To be honest, I find it hard to swallow any comapany's line about fees if it's not an MMO and needs giant servers and the costs that go with that. But then I loathe that too, so that's not saying much.
Cryptic Undecided On Neverwinter's Payment Model
- Thread starter Tom Goldman
- Start date
Recommended Videos
If it's very good, Ill play it, and pay for it. But they should know that Ill have higher expectations, and be more picky and more critical, if I have to pay by the month, even if It ends up being less of an extent.
Quick Psych lesson: Buying stuff is a behavior. As a business, you want to encourage this behavior. MMOs are basically a social service that requires constant maintenance, so a pay monthy scheme is a necessity. However, a monthly fee is the least effective form of enforcing purchases. See, from the players view, your using positive punishment: Pay this monthly fee, or you lose the game. Punishment is the least effective form of behavior modification, and the necessity of it being a fixed schedule makes this even worse. A person who has played this game is, if anything, motivated to quit the game to stop the fee. Re-enforcement is far more effective, particularly if it isn't on a fixed schedule. Release a string of DLC, and people will view the purchase as being rewarded, and the person will continue to play. Yes, this means constant support and regular updates, but it sounds like that's the plan anyways. Borderlands is an interesting comparison. I think the DLC system was a great one. I was motivated to buy every one, and I would have bought it monthly. Do a DLC system, and you will have a bigger player base, more motivated to keep buying.
Quick Psych lesson: Buying stuff is a behavior. As a business, you want to encourage this behavior. MMOs are basically a social service that requires constant maintenance, so a pay monthy scheme is a necessity. However, a monthly fee is the least effective form of enforcing purchases. See, from the players view, your using positive punishment: Pay this monthly fee, or you lose the game. Punishment is the least effective form of behavior modification, and the necessity of it being a fixed schedule makes this even worse. A person who has played this game is, if anything, motivated to quit the game to stop the fee. Re-enforcement is far more effective, particularly if it isn't on a fixed schedule. Release a string of DLC, and people will view the purchase as being rewarded, and the person will continue to play. Yes, this means constant support and regular updates, but it sounds like that's the plan anyways. Borderlands is an interesting comparison. I think the DLC system was a great one. I was motivated to buy every one, and I would have bought it monthly. Do a DLC system, and you will have a bigger player base, more motivated to keep buying.
Yeah? Tell that to ArenaNet. Guild Wars has no subscription fee. Three paid expansions plus multiple free content updates were released for it. And unless I'm mistaken, Guild Wars 2 will not have a subscription fee either.Tom Goldman said:
If this new Neverwinter game has subscription fees, I'll never buy it.
Second patch, every version of the game, introduced SecuROM. I paid $50 for a DRM-free game BECAUSE it's awesome AND it has no DRM. Then they punched me in the face. And Steam buyers, since they had no choice but to update the game to play.Tom Phoenix said:
Well, I just continued to pirate DLC, since I didn't need a pirated stand-alone to use third-hand add-ons.
Also, Cryptic sucks, anything new? "NEW CHARACTERS WITH EXOTIC WEAPONS - ONLY $5 for 5 characters!! Mages too soft, warriors too slow, rogues too reliant on stealth? BUY POTIONS OF FORTITUDE, HASTE AND GREATER INVISIBILITY TO GAIN AN UPPER HAND! $10 A BUNDLE!!"
God, I'll just install NwN and play persistent worlds.. oh, wait, I never uninstalled NwN.
Why the fuck does this keep happening? Why do companies insist on raping franchises I actually like, instead of coming up with their own generic piece of crap shell to hide their obscene payment system?
I was so up for the prospect of a new NWN RPG, I went back and played some of NWN2 the other day, but since then all the anticipation has been sucked out of it. First, we find out it's Cryptic doing it, a company notorious for taking existing franchises and fucking them up. Then it's going to be one of these shitty "co-op focused" titles, which inevitably have an unplayable single-player campaign, if they have one at all. Now we find out it will have an "alternative" payment model, which is Cryptic-code for "making customers pay out the arse for stuff that should really be part of the original game".
Looks like I'll pass thanks.
I was so up for the prospect of a new NWN RPG, I went back and played some of NWN2 the other day, but since then all the anticipation has been sucked out of it. First, we find out it's Cryptic doing it, a company notorious for taking existing franchises and fucking them up. Then it's going to be one of these shitty "co-op focused" titles, which inevitably have an unplayable single-player campaign, if they have one at all. Now we find out it will have an "alternative" payment model, which is Cryptic-code for "making customers pay out the arse for stuff that should really be part of the original game".
Looks like I'll pass thanks.
I thought about this a little bit more, and although I've never played a Neverwinter nights game, I have played tabletop D&D. Wizards doesn't charge people a monthly subscription to use their books to play group games, and if Cryptic does, they'll just screw themselves over. I'll just go play tabletop for free! Wooo!
Fuck them. I'm so sick of these companies trying to milk players until we're dried out husks. I can't barely stand (though can understand) that MMOs do it to cover server costs. This game is not an MMO and so has no excuse for this bullshit. My new biggest fear is these kinds of ideas catching on so companies can afford to hollow out Mt. Everest and fill it with money.
If they're going to require subscriptions, or micro-transactions, or whatever, they have to also learn one important thing. The incoming money should then be put towards expanding the world frequently, and not just by paid for expansions.
If they're going to release new, high quality content on a regular basis, and hotfix, and patch when needed, it might just be worth it. But if they're just trying to cash in, it's going to be a dismal failure.
If they're going to release new, high quality content on a regular basis, and hotfix, and patch when needed, it might just be worth it. But if they're just trying to cash in, it's going to be a dismal failure.
I don't care what they do as long as I feel like I'm getting my money's worth. They mention Borderlands, which is a good sign, since I'd really enjoy some targeted DLC like Borderlands has. I'm not interested in all of what Borderlands has, though I own it all because I waited long enough and grabbed it all for super cheap on Steam. I don't imagine the new NWN will ever end up like that, since it sounds like they're planning on keeping a tighter leash on it, but who knows.
What I really don't want to see is them charging MMO-style for a game that doesn't even offer what an MMO does. I don't want a subscription for a single player game, thank you very much, and they should avoid even calling it subscription based unless it's going to have some sort of persistent world quality to it.
The very fact that they're so careless and cavalier about the pricing model in a published interview makes me question the direction of the game already, since I hear very little about adding value to the customer and a lot about them trying to figure out just how much they can get away with charging for 'additional' content before people complain too much.
What I really don't want to see is them charging MMO-style for a game that doesn't even offer what an MMO does. I don't want a subscription for a single player game, thank you very much, and they should avoid even calling it subscription based unless it's going to have some sort of persistent world quality to it.
The very fact that they're so careless and cavalier about the pricing model in a published interview makes me question the direction of the game already, since I hear very little about adding value to the customer and a lot about them trying to figure out just how much they can get away with charging for 'additional' content before people complain too much.
You people wonder why there will be a sub or RMT systems in most new games?
Because DRM does not work, only ~10% of players actually purchase the game and despite what pirates say, 0% actually buy the game after playing for free.
Did you think that there would not be consequences for the rampant piracy we have now?
The digital code is an infinite good (and as such has no value once released), but server access is finite (a 'scarce good') and can be easily monetised.
I suggest you get used to it, most games will be cloud based or a sub/RMT in the future.
Because DRM does not work, only ~10% of players actually purchase the game and despite what pirates say, 0% actually buy the game after playing for free.
Did you think that there would not be consequences for the rampant piracy we have now?
The digital code is an infinite good (and as such has no value once released), but server access is finite (a 'scarce good') and can be easily monetised.
I suggest you get used to it, most games will be cloud based or a sub/RMT in the future.
