A case for a more robust preferred status

[lollie]

Black Hole and Section X would like a word with you

 

The Rise of the Hutt Cartel would like to yell at you.

[leojreimroc]

Because if people don't prefer to be subscribed and think the deal is better for them if they spend a few dollars in one go in the store, then revenue dies.

 

Your issue is you are thinking entirely selfishly and thinking short term, the reason revenue needs to filter in constantly is for continued development of the game.

 

If you get your one time deal then sit on your money, then the game will die.

 

If f2p people get a better deal and subscribers remain with the same benefits, then all subscribers will cancel their subs and become f2p people.

 

Wrong. Bioware will stop receiving money IF they stop releasing content. If they keep releasing content faster, this will benefit everything, bioware, subs, and preferred players. The fact that I buy an unlock permanently today will affect nothing in two years. The constant release of content is what's important, not the arbitrary locking of some content. This can only hurt the game.

 

This is incorrect. A subscriber needs to buy the same content updates the f2p people have to buy. Therefore renting the game features as opposed to buying them outright becomes less and less attractive as the player continues to play, unless the deal is sweetened.

 

All this thread has done is highlight this.

 

Subs payed half. And it's an expansion. Smaller content updates will most likely be free for subscribers. If not free, then reduced rate, which is a benefit either way.

Edited January 14, 2013 by leojreimroc

[Tumedus]

This is incorrect. A subscriber needs to buy the same content updates the f2p people have to buy. Therefore renting the game features as opposed to buying them outright becomes less and less attractive as the player continues to play, unless the deal is sweetened.

 

All this thread has done is highlight this.

 

Yes they charged for the expansion, but subs get it for half price. On the other hand, F2P have to pay weekly for space flight, ops, and flashpoints. They have to buy section X. They start with fewer character slots and must unlock pay to get access to the other races.

 

And this trend will continue as they continue to add content. The f2p will have to buy access unlocks each time, the subs will get it as part of their sub, or at a reduced cost.

[Ratajack]

The thing that you guys aren't seeing is that people who don't want to sub simply will not sub to MMOs. Medical probes and credit cap is not enough to sub, especially after spending a lot of money on the game for unlocks. Bioware will make more money if they offer these unlocks.

 

I know that this can make subscribers angry, but in the end, it's in bioware's best interest to offer these unlocks, for a price. After buying all of the other unlocks, subbing is not worth it. If they don't sell these, they won't get money for them.

 

Answer me this: After bioware has earned more than $100 for the unlocks that I have bought, why can't I buy the last few? So after spending more than $100, I need to sub? That would basically mean that I just lost $100, and it will just never happen. As people buy more and more unlocks, you will see more and more people buying a la carte. The unlocks posted in my OP are very standard for freemium games (which is what swtor is).

 

-edit-

I'm going to add something else. I don't see why there is hostility between preferred and subscription. Both are a way to pay for the game. Ideally, both payment methods should be around the same amount of cash -or- subscription payers should be given bonuses.

IMO, the model should aim to provide better benefits to subscribers instead of penalizing preferred players. Both types of players spend money, and both want a barrier free gaming experience. The subscriber has the bonus that they are never bothered with small purchases every week/month. They simply get everything and they don't mind paying extra for that. Ideally, they should also get loyalty bonuses. The preferred player gets the advantage of only buying what they want, and not renting content. Both type pay money. Ideally, both should have access to the full game, if enough money is provided.

 

 

Players not paying for a subscription, even preferred players should not have access to the full game. That hundred dollars you spent got you the unlocks you currently enjoy, not the full game. The rest of the unlocks you want will cost you extra, $15 month, to be specific. If you choose not to subscribe, then you have two choices. You can continue to play with the unlocks you have, or you can stop playing.

 

Either way, EA has nothing to lose. You are not paying for a subscription now, so they will not lose your sub fee. If you want to talk about a miniscule one time payment, I'm sure that EA stands to make much more from those that do sub to get access to the full game.

Edited January 14, 2013 by Ratajack

[mothear]

The Rise of the Hutt Cartel would like to yell at you.

Everyone buys 'expansions'

[DeludedAussie]

This is incorrect. A subscriber needs to buy the same content updates the f2p people have to buy. Therefore renting the game features as opposed to buying them outright becomes less and less attractive as the player continues to play, unless the deal is sweetened.

 

the only thing Subbers have to pay for are expansions, but everyone has to pay for those, Large content updates are free to subscribers(this was stated), but F2P players have to pay for them (Think HK-51). Even then, as we clearly see, Subbers only need to pay half the price of expansions.

 

Now, You are asking for something that being subscribed 'unlocks' the ONLY way for you to get it is for Subscribers to get something more.

 

In order of things it goes Subbers - Preffered - F2P

Same thing apply's to features in the game. Subscribers take point in the new things. Now if something purely awesome is released to subscribers only, then, and only then, Would i accept giving preffered and F2P players the option to buy a feautre currently only available to subbers.

[leojreimroc]

Players not paying for a subscription, even preferred players should not have access to the full game. That hundred dollars you spent got you the unlocks you currently enjoy, not the full game. The rest of the unlocks you want will cost you extra, $15 month, to be specific. If you choose not to subscribe, then you have two choices. You can continue to play with the unlocks you have, or you can stop playing.

 

Your opinion is noted. But I'm glad that you're not in charge at BW. In the meantime, I (and other like me) will have some money saved and waiting to spend when they do release these unlocks.

[lollie]

Yes they charged for the expansion, but subs get it for half price. On the other hand, F2P have to pay weekly for space flight, ops, and flashpoints. They have to buy section X. They start with fewer character slots and must unlock pay to get access to the other races.

 

And this trend will continue as they continue to add content. The f2p will have to buy access unlocks each time, the subs will get it as part of their sub, or at a reduced cost.

 

And yet - people here are stating outright they don't see any reason to remain subscribed.

 

Therefore (once again) subscribing needs to offer a far better deal for those who do want to fully experience the game. The whole point of offering a f2p option should be to encourage players to want to stick around while paying MORE money than a subscriber has to pay each month, which they should then realise to be foolish, and so become motivated to hit the "subscribe" button. The deal to subscribe should seem like the far better option to those who wish to continue to play long term.

Edited January 14, 2013 by lollie

[leojreimroc]

Do you also want a permanant unlock for warzones, Flashpoints etc?

 

 

Actually, yes I would, but one thing at a time. Other games sell full access to particular instances, or group of instances. I think this system works very well, especially as they start to add more and more instances. When you have 20-30 instances in your game, you can start to see large payouts by selling permanent access to individual instances, or again, selling them in groups.

[Jeweledleah]

the one thing that pisses me off about freemium accounts is the experience/rested experience penalty. it penalizes people who might want to level together, but are playing via different payment model. making free/prefered pay for perks/unlocks/extra content - fine. limiting gold, GTN, mail functionality - fine. but experience penalty just makes no sense to me, sorry. (and I do think that preffered should be able to buy increased credit limit, just like they get to buy more GTN slots and more character slots)

[leojreimroc]

And yet - people here are stating outright they don't see any reason to remain subscribed.

 

Therefore (once again) subscribing needs to offer a far better deal for those who do want to fully experience the game. The whole point of offering a f2p option should be to encourage players to want to stick around while paying MORE money than a subscriber has to pay each month, which they should then realise to be foolish, and so become motivated to hit the "subscribe" button. The deal to subscribe should seem like the far better option to those who wish to continue to play long term.

 

You're arguing for subscription model as if it's the best option. There is no best option. Both have positives and negatives. Both pay money. Both will make bioware money. Remember, this is only HOW we pay for the game, not the game itself. It's a payment option, that's it. What we're saying is that both payment options should have the whole game available, for a price.

Edited January 14, 2013 by leojreimroc

[Tumedus]

And yet - people here are stating outright they don't see any reason to remain subscribed.

 

Therefore (once again) subscribing needs to offer a far better deal for those who do want to fully experience the game. The whole point of offering a f2p option should be to encourage players to want to stick around while paying MORE money than a subscriber has to pay each month, which they should then realise to be foolish, and so become motivated to hit the "subscribe" button. The deal to subscribe should seem like the far better option to those who wish to continue to play long term.

 

No, your entire premise is built on the idea that subbing is naturally superior in terms of revenue. It is NOT. It should be viewed as an alternative way to pay for access. The end goal is to keep people around so that there are bodies in the game and people spending in the store.

[lollie]

You're arguing for subscription model as if it's the best option. There is no best option.

 

No, the continued revenue model is the best option as it is best for the game overall. Allowing f2p people a way to entirely stop needing to pay money to the business would be foolish.

Edited January 14, 2013 by lollie

[DeludedAussie]

And yet - people here are stating outright they don't see any reason to remain subscribed.

 

Therefore (once again) subscribing needs to offer a far better deal for those who do want to fully experience the game. The whole point of offering a f2p option should be to encourage players to want to stick around while paying MORE money than a subscriber has to pay each month, which they should then realise to be foolish, and so become motivated to hit the "subscribe" button. The deal to subscribe should seem like the far better option to those who wish to continue to play long term.

 

1 in a hundred people are stating that they dont see any reason to being subbed. Does EAware Care? NO. The fact is this thread wasnt made about questioning Subbing and the deal you get with it. It was a Thread about crying because being preffered or F2P doesn't give a player or two all he/she wants. and for those who play long term, its is better, No need to pay for unlocks of any kind, No need to buy med probes. Free content updates, 1/2 price expansons. think about it. You pay for all those unlocks and you still need to spend at least $10 a month if you want to do some pvp and/or pve.

 

now the 'med probes' are making EAWare a lot of money on their own. so, EA is making money, Why would they change it? Because a minority is unhappy. EA dont care about the minority OR the majority. So long as they are rakeing in the cash, Nothing will change. and believe me, they ARE rakeing in the cash...

[leojreimroc]

No, the continued revenue model is the best option as it is best for the game overall. Allowing f2p people a way to entirely stop needing to pay money to the business would be foolish.

 

I think you're probably trolling at this point, because every sub game that has gone the freemium route has made much more money from selling unlocks/items a la carte. So your argument doesn't quite hold up.

Edited January 14, 2013 by leojreimroc

[lollie]

The end goal is to keep people around so that there are bodies in the game and people spending in the store.

 

Most of whom will not continue to spend money in the store once they no longer have to after buying permanent unlocks for everything.

 

That would clearly be idiotic for this business to offer.

[mothear]

And yet - people here are stating outright they don't see any reason to remain subscribed.

 

Therefore (once again) subscribing needs to offer a far better deal for those who do want to fully experience the game. The whole point of offering a f2p option should be to encourage players to want to stick around while paying MORE money than a subscriber has to pay each month, which they should then realise to be foolish, and so become motivated to hit the "subscribe" button. The deal to subscribe should seem like the far better option to those who wish to continue to play long term.

 

On your last point if you want to do FP's/Op's/WZ/Space I agree with you, however you seem fixated with this idea that subscribers need to have a 'better' deal. Subscriber models in my opinion are a dying breed at the moment.

[leojreimroc]

now the 'med probes' are making EAWare a lot of money on their own. so, EA is making money, Why would they change it? Because a minority is unhappy. EA dont care about the minority OR the majority. So long as they are rakeing in the cash, Nothing will change. and believe me, they ARE rakeing in the cash...

 

I'm sure you don't have access to any financial reports from bioware, as I do not either. You can't tell for sure if they're making "a lot" of money on them. Same thing as me, I can't say that they're not selling them. I can say that I don't know many people who buy them continually. I also rarely see them on the gtn. They just don't seem to be great sellers. Although, unlike you, I make the statement that I could be wrong on this.

[lollie]

Subscriber models in my opinion are a dying breed at the moment.

 

Only because subscribing no longer offers enough bang for the buck vs buying things upfront. Sweetening the deal and offering something you simply could not get without it would bring it back into fashion. It's only a few dollars a month after all, so it clearly is not about the amount of money being spent for most normal people. It has to be about lack of perceived benefits.

Edited January 14, 2013 by lollie

[DeludedAussie]

I think you're probably trolling at this point, because every sub game that has gone the freemium route has made much more money from selling unlocks/items a la carte. So your argument doesn't quite hold up.

 

Exactly, And bioware and making heaps of money exactly the way it is, They have a steady revenue from the Subbers and also for those who buy all the unlocks and pay that $10 a month for the pvp/pve. Sure the latter isnt as steady but they get $5 for every Section X unlock that has ever sold (just to put it in perspective the mass of money they made on one unlock). Now imagine how much money they made on Weekly unlocks? it HEAVILY exceeds the ammount of money made for the unlock somebody had to pay for once. so, again i ask, Why would they change it?

[leojreimroc]

Only because subscribing no longer offers enough bang for the buck vs buying things upfront. Sweetening the deal and offering something you simply could not get without it would bring it back into fashion. It's only a few dollars a month after all, so it clearly is not about the amount of money being spent for most normal people. It has to be about lack of perceived benefits.

 

I happen to agree with you here. The way to make the sub appetizing is by giving it extra rewards, not by locking out other paying customers out of important game features such as medical probes, credit caps and other needless restrictions. These should be able to be bought like any other game features. Reward subscribers, don't penalize preferred.

[leojreimroc]

Exactly, And bioware and making heaps of money exactly the way it is, They have a steady revenue from the Subbers and also for those who buy all the unlocks and pay that $10 a month for the pvp/pve. Sure the latter isnt as steady but they get $5 for every Section X unlock that has ever sold (just to put it in perspective the mass of money they made on one unlock). Now imagine how much money they made on Weekly unlocks? it HEAVILY exceeds the ammount of money made for the unlock somebody had to pay for once. so, again i ask, Why would they change it?

 

The credit/commendation cap is not offered, so clearly offering this unlock would make them more money. The medical probes...without seeing how successful they are selling, it's hard to say. Again, I never see them on the gtn, and I don't really know anyone who buys them. I'm just not sure how well or not they are selling to make an informed comment on this. All I know for the probes is that I don't buy the 5 packs, but I would buy a global medical probe unlock.

Edited January 14, 2013 by leojreimroc

[lollie]

I happen to agree with you here. The way to make the sub appetizing is by giving it extra rewards, not by locking out other paying customers out of important game features such as medical probes, credit caps and other needless restrictions. These should be able to be bought like any other game features. Reward subscribers, don't penalize preferred.

 

I completely agree, I would not like to see more lockouts for f2p people at all. Giving the subscribers a better deal would seem to be the obvious solution, especially if they did consider offering more upfront unlocks for the f2p people.

 

Offering more unlocks to the f2p people without offering a better deal to subscribers would make most people unsub in a flash and go f2p. Sweetening the deal to subscribers would be the only way around this, to please both groups...assuming they do still want people to subscribe.

Edited January 14, 2013 by lollie

[DeludedAussie]

I completely agree, I would not like to see more lockouts for f2p people at all. Giving the subscribers a better deal would seem to be the obvious solution, especially if they did consider offering more upfront unlocks for the f2p people.

 

Offering more unlocks to the f2p people without offering a better deal to subscribers would make most people unsub in a flash and go f2p. Sweetening the deal to subscribers would be the only way around this, to please both groups...assuming they do still want people to subscribe.

 

^ This. They need to address the subs BEFORE they address the F2Pers

 

/Thread.

Edited January 14, 2013 by DeludedAussie

[Ratajack]

You do get more stuff - free content unlocks, free cartel coins every month and unlimited access to WZ/FP/OP/Space.

 

Why should most players 'desire' to be subscribers, you are looking at this with a 10 years ago mentality. Subscription is no longer the gold standard in this day and age of the choosy consumer.

 

Why should players who do not pay a sub fee have access to the full game that I pay a sub to experience?