How I believe F2P should have been

[Soluss]

Give players the UI. Give players 2 character slots and starter bag and bank space. Only give players access to the first chapter in the story. Charge a fee of 5 to 10 bucks for each additional chapter of the story per class. Charge a 1 time fee for the current warzones in a bundle. Do the same for Ops, flashpoints and space missions. Quests like the new HK quests can be unlocked from a quest pack charge. Future aditions of the game can be charged for individually, like a future warzone or a future op. Future class stories can also be charged for per class. All the fluff stuff like xp pots and cartel packs and armor and such could remain the same. Oh and let people earn gear and wear it like subs do.

 

I think that would have made everyone happy and still made BW money. People could truely purchase just the content they want without feeling ripped off and nickle and dimed every week. It also benefits subscribers because it gives developers more ambition to continually make more content that isnt just fluff stuff added to the cartel packs.

[astrobearz]

Give players the UI. Give players 2 character slots and starter bag and bank space. Only give players access to the first chapter in the story. Charge a fee of 5 to 10 bucks for each additional chapter of the story per class. Charge a 1 time fee for the current warzones in a bundle. Do the same for Ops, flashpoints and space missions. Quests like the new HK quests can be unlocked from a quest pack charge. Future aditions of the game can be charged for individually, like a future warzone or a future op. Future class stories can also be charged for per class. All the fluff stuff like xp pots and cartel packs and armor and such could remain the same. Oh and let people earn gear and wear it like subs do.

 

I think that would have made everyone happy and still made BW money. People could truely purchase just the content they want without feeling ripped off and nickle and dimed every week. It also benefits subscribers because it gives developers more ambition to continually make more content that isnt just fluff stuff added to the cartel packs.

this shouldve been the f2p model

 

it nice and reasonably fair

[Siggen]

I rly want a permanent subscription plan, a one time fee equal to a few years or something.

Lots of other games have, or had this, look at their pricing compared.

Then they could give like a bit more cartel coins each month than a regular sub.

[DarkVictory]

Give players the UI. Give players 2 character slots and starter bag and bank space. Only give players access to the first chapter in the story. Charge a fee of 5 to 10 bucks for each additional chapter of the story per class. Charge a 1 time fee for the current warzones in a bundle. Do the same for Ops, flashpoints and space missions. Quests like the new HK quests can be unlocked from a quest pack charge. Future aditions of the game can be charged for individually, like a future warzone or a future op. Future class stories can also be charged for per class. All the fluff stuff like xp pots and cartel packs and armor and such could remain the same. Oh and let people earn gear and wear it like subs do.

 

I think that would have made everyone happy and still made BW money. People could truely purchase just the content they want without feeling ripped off and nickle and dimed every week. It also benefits subscribers because it gives developers more ambition to continually make more content that isnt just fluff stuff added to the cartel packs.

This is pretty close to how I thought they were going to do it, which is why I was excited about free to play, as I wanted the option to buy content out right. I don't think the system that they put in place is too bad, although nowhere as good as the system you listed; however, charging for ui bars is silly and sets a bad precedent for the game because it creates the image that ea is trying to nickle and dime a player at every opportunity.

[Soluss]

This is pretty close to how I thought they were going to do it, which is why I was excited about free to play, as I wanted the option to buy content out right. I don't think the system that they put in place is too bad, although nowhere as good as the system you listed; however, charging for ui bars is silly and sets a bad precedent for the game because it creates the image that ea is trying to nickle and dime a player at every opportunity.

 

If this was the way they did it then I would probably play F2P and unlock the content of my choice. I know atleast 12 guildmates that would do the same. As it stands, I cancelled my sub and wont even bother with F2P nor will guildmates. I believe they would have gotten more people and more money this way.

[Arkerus]

If this was the way they did it then I would probably play F2P and unlock the content of my choice. I know atleast 12 guildmates that would do the same. As it stands, I cancelled my sub and wont even bother with F2P nor will guildmates. I believe they would have gotten more people and more money this way.

 

One time fees do not supply a constant stream of cash. There is a reason the model was built the way it was.

[Cretinus]

If this was the way they did it then I would probably play F2P and unlock the content of my choice. I know atleast 12 guildmates that would do the same. As it stands, I cancelled my sub and wont even bother with F2P nor will guildmates. I believe they would have gotten more people and more money this way.

 

Don't get me wrong, but all these posts about how F2P should have beeen, come more or less to the same conclusion: If it was possible to play the complete game for a couple of bucks only, then everybody would be playing.

That's very true, of course. But you will have to keep the game's actual costs in mind: a subscriber pays 180 bucks a year for playing the whole content. Now take the fluff stuff away, as you said, and sell the complete content for a one-time-fee. The fee would have to be something like 150 bucks and not only a few bucks. Now tell me, which F2P player would pay 150 bucks for WZs, OPs and FPs?

Edited November 19, 2012 by Cretinus

[Soluss]

One time fees do not supply a constant stream of cash. There is a reason the model was built the way it was.

 

They do if they keep building content. They do if you charge accordingly.

[Soluss]

Don't get me wrong, but all these posts about how F2P should have beeen, come more or less to the same conclusion: If it was possible to play the complete game for a couple of bucks only, then everybody would be playing.

That's very true, of course. But you will have to keep the game's actual costs in mind: a subscriber pays 180 bucks a year for playing the whole content. Now take the fluff stuff away, as you said, and sell the complete content for a one-time-fee. The fee would have to be something like 150 bucks and not only a few bucks. Now tell me, which F2P player would pay 150 bucks for WZs, OPs and FPs?

 

Not really. Its called only paying for what you want to play. If say I want to play just Operations, there are 4 of them now. Charge me a 1 time fee of 40 bucks for all of them or sell them for 12 bucks a piece individually. If they release 4 operations a year at 10 bucks a pop thats another 40 bucks. I still dont have the full game like the subbers and Im already paying almost 25% of what a subber will pay. Not to mention I still have to unlock the class stories so that I can level that high. Do the same for Warzones, do the same for dungeons. If people want both warzones and ops or dungeons and ops or all 3, they are now paying half to just as much as subscribers in the short run and in the long run more. And they are still limited by character slots, bag space, bank space and things like that. You can adjust any price points. I was just giving an example.

 

I also have to unlock future updates if they raise the level caps. Most likely I will want all the story on each of my characters... Even if I only play 2 characters thats 2 chapters of story I have to buy for each character plus new updates that come out.

 

Now I am vested in the game. I have purchased what I want to purchase as far as content. I will continue purchasing new content in those categories as it comes out. Now, I dont feel nickle and dimed by having to pay for weekly passes. I dont feel ripped off by having to pay for UI unlocks and the ability to loot and wear gear. Now, because of that, I may purchase some vanity stuff too. I would be more willing to purchase bag space and extra character slots and bank space etc.

 

Im also not so damn agitated over poor functionality of the game by seeing messages like "if you were a subscriber this is what you would have looted" and things like not having space for my skills. I wont quit before I even get started, I would be vested.

 

This of course relies on them comming through on content every 6 weeks, like they said they would. Even every 2 months. Id be buying it.

Edited November 19, 2012 by Soluss

[Arkerus]

They do if they keep building content. They do if you charge accordingly.

 

It doesn't work that way. They need cash up front to keep paying for a staff to develop new content. Unless you have a business model like GW2, the traditional route supplies cash.

 

 

The current F2P model is somewhere in between both worlds. The store updates, in theory, provide a constant stream if cash that should, in theory, be less of a barrier than a sub.

 

I don't 100% agree with all of their decisions, but unless you have access to their exact financial models and player data you can't even begin to make a judgement call on what would work better.

 

The model you propose has too many cash shortages...unless you are talking 100 or so dollars to permanently unlock new content.

 

The other problem with your proposal is simply lack of evidence. There was some study done a few years back on cash shops and the results are staggering. They generate billions of dollars because they play at the mentality that small incremental charges are easier for a consumer to stomach. I think it was the magid associates study.

Edited November 19, 2012 by Arkerus

[Soluss]

It doesn't work that way. They need cash up front to keep paying for a staff to develop new content. Unless you have a business model like GW2, the traditional route supplies cash.

 

 

The current F2P model is somewhere in between both worlds. The store updates, in theory, provide a constant stream if cash that should, in theory, be less of a barrier than a sub.

 

I don't 100% agree with all of their decisions, but unless you have access to their exact financial models and player data you can't even begin to make a judgement call on what would work better.

 

The model you propose has too many cash shortages...unless you are talking 100 or so dollars to permanently unlock new content.

 

The other problem with your proposal is simply lack of evidence. There was some study done a few years back on cash shops and the results are staggering. They generate billions of dollars because they play at the mentality that small incremental charges are easier for a consumer to stomach. I think it was the magid associates study.

 

They still have subscribers for consistant cash flow. Its funny you say it doesnt work when it works in other MMOs.

Edited November 19, 2012 by Soluss

[Slurmez]

love how "this is how I would do it" entails people getting more for less, there is a gigantic amount of game available here for nothing

[DarkVictory]

love how "this is how I would do it" entails people getting more for less, there is a gigantic amount of game available here for nothing

 

Actually the model that the op suggested is very similar to the f2p models that other sub based mmos used to add a f2p option (such as Aion, AoC, DCO, DDO, LotR). The op is just suggesting that ea/bioware should look to making their f2p structure as attractive as the competitions. Seems like a reasonable suggestion to me. Sometimes it appears like SWTOR brought in a lot of people that aren't familiar with mmos and don't know what the industry standards are.

[Soluss]

love how "this is how I would do it" entails people getting more for less, there is a gigantic amount of game available here for nothing

 

You wouldnt be getting more for less. This is close to the same model that most other F2P games have done.

 

I love people that criticize when other people make a constructive suggestion post and not a whine thread. Its people like that that turn constructive people into trolls.