and DDO's performance closely. Right now, the team is doing fine with the standard subscription model and that's the course for near to mid future.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Cruis.In wrote: »
    if its free 2 play and gets more people playing, how doest that affect you? other than saving you money of course.

    It effects the revenue stream which impacts the size of the Dev team which effects the amount of new content. It increases the number of people playing but lowers the general IQ of the player population. The inconsistancy of the revenue also has various side effects. All of which effect me as a player of this game

    Not to mention the complete and utter bottoming out of cryptics reputation.

    Going F2P also requires pandering to the lowest common denominator which would cause the quality of the new conetent to be lower.

    In general this game would probably go from being complained about and ridiculed to pretty much forgotten.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    It effects the revenue stream which impacts the size of the Dev team which effects the amount of new content. It increases the number of people playing but lowers the general IQ of the player population. The inconsistancy of the revenue also has various side effects. All of which effect me as a player of this game

    Not to mention the complete and utter bottoming out of cryptics reputation.

    Going F2P also requires pandering to the lowest common denominator which would cause the quality of the new conetent to be lower.

    In general this game would probably go from being complained about and ridiculed to pretty much forgotten.

    Come on! I am clearly ready for a Free Realms version of this... I mean, aren't Klingons beta testing that now?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    It effects the revenue stream which impacts the size of the Dev team which effects the amount of new content. It increases the number of people playing but lowers the general IQ of the player population. The inconsistancy of the revenue also has various side effects. All of which effect me as a player of this game

    Not to mention the complete and utter bottoming out of cryptics reputation.

    Going F2P also requires pandering to the lowest common denominator which would cause the quality of the new conetent to be lower.

    In general this game would probably go from being complained about and ridiculed to pretty much forgotten.
    Just like DDO and LOTRO?

    I wish people would research what the market is actually like instead of making up stuff to conform to their beliefs.

    As some who has played DDO (both before and after the F2P/P2P hybrid) and done some beta-testing with the Hybrid Model LOTRO, I can safely say cavilier really hasn't researched this thoroughly.

    In DDO's case, the game has increased in user-base, revenue stream, content development, player retention, player resubscription, etc. You can look at the data: it just adds up for them. It's been a win all-around.

    That's the model being considered (a hybrid of subscriptions and F2P-item mall). So far, that model seems to be doing the opposite to being forgotten. :rolleyes:
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Cruis.In wrote: »
    Ask yourself would sto do better with 1 million people, probably paying 5 dollars average a month on c store items?

    or 50k people paying 15 dollars a month? :)

    I think it would be far higher for a lot of people personally. I mean just look at most of the items in the C-Store now they are already out of site over 5 dollars. I mean the Galaxy X alone cost 25. Can you imagine if they had to get all their money from it how bad it would be, they already waste so much time on just the C-Store. I have yet to play a F2P game that I like not saying there are not good ones out there. However in free to play whoever has the most money has the best game, the most items, and the easiest leveling. I there for divides the player base into the rich who have the real game and pay far more per month than a regular sub and the rest of us who have to have a sub-par game. I would actually rather see them kill the C-Store and raise the monthly sub so that every one can play on the same level and same game.In Lineage 2 for example every one could play on a equal footing and get any thing they wanted with hard work .
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    If they do something like that. I'll just count my money wasted and move on. Some of the moves the company in charge does just don't make sense to me. If I sell a product, I'd want to deliver as much as possible as cheaply as possible. Not as cheap as possible just to say my stuff rivals the numbers of someone else. I'm glad there aren't millions playing STO, we'd have forums as bad as WoW's if that happened.

    The game needs to grow, not pander to grab money. Look at how the handling of the C-store drives people away, thats all wed have to depend on if STO was F2P, and many just don't believe in it.

    Btw, I know there many european and australian players, but the fact of the matter is, the number of potential customers in america outstrips your homelands, and many americans just see a waste of time in the F2P model.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    If they do something like that. I'll just count my money wasted and move on. Some of the moves the company in charge does just don't make sense to me. If I sell a product, I'd want to deliver as much as possible as cheaply as possible. Not as cheap as possible just to say my stuff rivals the numbers of someone else. I'm glad there aren't millions playing STO, we'd have forums as bad as WoW's if that happened.

    The game needs to grow, not pander to grab money. Look at how the handling of the C-store drives people away, thats all wed have to depend on if STO was F2P, and many just don't believe in it.

    Btw, I know there many european and australian players, but the fact of the matter is, the number of potential customers in america outstrips your homelands, and many americans just see a waste of time in the F2P model.
    Many Americans have made the hybrid model DDO uses a success (in fact, DDO's EU server were or still are subscription only). In fact, judging by DDO voice chat data - I'd say there must be a lot of American expatriates in order for this not to be a success with American audiences.

    I could be wrong: it's just the data made available conforms to my anecdotal evidence.

    Research: there's a wide body of evidence that completely contradicts your prejudices. I suggest looking at it.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Cruis.In wrote: »
    Ask yourself would sto do better with 1 million people, probably paying 5 dollars average a month on c store items?

    or 50k people paying 15 dollars a month? :)

    Free to play never, ever ends up cheaper than a monthly sub. It always ends up costing you several hundred dollars more per year to get the same gameplay experience you wouls from a standard sub. It also always comes to pass that in f2p models those who are rich ended having all the fun.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Just like DDO and LOTRO?

    I wish people would research what the market is actually like instead of making up stuff to conform to their beliefs.

    As some who has played DDO (both before and after the F2P/P2P hybrid) and done some beta-testing with the Hybrid Model LOTRO, I can safely say cavilier really hasn't researched this thoroughly.

    In DDO's case, the game has increased in user-base, revenue stream, content development, player retention, player resubscription, etc. You can look at the data: it just adds up for them. It's been a win all-around.

    That's the model being considered (a hybrid of subscriptions and F2P-item mall). So far, that model seems to be doing the opposite to being forgotten. :rolleyes:

    Just to let you in on my secret. I don't research. I say something and if it's far enough off the mark from what someone believes, or the facts, someone will inevevitably either prove me wrong, or prove me right. They do the research.

    Anything that affects the game effects the players, thats undebatable. It's the effects that are debatable.

    Like you said, those games are hybrid models, and aren't free 2 play. If a game is actually free 2 play, then you cause a lot of problems and many people don't play. I don't touch a game that says free 2 play. I'm sure theres hundreds, but every single one of the 5 i've taken the time to try have sucked beyond belief. No, I don't remember their names because they aren't worth the time.

    I don't see titles of threads saying "Lets go Hybrid model like LotRO because thats an awesome idea", I actually see a lot of "STO should be free2play, it'll get more players". I don't support either, but I'm not gonna budge on F2P.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    To be fair, DDO was largely packed with idiots before the move to F2P, so the change couldn't have made things that much worse.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Just to let you in on my secret. I don't research. I say something and if it's far enough off the mark from what someone believes, or the facts, someone will inevevitably either prove me wrong, or prove me right. They do the research.

    Anything that affects the game effects the players, thats undebatable. It's the effects that are debatable.

    Like you said, those games are hybrid models, and aren't free 2 play. If a game is actually free 2 play, then you cause a lot of problems and many people don't play. I don't touch a game that says free 2 play. I'm sure theres hundreds, but every single one of the 5 i've taken the time to try have sucked beyond belief. No, I don't remember their names because they aren't worth the time.

    I don't see titles of threads saying "Lets go Hybrid model like LotRO because thats an awesome idea", I actually see a lot of "STO should be free2play, it'll get more players". I don't support either, but I'm not gonna budge on F2P.

    Theere's a lot of misconceptions from players as to what business models the developers of Star Trek ONline are actually considering.

    A pure F2P item mall is not it (I'm assuming this is what people seem to think).

    On the contrary, Cryptic seems to be monitoring the hybrid model that has made DDO (and potentially LOTRO) late-term successes. Colloquially, I think many players mean the hybrid DDO model when they refer to F2P (especially since Turbine refers to DDO as F2P, despite having a subscription model too). It's by far one of the most financially successful and popular of the F2P combos out there.

    DDO has had some amazing updates since it went F2P - including a guild system so deep and rewarding that I'm surprised no developer has brought up those design choices to make Fleets more engaging.

    Anyways, the point being that F2P/P2P hybrids do work.

    Also, I hope you'd recant that opinion that you're glad STO doesn't have millions of subscribers. I think that would be awesome for the game. :)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Some of what I wrote was answered by darren and I thought better of this.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Theere's a lot of misconceptions from players as to what business models the developers of Star Trek ONline are actually considering.

    A pure F2P item mall is not it (I'm assuming this is what people seem to think).

    On the contrary, Cryptic seems to be monitoring the hybrid model that has made DDO (and potentially LOTRO) late-term successes. Colloquially, I think many players mean the hybrid DDO model when they refer to F2P (especially since Turbine refers to DDO as F2P, despite having a subscription model too). It's by far one of the most financially successful and popular of the F2P combos out there.

    DDO has had some amazing updates since it went F2P - including a guild system so deep and rewarding that I'm surprised no developer has brought up those design choices to make Fleets more engaging.

    Anyways, the point being that F2P/P2P hybrids do work.

    Also, I hope you'd recant that opinion that you're glad STO doesn't have millions of subscribers. I think that would be awesome for the game. :)

    I can get onboard the hybrid model, I can't get onboard the free 2 play one, because as many have said it creates player classes divided by monetary means. Splitting your players into RL social classes doesn't sound good IMO. At the moment the C-store is for the most part cosmetic. I debate on the Gal-X until the new ships come out, then it becomes moot.

    Millions of players would bring in lots of money for development, true, but I don't want the WoW forums in all their horror. I like our forums, even though we rage. I'm sure thats understandable. It's hard to feel like you have a say, when your drowned out by the trolls. I, like many, can't take our money elsewhere and use that as our say, so we come to the forums. I'd hate to see a dedicated lifer forum because there are many great non-lifer players. Just my opinion.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    aww, but I like my prejudices :D

    ok, so, what exactly does your data provide? Does it have number of accounts? Does it have number of seperate people playing? Does it show the numbers in certain geographical areas both before and after the change?

    Whats the quality of that game (since we're on DDO)? How often do they update it with new content? How large is the team that runs it?

    I'll have to dig up the PDF from Paiz's (Turbine exec) keynote address on switching to F2P/P2P hybrid. It's quite astounding as to how many players they've reclaimed and the triple digit growth they've experienced. In terms of profits, F2P actually earns them more than P2P (ironic, isn't it?).

    Funnily enough, other industries have Free/Pay hybrid models. Nine Inch Nails released a 4-disc album (1st disc was free, you could buy the whole thing for under 5 dollars) and released a deluxe version for those that wanted. Millions downloaded the free album off Amazon.com and the limited, super-deluxe edition made a cool million (USD). The kicker? The four-disc album featured no lyrics - it was all instrumental/ambient work (like a film score).

    It's an interesting approach: though market considerations are quite different in the music industry than the video game industry.

    DDO's quality is quite high (now) compared to many P2P options (and especially compared to DDO before the switch).

    They've had five major updates since going F2P/P2P hybrid.

    Let's take a look at one component of one of those updates:
    That's just apart of Update 5 - which also included new missions, QoL fixes, and new feats/options for classes.

    What's intriguing is that DDO is as heavily instanced as STO (perhaps more so due to the wide range of difficulty settings spawning different instances).

    It's intriguing and I'm sure Cryptic is watching these changes like the rest of the industry is.

    (It's a shame games like Vanguard won't be getting this treatment - SOE just laid off the rest of the development team there).
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Let's not forget EVE Online has a hybrid-esque model with the Game Time Cards payed for using in game isk.

    The game gets new content often. The game hasn't suffered.

    Why? Probably because not everybody has the in game money to buy the GTCs. Yet the option is open for end gamers who have established themselves. This keeps the end gamers in the game. If all the endgamers left then the game would suffer.

    I think its a pretty good business tactic. Now STO can't do that quite yet seeing as we don't have a player run economy.

    But...hopefully we will in the near future.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Do Cryptic really need to go F2P at all? I think all they truly need to do is dish out constant updates of both content and C-Store items and gradually lower the prices of subscriptions, both lifetime and monthly and they'd already offer the best of both worlds to who ever is interested, and I think many more would be interested in STO if they could pay $200 (or even less) for a lifetime membership rather than $300.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Right now I'm not getting my $15 worth and I feel that the sub PLUS this C-Store craziness is too much. Perhaps they can lower it to like $10 a month....

    Though I pay yearly so it's not like I'm paying $15 a month. :P
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    I'll have to dig up the PDF from Paiz's (Turbine exec) keynote address on switching to F2P/P2P hybrid. It's quite astounding as to how many players they've reclaimed and the triple digit growth they've experienced. In terms of profits, F2P actually earns them more than P2P (ironic, isn't it?).

    Funnily enough, other industries have Free/Pay hybrid models. Nine Inch Nails released a 4-disc album (1st disc was free, you could buy the whole thing for under 5 dollars) and released a deluxe version for those that wanted. Millions downloaded the free album off Amazon.com and the limited, super-deluxe edition made a cool million (USD). The kicker? The four-disc album featured no lyrics - it was all instrumental/ambient work (like a film score).

    It's an interesting approach: though market considerations are quite different in the music industry than the video game industry.

    DDO's quality is quite high (now) compared to many P2P options (and especially compared to DDO before the switch).

    They've had five major updates since going F2P/P2P hybrid.

    Let's take a look at one component of one of those updates:
    That's just apart of Update 5 - which also included new missions, QoL fixes, and new feats/options for classes.

    What's intriguing is that DDO is as heavily instanced as STO (perhaps more so due to the wide range of difficulty settings spawning different instances).

    It's intriguing and I'm sure Cryptic is watching these changes like the rest of the industry is.

    (It's a shame games like Vanguard won't be getting this treatment - SOE just laid off the rest of the development team there).

    ah, ok. I may have to take another look at DDO when schools out.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    I can get onboard the hybrid model, I can't get onboard the free 2 play one, because as many have said it creates player classes divided by monetary means. Splitting your players into RL social classes doesn't sound good IMO. At the moment the C-store is for the most part cosmetic. I debate on the Gal-X until the new ships come out, then it becomes moot.

    Millions of players would bring in lots of money for development, true, but I don't want the WoW forums in all their horror. I like our forums, even though we rage. I'm sure thats understandable. It's hard to feel like you have a say, when your drowned out by the trolls. I, like many, can't take our money elsewhere and use that as our say, so we come to the forums. I'd hate to see a dedicated lifer forum because there are many great non-lifer players. Just my opinion.

    ok so you rather sto die a slow painful death because you don't want idiots on the forums.

    1) theres an ignore option

    2) forums don't affect enjoyment in game.

    id rather they go with WHATEVER model gives them the most revenue for content and future updates. if thats sub fine, if thats f2p/hybrid fine.

    i dont see how rich players can enjoy a game more. the majority of gamers DO NOT like subscription based games. Ive read some research on it, but the numbers playing mmo's compared to game sales is so small.
    the casual non-mmoers look at ALL mmoers as being hardcore because they pay a monthly for the game.

    and indeed a monthly sub was a big gripe on alot of star trek gamer fans who grew up on the older pc games and it was alien to them.

    as shown by darren and as shown by the DDO dev team f2p can work wonders.

    if anything players with less money can now play the game, since theres no subscription fee, it cant only cater to rich people.

    like i said rather than see sto die a slow bleeding sub death, i hope before it comes to that that while theres enough of a dedicated user base left that the devs see fit to do something about the payment model to get more revenue and player base, after all its supposed to be a MASSIVE multiplayer game.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    i dont care what they do as long as the game is stable, has funds to develop and is a lively place to be
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Cruis.In wrote: »
    ok so you rather sto die a slow painful death because you don't want idiots on the forums.

    1) theres an ignore option

    2) forums don't affect enjoyment in game.

    id rather they go with WHATEVER model gives them the most revenue for content and future updates. if thats sub fine, if thats f2p/hybrid fine.

    i dont see how rich players can enjoy a game more. the majority of gamers DO NOT like subscription based games. Ive read some research on it, but the numbers playing mmo's compared to game sales is so small.
    the casual non-mmoers look at ALL mmoers as being hardcore because they pay a monthly for the game.

    and indeed a monthly sub was a big gripe on alot of star trek gamer fans who grew up on the older pc games and it was alien to them.

    as shown by darren and as shown by the DDO dev team f2p can work wonders.

    if anything players with less money can now play the game, since theres no subscription fee, it cant only cater to rich people.

    like i said rather than see sto die a slow bleeding sub death, i hope before it comes to that that while theres enough of a dedicated user base left that the devs see fit to do something about the payment model to get more revenue and player base, after all its supposed to be a MASSIVE multiplayer game.

    Well atm I have more fun on the forums than in the game. My fleet seems to be gone until S2 comes out. They see no point in the grinding of obsolete badges.

    So your saying that the feedback of the players, the people who play the game, doesn't matter as long as cryptic gets as much money as possible? Odd, but w/e.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Cruis.In wrote: »
    Ask yourself would sto do better with 1 million people, probably paying 5 dollars average a month on c store items?

    or 50k people paying 15 dollars a month? :)

    The answer is...both. You may not know what I'm talking about, but thats ok because I know there are plenty that do :o
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Cruis.In wrote: »
    ok so you rather sto die a slow painful death because you don't want idiots on the forums.

    1) theres an ignore option

    2) forums don't affect enjoyment in game.

    id rather they go with WHATEVER model gives them the most revenue for content and future updates. if thats sub fine, if thats f2p/hybrid fine.

    i dont see how rich players can enjoy a game more. the majority of gamers DO NOT like subscription based games. Ive read some research on it, but the numbers playing mmo's compared to game sales is so small.
    the casual non-mmoers look at ALL mmoers as being hardcore because they pay a monthly for the game.

    and indeed a monthly sub was a big gripe on alot of star trek gamer fans who grew up on the older pc games and it was alien to them.

    as shown by darren and as shown by the DDO dev team f2p can work wonders.

    if anything players with less money can now play the game, since theres no subscription fee, it cant only cater to rich people.

    like i said rather than see sto die a slow bleeding sub death, i hope before it comes to that that while theres enough of a dedicated user base left that the devs see fit to do something about the payment model to get more revenue and player base, after all its supposed to be a MASSIVE multiplayer game.

    It may work to get more money or may not I don't think any one is arguing that it is about the other pros and cons. You claim it wouldn't cater to the rich because there is no sub. I would argue it would because you would have a sub par game if you don't buy all the extras which would end up costing a lot more than a monthly fee. If you look at what they are already putting into the C-Store. Now imagine if this was their only way to get their money. Like I said before I think it would be more fair to kill the C-Store and raise the sub so every one has a good game not just the few who can spend 60 or so a month on the new content in order to keep up.
    I cant say this is true with all F2P games but from the ones I have played it seems to attract worse players as well. A lot of people who just want a game to troll or children who cant get their card from their mom would join so I would say you have a lower quality player base. Also they would then be catering to the lowest common denominator. So you may get more players but the question is are they the kind we would want.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Not to mention the complete and utter bottoming out of cryptics reputation.

    Going F2P also requires pandering to the lowest common denominator which would cause the quality of the new conetent to be lower.

    In general this game would probably go from being complained about and ridiculed to pretty much forgotten.

    This is my general belief as well. F2P will not be good for Cryptic and would hurt them within the marketplace. Who would trust them to make good product if they throw in the towel and go F2P?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Cruis.In wrote: »
    Ask yourself would sto do better with 1 million people, probably paying 5 dollars average a month on c store items?

    or 50k people paying 15 dollars a month? :)

    Question then.
    Will LTS be reimbursed in a F2P version say equal to thier expenditure?
    If so at 5 dollars a month thats roughly guessing 6 years of freebies or $300 dollars worth. Given the amount of lifers thats a lot of non-revenue for Cryptic.
Sign In or Register to comment.