We SHOULD Pay to Play

[InnannI]

Ok, yes free is always nice but I think the Free to play MMOR games need to shorten the Free Options and instead of charging $15, give tiered access at a cost of $5 per segment up to the $15 giving FULL access. Come on people, they need to make money or they don't keep going. Hell, people begging in SF get more than $5 per hour in the right areas.

The games should start as Free to Play with Uber Limitations. Enough play to let you feel the game, experience the art, see if it does seem like something you can have fun with. Then perhaps for $5, limit the zones you can get into, or something else. Something on the line of 25% access for the first $5, 50% for the second, and 100% access for the third. Then perhaps for an additional $5 per month, special stuff. like Bases/buildings that we can customize the build. Or Personal ships that we can design. Etc. All games should go this direction.

Additionally, if you loose your job or something, you should not loose your toons, BUT until you are paying again your limited in what you get to do. YOu don't LOOSE what you had, you just don't have access to it all.

We need to pay to play so that the games continue giving great service. Great Art, and continually grow and develop.

[CFeuer]

I got news for you OP, the PERFERED status has Uber limitations as is!

[Nommaz]

I got news for you OP, the PERFERED status has Uber limitations as is!

 

^ This there are F2P games out now and coming that allow far more access than this does now, the less restrictions the more people that you will see playing, then as more people come more will sub. simple really, lock it up to much and it goes out of the market, if I wasn't paying a sub I wouldn't be playing to many restrictions...

[CaptRavenous]

Its amazing how, in the days of arcades, you could easily walk into an arcade and spend 20$ to 50$ in an hour.

 

No one complained that the games cost 25 cents per play, and were designed to be nigh-unbeatable, so people would keep feeding them quarters.

 

Then came the console games. 300$ - 500$ to buy the console. 60$ to 80$ per game.

 

We've come a long way since the 1970s. Now we can buy a game for 60$ to 80$, and pay 15$ a month to play them over a long period of time, with no costs over and above those of initial cost and subscription necessary.

 

Compare spending 20$ in an arcade in one hour, to 15$ of unlimited play over a month.

 

You're already getting a good deal, but are too spoiled by the present entertainment market to realize it.

 

P.S.: Every F2P game has people complaining about F2P restrictions in their games, because so many people want less restrictions so they can unsub and play free. Not gonna happen. While SW:TOR will probably tweak their model over time, it will NEVER be comfortable enough to play without ever spending a dime. Bioware would be stupid to make it so. F2P exists to entice you to sub. If restrictions are making you feel unsatisfied with the game and you wish for less restrictions, then they are accomplishing their job. If you wish for less restrictions, that's what the subscription option is for.

Edited May 22, 2013 by CaptRavenous

[Paitryn]

20 bucks at the arcade? possible sure, but not a lot of people did that and it was a more social point than games really are now.

 

given the expectations of the game and its lifespan, paying 60 bucks plus 180 bucks a year seems more than an arcade. given my experiences with arcade games, you would at best drop 5 bucks in a visit, if you went once a week thats 20 a month 240 in a year. so exactly the same cost when factoring in the initial box price. but this doesn't include your computer or any console you may own at this point that replaces one. If not for the games, are needs on hardware are much smaller so your average computer a gamer uses would be nonexistant on the consumer market.

 

As for MMO's the complaint currently is content is provided to subs unlimted but they still have to pay microtransactions. Some points I both agree and disagree with. Most of SWTOR's CM items are purely cosmetic and impact the game in no way other than asthetics so I disagree with the crying of foul here. I do agree about the way the CM market is currently handling purchases in relation to subscribers in the fact that subs are now being milked. They don't have to fall for the hype of course, but they also do not need to be targetted either. 80 cents for a haircut is obviously a full price target to subscribers as you would have to be a complete moron to think a F2Per is going to spend $1.60 for one. Thats just a hair change, not the color. So its a nickel and dime method of pulling your "freebie" coins away from you so you still pay money for the cartel packs. Wise not to buy of course, but again players got used to the concept so its running with it.

 

My theory is that subs are the ones buying from the shop the most, not the F2Pers.

[Projawa]

BW stated at the recent cantina tour event that subs spend the most on the market, far eclipsing the amount that free players spend.

 

F2P is there to entice new players to sub. But in the case of this game, F2P was the saving grace less for the number of new players it signed up and more because the microtransactions shop that came with it is an effective way of extracting a great deal more money from existing subscribers.

 

To state the duh obvious: ultimately, SOMEONE has to pay the bills. Right now that someone are spend-happy subscribers whom the f2pers are essentially mooching. If these subs didn't exist, the game would only carry on in a non-vegetative state if EA suddenly became a non-profit charity with government subsidies, or if a rich guy decided to buy it out so he could personally fund this game as a "gesture to gamers everywhere". I'd love to get unrestricted access for zilch (as with many things in life), so I do the next best thing which is sub.

Edited May 23, 2013 by Projawa

[Starglitter]

I can't disagree with the overall principle you should pay something for something given, its rather simple to understand.

 

I also could not disagree that what you receive should be in a basis of what you paid, once more a rather simple principle.

 

With FTP you can't universaly brush all non-subscribers as moochers or leaches, for some do spend real money unlocking features, etc and could possible invest more money than a normal subscriber as myself who does not spend additional money at the game's store.

 

As i see it, you have 4 types of customers:

 

FTP and buys nothing: Could be judged as moochers, bu they do bring value for those of us who contribute financially to the game: Without them there would not be much of a player base to play with., and as counter-intuitive as that may appear would make our paying for a service relatively speaking pointless.

 

FTP and buy store products: Depending on how much or little the purchase each month they could out-shine subscribers or be a bit better than the leach class.

 

Subscribers: Their commitment to pay to play, helps the company depend on a baseline income to plan operations, even better are those who pay for multiple months such as myself who pay for quaterly service.

 

Subscribers and Store Buyers: This would be ultimate customer for they are paying for base services and then for premium services.

 

For me, a very old timer, I grew up with the subscription gave you all the game had to offer; but that was before FTP. I would like to see an added category, sure it cost more per month, that actually does give you all in accordance to the old day practice.

 

Now for the FTP who does not contribute, they help the game by their presence, teaming, and expertise they lend which in a way is a contribution in making this a more nejoyable game.

 

Sue