Spotfist, If people didn't want to pay to get rid of the ads, they wouldn't have sold 500k copies.

Angry Birds doesn't count either. Cell carrier salespeople were pre-installing that one.

+1 draug. I usually forget Aeolus even exists.

I can't comment too much about ads on android, not having one myself. I did pay extra for my kindle 3 to not have ads on it though (note that I'm referring to one of the real kindles, i.e. the ones with e-ink instead of that LCD crap the Fire has).

As long as people like me can still get a normal ad-less subscription for the normal price on all platforms, I am okay with a loser-tier that is f2p with ads. Not "jumping up and down hugging Inc" levels of okay, but I could tolerate it. Frankly I might like that more than Inc's vo-lite proposal. Models that mess with what you're allowed to do bug me more than letting the free-turds in.

I havent had the time to parse all the posts here but IMHO...

Simply make an android only version for 1.00 per month. (possibly time limited to 4 hours per day?)

Ok, just jumping on for a sec because I'm still very busy, but:

MOBILE ADVERTISEMENTS WILL NOT SUPPORT THIS GAME

Ads on mobile are entirely based on the principle of:

1) Extreme numbers of players.

2) Very low overhead per-player.

We will never have #1 (not like an Angry Birds), and we sure as hell don't have #2. Think about it, Rovio pays nothing per Angry Birds player. Google is paying for the downloads, the game is single-player and has no server-side mechanics to speak of, etc. The same is true for Fruit Ninja and many other games.

I on the other hand have major server infrastructure to maintain, along with a cost to support each connecting user (not a huge one, but infinitely larger than Rovio), and a game that simply is not consumable by 10 million people on phones the way that Angry Birds is. Our gameplay requires drastically more patience to access, and no matter how much I improve the newbie experience, that will always be the case.

(On a sidenote, advertising is not Rovio's primary revenue stream, but rather licensing of their characters and the sales of merchandise. Let's just say I don't expect to be doing that either in the near future).

So no, the business model will not work. I know this, because I had integrated banners in the updater for hundreds of thousands of installs, and made like $200 from the ads. Total. Even if I had the most idealistically optimized ad network in the universe, it would not have made for much revenue (FYI, we have since removed the banner ads from the updater). Rebuilding the whole game to be constantly filled with ads would make for a kind of horrific game experience, and still probably not much revenue. (Also, I have friends who run much more widespread apps, with tens of millions of active installs, and they tell me the ad networks suck for them too. Just because everyone uses ads on mobile, doesn't mean they do a whole lot).

This is why all the F2P mobile games are supported by microtransactions (whether they also have ads or not). And that is a big engineering challenge that I can't take on right now. It's much more complicated to retrofit an existing game and community to a different business model.

This discussion is about Lite mode, and ramifications thereof, let's try to keep it there..

Also, yes, subscription billing is supported on Android and some other platforms.

It is good to know that subscription billing is an option.

I say limit your risk, while testing the waters. If all a player gets to do is bot in a basic centurion and do some light trading in an EC, that is still something to do. It is easy to reduce limits later, but hard to impose new ones. On the other hand, if you get so many $1 subscriptions that it becomes your primary revenue (sans micro transactions), you should probably open things up fast.

Consider relabeling all full rate subscriptions as "premium", "top tier", "full subscription" or something along those lines, and downplaying the "Lite" Lingo. There really isn't anything "Lite" about it. It will have the same memory, processing, and network requirements as the "premium" version. Call it "Basic", "Starter", or something that communicates that more is available. I am not a marketing person, and you might should consult one.

You are targeting the mobile market, but the mobile market is perceived as handicapped in pvp. There is nothing to keep some one from running the "Lite" package on a PC, but the implemented limitations could coincide with the perceived limitations of the mobile market. Even if someone runs it on a PC, they could end up gaining (by design) about the same play experience.

I do hope to see a cross over market, with mobile customers converting to PC customers. I really have no interest in a larger population for the sake of chat. I wish for a larger pvp capable population.

The term "Lite" actually comes from the MMO and mobile industries, used for this exact kind of tiered access level. So I'm using it not because I think it's great, but because it has become relatively common as a term for this (enough that people asking for this kind of pricing level refer to it as such in our Play Store reviews). Anyway, I doubt we'll call it anything in the actual pricing system, we'll just present it as the primary option and give them an "addition options" button to see other possibilities or something. Not being too complex is important on mobile.

I would definitely refer to our usual subscriptions as "Premium" or some such.

Mobile gets a bit of a rap as far as PvP capabilities go, but this is only going to improve. There's no question that playing on a touchscreen sucks, but methods of controlling mobile devices are rapidly evolving (like the bluetooth controllers from PowerA and Nyko).

It's kind of like mobile devices being "slower" too.. I'm pretty sure the (Adreno 320) GPU in the Nexus 4 is faster than the one in my Core i5 laptop, heh.

Anyway, cool, I welcome further feedback on different ways we could approach limiting the tier, or whatever else.

You could restrict subfaction standings and then charge a microtransaction to achieve neutral standing. Would be a good primary unlock for lite subscribers, then have it so they can buy it back again if it drops down, kind of like TRIPS but with real money instead of the in-game credits. As an alternative, of course.

More ideas for Lite accounts, after reading other posts, as Andy's post:

Threat to vets: Desirable! But should require a good Lite player to invest few dollars...

ALTs: Limited to 1 (or 2) alt(s). Here we can have a quick Lite/SUB transition. Make all accounts have 1?2? Lite slots, with all limitations, and other 5?6? slots for unrestricted accounts, that remain grayed out without subs. Once a subscription ends, the full slots are grayed out...
I prefer to keep them separated, subbed account can access any ALTs, Liters access only the Lite Alts. Easier transitioning also!
This clear distinction avoids that "Why can't I have that?" feeling, and resulting anger when unable to achieve/purchase/unlocks something...

Nationality: Then we have two levels of players, like "noble subbers" and "peasant liters". I'd like to see some backstory about it, or somehow directly related to nationality, as I proposed before, "Lite Alts" are born in sub-factions, while only "Subbed Alts" can be created in main nations. It does not restrict gameplay, as a Lite Alt can join any nation's military...

Licenses: Licenses limited to 4/4/4/4/4 for simplification. Temporary "5" level allowed, decaying after few hours.

Standing: Limited to +800/native, +199/foreigner. But allow +800 with another single faction if native hated/KoS. Also, joining any nation's military will revert the caps to 800/Nation, 199/others. Just like if someone adopts a new citizenship resulting in losing native status. (No double nationality allowed).

Guilds: Allowed only as regular member, positions restricted to subbed players.

Play time/Plataform: Unlimited. Same rules for mobile/PC. This integration is a major feature for VO, and plataforms are merging. *IF* someday there are too many simultaneous players, add limited free/lite slots. But I hope some day we can complain about too many concurrent users.

Microtransactions: Same features available for sub/Lite accounts. Sell most things, including:
-Daily/Weekly subs, for US$1,00/3,00.
-Capships, for real dollars, only in UN-insured version. When explodes, must buy another...
-Weapons, ships, etc: Sold only in Black Market (grayspace), for real dollars and indecent credits amounts. Example, a grayhound can be sold to anyone for US$1,00 or 10.000.000c. Same for Other ships, with limited daily/hourly global availability, as 1 Prom/Hour.
>Best features should never be sold, as SCP, X-1, N3, etc...

just my opinions... but the sub/lite separation for me seems a must-have.

Limiting levels/equipment/money is one thing: Pay to win. It would be discouraging for a player to put a good amount of time playing the game only to see some vet cruising around in a ship they can never have for a lack of their financial situation. Nobody would stick around paying for a limited demo.

Incarnate is right. Advertising is only for the platforms that are so large that marketing budgets can't ignore them. Micro transactions are a frivolous pursuit better spent on actual development. If Incarnate is going to be doing any major development, it should be working with Apple and moving the game to iOS where the revenue is many times that of Android. Other MMOs are already on that platform and making good money.

Let's think about what already exists: Time limited accounts and player slot limits. It's already been written and tested. Try coming up with something that already exists so Incarnate can get this done as quickly as possible.

+1 to Lite

Another small possible limitations:

- limit the stations Lites are alowed to set home
- no way to see stuff they have stored in other stations
- no plugins allowed

You are talking about starting at $1 (Lite), with the target of getting them to $10 (Premium). If your minimum transaction is $1, that only leaves about 9 transactions.

We only need about ten tiers, and they do not have to be linear.
$1 buys a single character, with limits
$1 to add a character slot
$1 to gain access to ship color selection, double station storage facilities, Guild access.

These are only examples. The point being that it does not need to be a fixed path of upgrade. I might not ever care about ship color, and I might be a $9 subscriber forever, enjoying most of the game otherwise. I might be $6 sub forever, enjoying all of the game, but limited to a single character.

Edit: The game could be divided into packages: The basic package, trader upgrade, combat upgrade, mining upgrade, etc...

Edit2: Personally, I think some options should stand outside the Lite issue. How may premium customers would be willing to pay extra per month for extra character slots? Extra station storage? etc?

-1 kab. Level and faction restrictions, as well as possible chat restrictions, are sufficient. The stuff you suggest is just devolving into meanness. (And let me be clear: I have no love for the sort of people who'd use a vo-lite. But there's a difference between offering them a semi-fair lower-tier access and outright treating them like the subhuman filth they probably are. That would reflect poorly on GS and VO.)

DE: re edit2, Fuck No. The premium tier should include everything, particularly in-game things. Character slots possibly being an exception, but certainly not things like station storage. In-game things should always be earned via in-game methods.

You are only limiting yourself and others. You have a premium sub, and you have the station storage you have now. I can pay for a second account, and trade inventory between characters, by why should I be forced into such a convoluted upgrade scheme. Simplified options make for simplified revenues. What do you have against the devs making a buck fair and square, by giving players more versatility?

Hmmm... I don't know that a 'lite' sub will really expand your market at all. The subscription cost for VO is already pretty low, so it's already in an appealing range for the people who are not opposed to a monthly subscription style of payment.

Instead, I might suggest having an up-front client purchase get you in the door 'permanently.' For example you could have a paid android client version that comes with a non-expiring limited subscription. Have people throw down maybe $5 up front to get limited access for good, and you could come out ahead of the average per-user commitment at $1/mo, while expanding your market to people who might be opposed to monthly payments to get in the door. Then anyone could upgrade to a full subscription at any time, and still have the limited client to fall back on if they let their subscription lapse.

People would still have the 'free trial' tier of play on the free downloadable client, so really the purchased client just grants them access to the limited play for life option, and could be bought later for free trial people or past subscribers (or maybe make the option available for free to anyone who's been subscribed for x months running at the full subscription rate, so they can come back and re-try the game at any time)

The limited client should be only one character. Level caps seem like an OK limitation, as well as the no guilds rule. Perhaps faction standing limits as well with non-home nations. All earned badges would be disabled, and they'd get a 'limited account' badge instead while on the limited client.

As an aside, I think it might be a good idea to also offer 'supplemental' account rates... i.e., if you have one paid subscription already at the full rate, allow people to purchase additional characters or subscriptions at a reduced rate... for example, expand by $1/mo per additional characters over 6 on the same account, or buy an additional account with 6 more characters that can be online concurrently with the main account for $5/mo. This would encourage more steady subscribers to pay a little extra for more accounts and characters, which could be used personally or as guild assets, etc. Lower price only applicable when billed to the same person as the main account to prevent gaming the system.

I'm against premium content that could give any tangible advantage to a single player character over other subscribers, like micro-transactions for premium content. That's a slippery slope that will turn away a lot of players, and you don't want to go there. Stuff like special paint schemes might be OK, but nothing that could change the combat dynamic even the tiniest iota is going to be tolerated by a lot of people. The moment you start entering the realm of 'pay to win', you're going to lose subscribers, including me.

The moment you start entering the realm of 'pay to win', you're going to lose subscribers, including me.

Unlike other games, having top-tier gear (ships/weapons) does NOT ensure victory. An average newbie pilot in a SCP or X1 is no match for an Ace Vet in a hog2/Vult... Not even an un-shielded trident ensures safety or victory...

Just to clarify - I meant a 1.00 a month android only account - not playable on any other platform

The android players are hampered enuogh already so any other limitation seems a but redundant....

"Unlike other games, having top-tier gear (ships/weapons) does NOT ensure victory. An average newbie pilot in a SCP or X1 is no match for an Ace Vet in a hog2/Vult... Not even an un-shielded trident ensures safety or victory... "

Absolutely true, but that still doesn't change the fact that giving someone even a small advantage, like Neut IIIs over Neut IIs, changes the combat dynamic enough to create a 'pay-to-win' mantra, which is what will hurt the subscriber base far more than any actual advantage, which is the point I was trying to make. It's a slippery slope you do NOT want to start down, because it changes the way people view your game in a negative way.

Consider what happened to World of Tanks when premium ammo became a thing. Proponents argue that it's only a tiny advantage and not necessary to buy, yet tournaments are now 100% premium-ammo-or-go-home because of the way it changes the gameplay paradigm, and tons of people have just given up on the game rather than get suckered into a cycle of always paying for premium ammo to stay competitive. It's not that people can't afford to buy it. It's that people are against the very idea of needing to pay for something that improves their play, even a tiny bit.

It's also extremely newbie-unfriendly, because while vets can easily do without the premium content and still wax the floor with less experienced players, it sets a high bar of entry for new players just trying to learn the game, and forces them to fork over extra cash in the hopes of gaining a competitive advantage, and sets them up for huge disappointment when it isn't a game-changer for them. Many will opt to just stop playing when they see what looks to them like a paywall to success.

Unless I am much mistaken, android players are already disadvantaged against pc players. If this is the case, and players who competently use both to play would be best able to answer that, then does it really make sense to impose additional restrictions upon them?

If there is a hard limit already created by device type used, then I would be reluctant to add any further hindrance to player success and go with a tiered payment system that is downward inclusive, but does not allow upward mobility without changing payment tiers.

loads of good ideas here. My 2c:

Option 1: restricted Lite account

Mobile only.
New accounts only.
No downgrade option: The only way to go is up.
Level cap 5/5/5/5/5
Only 1 character slot available (this might be something for all trial accounts)
No founding guilds, only regular member available
1,000,000c bank limit (or some random #. 10M? 100M?)
account auto-logs off if inactive for x-minutes (like trial accounts do now)

Option 2: Unrestricted Day Pass

add a new $1/day non-recurring sub option, All platforms. You want to play today? Cough up a buck and the universe is yours. (This might get a lot of lapsed vets to drop in once in a while between Jan 1 and Dec 24...)

Option 3: Unrestricted Mobile $1/mo for 1 character.

While I was defining option 1 it hit me: We pay $1.17 - $1.67 a month per character slot depending on our sub length, why not let Mobile newbs buy in 1 character? and In fact, a lot of trial account shenanigans (my own included ;) would be put to rest if you greyed out 5 alt slots on all trial accounts. You do not need 6 characters to try the game for 8 hours.

3/3/3/3/3 plus allowing Lite subscribers to make trips to Corvus to purchase level 6/6/6/6/6 ships, cells, and conventional weaponry seems like a good cap. I would restrict the s-port blaster families of neutrons, positrons, and gauss.