|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
David Spd
Caldari State
95
   |
Posted - 2013.11.23 22:26:00 -
[1] - Quote
Nothing good can come from a subscription option. Basically you'll have all the EVE players paying for two monthly subs and think they're entitled to something similar to what EVE is offering.
And IWS you can't honestly believe CCP will be able to "properly" implement such a thing, do you? Their track record on "premium" content for Dust is atrocious.
Not to mention seemingly all decisions in the marketing area are just pants backwards batshit crazy. I've said it before & I'll say it again: the last thing we need is for two EVE Online MMOs. Maybe a subscription option would be feasible much MUCH later down the line (as in, years from now) when CCP finally has content to justify paying monthly, and has finally decided what balance should be like...
But talking about and even considering such a thing now is just ludicrous.
--> I'm a closed beta vet; I just don't post often <--
"Other people just complicate my life." ~Solid Snake
|
David Spd
Caldari State
95
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 23:15:00 -
[2] - Quote
Jaysyn Larrisen wrote:Might take you a steeper grind but there should be no direct items or skills that don't have ISK or AUR equivalent in reach of non-subscription players.
That is the exactly the reason why subscription option is a bad idea. That's one of the "most viable" options when considering a "premium" service for Dust. increasing SP gains in one way or another.
Gaps between newbies and vets is all ready the worst part of experiencing Dust. Casuals might pay for consistent SP gains tied to a monthly "premium" option but Hardcore elitists that live, breathe, eat and **** Dust will be the primary sales of such a thing. People with more SP get even further ahead from the rest and just because they can afford to pay for it.
It might not be "pay to win" but it certainly doesn't create any appeal for someone that's getting six-man proto stomped in every game he plays.
Locking content behind a pay wall will doubtingly cause Dust to die a slow, painful death with nothing but bitter newbies and vets alike spitting venom at the paying players that get better rewards for doing the same thing that others are doing, so that's not even an option. People all ready fight like cats & dogs on these forums and doing anything that even slightly smells of "pay to win" will cause a never ending feud that will likely last until the end of time.
In my opinion (and experience with free to play) the most viable options to offer with subscriptions with least backlash is:
A. Increased gains (with free having no "penalties")
B. Early access to gameplay content (with no permanent exclusive game impacting items)
C. "Free" bought currency monthly just for having a subscription
These ideas are still incredibly bad due to the unique nature of Dust for the following reasons:
A. Creating an even larger SP gap (and awarding more SP for doing nothing) contradicts all the efforts CCP is putting into lessening the "SP sinks"
B. Paywall limits players taking part in content. Game went into release with bare minimum and forcing people to pay to get things they want in a reasonable timeframe is hard to justify or excuse
C. Getting "free" aurum each month might be nice for newbies but "vets" don't have need for most Proto. consumables. It also creates a similar issue CCP recently address by BPO removal: free ISK without risk to the player.
--> I'm a closed beta vet; I just don't post often <--
"Other people just complicate my life." ~Solid Snake
|
David Spd
Caldari State
95
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 23:21:00 -
[3] - Quote
Iron Wolf Saber wrote:David Spd wrote:Nothing good can come from a subscription option. Basically you'll have all the EVE players paying for two monthly subs and think they're entitled to something similar to what EVE is offering.
And IWS you can't honestly believe CCP will be able to "properly" implement such a thing, do you? Their track record on "premium" content for Dust is atrocious.
Not to mention seemingly all decisions in the marketing area are just pants backwards batshit crazy. I've said it before & I'll say it again: the last thing we need is two EVE Online MMOs. Maybe a subscription option would be feasible much MUCH later down the line (as in, years from now) when CCP finally has content to justify paying monthly, and has finally decided what balance should be like...
But talking about and even considering such a thing now is just ludicrous. You have to consider that the CPM just recently managed to secure marketing's ear, turnaround will take some time. I can't change the past but influencing the future is something the CPM is doing. We're just slightly upset there is no racial parity yet or full lineup of roles for most of the races.
I'm all for discussing options, but please don't press CCP for monthly subscriptions. The risk vs. reward (at least in my opinion) is just too heavily favoring risk right now and the last thing CCP needs is more ammunition from their all ready bitter playerbase.
--> I'm a closed beta vet; I just don't post often <--
"Other people just complicate my life." ~Solid Snake
|
David Spd
Caldari State
95
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 23:48:00 -
[4] - Quote
KayDidYue wrote:calvin b wrote:This would be the final nail in the coffin of this game. I have spent enough on this game and cannot justify spending anymore, so if it did go this way I would leave. Now this I really do not understand, as you would still be able to play the way you have been playing and it would be those that are willing to pay a subscription that would be providing the "free" to other players.
Despite "goodwill" free players are an integral part of free to play success. Free & paying players share a symbiotic relationship
Paying players' numbers are typically lower than free players in any free to play title. Free players are CONTENT for paying players. Free players are fickle and easily upset. Paying players usually less so. If you anger the free players they leave (yes, "i'm leaving" threads are normally just attention whoring, but players do actually leave without saying anything). Leaving less content for paying players.
People playing monthly for a free to play title are typically in it until the end, so as free players leave due to unhappiness the amount of people in a game slowly falls off until there's only a couple hundred (oftentimes less) people playing at any given time.
Dust may have solid numbers now but the general happiness level seems quite low right now. There is no guarantee numbers will go up, nor is there guarantee they will go down but the amount of hostility also influences player retention.
All of the games I've seen die haven't done it overnight and it sometimes takes years for a game to finally shut down, but if free players (or "one time customers) are constantly disgruntled then it's just a matter of time.
--> I'm a closed beta vet; I just don't post often <--
"Other people just complicate my life." ~Solid Snake
|
David Spd
Caldari State
98
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 23:55:00 -
[5] - Quote
KayDidYue wrote:David Spd wrote:KayDidYue wrote:calvin b wrote:This would be the final nail in the coffin of this game. I have spent enough on this game and cannot justify spending anymore, so if it did go this way I would leave. Now this I really do not understand, as you would still be able to play the way you have been playing and it would be those that are willing to pay a subscription that would be providing the "free" to other players. Despite "goodwill" free players are an integral part of free to play success. Free & paying players share a symbiotic relationship Paying players' numbers are typically lower than free players in any free to play title. Free players are CONTENT for paying players. Free players are fickle and easily upset. Paying players usually less so. If you anger the free players they leave (yes, "i'm leaving" threads are normally just attention whoring, but players do actually leave without saying anything). Leaving less content for paying players. People paying monthly for a free to play title are typically in it until the end, so as free players leave due to unhappiness the amount of people in a game slowly falls off until there's only a couple hundred (oftentimes less) people playing at any given time. Dust may have solid numbers now but the general happiness level seems quite low right now. There is no guarantee numbers will go up, nor is there guarantee they will go down but the amount of hostility also influences player retention. All of the games I've seen die haven't done it overnight and it sometimes takes years for a game to finally shut down, but if free players (or "one time customers) are constantly disgruntled then it's just a matter of time. Actually, the numbers aren't solid right now. Eve players are agitated that the numbers are so low, and also that the quality of the players (which include their attitude) are very low compared to what they where told the numbers would be. If you are looking at the numbers when you are logging in, don't think that that is the number of DUST players, because that is not the number of dust only players.
Even more reason for CCP to tread VERY lightly then.
--> I'm a closed beta vet; I just don't post often <--
"Other people just complicate my life." ~Solid Snake
|
David Spd
Caldari State
98
|
Posted - 2013.11.24 00:16:00 -
[6] - Quote
KayDidYue wrote:David Spd wrote:
Even more reason for CCP to tread VERY lightly then.
Oh I do agree with this, as it should be well discussed; which IMHO the discussion should be include the entire community as I believe that if left to them alone, it could be the straw that breaks...
Agreed but it doesn't seem like CCP's style, unfortunately...
--> I'm a closed beta vet; I just don't post often <--
"Other people just complicate my life." ~Solid Snake
|
David Spd
Caldari State
105
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 02:38:00 -
[7] - Quote
Events need to be the same for everybody. If paying members get "more" from them then free players will feel gimped, and be less inclined to take part.
I honestly do not see any good options for subscription options.
The best thing CCP can do (right now) is create a robust system to support cosmetics. People buy cosmetics like mad in every single free to play game I've ever touched. It's like clothing: a different outfit for every day.
With this being a FPS there is very little a subscription option would be able to touch without somehow lessening the experience for free players.
If CCP added cosmetics, then subscription option could touch that. Unique skins, extra cosmetic slots, discounts on cosmetics. What is a subscription model supposed to do for Dust right now? Boost something or other, since the game is bare bones. Boosting stats makes people perceive it as "pay to win" which makes them bitter. Boosting gains makes the "end-game" approach faster (think of having a subscription AND boosters active, the rates would be insane) and increases the intensity of "proto stomping" while not really offering anything more enjoyable to the game as a whole.
Exclusive consumables? What's the point? They'll be gone in the first couple days of your subscription. BPOs were removed because CCP doesn't like to give out free ISK, having free anything in terms of items would just throw that problem back into the game.
Until cosmetics are supported in a big way I don't see anything for subscription options to touch that wouldn't anger the playerbase as a whole or contradict choices CCP have made for the "health of the game".
Please, don't press subscription options. Instead press cosmetic options. Cosmetics for your armor, your weapons, your merc's voice, your merc profile. Give players a Dust version of the EVE character creator. Let players wear casual clothing in the merc quarters. Monetize off of these things that are optional and are far away from game balance and gameplay impacting items.
Then once players have some freedom on what they want to look like, add special exclusives to a monthly subscription, or convenience tied to them. Hell, they could implement a system where mercs earn "points" per match to buy cosmetic attachments for their armor or civilian clothes. Make subs increase the gains on THAT.
Cosmetics are the way to go. Free items, boosts or exclusive gameplay features are bad and do nothing good for the game. The "I don't care; they paid for it so they should get it" attitude is a VERY small minority when it comes to free to play games and you shouldn't assume "people will understand" or "it will make them want to buy it" because believe me; it won't. People will just get pissed off and fight about it. And I'll reiterate that this playerbase is all ready quite aggressive and fights all the time, giving them more reasons to fight isn't wise.
--> I'm a closed beta vet; I just don't post often <--
"Other people just complicate my life." ~Solid Snake
|
David Spd
Caldari State
105
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 03:29:00 -
[8] - Quote
You must be an EVE player. And you obviously have limited insight (and experience) on free to play games if you're lecturing me like that. Happy players bring more money. EVE is an anomaly in the gaming business, and nobody outside seems to understand how it has managed like it has. CCP seems just as surprised it survived so long and sustains itself.
You can't treat Dust like EVE. You can't appeal to a bunch of middle-aged people (or older) with a disposable income and not a lot of time and expect to get the same results on a console in the first person shooter genre.
And the only reason the game is so buggy is because CCP chose to build a revolutionary game on a ten year old machine that is no longer growing or improving, unlike PC which is constantly getting better. That's the only reason. Throwing more money at them isn't going to make the PS3 better. Nor is making players feel obligated to pay for a free game going to make Dust more enjoyable.
Get over yourself. While you're at it, go watch your cable tv, call someone on your cell phone and then make a withdrawl from your bank.
--> I'm a closed beta vet; I just don't post often <--
"Other people just complicate my life." ~Solid Snake
|
David Spd
Caldari State
105
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 04:10:00 -
[9] - Quote
KayDidYue wrote:David Spd wrote:You must be an EVE player. And you obviously have limited insight (and experience) on free to play games if you're lecturing me like that. Happy players bring more money. EVE is an anomaly in the gaming business, and nobody outside seems to understand how it has managed like it has. CCP seems just as surprised it survived so long and sustains itself.
You can't treat Dust like EVE. You can't appeal to a bunch of middle-aged people (or older) with a disposable income and not a lot of time and expect to get the same results on a console in the first person shooter genre.
And the only reason the game is so buggy is because CCP chose to build a revolutionary game on a ten year old machine that is no longer growing or improving, unlike PC which is constantly getting better. That's the only reason. Throwing more money at them isn't going to make the PS3 better. Nor is making players feel obligated to pay monthly for a free game going to make Dust more enjoyable.
Get over yourself. While you're at it, go watch your cable tv, call someone on your cell phone and then make a withdrawl from your bank. On all these points (about me) you are dead wrong. 1st, I am not an EVE player, and this is the first FPS type game I have played. As far as "free to play games," no I am a programmer, and do know about these type of games. Now if there are other free to play "online" games, then I am not familiar with them. What you may not realize is that it costs to improve things, and it also costs to have something connected to the Internet. How about you pay for the Internet connection and not have some type of compensation for it, other than people possibly paying for certain things that you can offer that is connected to the game. Maybe "throwing" money at them through a subscription, can make improvements by providing them the means that they can depend on to make said improvements. And no, I do not have cable tv, just an internet connection, and my cell phone, is just a basic one that costs me for each individual call as I do not have one of there "expensive" plans that I have no interest in paying for but not using. Of course if you had read the entire posting on this subject you would have known this. Lastly, I do not have a disposable income. Again, if you had read the previous posts, I am on a limited fixed income so I do have to be careful on what I do purchase. So your statement "Get over yourself" is thrown right back to you, as it seems that you are the one with an attitude of being full of himself and want things for free and do not want others to have it either!
Touche. I bolded your issues for you.
Firstly, this is your first first person shooter. Skill is the primary thing that drives FPS games. You give someone something that makes them perform better without being more skilled and you've fundamentally damaged your game (one of the main reasons why Dust is doing poorly).
Secondly, "Maybe" is the keyword. You can't guarantee that them having more money will make the game better in any capacity. We don't even know if money is an issue. We probably never will.
Thirdly, I read your entire post. You said you had limited budget, which doesn't necessarily mean it's not disposable, it just means that there is only so much available (could be extra earnings from a paycheck at the end of the month). I went with what you gave me, and I was wrong. My bad.
I have eleven years of experience playing all different types of free to play games as my primary source of games. I have taken part in countless alpha, closed and open beta for free to play, pay to own, and pay to play games. I have literally spent thousands of dollars in them (social security from my father's death went into building a computer and investing heavily in video games to cope) The business models are drastically different and every game that I have seen that transitions into a different business model has suffered because of that change or implementation.
I am full of myself, and I try to be confident on these forums because I seem to be the only one with experience in this genre and business model around these forums. I have to voice my opinion as openly and blatantly as possible because if I "half-ass" it then I won't be heard.
So in the end, yeah, I'm just some random person on the internet with a stick up his ass but I'm also someone that has seen games come and go through many different business models. I may not be experienced in life, nor paying bills or earning for them, but I know how I feel when I sit down and play a game, and I know how others react to being treated a certain way in their games, or dealing with changes to their game that they have no control over.
If there's one thing in life I know about, it's video games. And if people choose to ignore me; that's fine. I don't expect people to take some guy's word on the internet every time he posts a wall of text, but at least believe me when I say that video games should be fun first and foremost, and free to play games need to focus on that, and ways of delivering that. Pointing at people's wallet every time is not a good way to earn people's loyalty or make them WANT to spend money.
If CCP wanted money for every single thing they did then they chose the wrong business model for Dust. They need to make SOME sacrifices because this is the business model they've chosen. If they go back on it now then they are giving up their current demographic for a new one, and that transition hits the game hard. You might not think subscription model is a big deal and maybe in the end it won't be, but I simply cannot in good conscience say it is a good move based on what I've seen in my experience with this business model and genre.
Sorry if I offended you.
--> I'm a closed beta vet; I just don't post often <--
"Other people just complicate my life." ~Solid Snake
|
David Spd
Caldari State
105
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 04:35:00 -
[10] - Quote
KayDidYue wrote:To David Spd:
I can understand, and your point is taken, and no you did not offend me so no apology is needed.
As for me, I started playing this game, and was enjoying it, but it has been going downhill. I was hoping to bring about a way to possibly get it back to being a fun game.
Truthfully, with the time I have put into the game to build up my experience I really don't want to give up on it, but I may have to do this.
I do think that this might be a viable option where things could improve the game. That is if finances are the issue. This would also give a more powerful voice to the subscribers on how to improve the game. If they need funds, and get them through subscribers, they need to keep them happy - as it is, they don't have to listen to the players because the players aren't paying for the game. At least not on a regular basis.
Well listening to the players (at least partially) is usually a good idea because there are more of us than there are of them (at least... I would hope).
Overall I'm not against the idea of a subscription.... it's just, like I said before, it's really hard for me to think of ways to do it without heavy handing it. And I was really surprised at the amount of people that were paying $100 for those packs, so I know I'm not always right and certainly don't think I always am.
That sort of stuff usually goes over really badly in my experience. I guess people realized the value of permanent dropsuits and vehicles and went for it.
Also thanks for keeping your cool when I got a bit carried away. I tend to do that sometimes. Personality flaw of mine. It's also kind of nice to know our discussion was never really an argument. You're an okay guy KayDidYue. Hope you can find a way to enjoy Dust again eventually.
--> I'm a closed beta vet; I just don't post often <--
"Other people just complicate my life." ~Solid Snake
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|