Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
MMO with two servers, one subscription, the other Free To play
DrDread74
Member UncommonPosts: 308
What do you think of an MMO game that has two servers you can join. One is a subscription based model and no cash shop, the other is free to play with a cash shop and an acceptable amount of pay to win. You can choose which one you want to play on.
Do you think this would attract more player base? Would all the people willing to pay all be on the subscription server? Would the F2P server be dominated by non-paying players but with a small handful of big whales?
Would this be a good or bad thing?
http://baronsofthegalaxy.com/ An MMO game I created, solo. It's live now and absolutely free to play!
Comments
Sub and F2P should be set up to rather complement each other instead of competing with each other and offer a choice with each model providing value on it's own -instead of one thriving on simply being "better than the other".
Plus, usually the gap between both is too wide and makes the decision towards one or another too easy or one of both models comes with a major turn off like i.e. P2W options.
One step could be to lower the sub from 12,99 to say 9,99 and don't try to push the players to sub with grinds of death or other annoyances in your F2P model.
Ideally they should be rather close together so that people are encouraged to hop on and off and feel ok with any of them at a time.
A big problem many people have with a monthly subscription fee is that they feel obligated to play the game in all the free time they have or they are wasting their money. Nobody likes to pay for something they don't get to use. Either they will pay and try to get the most out of it or they choose not to pay for it at all. With this in mind, a free to play game, even with the annoyance of the cash shop, is still a more appealing option to a casual player who might only get to play on the weekends than paying for an entire month of a game to only play a few days out of that month.
What if instead of paying $15 for a 30-day subscription that you may or may not get to use much depending on how life goes during the month you instead pay $15 for 720 hours (the equal of 30 days) of in-game time?* By paying this way you are using 100% of the time you paid for since only in-game hours count toward your subscription fee. Once your paid time runs out you just buy more and continue.
This way casual players or anyone without enough time to make a traditional subscription worth the money can still enjoy a game without a cash shop, content locked behind pay walls, etc. and the company can still make money.
* the pricing might need some work due to the fact that even the most hardcore players cant play 24/7 and need sleep but this is just as an example.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
Server A. Pay-to-play only. No cash shop or cash shop for in-game currency. Many resources, more generous awards.
Server B: free-to-play. Cash shop for $/smth like Turbine points. Less resources, not-so-generous quest awards. Limited number of toons, longer waiting time, longer time for support to respond.
http://www.mmoblogg.wordpress.com
Easy to see why most developers don't try this setup...
Besides, you can't fight the power of human psychology. "Free" will always win, even if it's not actually free...
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
I am interested, because I haven't played any games that have operated under this model so I don't know.
What games have done this? You make it sound like there is multiple examples of it failing.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
CO has a similar one, and while it was the logical way for separating sub and free, it was quite a backlash at the f2p switch. It's like a brick wall, even with the later added FF slot for free players. While there's only one server, from the player's point of view it acts like the OP's version, if cancel the sub they can't access their characters (but can roll free ones), and after resub they can't access the free characters.
So yep, I think Kano's right, in a similar setting the sub server would go empty slowly, with only a handful players remaining, because from the player's side it's a better pick (except those few who are really into the game) to use the free server. Not to mention from the publisher's side
(on a sidenote, I think threads like this are based on a mistake, but that could be a topic of its own: that among the few players who still use the forums at all, the sub option has a large share. Which is not the case if you check the playerbase as a whole.
Heck, just ask the teens around you, they don't even understand the idea... maybe they can relate a general sub, like SOE's / now DB's All-Access, for a price play all the games the company has ("it's like Netflix or Prime on Amazon"), or the "sub" on PS with the regular gift games in it...
but paying every month, in advance, for the access of 1 single game? They think it's dumb - and it's understandable, might I add, with the current market where they're literally flooded with games to play, either for free, or for a one-time purchase.)
What about a game where you can subscribe or play free. If you play free, you can only be a somewhat weak race, lets say Orcs. If you sub you can play stronger races like humans. The free players would be no match for a sub player one on one but in groups they would be much more effective. It is sorta like the real premise behind warhammer 40k, the orcs by themselves had much less effective weapons and were only feared due to their numbers.
One of the issues in todays MMO's that do F2P is the subscriber benefits are not always worth the sub. Extra character slots and extra dungeon runs are not worth the $15 a month to many players. Allowing subscribers to be noticeably more powerful than free players would be a very strong benefit to subscribing.
Developing and maintaining two different versions of the same game is what doubles the cost. And hugely increases the risk of patches getting mixed-up, etc.
Easy to see why most developers don't try this setup...
Non-Spending Customers want to Play 4 Free (P4F). Those willing to buy P2W will, and will enjoy themselves. Those wanting not to spend money, will complain about P2W and the cash shop in general.
Some subscribers will rush to endgame content, most wont. When I was in Desolace, there were 4 other players on the map. I think paying customers will feel the world is too empty. Socializers will feel left out and alone. Achievers will feel the information they have collected is going to waste. Explorer will be able to go anywhere. Killers will never leave the PvP arenas, but will complain about seeing the same people every time. Even if they can go to a crowded capital city, some will feel lonely, and neglected, then leave. This all assumes that the game is flawless, or as near flawless to be acceptable to play.
I used to play 30+ hours a week on MMOs. I now play 15+ a week. At my peak I was subscribed to 11 MMOs ($165) at once. So I was spending approximately $1.40 an hour, now I spend $0.25 an hour. No changing the subscription model is not the solution.
Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
As if it could exist, without being payed for.
F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.
Even telemarketers wouldn't think that.
It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
I don't feel like I have to talk on my phone all the time or else I've wasted money or that i need to go to the gym very minute of my free time or else I've wasted money or that I need to watch my netflix all the time or else I've wasted money.
People really do make their own hells.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Pay for a block of hours sounds like an interesting concept. You might have the reverse problem though were every minute you spend waiting for a group or having some PvP force you to respawn would infuriate you
How about a Subscription system that sets how many hours a day you can play. Say 2-3 hours a day or whatever amount you choose to be reasonable. If you go past that time in a single day it will charge you a small amount of overpay. I can guarantee you I'm not going to put more than 2 hours a day into an MMO. Some people play for 10.
Another idea is to make a "Casual" vs "Hardcore" subscription. The casual one starts to limit how much XP or Questing or whatever you can do in a day before giving out reduced XP. Making it so after an hour or two, your XP gain will start to drop. The hardcore version doesn't do that.
That model would be a very cheap subscription but with an option to pay MORE for HARDER PLAY.
http://baronsofthegalaxy.com/ An MMO game I created, solo. It's live now and absolutely free to play!
yes, I of course saw them both as well. Just the two then?
What this thread is really about is moving spending customers to one server, along with P2W cash shops. Then having an absolutely free, no hassle, no grind, no cost server, paid for by the subscribers.
Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
As if it could exist, without being payed for.
F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.
Even telemarketers wouldn't think that.
It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.