Napalmeddie Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Has the idea of charging for amount of time played ever been tried in an MMO or any other online game? What would it be like if those that played 5 hours a week payed less than those that played 20 hours a week? My thought is that part of the reason I don't stick with MMOs is that after awhile the cost to play outweighs how much time I play the game. For me I start thinking "I should play my MMO since I'm subscribing to it, but I'm kind of burnt out on it or I've got other games to play." If I knew I could take a few weeks off and not pay the full fee I'd stick around longer. I know lots of you don't have this problem because of no money restrictions or no time restrictions of you just love the game all the time. I'm sure I'm not the only one that would love to pay say 8 bucks for one month when I only play a few hours and the full 15 when I play more. Does anyone think this could help or hinder MMOs that tried it out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cujojax Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 (edited) Id like it since I'm not a hardcore and especially during the summer months, but honestly the amount some people play it would end up getting absurd I'm sure. Edited May 11, 2012 by cujojax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthDemens Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 It generally wouldn't work well. As it stands right now, we're paying 50 cents a day to play. But that is generally subsidized by subscriptions that only log in for a fraction of those days. Overall, prices would increase (probably severely) if it went to a time played model. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reaperchris Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 It was originally in APB but we never got to see how it worked out because it crashed so fast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zmidponk Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 There is a model used with a few games in places like China whereby people pay for game time on a minute-by-minute, hour-by-hour basis. In other words, if they pay for, say, 24 hours of game time, that doesn't mean they only get to play all day Tuesday, it means they get 24 hours of actually being logged in and playing, so, if they log out after 3 hours, they still have 21 hours left until they log in again. To me, this is a much fairer system, so I don't know why it's not offered more widely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfeisberg Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Has the idea of charging for amount of time played ever been tried in an MMO or any other online game? What would it be like if those that played 5 hours a week payed less than those that played 20 hours a week? My thought is that part of the reason I don't stick with MMOs is that after awhile the cost to play outweighs how much time I play the game. For me I start thinking "I should play my MMO since I'm subscribing to it, but I'm kind of burnt out on it or I've got other games to play." If I knew I could take a few weeks off and not pay the full fee I'd stick around longer. I know lots of you don't have this problem because of no money restrictions or no time restrictions of you just love the game all the time. I'm sure I'm not the only one that would love to pay say 8 bucks for one month when I only play a few hours and the full 15 when I play more. Does anyone think this could help or hinder MMOs that tried it out? Yes it has been tried in pretty much most MMOs that go to places like China, Korea. Over there they pay by the hour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reaperchris Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 It was also in earlier MMOs that played off of AOL the first MMO was called Never Winter Nights and you paid $6 an hour to play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerokTalram Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 (edited) There is a model used with a few games in places like China whereby people pay for game time on a minute-by-minute, hour-by-hour basis. In other words, if they pay for, say, 24 hours of game time, that doesn't mean they only get to play all day Tuesday, it means they get 24 hours of actually being logged in and playing, so, if they log out after 3 hours, they still have 21 hours left until they log in again. To me, this is a much fairer system, so I don't know why it's not offered more widely. It won't work because it would discourage veterans and those that play a lot from being online as much. If you think that some of the servers are dead now, try discouraging heavy play like that. With out the people who play lots, there would be a lot less to group with. Also it would discourage people from playing Operations because of the amount of time it takes to run them. Edited May 11, 2012 by JerokTalram Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SajmanPeetee Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 It wouldnt work as stated above. I play alot and if my bill went above say $20, id just quit and go play wow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kubernetic Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Yes, this is originally how multiplayer online games started out. With services like CompuServe and GEnie way back in the dial-up 80s, you'd wind up paying several dollars per hour, sometimes $5-$40 per hour depending on whether you were playing during off-peak or peak hours. This is one reason why you'll see a lot of us older players scoffing at the notion that $15 a month is some great travesty of cost... we've seen it when it cost a LOT more than that. And the games that cost so much didn't amount to a fraction of what SWTOR offers for that $5 per hour. Entropia is still a pay-to-play game. You have to either find a way to make money in the game or deposit real cash into the game in order to afford new weapons, armors, ammo and to cover repair costs. When I was playing that in earnest, it would cost me anywhere from $1.80-$3.50 per hour of time played. If you're in space manning a gun turret on a capital ship, each time you fire the cannon, that's $1.00 USD in ammo costs per shot. Get into a tangle with some pirates and you could easily eat a nice chunk out of your wallet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ultimateballoon Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Perhaps if it were optional... For example, you could either choose to pay the $15 monthly fee for unlimited access, or buy a time card with like 50 hours or something for like $25. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zmidponk Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 It won't work because it would discourage veterans and those that play a lot from being online as much. If you think that some of the servers are dead now, try discouraging heavy play like that. With out the people who play lots, there would be a lot less to group with. Also it would discourage people from playing Operations because of the amount of time it takes to run them. Well, considering the level of those subscriptions, I think only ludicrously heavy players might be discouraged. WoW in China, for example, has cards that give 4000 minutes (66.6 hours) for 30 RMB ($4.74, 3.67 Euros or £2.94). One months subscription is enough to buy three of those, giving you 200 hours of actually being logged in and playing per month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GRINnBARRETT Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 The monthly cost is so nominal, I don't see why any developer/producer would even bother with it. I could see allowing us to suspend out account & then when we turn it back on, the sub starting up again. This would work great for people that have to travel or say, our armed forces. Not holding my breath or anything, just an idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorrinRaddd Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Id never play an MMO again that should just be optional not mandatory everrrrrrrrr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kourage Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 It's 50 cents a day. It doesn't matter if you only play 30 mins a day, it's worth 50 cents. Plus, already paid $60 for the game. Not going to cancel till I run out of things to do. If you ran out of things to do, then by all means quit and play something else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kubernetic Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 [quote name='Kourage']It's 50 cents a day. It doesn't matter if you only play 30 mins a day, it's worth 50 cents. Plus, already paid $60 for the game. Not going to cancel till I run out of things to do. If you ran out of things to do, then by all means quit and play something else.[/QUOTE] I think it's hard for some of us who used to spend time in arcades to fathom the thought that 50 cents is so much. We'd drop 50 cents into a stand-up arcade game just for ONE play that might last 5 to 10 minutes. And if you lost, INSERT COINS TO CONTINUE... LOL $15 a month for all the play time I can handle? HELL YES, sign me up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HelinCarnate Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Perhaps if it were optional... For example, you could either choose to pay the $15 monthly fee for unlimited access, or buy a time card with like 50 hours or something for like $25. Then all the people that don't play often go to the pay by the hour concept and give BW less money. Where do they make it up? On people that play more often. What happens when you make your hardcore gamers pay more? They leave. The only way that EA would allow any kind of change like this would be if it made them more money. Not going to happen with people paying less unless that change can spark a huge increase in customers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkhosis Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 They don't do it because it's much easier to calculate projected revenue per month. The amount would vary way too much. The very first multiplayer games namely, Scepter of Goth, used a similar pay per hour system. You'd buy credits and they'd tick down. It made for going AFK and or other things very stressful, lol. Especially back then when it was like 8$ an hour to play/ Over a 300 baud modem no less! I mowed lawns to pay for my addiction back then circa 1981. 100$ a month 1980's money was a lot for a 13 year old. Paying per month is just more reasonable in the long run and makes more sense than any other system that's come before it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponytail Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 I recall paying $9.95/hour for Gemstone II on Genie. That didn't include phone charges and the Genie subscription charges. I think $15/month is a much better deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ConradLionhart Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 That's how it works for China and Korea. You pay based on an hourly rate or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morridan Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Has the idea of charging for amount of time played ever been tried in an MMO or any other online game? What would it be like if those that played 5 hours a week payed less than those that played 20 hours a week? My thought is that part of the reason I don't stick with MMOs is that after awhile the cost to play outweighs how much time I play the game. For me I start thinking "I should play my MMO since I'm subscribing to it, but I'm kind of burnt out on it or I've got other games to play." If I knew I could take a few weeks off and not pay the full fee I'd stick around longer. I know lots of you don't have this problem because of no money restrictions or no time restrictions of you just love the game all the time. I'm sure I'm not the only one that would love to pay say 8 bucks for one month when I only play a few hours and the full 15 when I play more. Does anyone think this could help or hinder MMOs that tried it out? This would be a terrible model. 1.) server populations vary vastly, and as such it would cost person x on low pop server more money to run a FP than it would for someone on a vastly populated server. Safeguards to provide a similar experience over every server would have to be taken. 2.) the cap would have to be a realistic $$ amount like the standard $15 sub fee, at which point BW would be paying the same for maintenance / upkeep to provide the service for people while they pay much less. This would mean BW would make less money, off the same subscriber base. In the world of MMO's, excepting extenuating circumstances, the playerbase consists of two types of players. Those who play very little, or those who do nothing but play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Napalmeddie Posted May 12, 2012 Author Share Posted May 12, 2012 I'm thinking more along the lines of having 2 or 3 tiers of pay. 15 bucks would be the top tier offering unlimited time as it is right now. Maybe the next tier could be 10 or 8 bucks for some smaller increment of play time. I agree that just leaving the meter running and charging you for every moment you play wouldn't be a good idea! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gungan Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 (edited) I would rather pay for the box, pay no monthly fee, then pay $10 bucks for each new content patch. I do not feel I'm getting money sub fee worth when I can't even find enough people to do the content i'm actually interesting in. Edited May 12, 2012 by Gungan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metalgearyoda Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 Has the idea of charging for amount of time played ever been tried in an MMO or any other online game? What would it be like if those that played 5 hours a week payed less than those that played 20 hours a week? My thought is that part of the reason I don't stick with MMOs is that after awhile the cost to play outweighs how much time I play the game. For me I start thinking "I should play my MMO since I'm subscribing to it, but I'm kind of burnt out on it or I've got other games to play." If I knew I could take a few weeks off and not pay the full fee I'd stick around longer. I know lots of you don't have this problem because of no money restrictions or no time restrictions of you just love the game all the time. I'm sure I'm not the only one that would love to pay say 8 bucks for one month when I only play a few hours and the full 15 when I play more. Does anyone think this could help or hinder MMOs that tried it out? I can imagine it right now... "You are going to charge me while I wait for a group? Ive been trying to get a group for foundry for 3 hours. you are really going to charge me for that?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cotheer Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 Well i wouldn't go into such lvl of granularity as to pay per hour, but pay per day, and bill at the end of the month wouldn't be too bad in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts