115 replies to this topic

[Secluse]

Kind of surprised how many people point to the WoT model being a good F2P model. Personally, I think the concept of premium ammunition, and the need to pay to avoid an almost impossible grind, as being a terrible model. I would much rather support a LoL type model where you pay for cosmetic type items and XP / C-bill boosts that simply accelerate, but do not elevate, your progress.

[Volthorne]

Secluse, on 01 April 2012 - 01:08 PM, said:

Kind of surprised how many people point to the WoT model being a good F2P model. Personally, I think the concept of premium ammunition, and the need to pay to avoid an almost impossible grind, as being a terrible model. I would much rather support a LoL type model where you pay for cosmetic type items and XP / C-bill boosts that simply accelerate, but do not elevate, your progress.

THIS ^^ FOR ALL ETERNITY

[ice trey]

Personally, I'd like to first know how the MWO Marketplace would look, if there's going to be one.

I'd like to see money not be able to buy new 'mechs, but rather, money to unlock them from the marketplace.

So long as we're keeping the Succession wars era 'mechs in here, it shouldn't be a problem. Popular demand has dictated that the best of the 3025'ers are already core product. How will someone complain about some dude unlocking some Spiders or Assassins when the best-of-the-best are already available as the core product.
Alternately, I'd like to see money be able to buy "refit kits", which let you refit your existing 'mechs to different variants. For example, converting the Dragon into the Grand Dragon, or the Catpult to the Drac version of the Catapult - which puts PPCs in the place of the LRM racks. This could also be done by simply using the previous "Unlocking" system, so that they become available in the marketplace.

Long story short, I love mechwarrior the most when you've got selection. MW4 and 3 felt like they paled in comparison to MW2 Mercenaries and it's swaths of mechs to choose from. I want to be able to make that happen in this game, too - in such a way that it's not like Mechwarrior 4 Mektek (dozens on dozens of mechs to choose from, but never see more than 10 different types on the multiplayer battlefield because they're the most optimized ones and able to poptart). roughly 10 mechs per weight class is my ideal (Light (20-35T); Medium (40-55T); Heavy (60-75t); Assault (80-100T)). If I have to pay to see that happen, then I will.

[Pvt Dancer]

Secluse, on 01 April 2012 - 01:08 PM, said:

Kind of surprised how many people point to the WoT model being a good F2P model. Personally, I think the concept of premium ammunition, and the need to pay to avoid an almost impossible grind, as being a terrible model. I would much rather support a LoL type model where you pay for cosmetic type items and XP / C-bill boosts that simply accelerate, but do not elevate, your progress.

I disagree on the grind part, because I have been grinding. To be frank, I bought extra hangers to have multiple tanks or keep lower tier tanks I enjoy playing. So I play my 10 tanks till I get my first win and then move on. Even with a free account, I can earn 200k+ a day just playing that way. My tanks at my tier are just as good as anyone else's tanks. Sure, my top tiers is 7, but when I win I get 20-40k cash on my win. I still have some goals, like taking the Russian SPG (which is a /real/ grind) to the top and getting a Jagdtiger for my German TD line (which has been fun!).

Grinding in the WoT system does not hurt people like me, because I have goals to reach certain tanks, not some tier 10 tanks that I really don't care about (for the most part). Free players in WoT with their starting 4 tanks who only want to play a single tank (or path) are the ones who have the hard grind.

Listen, we have to be realistic, they /need/ premium accounts to exist and standard cost is 10-15 bucks a month. Skins and mech slots alone will not give them enough money to consistently produce a income stream to maintain the game. Every day the Forums and host servers, much less salary of their employees runs them into the Red without a source of consistent income. Premium also has to give the person /something/ for their money. I /like/ the idea of a smaller XP/C-bill boost over the free players (which I will probably be), but is that really worth that money for a 5%-20% boost? I honestly would have to say no.

Could I see a scaling subscription? Yes... no one has mentioned this as an option. Would you guys pay $5 bucks a month for a 10-15% increase to XP/C-bills? $10 for 25-35%? $15 for 50%? I would probably stop there, but I am also a fan of buying a Premium account for less than a month. I love buying a day, or 3 day period and I mentioned I would love to even see 12 hour, 6 hour, and even 1 hour purchasable periods of Premium Something less than a month doesn't work with a scaled Premium. I do like WoTs giving X amount of Gold for real cash and that everything costs various amounts of Gold, so that might be an option here as well.

Been interesting hearing about how other F2P games run their systems though...

Edited by Pvt Dancer, 02 April 2012 - 01:55 PM.

[Vodkavaiator]

I have been told by reliable sources that one will have to offer a first borne son or daughter to someone named "Paul" in order to play MWO.

Currently, I am trying to figure out what sort of demonic entity this "Paul" is.

[Xyph3r]

as long as it doesn´t end up like in Allods Online (where you can literally "Buy Power", up to additional 130% Damage and 100% defense, and are not even close to being competitive without at least 70% att / 60% def, which already equals about 200€ or about one-and-a-half year of Chinafarming 18hours a day/ 7 days a week[no wait, that time it would take if you had those runes, so double it...]) i´m fine with the F2P model..

Hula Girls? - gimme that!
a paint scheme makin my `Mech look like it was wearing a `Mech-sized Jogging suit (with gold chain and Mullet)? - bought! XD
a premium account making me earn more C-bills per drop or cutting my repair times by half? - why not
exchange money for C-bills to buy a second/Third/one-hundred-and fifty-third Mech? - I´m fine with it
... could continue this list, but i`m sure i made clear what i think of...

a Twelve-year-old that stole daddy´s paypal data to buy himself the Power to Overwhelm a whole party of Badass End-Content-Equipped PvP Players all by himself with his 5-week-old, below-epic-equipped P.O.S. Character? - ok, I´m outta here
(and this is the reason why i stopped playing the A-game after 2 years, btw^^ )

Edited by Xyph3r, 02 April 2012 - 02:55 PM.

[Nick Makiaveli]

Max Grayson, on 30 March 2012 - 09:16 AM, said:

I agree, the length of grind, for non-payers or non-"premium" is always the issue. The balance needs to be right.

but if you work for the city don't you always have spare time to run a few games during the day

Yea but I work in IT so my odds of getting caught are just shy of absolute.

Also, what Xyph3r said above. Well minus the whole mafia guy with a mullet part...that kinda scared me.

[Serpentine]

[Comment only available for MechWarrior: Online® Gold™ account holders]

[Nick Makiaveli]

Serpentine, on 02 April 2012 - 04:59 PM, said:

[Comment only available for MechWarrior: Online® Gold™ account holders]

That's another thing. Blocking the forums to non-paying members is a quick way to **** me off. I have to pay to ask another member their thoughts or get help? Since we all know CS is two homeless guys they found outside the building and we all know what that response time is like.

**Note** Some of my best friends are CS/HD. No really they are In all seriousness, since most people can't turn on a **** computer without pictures, if you work in IT and have a phone, you wind up doing Hell Desk work.

[Peiper]

empath, on 01 April 2012 - 07:18 AM, said:

~The issue of 'squads' and clans being available subscription perk or other paid method might be okay - I have tended to be a lonewolf in F2P games, so I'm not very knowledgable on the issues surrounding that.

Empath, what are you talking about? I don't understand. I don't see how joining my merc group or enlisting in a house would cost money. We all have to be loyal to someone (except lone wolves). Also, let's say I wanted to join the Black Widow Company (a likely candidate for a pay-to-join group if there is one). Well, what if my friends wanted to too, but only half of us pay? I see us players working as units with similar colors, lance groups, etc... If this is the case, I don't see how the devs would impliment this UNLESS all FTP players are lone wolves?

[Volthorne]

Everyone is going about this wrong. I keep seeing post after post about "premium accounts" and "subscriptions" And I say f*** that because that's how Devs get away with making terrible games. They lock away 90% of the content unless you have a "premium account" or pay a subscription fee, and the 10% that is accessible is absolute garbage (WoW would be an appropriate example, but that's also garbage even with the subscription being paid).

Skins/accessories/visuals won't pay for the server and employees? Bullsh***, go take a look at any Nexon game. They EXCLUSIVELY make their money off of stuff like that (granted they put it on a timer so you have to keep re-buying your costume), as does Riot from League (although they have IP/XP boosters and other goodies that take a good while to save up for if only using IP available for purchase with cash). Valve probably turns a pretty penny on TF2 as well, even though you can brute-force your way to getting the loot you want through the forging system.

<rage> LOOK AT ALL THESE GOOD F2P MODELS AND STOP BEING ELITIST A-HOLES WHO WANT TO KEEP US POOR PPEOPLE FROM PLAYING ALONG WITH YOU. </rage>

Edited by Volthorne, 02 April 2012 - 05:29 PM.

[Opus]

Click on Photo, for my real response

Edited by Opus, 02 April 2012 - 05:35 PM.

[empath]

Peiper, on 02 April 2012 - 05:12 PM, said:

Empath, what are you talking about? I don't understand. I don't see how joining my merc group or enlisting in a house would cost money. We all have to be loyal to someone (except lone wolves). Also, let's say I wanted to join the Black Widow Company (a likely candidate for a pay-to-join group if there is one). Well, what if my friends wanted to too, but only half of us pay? I see us players working as units with similar colors, lance groups, etc... If this is the case, I don't see how the devs would impliment this UNLESS all FTP players are lone wolves?

No, I'm talking about WoT's methods - you had to be a subscriber to form a 'platoon' to enter the same match together (and use vox comms); they may have altered it since I gave up but that was a bigger nail in the coffin for me than premiuim "Pay 2 Win" ammo - I had plenty of friends on WoT, but I'd only ever SEEN one again in a match ONCE after I'd befriended them. EVER.

[LackofCertainty]

00dlez, on 30 March 2012 - 10:10 AM, said:

In my hopes and dreams, XP/cbills will be awarded in such a way that the average player playing 10-15 hrs a week (pretty average I'd say) is able to unlock things as they are released, able to keep up with the latest and greatest equipment.

Those definitely fall into the dream range, sadly. If you look at league of legends (similar pay scheme, similar play style in arena based team combat) they don't price it anywhere near to allow people to buy -everything- with in game currency for 10-15 hourse a week. If the barrier was that low, "play 2 hours a day and you unlock everything" then it removes the desire to put money into the game. If you want to get -everything- without paying a cent you're going to have to devote something like 40 hours a week to the game.

What they want is to create desire, and keep the ingame currency valuable. Lets say they release a new mech design/variant every 3 weeks post launch. In your idea/dream/hopeful prayer:
Joe schmo (2 hrs/day player): Earns enough to buy a mech every 3 weeks. Buys mechs as released, money matters, because if he has a bad week he might not be able to afford the new mech as it comes out.
Jane schmo (4 hrs/day player): Earns enough to buy a mech every 1.5 weeks. Steadily builds up excess money, till eventually it becomes meaningless.
Jack schmo (8 hrs/day player): Earns enough to buy a mech every 0.75 weeks. Doesn't care about money at all, because he has enough to buy every item in game two or three times over.

What they want is something more like:
Joe schmo (2 hrs/day): Earns enough to buy a new mech every 12 weeks. Has to make tough decisions on which mechs he wants, or pay real money to unlock them all.
Jane schmo (4 hrs/day): Earns enough to buy a new mech every 6 weeks. Buys about half of the mechs as they come out, or pays a little bit of real money to unlock them all.
Jack schmo (8 hrs/day): Earns enough to buy a new mech every 3 weeks. Money still matters to him, because if he has a bad week he might not earn quite enough to pay for that new mech.


In free to play, if you want to have it all you need to put a -lot- of time into it. If you don't have time, but still want it all, then you pay. : P

Pvt Dancer, on 02 April 2012 - 01:52 PM, said:

snipped for space: Basically talked about variable subscriptions and short duration subscriptions

I think LoL also covers this way better than WoT does. Instead of "our subscriptions range from yearly down to 1 day at a time" they have 1 day, 7 day, 14 day xp/money boosters and also 1 win, 5 wins, 10 wins boosters. So if you have a Saturday free and want to really earn a lot of IP (the LoL equivalent of C-bills) you can buy a 1 day booster. If you're someone who can only snag a game or two a day, and have an unpredictable schedule, you can instead buy a 10 wins booster that doubles the money you get when you win a game. (and only when you win a game, so you don't waste one of them in some game that you got instagibbed in)

Edited by LackofCertainty, 02 April 2012 - 06:22 PM.

[Peiper]

empath, on 02 April 2012 - 05:40 PM, said:

No, I'm talking about WoT's methods - you had to be a subscriber to form a 'platoon' to enter the same match together (and use vox comms); they may have altered it since I gave up but that was a bigger nail in the coffin for me than premiuim "Pay 2 Win" ammo - I had plenty of friends on WoT, but I'd only ever SEEN one again in a match ONCE after I'd befriended them. EVER.

Wow, that does sound lame. Thanks for explaining.

[Carebear]

WoT may sounds like lame but trust me its quaranteed way to get money out of customers. Usually if we're lucky we get free demo, f2p games actually let us play/test is as long we want. For me it comes down to money simple as that, 10-20 euros for devs should be enough per month, if I play 3-4 month they get full game price, if 4 month longer they get double.

Edited by Carebear, 02 April 2012 - 11:46 PM.

[Oswin Aurelius]

Volthorne, on 02 April 2012 - 05:29 PM, said:

Skins/accessories/visuals won't pay for the server and employees? Bullsh***

<rage> LOOK AT ALL THESE GOOD F2P MODELS AND STOP BEING ELITIST A-HOLES WHO WANT TO KEEP US POOR PPEOPLE FROM PLAYING ALONG WITH YOU. </rage>

This.

[Ulric Kell]

I'm on the same page as the majority of others here based on what the developers have so far said. The idea from LOL where everything is attainable through time spent playing the game and then some items can be procured faster with monetary transactions.

[Larynth]

I would just like to add my $.02, It rocks that they are offering the game as free-to-play, but the gaming community tends to take that a bit too literally. I approach this model from a "Free-to-see" angle and it's worked well. I've avoided spending money on some terds and found games I loved that I otherwise never would have tried. In the end the devs all have mortages, car payments, and significant other's with credit cards and shopping habits, just like the rest of us. Instead of worrying what advantage the guy who ponies up to support them might have the discussion should be about the fact we get to chooose how much what they offer is worth to us. No one playing this game as more than a trial should be too cheap to spend a couple bucks a month, you payed for your computer, you pay for internet service, pay for the game you enjoy. "If everyone went to work with no pants on, I wouldn't be considered a deviant." Point being, if everyone pays the minimum, no one really has any advantage for anyone else to whine about.

Edited by Larynth, 03 April 2012 - 05:10 AM.

[Sylow]

Pvt Dancer, on 02 April 2012 - 01:52 PM, said:

Listen, we have to be realistic, they /need/ premium accounts to exist and standard cost is 10-15 bucks a month. Skins and mech slots alone will not give them enough money to consistently produce a income stream to maintain the game. Every day the Forums and host servers, much less salary of their employees runs them into the Red without a source of consistent income. Premium also has to give the person /something/ for their money. I /like/ the idea of a smaller XP/C-bill boost over the free players (which I will probably be), but is that really worth that money for a 5%-20% boost? I honestly would have to say no.

Facts instead of guesses, please. There are good and bad examples on how to do F2P out there and i've taken a look at plenty of them over the years. WoT, due to the criterias mentioned, is a bad example. Granted, it's not as bad as Allods or Shajya, stating the worst examples i ever played, but it's still far from being "good".

League of Legends is one of the best positive example, but others were also mentioned in this thread. Team Fortress 2 was mentioned several times and i also played several others with very sensible cash shop designs.

They do fine without any "premium" nonsense, don't sell power and don't give any technical advantaged to the paying player. At the same time, they make profit, even more than many subscription based games. I personally for example also spent some money on DC Universe and Star Treck Online. After they went F2P. And they are just two examples of a long list of games, which were about to die due to low subscription numbers and not only became very profitable after going F2P but even got more new content and upgrades after being F2P than while running on subscriptions? (DCU currently has the third expansion in development, that's three more than it had during its subscription-only time. And STO right now is successfully and profitably relaunching into markets where it formerly already died. )
[Although i also have to say, DCU is only a mediocre example. While you don't hit a hard "pay now or leave" wall, you will get to a point where spending at least some money is essential to keep it enjoyable. But paying for additional classes and more content feels allright, as long as you can also compete with other players without having to pay. ]


So anyways, returning to your assumption that only a subscription can bring in enough income to keep the game up and running, i'd really like to answer that with the question: how can currently existing games, like the ones mentioned above, be more profitable and depend on F2P to survive, if only subscriptions can bring in enough money to stay operational?

After this all being said, i wouldn't mind some kind of subscription, which would look like this:

- When being F2P you can buy XP boosters for a decent price. (Say, 25 cent per hour, as a wild guess. )
- When being subscriped, you have the same XP boosts active permanently.
- When being F2P, you need to buy a "mech repaint kit" for like 2€ to give your new mech the paintjob you want.
- When being subscribed, you can repaint your mech as much as you like to.
- When being F2P, you start out with 2 to 4 slots for mechs. Want to store any more mechs, you buy additional storage slots for 2€ each.
- Each month of subscription gives you another 2 mech slots.

If the subscription then is like 10€ (a little below 14$, for the US people here, so well within the normal scope), players can make their choice. For any "regular" the subscription might be the better deal, but the very casual player is not being scared away. I could write quite an essay why the non-paying casual player is one of the most valuable assets a game can have, but i doubt anybody here would want to read that, so i leave it at the statement: for best success, a F2P game must offer casualy a way to play the game without them ever feeling forced to spend money. (No "now you have to pay" wall, please... )