"Paying a monthly Fee is stupid" - No..no it's not.

[SilverUchiha]

I still say the monthly payments are stupid if they are a requirement to play the game. Instead, why not charge for certain content within the game whenever a player is about to encounter it? Limit their access to certain parts of the world unless they pay a small fee to continue. Maybe only let them achieve a certain level or get only certain equipment.

Sure, the current model may not be a ripoff as you see it. But it certainly isn't a model everyone is happy with. A few small adjustments like this wouldn't be too bad at all. Hell, you can still keep the monthly option for players who just decide they want access to all the content without having to stop the gameplay for a transaction.

Also, what about Guild Wars? It's an MMO and it is free to play after purchase. And i think the same is true of D&D online. Again, I don't know much about them because I don't waste my time on MMOs, but I just thought I'd offer an alternative to the current "issues".

 

[Sabiancym]

One could argue that quality is superior to quantity. Crafting, level grinding, farming... is not something I consider entertainment. That is work. Why would I pay anyone anything to work for them?

I understand how PvP could be considered worth paying for (after all, Lazer Tag costs $10 a person to play), but if that is all you're doing, then you're either missing 60-80% of the content OR you've had to slog through those artificially extended work hours JUST TO BE ABLE TO PLAY the game that you paid/are paying for. When that is taken into consideration, the monthly fees are no better value than an XBox Live account.

This leaves endgame content: "raiding", etc.. As in my previous argument, why would you want pay for those hundreds or thousands of hours doing effectively nothing just to be able to play the fun part of the game for an hour or two? That is NOT value. Back me up on this one, Yahtzee [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/2634-World-of-Warcraft-Cataclysm]. I invite you to watch this video [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35BPhT-KI1E]. Colin Johanson explains my feelings on this issue quite adequately around 1:27.

TL/DR: A simple average of inconsistent experience is improperly weighted and therefore meaningless when measuring true value.
Do the math correctly.

You're TL/DR summary assumes that everyone shares your point of view on what is and what isn't entertaining.....

And PvP in an MMO is not the same as Halo or some other regular online multiplayer game. Depending on the game, it's much much more involved. You form guilds, find people you love to hang out with and people you love to see die. You're a face in the world. People know you and you know them. Your guild can be server famous or server infamous.

That sense of community and reality is well worth the $15. So I suggest you do the math correctly.

 

[Sabiancym]

tf2 costs 20$
I played it more than 800 hours.
No monthly fees. But regular content updates. so Valve beats MMO makers I think?
-
[small](I think so anyway, Not a big fan of MMO's
Unless tf2 counts as that, but I don't think it does, does it?)[/small]

but I cannot detect any form of discussion here, more of I say A. Deal with it

Spoiler: Example

And it's not nice to insult people, Math can be quite hard for some. Like me.

You can play minesweeper for 1000 hours if you really want to. It doesn't mean it's a better value than a game with more variations in gameplay.

 

[Ghostkai]

I get this alot, but to be honest, after alot of digging it usually turns out it's because they physically can't pay for said game at all in the first place. (no credit/debit card, mummy buys games etc.)

it's just typical raging at things you can't have, like the console wars (for the most part)

 

[skwart]

I paid £15 for tf2.
I'm currently at 1800 hours.
TF2 is updated regularly, free of charge.
Yes it's a rip-off

 

[GodofCider]

Snip.

So, how do games such as Guild Wars that lack a monthly base charge, and yet offer the same if not better content as their competitors, factor in?

 

[Erana]

Whenever I'm reading articles about MMOs or topics about MMOs on this forum I always see some familiar words.

"This game looks cool, but I'm not paying $15 to play a game I already bought."

"15 Dollars a month!!! That's ridiculous, I paid for the game once, let me play it!!"

"MMOS are Ripoffs!!"

"LOSERS!! PAYEING $$$ TO PL4Y a GAEM. U AINT L33T!"



Are these people that mathematically challenged?


When you pay for a regular game you get a certain amount of content for a certain amount of money. Let's take Dragon Age for Example. If you do everything in the game once, you get about 40-50 hours of gameplay. Yes you can replay it, but for the most part, there is only 40-50 hours of new content. So if the game costs $50, that's a dollar per hour of gameplay.

Now if you take an MMO, you have hundreds and hundreds of hours of gameplay. PvP, crafting, leveling, raiding, etc. Even if you only play a couple days a week, the dollar per gameplay hour ratio is way way way higher than a normal game.


So the "Ripoff" that people claim is not even close to true. The sad thing about this is that companies are taking advantage of this stupidity and going with "free to play" games. This gets the anti-monthly fee guys addicted to a game because it's free, and then charge them crazy prices for in game items and gold.

So the people who were against paying money for an mmo now end up paying potentially more money for an inferior game ruined by micro-transactions.


So before you complain about other people paying a monthly fee for a game. Do the math.

Its only feels like a ripoff to me when the monthly fee is going into the big pockets of the publisher/distributor/etc, rather than back into development.
I can understand people wanting to turn a nice profit, but it would be nice to feel like the money I'm paying went to repay the efforts of the developers. I still have a taste in my mouth from buying WoW and some expansions...
I mean, there have got to be a bunch of Activision businessmen who don't give a damn about their products but are Scrooge McDucking the profits out there.

I know profits=incentive for people to invest in games, but with MMOs, it just usually doesn't turn out so well...

Same thing goes with Xbox Live: I'd feel a lot more interested in paying if PC, Nintendo and Sony weren't providing the same service for free. I know the charge isn't necessary for this service, so am I just lining someone's pockets? It feels that way.

A lot of the money from MMOs goes into making other forms of games. Not just the developer, but publishers and advertisers get a cut and play parts in advancing the gaming industry.

Perhaps I was not clear; I said, "Put back into development." I didn't say, "I want them to make more content for the game with the money." I classify the entire process of getting a game out there as "Developing more games." Development of most games involves a studio paying a huge amount into a game, then hopefully getting it paid back and then some. When I buy a game, I like it to be a part of the "Paying back and then some" because that enables them to return to a status quo, or possibly make it slightly bigger.

Blizzard makes good games and all, but from the near-obscene profits, I bet they could afford to at least lessen the monthly fee. I can't say this for sure, of course- I don't know all the things that would factor into it -but its probably a safe bet.
And when they have the means to lessen the price without any deficit to the funds needed to continue to do what they do, it stops being about furthering the games industry as a whole and starts becoming more about profits.

Its a personal thing that makes this uncomfortable to me, but I just don't like the idea of consumers being charged significantly more than is required to provide a service. It just sets a precedence for, "Yes, I'll pay whatever you want me to pay, Mr. Corporation."

Its not so bad when Blizzard produces one of the best experiences in the MMORPG genre to date, but still. It makes me a marginally uncomfortable panda.

 

[Sabiancym]

Snip.

So, how do games such as Guild Wars that lack a monthly base charge, and yet offer the same if not better content as their competitors, factor in?

They don't. Guild wars isn't a full mmo. They don't have persistent worlds.

 

[Dastardly]

snip

In principle, I agree.

What I have to say, though, is that current MMOs are not as worthy of a monthly fee as their predecessors. There's more to it than just hours-to-dollars.

When MMOs were first coming out, the very idea of charging monthly was met with heavy skepticism. So these developers had a lot of pressure on them to create a game that was worthy of continually paying. The first generation of MMOs included games like Ultima or SWG, and these games had a ton of things to do.

You had a lot of freedom in creating your character's appearance and skills, you weren't corralled from one "quest zone" to another, and there were reasons to go to far corners of the map. And most importantly, players had persistent housing and cities available to them. This meant that a part of your character still existed in the game world even after you logged off, and other players would see and interact with it. You got to create a character, and then rent him/her a piece of this digital world.

Then there are games of the new sort, the WoW generation. You get a small handful of customization options... which don't matter, since you'll be covered in the same quest armor soon, anyway. No housing, and nothing about you is persistent. You don't even have a horse. You have a change of animation that turns you from "You" into "You Riding Horse." You're shoved into one of a handful of classes and funneled through a narrow corridor of quests. You aren't creating a character, you're renting one, and once you log out the game world shows no sign you were ever there.

What changed? Expectations. People got used to the idea of a subscription, so that pressure was taken off of the developers. Yeah, sure, there's "hundreds of hours of gameplay," but how many of those hours are the same hour with different models and colors? And how many hours are spent on a plateau, sitting around waiting for the next content release? How many of those hours matter in the least after you log off?

This is why the free-to-play model is gaining ground. It lines up more accurately with what current MMOs provide, which is a marginal single-player experience with the option of occasional teaming. In order to fully justify continuing a monthly fee, MMOs don't need to add crazy new stuff--they need to add back some of the old stuff:

1. Robust character customization--tons of options
2. Clothing/costume options that allow you to have your stats but look the way you want
3. World furniture you can interact with (like chairs, etc)
4. Vehicles/mounts that are more than just a character model change
5. Persistent, non-instanced player housing/cities, and enough space to put them in.
6. Freedom when it comes to decorating your house, not "Stick trophies on pegs" crap.
7. Tools for players to create content (like quests or events) within the game world.

Some games have some of these, no game has all of them, but some have just vanished for no good reason. I'm not against subscriptions, but we expect less from the games while we pay the same money. That should stop.

 

[Podunk]

I have an offhand rule to buy a game straight-up, OR pay a monthly fee. Haven't found a game that justifies both. (Made a bad, bad mistake in breaking this rule with Final Fantasy XI)

 

[Mallefunction]

I personally have no interest in games that NEVER end. Yahtzee put it best. Games are most satisfying when they've ended.

So yeah, a monthly fee is still a rip-off for me because you're endlessly paying to essentially do the same thing over and over and over again a zillion friggin times.

 

[Sabiancym]

I personally have no interest in games that NEVER end. Yahtzee put it best. Games are most satisfying when they've ended.

So yeah, a monthly fee is still a rip-off for me because you're endlessly paying to essentially do the same thing over and over and over again a zillion friggin times.

You do the same thing over and over in pretty much every game. Find a guy, kill the guy, repeat.

 

[Sgt Pepper]

To people talking about CounterStrike, TF2 etc, you do realise people are paying for servers right? Whilst they might let you play for free someone is paying.

With MMOs the devs are providing the servers thus charge a fee to cover cost of running them, dev costs for updates and content and then some profit on top.

 

[Sabiancym]

snip

In principle, I agree.

What I have to say, though, is that current MMOs are not as worthy of a monthly fee as their predecessors. There's more to it than just hours-to-dollars.

When MMOs were first coming out, the very idea of charging monthly was met with heavy skepticism. So these developers had a lot of pressure on them to create a game that was worthy of continually paying. The first generation of MMOs included games like Ultima or SWG, and these games had a ton of things to do.

You had a lot of freedom in creating your character's appearance and skills, you weren't corralled from one "quest zone" to another, and there were reasons to go to far corners of the map. And most importantly, players had persistent housing and cities available to them. This meant that a part of your character still existed in the game world even after you logged off, and other players would see and interact with it. You got to create a character, and then rent him/her a piece of this digital world.

Then there are games of the new sort, the WoW generation. You get a small handful of customization options... which don't matter, since you'll be covered in the same quest armor soon, anyway. No housing, and nothing about you is persistent. You don't even have a horse. You have a change of animation that turns you from "You" into "You Riding Horse." You're shoved into one of a handful of classes and funneled through a narrow corridor of quests. You aren't creating a character, you're renting one, and once you log out the game world shows no sign you were ever there.

What changed? Expectations. People got used to the idea of a subscription, so that pressure was taken off of the developers. Yeah, sure, there's "hundreds of hours of gameplay," but how many of those hours are the same hour with different models and colors? And how many hours are spent on a plateau, sitting around waiting for the next content release? How many of those hours matter in the least after you log off?

This is why the free-to-play model is gaining ground. It lines up more accurately with what current MMOs provide, which is a marginal single-player experience with the option of occasional teaming. In order to fully justify continuing a monthly fee, MMOs don't need to add crazy new stuff--they need to add back some of the old stuff:

1. Robust character customization--tons of options
2. Clothing/costume options that allow you to have your stats but look the way you want
3. World furniture you can interact with (like chairs, etc)
4. Vehicles/mounts that are more than just a character model change
5. Persistent, non-instanced player housing/cities, and enough space to put them in.
6. Freedom when it comes to decorating your house, not "Stick trophies on pegs" crap.
7. Tools for players to create content (like quests or events) within the game world.

Some games have some of these, no game has all of them, but some have just vanished for no good reason. I'm not against subscriptions, but we expect less from the games while we pay the same money. That should stop.

Oh I agree that mmos have gotten worse, but if we accept that and go with the free to play model for everything, they'll never get better. They'll just turn into facebook games and gimmicks.

 

[Darkauthor81]

From my experience, I'd rather pay a monthly fee. Because most free-to-play MMOs get their money via selling cash shop items for real money. Sooner or later, the game becomes unbalanced and victory is dictated by how many uber cash shop items you have instead of skill or strategy.

THANK YOU! I was just about to say this exact same thing.

 

[Chrono212]

I'm playing the Battlestar Galactica MMORPG which is both browser based and free-to-play but I'll admit that it's hard to resist using real cash to buy in-game currency.
However, I want to prove a point that free-to-play can be free but also that I don't need to waste real money on something virtual and I'll soon forget about.
You get as much out of a game as you put in, and I'm not talking about money.

 

[Trivun]

I don't think it's stupid to have a subscription system for MMOs. From a business perspective, at least, it makes perfect sense. However, I don't like it simply as a consumer. I much prefer the F2P/micro-transaction system, because then everyone gets to play the game as normal after buying it once (assuming it's a game like WoW that could, potentially, switch to F2P), then the subscription fees are replaced by micro-transactions in-game for extra content, ideally things like extra levels/missions, new exclusive locations, new character skins, things like that. And it does work, games like DoD Online and LOTRO are testament to that. Nobody loses out, the customers least of all as they're still able to play the game and then support it even more financially if they feel it's worth it. It still promotes the creation of an actually good game, and the financial model is sound. Of course, while people continue to subscribe to things like WoW for no good reason other than it making Blizzard lots of money, we're unlikely to see much more widescale change anytime soon, which to me is something of a shame...

 

[TheEvilCheese]

Well I don't play MMO's because of the monthly fees. It's not because I think they're stupid, I fully understand why you would have to pay. I don't play the £15 (or whatever) a month because
1) I like to buy games fairly often (for that £15 I could get one, maybe two descent pre-owned titles) and because of this I spend my time jumping from game to game, meaning they never get stale.
2) I only have a laptop, which isn't really ideal for gaming.
3) I'm not all that big on online play (with the exception of fighting games) and prefer singleplayer.
4) Sometimes I barely find time to play games at all, meaning that I could be throwing away money (granted that's only if I'm not paying a month at a time)
If I ever got a descent set up I'd probably consider starting a pay monthly MMO, as I do think games like Warcraft look quite fun, but it's unlikely, I'm happy to spend my £15 a month on other things.

I totally understand your points, this was pretty similar to my argumenst for not playing WoW for five years.

However it isnt anywhere near £15 a month, I pay £16 per 2 months (gotta love prepaid cards) and WoW is built to run on anything. My friend had it running pretty well on his 10 year old E-Mac just to prove a point.

The throwing money away thing is true though, I find myself playing for maybe 30 hours one week, and only 2 hours the next. But on average I think it's worth the money.
Also, you can get from level one to eighty five without ever having to interact with another player, I can't see why anyone would, but the quests (ala cataclysm) can be engrossing and interesting. Not to mention downright hilarious at times.

 

[Darkauthor81]

snip

snip

That's not entirely true. My sister is a WoW big shot. She has lead teams, several times, into challenges not yet overcome on her server. And the first people to overcome these challenges get permanent statues erected of their character.

So she has permanent statues of her character all over her server.