Forums » Suggestions
There is nothing wrong with a F2P tier that is level-locked at some lower point (like Lite) that has some microtransactional upgrade options, but who can never get on-par with Subscribers or have access to the endgame content. This sidesteps the entire angst over F2P (I've brought this up at least three or four times now).
However, one challenge is doing it and having existing subscriptions drop precipitously enough to run us out of business. We aren't just supported by veterans, we're also supported by people who come through and try the game for longer periods. And we do not have enough capital to "fiddle with a new business model" for a year. With the other successful conversions to F2P, they invested a lot of time and tweaking.
But, I do agree that we're going to have to go F2P before long. It's just too much of an expectation now, too much of a barrier. I'm trying to start down that road with "Lite" subs, and also raising some funds to give us enough time to find a working balance.
However, one challenge is doing it and having existing subscriptions drop precipitously enough to run us out of business. We aren't just supported by veterans, we're also supported by people who come through and try the game for longer periods. And we do not have enough capital to "fiddle with a new business model" for a year. With the other successful conversions to F2P, they invested a lot of time and tweaking.
But, I do agree that we're going to have to go F2P before long. It's just too much of an expectation now, too much of a barrier. I'm trying to start down that road with "Lite" subs, and also raising some funds to give us enough time to find a working balance.
how about lite PC or windows store accts? maybe ?
Omg, you ppl are just cheap. I've been paying the $9.99 sub forever just to give the devs the max amount of money.
I'd just leave the game on any kinda of pay for stuff model.
And CS, nobody should vote for ya, just cause your Crazy. Magic tridents shields be damned.. go Greenwall! :)
I'd just leave the game on any kinda of pay for stuff model.
And CS, nobody should vote for ya, just cause your Crazy. Magic tridents shields be damned.. go Greenwall! :)
I'm not comfortable with a full F2P conversion. I just don't think the benefits outweigh the disadvantages.
I would however, support lowering the subscription amount to 4.99 USD a month and adding a cosmetics-only micro-store to supplement it. Adding to the real-life merchandise store is also an option. I suspect maps, models of iconic ships, art books, and the like would be very popular.
This gives VO the impression of being "progressive" (not the word I would use for the F2P model, but okay...) while still guaranteeing that 100% of the population of the game supports 100% of the population of the game.
I would however, support lowering the subscription amount to 4.99 USD a month and adding a cosmetics-only micro-store to supplement it. Adding to the real-life merchandise store is also an option. I suspect maps, models of iconic ships, art books, and the like would be very popular.
This gives VO the impression of being "progressive" (not the word I would use for the F2P model, but okay...) while still guaranteeing that 100% of the population of the game supports 100% of the population of the game.
Yes thanks for posting exactly nothing helpful vskye
We are not the stingy ones, prospective players are who won't invest in a subscription model game are the ones you have to convince. There are always players who might never pay anything, but it doesn't mean we shouldn't let them play if it enhances the experience for everybody else AND there are sensible restrictions so it's still worthwhile to support the game.
Yes well, since I specifically mentioned that saying you will quit if any sort of F2P comes in was a stupid thing to post and you still managed to post it, perhaps its for the better anyway.
We are not the stingy ones, prospective players are who won't invest in a subscription model game are the ones you have to convince. There are always players who might never pay anything, but it doesn't mean we shouldn't let them play if it enhances the experience for everybody else AND there are sensible restrictions so it's still worthwhile to support the game.
Yes well, since I specifically mentioned that saying you will quit if any sort of F2P comes in was a stupid thing to post and you still managed to post it, perhaps its for the better anyway.
vskye
"Omg, you ppl are just cheap. I've been paying the $9.99 sub forever just to give the devs the max amount of money. "
just so you know I pay for 3 full sub accounts, at $30/month and gave $250 to KS so I am not cheap.
"Omg, you ppl are just cheap. I've been paying the $9.99 sub forever just to give the devs the max amount of money. "
just so you know I pay for 3 full sub accounts, at $30/month and gave $250 to KS so I am not cheap.
Personally, I've never liked my experiences with Pay 2 Win games. I've also never played them for very long. The adverse effect that P2W has on combat in games is pretty terrible, Whoever has the most disposable income gets access to the better gear and all the advantage. Since vo is twitched/skilled based combat I think that kind of model would fundamentally neuter combat in the game and thus drive people like me away and our money as well. This is just my opinion and it is based on the experiences I've had with P2W games.
If subscriptions exist as currently, and F2P are capped at something like Lite (3/3/3/3/3 or whatever), then the only "pay to win" is in competition between free players. It has no bearing whatsoever on subscribers, who.. are always better off (you could say they all "win" equally over F2P tiers, heh).
Are you certain that will reward you with the investment you'll need? I'm not being critical, but if I had to think like a shallow newby I would look at that model and think "so i'll have to sub anyway" which would leave me with the current deterrent, I don't like to pay money monthly. If I was one of those shallow newby types that is.
I think that the F2P mode that Inc wants to go to is good. look at DE or crusader they play for free & are happy with the levels they can get. Some new players I think will be happy to play at 3/3/3/3/3 levels why not they can still PvP, mine, trade & interact with other players & just maybe get hooked to buy a sub. Its a win/win for the player base & guild imho
Whilst not wishing to post anything of little help why not leave the graphics to a point where there is a sufficient player base.
With regards to securing a bigger player base, f2p games do yield higher new recruits though of unsavory natures, the free nature leads rise to a younger audience without access to funds that tend to spam and other unsavory actions. Mentioned inn earlier posts.
How to segregate the differences between subscriptions and free? The more sucessful free games only have aesthetic choices as payment options. The shops color scheme could be changed to price per color, something relatively cheap. This may drum up some minor funds as people will want something better than pain grey.
Granted this is not sufficient to catch your interests, here is a concept... Major PvP areas like denab require access pass to enter... It could be phrased like military restricted area please register your service with nation first (subscription) or purchase a temporay mercenary licence lasting 3 days etc etc (f2p). This could generate repeat business as PvP is a big make or break of games. PvP can still be found traveling around so it wouldn't discount completely though a pain to find. Move conquer stations to military sectors. Themes of this area is outside of government protection only enlisted personnel permited etc again removing quality PvP areas to places of privileged. Quality another key point, if you allows dozens of f2p into PvP areas is only going to create skill fade people will get lazy because new players are effectively bots (I know I am).
A new mission tree teaching combat skills resulting in a free military pass for a day could be enough to create the desire, to purchase more.
This would leave the remains of the game vastly open to f2p players whilst allowing subscription players a more premium content. The majority of f2p leave when they feel to restricted and forced to buy, PvP is not essential to play though its a popular commodity. Those new sectors they hinted at can be subscription only then released to f2p clients when a new release is made. The perks of subscribing format...
I am new to the game and admittedly I have not pledged anything to the kick stater though I have subscribed to the full monthly payments and not the lite version. I have not played enough to warrant investing any more money whilst there are a few bugs effecting playing enjoyment, though they are minor enough to warrant my subscription.
I hope this provides a good topic for thought and be nice with replies, I was trying to be constructive ...
With regards to securing a bigger player base, f2p games do yield higher new recruits though of unsavory natures, the free nature leads rise to a younger audience without access to funds that tend to spam and other unsavory actions. Mentioned inn earlier posts.
How to segregate the differences between subscriptions and free? The more sucessful free games only have aesthetic choices as payment options. The shops color scheme could be changed to price per color, something relatively cheap. This may drum up some minor funds as people will want something better than pain grey.
Granted this is not sufficient to catch your interests, here is a concept... Major PvP areas like denab require access pass to enter... It could be phrased like military restricted area please register your service with nation first (subscription) or purchase a temporay mercenary licence lasting 3 days etc etc (f2p). This could generate repeat business as PvP is a big make or break of games. PvP can still be found traveling around so it wouldn't discount completely though a pain to find. Move conquer stations to military sectors. Themes of this area is outside of government protection only enlisted personnel permited etc again removing quality PvP areas to places of privileged. Quality another key point, if you allows dozens of f2p into PvP areas is only going to create skill fade people will get lazy because new players are effectively bots (I know I am).
A new mission tree teaching combat skills resulting in a free military pass for a day could be enough to create the desire, to purchase more.
This would leave the remains of the game vastly open to f2p players whilst allowing subscription players a more premium content. The majority of f2p leave when they feel to restricted and forced to buy, PvP is not essential to play though its a popular commodity. Those new sectors they hinted at can be subscription only then released to f2p clients when a new release is made. The perks of subscribing format...
I am new to the game and admittedly I have not pledged anything to the kick stater though I have subscribed to the full monthly payments and not the lite version. I have not played enough to warrant investing any more money whilst there are a few bugs effecting playing enjoyment, though they are minor enough to warrant my subscription.
I hope this provides a good topic for thought and be nice with replies, I was trying to be constructive ...
I'm used to be different from the herd...
since VO is already so different than regular MMOs, as its multiplaform, single-instance, multi-layered sandbox format, why go the same path? Why not also advertise that we also have a NEW, unique, innovative model?
Instead of simply "F2P", say we are multi-tiered, with a Free Tier, another microtransactions based and regular subscription, to serve all gamers' needs or preferences. You don't have a CC nor dollars? Play limited for free... Mobile plataform users can benefit of integrated microtransactions support, and if you want to enjoy the game to its full extent, subscribe!
Then no one can complain that's Pay2Win, or that Free Cake is a lie in a cage... Rules are clear... Tiered gameplay...
No change at all in business models proposed so far, only its presentation... add a "NEW MODEL" tag can produce much more repercussion, analysis and comments than simply going F2P as so many others have gone...
(And the safeguard of limited free slots, to ensure that subscribers can allways login and play, while Freebies may not)
since VO is already so different than regular MMOs, as its multiplaform, single-instance, multi-layered sandbox format, why go the same path? Why not also advertise that we also have a NEW, unique, innovative model?
Instead of simply "F2P", say we are multi-tiered, with a Free Tier, another microtransactions based and regular subscription, to serve all gamers' needs or preferences. You don't have a CC nor dollars? Play limited for free... Mobile plataform users can benefit of integrated microtransactions support, and if you want to enjoy the game to its full extent, subscribe!
Then no one can complain that's Pay2Win, or that Free Cake is a lie in a cage... Rules are clear... Tiered gameplay...
No change at all in business models proposed so far, only its presentation... add a "NEW MODEL" tag can produce much more repercussion, analysis and comments than simply going F2P as so many others have gone...
(And the safeguard of limited free slots, to ensure that subscribers can allways login and play, while Freebies may not)
@Alloy
Sounds good
Why not even isolate the lower tiered players inside their own tier level of play as well.
Many other F2P games do that and if you want to get the better equipment to try it or play with the big boys to enter normal VO space then you have to subscribe, otherwise you can always access your non-subscription based space with other non-subscribers
Anyhow just something else to kick around to attract players as free but desire the subscription level as well.
Sounds good
Why not even isolate the lower tiered players inside their own tier level of play as well.
Many other F2P games do that and if you want to get the better equipment to try it or play with the big boys to enter normal VO space then you have to subscribe, otherwise you can always access your non-subscription based space with other non-subscribers
Anyhow just something else to kick around to attract players as free but desire the subscription level as well.
Why would we do that Captain86 when we want more targets to kill. Also, why the hell would you of all people suggest that when you're always complacent about not enough players
You never, EVER segregate players based on how much they paid you. It's unfair, it splits your community, and it does nothing to incentivize free players into paying (likely the exact opposite: leaving)
This is another reason I hate the F2P method. It's so damned easy to be completely unfair to the free players.
This is another reason I hate the F2P method. It's so damned easy to be completely unfair to the free players.
TerranAmbassador: Your logic lacks logic. To the best of my knowledge, Guild Software is based in the United States of America, a "capitalist" country, where capitalism is about money, and capitalism is judged as fair.
In communist Russia, this would be completely unfair.
In communist Russia, this would be completely unfair.
And you say MY logic fails...wow.
Runescape has been using that model for over 10 years and it's like one of the most played browser MMO's there is. They have a f2p on a restricted world and then a $5 subscription per month to get access to the members servers. If you want to meet somebody in-game you have to be on the same server as them.
Now you can laugh all you want about how its crap this, crap that bla bla bla, but it makes truckloads of cash.
Now you can laugh all you want about how its crap this, crap that bla bla bla, but it makes truckloads of cash.
TRS - I'm fairly certain that the main reason that F2P is demanded is because people without bank accounts or credit cards (i.e. teenagers) want to play the game for free because they don't have the means to pay individually. They terribly WANT to play WoW or Vendetta or Destiny or whatever, but can't because their parents won't fork over the CC# for recurring charges. (I know *I* wouldn't. We tried that with Amazon Prime and I had to lock it down since the kids bought almost $200 of movies for the Kindle fire in one month.)
If you could make an iTunes gift cert pay for VO, or other gift transactions on Amazon, or Steam, or Google Wallet, or maybe cellphone billing systems (text "vendetta" to 87654 to pay for a month of access!) , then I think paying the $9 a month would become easier for the target audience.
I think the real trick is finding a way to bypass the question of "Dad can I use your credit card to be billed monthly for a game that I play?" If you guys find a way to bypass that difficult conversation, then I think you're golden.
If you could make an iTunes gift cert pay for VO, or other gift transactions on Amazon, or Steam, or Google Wallet, or maybe cellphone billing systems (text "vendetta" to 87654 to pay for a month of access!) , then I think paying the $9 a month would become easier for the target audience.
I think the real trick is finding a way to bypass the question of "Dad can I use your credit card to be billed monthly for a game that I play?" If you guys find a way to bypass that difficult conversation, then I think you're golden.
What part of "Use cash to buy yourself a general purpose 'gift card' from the nearest convenience store" do people not get? Seriously, this is Shady-Lifestyle 101 here! It's right up there with the prepaid cell-phone!
I mean, I assume VO accepts those, right? People give me them for Christmas and birthdays all the time, and I use them at whatever random stores, and I'm pretty sure I've bought stuff online with them. I use paypal for VO though so I've never tried them here. But they're run by Visa and MasterCard, and work just like a prepaid credit card, so I believe they should.
Maybe this kind of thing should be added to the game's FAQs, unless I'm mistaken.
I mean, I assume VO accepts those, right? People give me them for Christmas and birthdays all the time, and I use them at whatever random stores, and I'm pretty sure I've bought stuff online with them. I use paypal for VO though so I've never tried them here. But they're run by Visa and MasterCard, and work just like a prepaid credit card, so I believe they should.
Maybe this kind of thing should be added to the game's FAQs, unless I'm mistaken.