next »

[Nillo]

So, the backstory. A number of my buddies (like, 5-6 of them) want me to start playing Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn with them. I told them I've long been averse to subscription-based games and have never played any game that demanded recurring payments. I don't have a problem with the game per se, it's just that this particular business model bothers me.

But when I started reflecting upon my stance, I came to realize that my reasons for it are pretty shaky. Sure, it could just be because I'm stingy, but that doesn't seem to be the case. After all, I spend ridiculous amounts of money on Steam games that I'm never going to play, so what difference is a small fee going to make?

I'm interested in your opinions. Disregarding the nature and quality of the game itself, how do you feel about paying a subscription for a game? From the perspective of a consumer, are you comfortable with it? And from the perspective of a developer, do you think it's a good idea?

[ProgramGamer]

If most of the subscription money goes to maintaining servers, I don't usually have a problem with that. I guess it would be less ethical to pay a subscription to a company that is already rich, but that's just my hypocrite opinion anyways because I play WOW with my friends.

I will, however, say that a small fee to a company is a small cost for the rewarding experience of playing a game with your friends, and as long as the game provides a good social "vessel" for us to have fun with, I'm okay with it.

[s0]

But when I started reflecting upon my stance, I came to realize that my reasons for it are pretty shaky. Sure, it could just be because I'm stingy, but that doesn't seem to be the case. After all, I spend ridiculous amounts of money on Steam games that I'm never going to play, so what difference is a small fee going to make?

yep i can totally relate to this.

one "consumer rational" reason i can think of is this: if you buy a game but don't play it right away, maybe you'll rediscover it in a year and enjoy it and still get your money's worth (i've done this with steam games a few times). subscription based games otoh get more expensive the less you play them, which also results in a greater sense of commitment (also bc subscriptions make you feel like youre entering into a "club") and greater pressure to play a game even if you don't enjoy it.

second, playing a subscription based game for multiple years is expensive. the only subscription based game ive ever played was WoW and there are many many other games i got more enjoyment and longevity out of for less money than i paid for that. you have to play these games a lot for it to actually pay off vs retail or freemium/f2p games.

third, i want as few companies as possible to have my credit card info, for obvious security reasons. so any subscription based game that does not use (easily accessible to me) prepaid cards or paypal is out of the question to begin with.

for me there's also the fear of forgetting to cancel the subscription and burning lots of money on something i don't use.

there's also the subjective sense that i'm paying for "nothing", same reason i will never buy ingame items in f2p games and stuff like that.

but ya there is nothing inherently terrible about subscriptions despite these qualms

[oahda]

I think this needs to be considered as more of a personal issue than something that can be applied as a general fact (i.e. "the subscription model is objectively a bad thing"). If the money goes to paying for the servers that you need to play, then why not? But as Silbereisen says, that also demands serious investment. For avid WoW players, why not? For people who feel like trying WoW twice a month, nope.

Maybe there could be subscription model based on how much playtime you actually invest?

[ProgramGamer]

but ya there is nothing inherently terrible about subscriptions despite these qualms

I dunno, the whole forced commitment thing is pretty terrible when you think about it. Of course I don't think of it that way because I'm paying to play with friends, that's as if I went to a theme park with them or something. I should also mention that I don't have a solo character in WOW. I play exclusively with my two other friends who have the game.

@Prinsessa
Yeah, payments with an appropriate play time to price ratio would be nice. I don't play that often either so it can get really expensive for on and off players.

[Alevice]

That would work better as prepaid model. And it could escalate quickly tbh. I think the subscription model as it is, forces a degree of commitment to the game i cant be personally arsed with.

[Nillo]

Maybe there could be subscription model based on how much playtime you actually invest?

I'd like to know if any games have tried this, and what the results were in that case. It certainly seems much more friendly to those who have a limited time to play, and it helps mitigate that feeling of commitment Silber mentioned. Although from the developer's perspective, knowing exactly how much money is being paid each month is obviously a big advantage since it means the company can efficiently assign resources to the game.

I imagine it would work like the IP boost in LoL or the battle point booster in Dota, where you purchase a certain number of minutes/hours/days and then you can play until it runs out, and it will last until you choose to use it.

[ThemsAllTook]

I had a long debate with a friend just yesterday about subscription fees for software. He was a big proponent of it, and I was a detractor. After some digging, we found that the two of us have different views on the concept of ownership. I find a lot of value in being able to truly own something, while he's perfectly OK with leasing almost everything. I think the level of tolerance any individual has for subscription-based services will largely depend on their worldview, and I don't think either side has stronger arguments than the other; it really is a matter of personal preference.

Speaking for myself, I don't really like it as a concept. I paid for a WoW subscription for several years and got more than my money's worth out of it, but now that I'm not paying for it anymore, I occasionally lament that the experience of the game is completely closed off to me now. Most games can be preserved in some way to be revisited at any point in the future, but my entire WoW experience is now locked away in the past...not only due to requiring a fee to resubscribe, but also due to game updates irreversibly changing the world and mechanics.

[oahda]

I wasn't thinking so much as you pay per time unit, but have an upper limit. So the "avid" WoW player wouldn't pay more than they pay today, but people who play less could pay less. Like maybe have it tick up to a certain point and then stop.

[ProgramGamer]

Maybe a system where you have "play days" would work? Basically you purchase day points and each day that you decide to play, a point is removed from your account, so you can play as much as you want that day but you can only play so many days. A single bundle of 14 points could last for two months for an on and off player while an avid player would burn it in two weeks, effectively creating a predictable spending schedule while allowing casual people to play without being punished or without feeling like they're paying too much for what they're getting.

Obviously add different bundle options to that and price them fairly and you have a healthy system.

[starsrift]

One thing you're missing is a subtlety that you can appreciate if you're accustomed to F2P games - the playerbase of a subscription MMO tend to be more mature, on average. Why? Because they have credit cards (meaning they're typically an adult with a job) and they don't want to dick around and get themselves account-banned.

It's not like everyone's nice and mature, but there's a lot higher percentage of it.
Add in the fact that you're not paying for power and stuff, and it's a decent model, I think.

Servers aren't free, and FFXIV is under continuous development. In fact, coming in now, you'll have a long way to go, and I guarantee it'll be at least October before you've finished the content and are at end game raid status, if not 2016.

[yeahjim]

I'm interested in your opinions. Disregarding the nature and quality of the game itself, how do you feel about paying a subscription for a game? From the perspective of a consumer, are you comfortable with it? And from the perspective of a developer, do you think it's a good idea?

I'm against any business model that pushes us toward stupid and/or pay to win games. So as long as I can still hate on the freemium model and the proliferation of 99 cent pink gems in video games, I'm fine with a straight subscription model.

[Chromanoid]

Speaking for myself, I don't really like it as a concept. I paid for a WoW subscription for several years and got more than my money's worth out of it, but now that I'm not paying for it anymore, I occasionally lament that the experience of the game is completely closed off to me now.

I always wonder if real life trophies and badges would make a difference. What do you think? For example you play for a certain amount of time and will find a badge with your avatar's name on it in your postbox. Virtual achievements would sometimes be accompanied with engraved real life trophies. This would give you something that lasts and can bring back memories while the game is not accessible anymore.

[Chromanoid]

Maybe there could be subscription model based on how much playtime you actually invest?

I'd like to know if any games have tried this, and what the results were in that case. It certainly seems much more friendly to those who have a limited time to play, and it helps mitigate that feeling of commitment Silber mentioned.

I think it would lead to a pretty lame experience. There is no fun when you see a dollar counter increasing. It would probably kill retention. I don't want to think about money when logging in. There would have to be a monthly cap that would be practically a normal subscription fee. Selfishness and impatience can be a problem in MMOs already, imagine how selfish many players would become when time is literally money.

[SirNiko]

It's my understanding that hourly payment plans are relatively common in Asian markets, where many players will play these games in internet cafes. I know when I played Aion: Tower of Eternity (Briefly, as it is still possibly the worst game I've ever played) they had a special event where you were entered in an hourly drawing for prizes; this was a holdover from Korean markets where it was meant to encourage pay-by-the-hour players to stay in the game.

I also found an article specifically stating that pay-by-the-hour was being implemented for Chinese users of FFXIV.

http://2p.com/8203204_1/FFXIV-Chinese-Servers-Uses-Pay-Per-Hour-Subscription-Model-01-per-Hour-by-flamedust.htm

Personally, the one thing I like to avoid in an MMO is feeling locked out of content and having to pay more money to access it. I want to do difficult quests and puzzles to get content, not buy it. Kingdom of Loathing had a neat system where instead of a monthly fee, they released an item each month for purchase, so buying it each month was equivalent to paying a subscription. I really liked that as a midway point between a monthly subscription and a microtransaction model.

[oahda]

Maybe there could be subscription model based on how much playtime you actually invest?

I'd like to know if any games have tried this, and what the results were in that case. It certainly seems much more friendly to those who have a limited time to play, and it helps mitigate that feeling of commitment Silber mentioned.

I think it would lead to a pretty lame experience. There is no fun when you see a dollar counter increasing. It would probably kill retention. I don't want to think about money when logging in. There would have to be a monthly cap that would be practically a normal subscription fee. Selfishness and impatience can be a problem in MMOs already, imagine how selfish many players would become when time is literally money.

well ban those idiots

[s0]

the iffy thing about that model is that it preys on people with addictive personalities, same reason why certain f2p games are iffy.

(idk maybe i just feel strongly about this because i know someone who dropped out of high school because of WoW and became a total fuckup later in life, but i do think videogame addiction needs to be taken seriously)

[SirNiko]

Videogame addiction needs to be taken seriously as a larger part of addiction in general, but it's important to understand it before applying heavy-handed, wide reaching rules.

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2014-04-01-free-to-play-whales-more-rational-than-assumed

What I've read in relevant studies suggests that F2P profits negligibly from addicts making impulse decisions and mostly from players rationally deciding to expend their income on a digital activity. Under those facts, regulating the market means punishing a wide playerbase for a small chance at protecting a small section of the population.

The best way to handle the problem of addiction is to target the addicts and protect them individually (intervention by family and friends, enrollment in programs). Otherwise, it's no different than letting your small child run unsupervised through the city because you believe you've fenced off everything that could be a danger (which is as impossible as it is to fence off an addict from everything that could harm him or her) . Ultimately you're going to get far better results (and not inconvenience everyone around you) with direct supervision even without any fences.

[Chromanoid]

It's my understanding that hourly payment plans are relatively common in Asian markets, where many players will play these games in internet cafes. I know when I played Aion: Tower of Eternity (Briefly, as it is still possibly the worst game I've ever played) they had a special event where you were entered in an hourly drawing for prizes; this was a holdover from Korean markets where it was meant to encourage pay-by-the-hour players to stay in the game.

I also found an article specifically stating that pay-by-the-hour was being implemented for Chinese users of FFXIV.

AFAIK the games industry and the gaming culture have a very bad reputation in China, also because of these more gambling-like business models and play-styles.

A telling description I read a while ago:

In all conscience, today’s many young writers and directors in China are producing quality works, not to mention older ones like Nobel Prize winner Mo Yan and world famous director Zhang Yimou, while games including currently popular mobile games in China are seldom related to art or culture, and game developers and publishers are universally deemed as potboiler makers and cheaters.

This view might be not that different in Western cultures, but I guess such a pay-per-hour business model would make things worse - even most Telcos don't charge this way, because it just ruins the experience. Gamers here are also much less forgiving when it comes to monetization...

[moomat]

As a player, I agree that subscription-based models are kind of a turn-off for me. I agree with most of what's been said in this thread in terms of what's off-putting about them.

As a developer, though, I have wondered lately about the possibilities for using, for example, scaleable cloud computing to handle large simulations and the like. As a tool for developers, such a possibility opens up a lot of new avenues for providing interesting gameplay, as the computing power that may be required in the future from game development projects may be large enough that it's necessary.

If that were the case, though, the question becomes, from a developer's standpoint, how will we pay for the servers? Raising enough venture capital in advance is risky (how can you accurately predict exactly how much computing power you'll need in advance?) Likewise, crowdfunding campaigns won't be all that effective at covering those costs in advance. You can try to cover it with f2p, but my feeling is that players in general are developing a distaste for f2p (as a player, I'm in that camp). Subscriptions are about the only good idea for covering the ongoing costs.

Just some food for thought from the opposite side of the coin.