“it's paying to support game development of one of the longest running, earliest examples of a twitch-MMORPG, supporting server costs”

“I don't understand why so many people want to live in a world filled with shitty ads and constant extortions just so they can play a game for free. Is it really so difficult to get a job?”

Some have expressed the above quoted sentiment which is completely the wrong way to look at it regarding any sort of profit model

Supporting a cause is typicall (not for profit model)

Anyhow I agree people "don't understand" WHY anyone is ever suggesting a free to play game at all.

It has nothing to do with money, and nothing at all to do with people needing a job.
I quote "NONE at all"

It has to do with suggestions to attract more players to play with. That is the basis for MOST if not ALL of these sorts of suggestions.

OK so now that I've pointed out the obvious that seems to have evaded some, I'll point to the direct and obvious problem with maintaining long term massive subs for this game.

First let me say it's not the subs, but the number of players; and it's not necessarily the content but the lure of achievement that people desire.

Consider all the models out there from subs to free. Currently the desire to achieve keeps people comeing back. OMG farmville to EVE.

Currently the lack of massive players create a catch 22 which is very aparent.

People say "where are the players" they have fun for a short burst then leave, nothing to see here.

Others may support the cause they might stick around but at a much lower number then those wanting to plugin to the system and stay.
VO is not a community organization but A GAME.

Suggestions for advertisers all stem from the interest of having more people to play with.
I often considered an ebay model that would go back to the days of auctions and NO FEES For customers to by or sell stuff.

Advertisting would be plenty and they advertising space itself would be up for bid.
IBM,DELL all the companies wanting exposure to millions of people which is why advertising is expensive but also depends on the number of people seeing the ad.

If NO ONE sees the ad then the ad is not very appealing to the company wanting exposure.

Of course this is all elementary, but it makes sense that advertising in VO has been less then successful thus far.

If you had 10k people playing everyday and there were a few ads in the station or near the station, or above the station as a sponsored station and lots of people saw it, THEN this would be a truely appealing ad space.

Currently the ad space is a good idea but it's just not apealing because of low exposure aka catch 22

Free to play is not appealing to the dev's because of the cost in changing around the model AND the potential to piss off the current sub base.

It really is a mess of a catch 22 that I can clearly see the delima in making decisions about what to do and where to go with it all.

The currently successful models have a theme in common with the free to play and micro transactions afterwards. Some have expressed pay to win, however I"m not talking about those regardless of their profitability.
I'm talking strictly free to play with micro transactions afterwards TO PLAY ON DIFFERENT LEVELS of THINGS.

Those models are simply successful.

The solution for VO seems clear IMO. To keep the sub based game as it is and enhance it as they have planned.

HOWEVER, a parallel and completely different VO FREE model that would be an entry level for leading to the desire to sub into the entire VO world

FREE to play separate from current VO. Yes I know it's probably costly AND time consuming.

They would never get access to all the higher end ships without a slow grind and of course would never interact with those with higher ships because their VO universe would be separate.

I mean if interferring with the current player base's satisfaction is an issue then keep them SEPARATE.

Let the subs sub, and enjoy the new world of VO free to play which will be a seperate world with new experience for them too.

I have no idea what events you would post in the FREE and seperate version of VO but it would be interesting without interferring with VO sub version.

FREE vo could have micro transactions without the vast of VO and isolate teirs to fight only other like tiers.

Team up to fight Deneb style battles with other players etc.
All of this could be kept separate and some advertisers might find use of it as well with the mass quantity of people playing and trying it.

However, there needs to be a transition point where people want to buy a home in the real VO universe with a sub.

I know current subs will hate this but the millions of others will love it and likely spend BIG MONEY on micro transactions as I do with just about every game I play.

iRacing for example
You need a lic to get higher levels of play so your not stuck racing a bunch of rookies your entire life

However, you have to purchase other cars, and tracks to race in other series.

Some are content with their annual subscription and a few tracks. They don't care about increasing their ratings to get other equipment.

But others want all the things available which is very expensive.
iRacing is not for people looking for free games but simply want racing and willing to pay for it.

World of Tanks is a good model, where you can't even access the other higher tier tanks without grinding levels or paying a sub to get a faster grinding rate.

However, 10's of thousands are satisfied with grinding slow with occasional purchase of a premium tank which does not require any grinding, or occasional sub to get a 30 day boost in their grinding efforts.

Those tiers are also isolated from eachother. You don't have to worry about getting crushed by a tier 10 tank in your tier 3 tanks because those tanks are not in the same battles as the others.

iRacing is the same things. Isolation of the tiers or similar equipment.

OK so current subs won't like this, Soooo keep the free VO world with lots of micro transactions and different battle zones all seperated like in WOT.

Other then the cost and of course development time which is everythings, what is the problem with this concept that works for so many others already ?

It's still space, it's still VO with twist and everyone including current subs should be satisfied with it since it does not effect their current sub VO world at all.

Oh well thats all I know.

You're a retard. The sub fee is still there. They've only extended f2p to mobile users, and while there is much ironing out of crystal hand-out ratios to be done, this is a step in the right direction, and cramping a Pay2Win model.

As a premium subscriber we still have superior access to everything.

Sorry your response does not actually respond to anything I've posted

I've already addressed the Pay2Win topic; and as I pointed out MOST have not suggested any Pay2Win

How do you win ? How can you pay to win in the models I've outlined ?

Rhetorically of course, You can't. Those models as I'm talking about are not Pay2Win as I mentioned due to tier seperation.

Explain how it's pay to win ? Please be specific in your description since there is not any pay to win regarding iRacing or WOT for that matter.

Please clarrify your retarded response ?

P.S
Currently there is only limited reason to even play VO for free unfortunately.
Why ? looking at space, limited combat if you actually happened to be online when others are there ? The grind of getting ships is so quick you have almost experienced everything before you even get started, with exception of a Trident build. If your not interested in the build then why play further ? No new levels, not new ships, just badgets who cares about badges ? Mining badges ? combat badges ? Who cares ?
However, HEY just go the level 10 warhog man it's nice. Or what about hitting combat level 1,2,3,4,5 and getting awarded some new ship. The current model of overlapping everyone and anyone to interact with eachother is good on one hand, but also a deterant on the other hand.

It's just all so incoherent and stupid. Why should we think up a proper response? Why would you ever want to split a playerbase further when you don't have to?

The title says your post in one line, without having to read that drivel.

"Why would you ever want to split a playerbase further when you don't have to?"

That is an easy one and the answer is even easier then the question.
The question itself is actually invalid since your considering on the the playerbase.

The easy answer is to increase the currently low playerbase. Expansion and profits of course is the easy answer.

The real question is this: Why would any company not want to expand it's revenue. The answer for VO is clear they don't want to upset the current player base that is currently supporting the sort of weak model right now while they continue to develop new ideas.

Ultimately the assumption of splitting up the playerbase is wrong. There seems to be a lot of false interpretations about what people are suggesting which is how I started this post.

It's not about splitting up the base but about expanding the base to generate profits without upsetting the current base.

Why would you care if there was a parallel VO universe full of Free players with micro transactions that ended up costing more then a VO subscription ? Why would that bother you and why do you care ?

Especially if you never even see or interact with them in a totally parallel VO universe.

This is exactly why the devs have so much trouble making decisions because any little thing upsets the base that would not even effect them.

How would this split the base by adding totally new playerbase to a totally seperate parallel VO universe that has absolutely NO effect on the current VO base of subscribers ?

So because of the emotional desires of the current base that would be uneffected by this type of change the devs are in bondage to only do things that won't upset the base due to the fact they feel they are supporting VO like some sort of charity organization or community.

YIKES

"The title says your post in one line, without having to read that drivel "

And what do you think this title is saying ? It sounds like you think I'm saying to ditch the subs ?

And your interpretation on this is of course complete wrong. My post is actually supporting keeping the current sub model.

What did you think I was saying here ? Perhaps you should read the drivel to understand whats being said first. Just a clue.

I don't see the problem. The developers were and are constantly experimenting with new models of subscription and we can all agree that they were successful with it. The f2p has supplied the game with many more newbies of which some even stayed. The least is something I was worried about but I was proven wrong: People actually stay, go for lite Sub and some even go for full Sub. The Crystal System sounds sane and will make it all work even better.

Your approach however is of course thoughtful and is most likely meant well but will not change VO in the ways you are hoping.
The Basic playerbase of veterans and people who really just love this game for its charme is what keeps VO alive. Making these people sad will cause much drama.
The thousands of players you see joining will not come either because you forgot something:
Today's player youth doesn't play space games. They don't watch star wars or enjoy a good strategy game. They buy a PS4 and play some brutal games they are not supposed to be playing at their young age.
The people who still enjoy good games such as VO are not Walking around app stores in large numbers and therefore have to be attracted with thoughtful models of subscription. And the developers have done great steps in the right direction here.

Sieger, I agree with your post.

However, we can't overlook that people are playing EVE still in large numbers and many great steam space games.

Even Star Trek Online is not a HUGE hit but still a fairly HUGE playerbase in spite, BattleStar Galactica ? I mean I could not really get into those that much as entertaining as it was for a short time but there is a lot of paying customers/players in there still.

I do agree with you, but yet there are still so many space lovers out there.

Lets not forget that console games are not typically sub games. You buy once mostly.

Yes VO has made progress in the player base and all the other changes, but mostly I was responding to what seems to be the major misunderstanding about many of the suggestions to begin with.

NO, it's not because people need jobs, NO it's not Play2Win suggestion etc etc.
The miunderstanding about what and why people suggest anything even remotely like those is because they just want to play MMORP that actually has a lot of people playing it among other things.

Wow Captaint86 you enjoy spouting your opinion, but don't like it much when others state your full of s***. How do you know which model would attrack more or less users? Have you yourself EVER developed a game that requires getting and obtaining on line users? How do you know how well other games are doing or how well they are not doing? I would imagine that you really don't know and are just guessing.

I believe the developers of this game have spent far, far more time researching which business models are best for them and most certainly will probably not take your well thought out advice. I mean, after all, the new release had been out for a whopping 8 or so hours before you responded with your vastly researched solution.

Give it a try for awhile. Let the Developers decide if it meets their needs. If you feel it's so damn lame, leave. Doubt many will miss you.

Yellowdog, I could ask you the same thing

Anyhow, YES I do know about such things without actually developing a game but have many years in sales and marketing. Many years in successful business operations of my own. Several businesses in fact.
All of this having nothing to do with the original post at all.

However in response,my information comes directly from the users and players of other games. I know how much they are spending because they tell me. I know why they are attracted to the game and why they are addicted to certain aspects of games because they tell me and I am a keen observer.

So I don't have to know anything about development but only about sales. Hearing directly from the users.

Your assumption that I don't know what I'm talking about is wrong of course.
You are correct that the developers may have spent more time researching which business models are best, but they also have verbally expressed already, that they actually don't like those successful business models because it conflicts with their ideas and also pisses off the base. They want to keep the immersion factor.

Have you not read the devs posts on this. They have a balancing act to perform of expanding the base without pissing off the current base and upsetting their current cash flow aka catch 22.

This is simply business budgeting and logistics subject which needs NO development experience whatsoever to understand. A simply knowledge of business in general will provide enough insight on this subject.

This is not spouting off opinion but fact based confirmation from players of many other games. Hundreds of members of various clans discuss in detail about the money they spend on PC games specifically and why.

I was not even talking about any release which you believe was the reason for my response.

Your response doesn't seem to be a response to anything I've posted actually but some other emotional reactions to something that was never discussed in this post.

So what experience do you have with comparing various business models ?
I look forward to this one.

What qualifies you to even ask the question ? Do you have any business experience at all. Have you ever owned a business ? Have you ever been in charge of any sales and marketing departments ?

Not to mention none of this has anything to do with this post whatsoever.

I was simply pointing out that I understand the catch 22 the devs have; and that they should NOT abandone the sub model at all
So is this opinion in line with the devs or not ? Of course the devs don't want to get rid of the sub model and rightly so, as I've pointed out.

Others should also not belittle those who suggest Free2play on the basis that they probably don't have a job or that advertising would create some sort of extortion etc.

I don't even know why your responding to this. Did you even read the original post ?

The title of my post is this:
ditch the sub fee ? Lame

To clarify for those who seem to be confused by their posts.

Ditching the sub fee is NOT a good idea

Get it ?

They're not ditching the sub fee so piss off.

We're obviously adding F2P components into the game, and keeping subscriptions as well, as I've posted extensively about that. This kind of Hybrid model has been proven in the past by games like Dungeons and Dragons Online, which experienced a 5-fold revenue increase with the addition of a "Free" tier, while also retaining most of their existing subscribers. They also kept their subscriptions as a "gold standard" of gameplay and access, as are we.

I'm not entirely clear on what's even being debated here, I guess. There are a bunch of pre-suppositions stated in the initial post that are incorrect. Anyway, I have no interest in fragmenting the userbase and splitting it by business model. And I have no idea why I would want or need to do that. I'm actually not concerned about upsetting subscribers at all, nor have I really seen anyone be upset by our F2P changes (only by the lack of pure gameplay development, which is understandable but unrelated).

Anyway, since the debate here doesn't seem super useful, I'm going to lock this for now, and also move it to Suggestions, which seems a more correct place for it.