The Subscription Psychology

[theSovietConnection]

I'd like something in the middle myself - I'd prefer to buy my MMO:s or other services 30 days at a time; not a month, but thirty DAYS, spaced out however I like.

That way I wouldn't feel like I was missing out if I had to skip playing for a week - but I wouldn't count every minute, either.

This here is a plan I can agree with. I'd be more inclined to play MMOs if I bought 30 days of playtime as opposed to the current system WoW and the like run on where you buy a month long subscription that runs out in 30 days no matter how much time you have left.

Btw, welcome to the Escapist. I'm a little busy at the moment, but I'm sure one of the more notable members can give you the proper introduction at some point.

 

[Syntax Error]

Before the "pay-for-items and perks, but game is free" revolution, that was the state of MMO's in my country. You pay about $10 for a month of unlimited gaming, $3 for a week or $2 for 8 hours for a week that you're allowed to spend any way you wish. Because of school, the $2 option was a godsend for me. Whenever I tried the $3 option, I was "forced" to play for more than 12 hours for that week, so as to justify that the additional $1 wasn't a waste.

 

[camazotz]

I haven't seen it mentioned yet, but Dungeons & Dragons online recently moved to its P2P model, which interestingly enough includes the traditional "monthly" service (VIP package) or a buy-by-the-bit store that includes special 90 minute "timecards" of some sort to gain brief entry in to restricted content. You can also buy specific quest lines and gain unlimited access that way. Me, I liked their changes enough that I went VIP monthly, but I wonder how many people are buying the 90 minute time cards, or paying by-the-dungeon....

On WoW: I figured out I had played it a total of about 40 days between all my characters from Feb 2005 to present. My sub is set to die (again) for another break here come October and I may never return...I can't even muster the energy to get my main from 76 to 80, the content is just too repetitive for my tastes. My shiny new wife, on the other hand, has spend more than 120 DAYS in the game, half of which was in 2007 ALONE. So I guess she got her money's worth.

That said, I still feel like my $100 on Fallout 3 (counting the downloadable packs) or Mass Effect have been more interesting and rewarding than anything I've seen to date in an MMO. Sure, MMOs may offer the best bang for the buck, but sometimes I'd rather spend $20 on a good steak rather than twenty big macs....

 

[Gildan Bladeborn]

I prefer the Guild Wars subscription option. Pay for the game, then never again--the lifetime subscription option is basically the cost of the box. Now I don't feel guilty that I haven't played in years! Looking forward to GW2 using the same model.

Guild Wars is the only MMO I've ever purchased for precisely that reason, as I vehemently dislike the entire concept of "games as a service". No matter how interesting a MMO might look, if it has a monthly fee then I am never going to play it. The problem isn't the subscription model itself, though I don't particularly like that, but the bit where if you allow it to lapse or if the servers are ever decommissioned, you now have absolutely nothing to show for all the money invested into that game. At least with something like a magazine subscription, you still have the bloody magazines!

As for the argument that MMOs provide more 'bang for the buck', well that's perhaps true from a gaming by the hour perspective, but to say that any given hour spent gaming is as good as any other hour is the problem - there is a very large ratio of time spent doing things that are inherently not fun in a MMO versus the bits people actually look forward to. I might only get a few hours from a single-player title but if all of them were fun, it's a MUCH better investment for me than hours upon hours of play with a MMO wherein I spent most of them in wearying grind, waiting around, or other 'administrative' duties instead of actually having fun. The classic quality versus quantity problem in other words (show me someone who purports to enjoy everything they do in a MMO and I will show you filthy lies!).

And of course there's also the bit where almost all of them are designed in such a way that to be 'good' at them you'd have to play it like a second job, only it's a job where you are paying for the privilege of doing work, which is somewhat backwards.

Guild Wars is awesome because it doesn't work like that at all - huzzah for ANet!

 

[Sindaine]

WTH?!? MMOs are fucking expensive!!! Not everyone has an extra forty dollars a month to throw away!

 

[Da Ork]

Personally the few times anyone has questioned me I what I spent a month on MMOs (I currently pay for 3 different MMOs) I always compare it to going to the movies. Going to the movies cost about $18 and you get 2 hours entertainment (roughly). I pay that for a MMO a month and I can play it as much as I have spare time. I mean even if you have a job were your too busy to play it during the week you'll still get more play time on the weekends. Don't get me wrong I still go and see the odd movies in the cinemas buts its a good measuring stick in my opinion.

 

[Therumancer]

I'm the quintessential example of a gamer on a budget although to some it might not seem like it, and it will get a LOT worse as time goes on due to being disabled and money winds up being worth less and so on.

I however tend to prefer the subscription or lifetime based fees options so I don't feel the need to worry about binging, and don't wind up getting a massive "surprise" bill at some point, not to mention the fact that argueing such a bill would be nearly impossible with a provider if I still wanted to use the service. In general when it comes to people running "meter" based scams, the laws all favor the guys running the meter as opposed to
your word or memory.

As far as things like "Guild Wars" go I tried it, and noticed a definate differance in quality between it and other "subscription fee" based games. As much as people might like to think that multiplayer is something people can provide for free at any level, that is not true in all cases, and in this case I think the maxim of "you get what you pay for" applies. Not meaning to start a giant arguement between GW and WOW fans or anything, just my opinion. To me the lack of a persistant world (outside of towns), and such a limited array of equipment stuck out in my mind.


"Lifetime Memberships" seem like an interesting way to bridge the gap between the monthly pay and "Free" models. For me, in thinking about it I tend to figure if I will get the value out of it I would for 4-5 single player games over a period of a year or so. If the answer is "yes" then it's worth it to me. I don't break it down by the minute or hour or whatever.

The problem I see with "Lifetime Memberships" though is that subscrition run games tend to give a relatively high degree of quality nowadays, with new free content (like holiday events) and other things being periodically added. If Lifetime memberships become "standard" I'm sort of afraid people will start to just sell "Guild Wars" for $250 a pop. What's more I can't help but wonder what happens to a game that sells lifetime subscriptions to the majority of their players, lasts longer than the time period that would equal from incoming cash, and still has those people demanding the product without any cash incoming. I can see some nasty stuff going down there eventually.

Lord Of The Rings Online having mostly succeeded due to their lifetime subscriptions being (relatively) limited in number to begin with, and more being added later on projecting the pre-pay well into the future. I think LoTRO has benefitted a lot from the franchise name and has as a result seen an unusual growth/player base cycle.

I'm looking toward Champions Online myself (which I bought a lifetime subscription for) and to see what happens a couple of years down the line if as many people bought those subscriptions as it seemed at the time.

 

[brunothepig]

I like to see games like Guild Wars. You pay for the game, then it's done. No obligations. It means I could stop for months, then dust it off. I wouldn't have to cancel and reconnect subscriptions or anything, just log in again. Why don't more companies do this? One thing to be said about any kind of continuous fee, is that people feel obligated to keep playing, so you have a fairly good community at times. I do enjoy free MMO's, since I've never been big on groups, as you don't know who you're getting, how reliable they are etc. Still, it's nice to find games with a large community, especially for PVP and guild wars. (One player guild warring with another lol.)