62 replies to this topic

[Dagger6T6]

Is this my lifetime? or the game's lifetime?

[vortas]

i'd probaly go for a lifetime sub if they offered it. Did it for sto when it was a subcription game and bought a lifetime for col got bored with sto after a couple of years though

[DeathAxle]

I think Cryptic has pretty much left the lifetime sub model tarnished and with a lot of bad feeling.

With STO the devs fawned over the lifetimers and pretty much viewed the monthly players as sheep.

It even had a post from one developer using a stupid anaology about cake and how the monthly players should be luckly that they were even getting some cake, it all got pretty nasty and showed how if not done carefully how you can alienate your playerbase.

But the game is using a F2P model rather than subscription and so I think the founders program is pretty much as close to a lifetime package as you will get.

[XxZylonxX]

No just no. Life time subscriptions are a thing from the past.
When subscribtion games where the norm.

Nowadays companies that offer a life time subscription do it for a cashgrab, when they know their game is bad or know in advance their game is gonna go F2P in a few months time.

That and you have no more say in the direction the game is going, since you payed so much up front.
You can not cancel your subscribtion or refuse to by ingame currency,

I think these times life time subscriptions should come iwht a big red WARNING label and the moment you click the order button it should play a sound...... SUCKER

[XxZylonxX]

torytrae74, on 02 July 2012 - 05:45 AM, said:

After Hellgate London I will never ever again get a Lifetime sub ... for apparent reasons.

I feel bad for you...

[Project_Mercy]

GHQCommander, on 02 July 2012 - 02:53 AM, said:

I suspect people who paid $120, are voting no, because they don't like the idea that their $120 makes them a founder only.

I voted no, but not for those reasons.

I vote no to the lifetime, because I find it's a short-term cash grab. It serves the same purpose as the founder's sale. Since we had the founders sale, a lifetime membership just seems irrational. If you look at it from a business perspective, the purpose of the lifetime is to compute the average sub time it would take someone to get to "max" and then fix that in as a price. It's only of real value if you're slower than average. To me, it feels duplicit.

I voted no for veterans rewards purely because of what happened in Guild Wars as a result. I didn't play guild wars early on, and went in later. I found there was an unfriendly/elitist attitude for it. It didn't really improve the game at all.

[Mu]

Whenever I hear about lifetime subscriptions I think of Hellgate London and laugh. You'd think people would learn their lesson after that one.

Seriously it's not like your subscription running out in MWO means you can't play...in fact if you don't really need EXP and c-bills why would you even want the premium sub?

[Rummy Kegstealer]

I'm a lifer I'm never quitting this game! It's been way to long!

[Greenomen]

I have a STO life time subscription. And I think Cryptic is well a head on the deal. I have played less than 8 months worth of game time. After the STO replease, I played for a steady 3 months after the release. Now I will pop on and off playing if I'm in the mood or a buddy is playing it. I do like playing STO but it lacks many things (off topic) to hold my attention. Yet, I still find myself logging back on and buying silly stuff from the Cryptic store.

I'm thinking MWO will be about the same sort of game. I'm sure this will be really fun to play. In August I'm planing on putting in many hours for the first few months. But after that, I'm thinking it may just become a jump on, shoot a few mechs and jump off if I'm in the mood or if a buddy is online.

I would gladly buy a life time membership. To help support this great thing Piranha is doing and to keep me tied to the game.

[Rolan26]

torytrae74, on 02 July 2012 - 05:45 AM, said:

After Hellgate London I will never ever again get a Lifetime sub ... for apparent reasons.

I feel your pain... even though it has been years...

[Fiachdubh]

I think a PGI would be shooting itself in the foot by offering a lifetime subscription on launch. BT has a very strong support base so many of those playing the game would be paying for a subscription, some constant others every now and then, and would be sticking with the game for a long time anyway so PGI would be losing out on revenue in the long run. It may be an idea further down the line.

[Cole Christensen]

I love the idea of a lifetime sub. I want my Founders tag AND my Lifetime tag.

[Schtirlitz]

I think devs may change subscription policy depending on number of players.

[Glythe]

From what I've seen veteran rewards tend to create a lot of hate and jealousy from folks who can't get the same perks in paid subscription games.

Why can't some guy buy a veteran reward without doing all the stuff in the middle? It would make no sense with the F2P model. "You can buy anything from the store you want except you can't buy that Hula girl unless you've already bought 6 months of premium." That is just a recipe of failure waiting to happen. As you will make people who want to buy that cool stuff rather angry and you'll just lose money from potential sales.

Edited by Glythe, 02 July 2012 - 09:11 AM.

[Black Storm]

I think 90 days would be better. Rounds down to roughly 3 months. Makes more sense to me. Maybe even implement a veteran reward points system, so you can turn in your points to buy something minor, or save them up to buy something awesome. If a point system is used, then points should be awarded every month.

What the reward system shouldn't be, is something that will give you a major advantage on the battlefield. If we use the point system, it becomes flexible. Use points to buy C-bills, more color options for the mech paint jobs, a hula girl, custom insignia on the mech and maybe an extra mech slot. Possibly even allow player to contribute points to their merc company to buy something for the company. There are many possibilities that won't generate hate.

As far as there being an elitist attitude, can't be avoided. There will always be those who are elitists. I tend to put them on ignore, as I try to help newbs out, rather than insult them for not knowing something.

Edited by Black Storm, 02 July 2012 - 09:35 AM.

[ORIGINAL SteelWolf]

Would MWO be worth a LTS? yes
Should it have a LTS? unknown.

Your wording of the question is almost bias.

[Xantha]

DeathAxle, on 02 July 2012 - 06:23 AM, said:

I think Cryptic has pretty much left the lifetime sub model tarnished and with a lot of bad feeling.

I did the lifetime for Champions Online and have regretted it every since. The game was rock solid for about as much as you could play during the limited beta when I got in. Honestly, I enjoyed the game until I got max level and had nothing to do. The game play experience was also very limited as you played new characters so there wasn't a lot of replay value either.

The problem of course was that they pressured you into getting it before you really got much more than a glimpse of the system and those of use that did felt really cheated. They must have over compensated for how they treated us on CO to the guys in STO because we got none of that love in CO.


Biggest knock about lifetime is it usually means the game sucks and the developer is trying to cover costs as best they can before they release it for general public to consume and review.

I am not a big fan of monthly fees as I can only really do 1 game with a monthly fee. Monthly fees are a potential hindrance in getting a large fan base. I personally would prefer no monthly fee and no lifetime option. Gaming companies need to come up with creative short term offerings that players can purchase to sustain the game without providing a considerable playing edge. (Ie. $5 to enter a monthly tournament?) The hard core players and casuals that have $ at the time can jump in as they want and help fund the game without gaining a ANY advantage over players that don't contribute.

This thread pushing for "Monthly Subscription, Veteran Rewards (A Reward for each 100 Days of a Monthly Subscription)" is a HORRIBLE idea. You're already getting 50% more cbills and XP by being a subscriber. As a future subscriber, I DO NOT want this because you're going to make the distance EVEN further between myself and players who cannot afford to subscribe. I have several friends who are either casually interested in Battletech or honestly cannot afford the monthly fee. I want them as well as 1000s of other players to be able to easily jump into the game and play matches with me without feeling handicapped. Along with many of you, I am hard core battletech fan who plans and hopes to play this game long term. Part of that is having my friends and a large player pool in the game.

None of us want's to play in ghost towns or sit in match queues for an hour an a half, so the 95% that don't pay need not be handicapped or else MWOnline will start to look like my SW:TOR server... Dead.

[Darq]

I think a lifetime subscription is a good idea, but I put no - because of the price point indicated. I would have to pay regularly for over two and a half years before that option becomes financially advantageous to me and even then the advantage is real small for the next bunch of time (I save $10 out of $310 the 31st month, $20 the next etc).

That is a long long long time to be playing a game regularly. The only game so far I have played that long continuously has been World of Warcraft and I have played about every MMO that has come down the pipes.

The price point needs to be lower to be attractive to me. Now I would seriously consider $150, but not $300.

<Troll Disclaimer: These represent my own oppinions. I do not in anyway pretend to represent anyone else's>

[zencynic]

No, thank you. In MMOs, my money is my voice to the company. Don't get me wrong, I love forums, but I feel the need for a fiscal feedback mechanism.

MWO will hopefully be an always-growing MMO with new updates, new content, new mechanics, balance tweaks, etc. I would like to see MWO have a good run. 5-10 years, ending only at the launch of MWO2, which uses some sort of revolutionary break-through 3D "brain-jack" technology.

I am an optimistic skeptic.

A lifetime subscription feels like I vote once, then hope for the best.

That being said, I don't mind if they do have a lifetime subscription. Handled correctly, a lifetime subscription offering provides a company with an influx of resources, usable to make a great game or make a great game even better.

It's just likely not for me. In the end, I think this is the best arrangement for me. A lifetime subscription would probably save me money in the long run. But that means it would probably cost PGI money in the long run.

I am willing to pay a bit more to feel like I have a say, even if all I say is, "Yes, yes. More please"

[Wildcat]

very interesting points

one problem is the Attitude of a Company, many Companies do seem to be out for them selfs and dont care about the community, some even seem to be run by Corporate Psychopaths.... other companies even try and tell you how to have fun... Blizzard....

I think many have had bad experiences, with gaming Companies, and does leave a bitter taste in your mouth...


MWO Team seems to be cool tho, so will see how they do over time

ORIGINAL SteelWolf, on 02 July 2012 - 09:41 AM, said:

Would MWO be worth a LTS? yes
Should it have a LTS? unknown.

Your wording of the question is almost bias.

Not sure what you mean ? but yea maybe I could have worded it better, but you get the general idea

this is not an official Poll by them, but should give the Company an idea of what Players Think about these things