DUST Search - Would you welcome a subscription fee?

Ludvig Enraga wrote:

Deadeye Dic wrote:

Ludvig Enraga wrote:

I read his interview on the link you provided. I think there are two 'buts' in it. First he is speaking from the position of a developer/publisher behind a large f2p project, so he has to defend this model. Second, iirc planetside 2 did not start out as f2p, they converted to f2p only after it was obvious that it would have enough players to support a profitable f2p. I think this difference is key as developer invested into planteside a ton of money from the get go - I think the may not have done it if they started out with the f2p concept in mind - it's just too risky. So I think planetside is more of an exception than the rule. You also see in the interview how he defends p2p: he says that really big games with a lot of effort going into their creation (he offers COD as an example) are obligated to be p2p - otherwise, they would not make money.

Not on you, but you kind of missed the point. Smedley has been President of SOE for years, almost 10 for sure (He was around when SWG was released 10 years ago this month). Until the last two years or so he never mentioned F2P. Neverwinter is a new release (more or less, it's still OB I think) and it was built by a F2P developer (Cryptic Studios). The difference between major studios supporting F2P and CCP supporting F2P is that these studios have BIG backers. In the case of Neverwinter, Cryptic has PWE to back them. CCP and Sony have no idea how to really market F2P games, Asian companies do, they have been for years, you'll note in that interview that the number one game in the world, based off of subscriber numbers is a F2P game (League of Legends), that is what everyone late to the game is trying to get into, including CCP. The problem with Subscription based games on a console is that players don't want to have to spend money to sub for a game on a console. Microsoft and Xbox Live are the reason that players are not interested in this. Who wants to spend $60 a year for access to a $15/month subscription? Sure Sony isn't doing what MS is doing, but they get a cut from every dollar spent on PSN. People will pay $15 to sub to a console MMO, but once the middle man get's his share, what does that leave for the developer? Therefore, for the developer to get there $15, they have to charge a higher subscription price and players aren't going to pay $20 a month in a F2P market where they have options. That being said, I would still spend the $20 sub if CCP had a hybrid model. While I'm not happy with Dust at this time, I still play from time to time and I believe that CCP can deliver on the future, but I seriously think that they need income to do it.

People are complaining that Dust isn't great and they won't pay. They want a AAA MMO title for free. Most people don't realize that games, any type of AAA game, cost millions to make before it is even worthy of being a beta, much less release worthy. That money has to come from some place. Dust is my game, it's not CCPs, they work for me to provide me with something. So why shouldn't I pay them? If I hire a maid, that maid provides a service or function and gets paid for it. That is how I look at it.

Right, exactly. We should pay them. But with the current system we are not paying enough. It's like your maid: he/she can't be expected go to ten homes for free just in hope of one of the homeowners paying for the extra premium clean, which, by the way, under f2p but not pay to win formula would have to be no better than the non-premium service delievered for free to the other 9 homeowners.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Justin Tymes Condotta Rouvenor Gallente Federation 144	Posted - 2013.06.09 03:29:00 - [1] - Quote With planetside 2 coming to the PS4, it would be the end of Dust. With a majority of players(outside and even in the Dust community) already thinking it's a superior game, and F2P to boot, there would be little incentive to pay money for Dust.
Justin Tymes Condotta Rouvenor Gallente Federation 144	Posted - 2013.06.09 05:31:00 - [2] - Quote Ludvig Enraga wrote: Daxxis KANNAH wrote: Most of these games are moving to free to play so why would OP even entertain going to a sub model. CCP decided this model was right for them so whats with all the pity???? Also, even if the sub was $5 per month do you think that in a year this game will be worth that of other top flight games, worse two or three years??? And what about other similar titles that will soon be on newer consoles? What other similar titles? Most of which games are moving to f2p system? All the big MMO put a foot through the door by offering limited content for free in expectation that a consumer would be drawn in and eventually switch to subscription. It's a marketing trick, not a business model. I think that DUST needs to better at what it promised to be, not play catch up with other AAA titles, so yes if it was subscription based I do believe CCP would have invested more since it would stand to have more in profit under subscription model. If' it's gonna take half a year to fix the major bugs and add worthwhile content I'd be fine with it. I would wait that long, and would be willing to pay subscription for this content. I don't pity CCP. I pity DUST because no one is gonna play it in 3 months because nothing will get fixed. And yes I used to be excited about DUST. I am prettys sure ppl will keep dropping off and those who stay wont be paying for aurum. So CCP would let the game die instead of putting more development effort to fix it. The problem is that a sub model requires the game to be good. Sub based games on the console only work if the game itself is good enough to pay money for them. Just look at early DCUO and FFXIV. You don't just say "pay us and we can make this lackluster game good" when CCP has no record in the console or FPS world to back this up. Why would anyone sub for a game like this, and "trust" that CCP will make it better if you give them your money? No, you make a good game first, and then say "if you support us, we can make this game even better".
Justin Tymes Condotta Rouvenor Gallente Federation 144	Posted - 2013.06.09 14:18:00 - [3] - Quote Ludvig Enraga wrote: Deadeye Dic wrote: Ludvig Enraga wrote: I read his interview on the link you provided. I think there are two 'buts' in it. First he is speaking from the position of a developer/publisher behind a large f2p project, so he has to defend this model. Second, iirc planetside 2 did not start out as f2p, they converted to f2p only after it was obvious that it would have enough players to support a profitable f2p. I think this difference is key as developer invested into planteside a ton of money from the get go - I think the may not have done it if they started out with the f2p concept in mind - it's just too risky. So I think planetside is more of an exception than the rule. You also see in the interview how he defends p2p: he says that really big games with a lot of effort going into their creation (he offers COD as an example) are obligated to be p2p - otherwise, they would not make money. Not on you, but you kind of missed the point. Smedley has been President of SOE for years, almost 10 for sure (He was around when SWG was released 10 years ago this month). Until the last two years or so he never mentioned F2P. Neverwinter is a new release (more or less, it's still OB I think) and it was built by a F2P developer (Cryptic Studios). The difference between major studios supporting F2P and CCP supporting F2P is that these studios have BIG backers. In the case of Neverwinter, Cryptic has PWE to back them. CCP and Sony have no idea how to really market F2P games, Asian companies do, they have been for years, you'll note in that interview that the number one game in the world, based off of subscriber numbers is a F2P game (League of Legends), that is what everyone late to the game is trying to get into, including CCP. The problem with Subscription based games on a console is that players don't want to have to spend money to sub for a game on a console. Microsoft and Xbox Live are the reason that players are not interested in this. Who wants to spend $60 a year for access to a $15/month subscription? Sure Sony isn't doing what MS is doing, but they get a cut from every dollar spent on PSN. People will pay $15 to sub to a console MMO, but once the middle man get's his share, what does that leave for the developer? Therefore, for the developer to get there $15, they have to charge a higher subscription price and players aren't going to pay $20 a month in a F2P market where they have options. That being said, I would still spend the $20 sub if CCP had a hybrid model. While I'm not happy with Dust at this time, I still play from time to time and I believe that CCP can deliver on the future, but I seriously think that they need income to do it. People are complaining that Dust isn't great and they won't pay. They want a AAA MMO title for free. Most people don't realize that games, any type of AAA game, cost millions to make before it is even worthy of being a beta, much less release worthy. That money has to come from some place. Dust is my game, it's not CCPs, they work for me to provide me with something. So why shouldn't I pay them? If I hire a maid, that maid provides a service or function and gets paid for it. That is how I look at it. Right, exactly. We should pay them. But with the current system we are not paying enough. It's like your maid: he/she can't be expected go to ten homes for free just in hope of one of the homeowners paying for the extra premium clean, which, by the way, under f2p but not pay to win formula would have to be no better than the non-premium service delievered for free to the other 9 homeowners. This is the problem; why should we pay them for something they may or may not do in the future? You're saying we should pay them for this mediocre game, so they can fix the game to what it should have been in the very beginning. You're not going to get anyone but the die-hard fans to jump on the board with this.