The base subscription, up to $20-25/month seems fine.
I would be interested in a premium subscription option for servers along the lines of EQs old Stormhammer or with a better GM presence. Depending on the value added, I could see something in the $30-50/mo range.
I would enjoy small discounts for longer subscription periods.
@Caine - I'm having a really hard time picturing whatever it is that you're describing. You're hitting some nifty jargon, but I'm not seeing how you're tying them together into something cogent at all.
Are you talking about using blockchain payment options?
Or are you talking about distributed infrastructure?
How does either address gold selling in any way?
Or are you simply talking about blockchain as a validation mechanism for player actions/game responses? Why?
Feyshtey said:@Caine - I'm having a really hard time picturing whatever it is that you're describing. You're hitting some nifty jargon, but I'm not seeing how you're tying them together into something cogent at all.
Are you talking about using blockchain payment options?
Or are you talking about distributed infrastructure?
How does either address gold selling in any way?
Or are you simply talking about blockchain as a validation mechanism for player actions/game responses? Why?
I am also confused. It seems like more of a general direction that could have cool ideas than an idea itself. I suggest another forum post dedicated too this unless a more specific suggestion oh how it relates could be made. Even if this did have possibility it seems far outside the scope of the current project. Meaning they do not have the resources to spare.
Feyshtey and starblight, thank you for chiming in on topic.
Well, currently Enjin coin has a plugin for Mindcraft right now. Where you can bring items into the game, or tokenize an Item to the ETH blockchain. There many creative ways Pantheon could do it. For instance, VR could allow players to Tokenize their "Epic" items on the blockchain, provided they were paying a subscription. You could then transfer your Epic Item to someone else on a trade, or for ENJ coin itself. Pantheon/VR could have a promotional "Air Drop" where those who decide to "Sub Up" will recieve a special item. Or if the Sub Up, then they can enchant an item withe a special proc.
The main draw would be allowing a player who spends 100+ of hours adventuring to be able to tokenize an Epic item and sell it for real money, in ENJ coin. It works like "cash back" for being a loyal player. Then, someday when VR has 2 awesome games, you can take that epic item and convert it into something cool in the other VR game.
The ideas are unlimited. Now, it will be a hard sell to anyone on this forum, because you know we all are going to Sub Up. But you need to keep drawing new players into the game. those players will come from Enjin community and others. these communities are huge. you don't need all of them just a small percentage.
That's it any more examples, and it's just Blah Blah Blah.
Caine said:Feyshtey and starblight, thank you for chiming in on topic.
Well, currently Enjin coin has a plugin for Mindcraft right now. Where you can bring items into the game, or tokenize an Item to the ETH blockchain. There many creative ways Pantheon could do it. For instance, VR could allow players to Tokenize their "Epic" items on the blockchain, provided they were paying a subscription. You could then transfer your Epic Item to someone else on a trade, or for ENJ coin itself. Pantheon/VR could have a promotional "Air Drop" where those who decide to "Sub Up" will recieve a special item. Or if the Sub Up, then they can enchant an item withe a special proc.
The main draw would be allowing a player who spends 100+ of hours adventuring to be able to tokenize an Epic item and sell it for real money, in ENJ coin. It works like "cash back" for being a loyal player. Then, someday when VR has 2 awesome games, you can take that epic item and convert it into something cool in the other VR game.
The ideas are unlimited. Now, it will be a hard sell to anyone on this forum, because you know we all are going to Sub Up. But you need to keep drawing new players into the game. those players will come from Enjin community and others. these communities are huge. you don't need all of them just a small percentage.
That's it any more examples, and it's just Blah Blah Blah.
THAT IS RMT NO RMT
Caine said:Feyshtey and starblight, thank you for chiming in on topic.
Well, currently Enjin coin has a plugin for Mindcraft right now. Where you can bring items into the game, or tokenize an Item to the ETH blockchain. There many creative ways Pantheon could do it. For instance, VR could allow players to Tokenize their "Epic" items on the blockchain, provided they were paying a subscription. You could then transfer your Epic Item to someone else on a trade, or for ENJ coin itself. Pantheon/VR could have a promotional "Air Drop" where those who decide to "Sub Up" will recieve a special item. Or if the Sub Up, then they can enchant an item withe a special proc.
The main draw would be allowing a player who spends 100+ of hours adventuring to be able to tokenize an Epic item and sell it for real money, in ENJ coin. It works like "cash back" for being a loyal player. Then, someday when VR has 2 awesome games, you can take that epic item and convert it into something cool in the other VR game.
The ideas are unlimited. Now, it will be a hard sell to anyone on this forum, because you know we all are going to Sub Up. But you need to keep drawing new players into the game. those players will come from Enjin community and others. these communities are huge. you don't need all of them just a small percentage.
That's it any more examples, and it's just Blah Blah Blah.
That's probably the fastest possible way to flood the game with bots that are just generating real world wealth at the expense of anyone trying to play legitimately. The damage to the atmosphere would be collosal. I mean, even the idea that you could transfer your epic weapon to another player is antithetical to a game where the journey is the reward. Nothing about this fits with what we've been told this game is all about.
And none of it really has any inherent correlation to blockchain.
starblight said:Too little information to know for sure what I would be willing to pay. But with a few assumptions I can give you a rough idea.
- No free to play. I think even a trial might not be worth it.
- Around the same amount or more of launch ready content as EQ and Vanguard had.
- No cash shop.
- Consistent new content added comparable to EQ. (this is really important to me)
- The game is fun and I am hooked like the good old days. (Without this what is the point?)
If all the above were true I would pay a lot actually. I am sure I would consider even $60 a month maybe more. I would even pay extra for the expansions. If it is as much funs as I had in EQ or Vanguard, I would be able to save money by canceling other services I no longer had time for.
But as others have also said, I can afford that kind of expense and seeing as Patheon will only succeed if it has lots of subscribers, I am not at all convinced $60 a month will work. I do think an increase is possible but not sure how much.
For me the real thing is content. In all the years I played EQ I never ran out of content and I would have played Vanguard longer if it had more content. What if you offered a way to fund the development of new content and in return gave out an in-game title that shows you are supporting the future of the game. If you offered this option and it was guaranteed 100% of the funds would go to developing more content I would pay more.
One caveat to all this is I have doubts any game can hook me like EQ did ever again. I backed Pantheon because of Brad and the fact that the only MMOs that have ever hooked me have been EQ and Vanguard. If pantheon fails, I will stop even trying to find an MMO and instead assume that the past is the past and that to get this kind of sensation and commitment I will need to find something new something I do not even know I want. My backing of Pantheon is not just in hopes it succeeds but also as a way of just saying enough is enough. I am sick and tired of investing hopes and time into an MMO only to be disappointed. We will see.
I could have written this . A basic rule of economics is value is set by the buyer , ie , what they are willing to pay. I think myself and the eq crowd would pay above and beyond for the eq experience , but for Pantheon to succeed it needs a broader base then us old farts , question becomes what is it worth? , not, what would I pay? I think a better way to ask this question is to poll a few packages and thier value. Just my 2 cents.
Pape
Feyshtey said:That's probably the fastest possible way to flood the game with bots that are just generating real world wealth at the expense of anyone trying to play legitimately. The damage to the atmosphere would be collosal. I mean, even the idea that you could transfer your epic weapon to another player is antithetical to a game where the journey is the reward. Nothing about this fits with what we've been told this game is all about.
And none of it really has any inherent correlation to blockchain.
I apologize, I should have stated the highlighted text in my post is a link to short video of actual blockchain in use in a real online game. The Engin coin is a ERC-1155 Token on the Etheruim blockchain. Please explain how bots are penetrating an encrypted blockchain?
Also, I can trade my Epic sword to a newbie character for 5 SP if I want, in game, not much difference trading it to a player via a blockchain wallet.
But the point is VR controls what is allowable. I am just giving examples what they could do. The possibilities are endless, but VR controls how they use it. I would not limit their options for fear of an unknown scenerios. What I don't want to see is, VR not realizing what is coming, fall behind, and in 5 years we are looking at another Vanguard.
Everyone is discussing what the answer should be. Blockchain opens the door to options. It's good to discuss what we don't want to be use it for, because out of 100 things we don't want, there could be one or two great uses for blockchain technology, that ensures longevity of the game. Have faith that VR would use the power of the blockchain wisely. To ignore it would be neglectful. If I were to invest $500,000 on the developement of the game, I would absolutely expect VR to explore the longterm future. Anyone thinking blockchain technology is not relevant, is not paying attention to what is happening.
In this particular case, I am thinking how can you survive with a subscription model, without a cash store. Your answer will be an innovated solution. Not all the old ideas we beat to death constantly.
Blockchain has driven up GFX card prices limmited avability and increases energy consumption it is not a friend to gamers or the environment.
Edit
I am Not saying it does not have uses but not for gaming tracking banking or stocks maybe.
"Just because you can does not mean you should"
Caine said:Vixx said:Blockchain has driven up GFX card prices limmited avability and increases energy consumption it is not a friend to gamers or the environment.
Thank you for the example. How can VR use the blockchain differently to aviod these types of problems?
:edit: You do realize that the example you quoted was one showing exactly how this kind of thing hurts gamers, right? :/edit:
A better question is, why would they want to use blockchain.
The only reasonable purpose in attempting to would be to link real world wealth with in-game wealth. Which, in every known instance, has heavily modified and in some cases wholly destroyed in-game economies. It alters simple supply and demand principles by incentivizing the game world with outside influences. Which brings me to this earlier quote:
Caine said:Please explain how bots are penetrating an encrypted blockchain?
The bots don't penetrate the blockchain. Because there's real world wealth achievable outside the game world by utilizing in-game mechanics, it incentivizes groups who have no interest in the game to 'penetrate' it solely for the purpose of accruing real world wealth. Those people don't give a crap about niceties like sharing content, or the health of the in-game economy, or the health of the community. Their only concern is to get in the game, dominate content for the purposes of transfering value to external sources. There are literally sweat shops set up for this sole purposes in games where an avenue to do so allows for it.
You're not just talking about leaving a gap that allows for it. You're talking about building a system that encourages it. That is in fact designed with that as a core principle.
Blockchain in the way you're decribing it doesn't open the doors to possibilities that make a better game. They just open the door to a toxic experience. And that is the fastest way to alienate any but the toxic players. We have plenty of that on the market. Many (most?) of the people here are desperately hoping to escape all the toxicity that exists in the market now from these very kinds of systems.
Just because a thing is new doesn't mean that it is good. Or that it applies well to all industries, or all facets of a given industry. What you're describing is like saying that if you invested in a biochemical company that you'd damn well expect them to embrace full telework for their employees. Telework is relatively new. It's embraced heavily, especially in this COVID world. But it doesn't mean that its even slightly intelligent to have practical application biochemists doing their job from the basement in their home.
I will stop all other mmo if PRoTF went $30+ sub with NO CASH, NO Cosmetic fanshion runway, NO Flamboyant mounts and costumes, NO sexualized male and female, NO outrageous big spikey armour and weapons, NO loot box oops i mean "suprise mechanic", NO Vertical progression, etc.
Yes two server One for PvE and One for PvP. You will have to pay $$$ for a "server transfer" on Pantheon website if you wanna switch servers.
Yes give me a button to turn ((on/off)) the fashion show let me see you like a Clown Tank, i'll heal you and keep you alive. Your role is more important for the group than you fashion appearance on my monitor. You can strud the catwalk on your monitor i dont care, i cant see your monitors.
Just to be clear. You still see yourself on your screen looking "pretty or cool" at your home/monitor BUT on my monitor you are wearing mixed gears.
PS: give me more button like the button on your shirt!
Feyshtey said:snip ...
The bots don't penetrate the blockchain. Because there's real world wealth achievable outside the game world by utilizing in-game mechanics, it incentivizes groups who have no interest in the game to 'penetrate' it solely for the purpose of accruing real world wealth. Those people don't give a crap about niceties like sharing content, or the health of the in-game economy, or the health of the community. Their only concern is to get in the game, dominate content for the purposes of transfering value to external sources. There are literally sweat shops set up for this sole purposes in games where an avenue to do so allows for it.
You're not just talking about leaving a gap that allows for it. You're talking about building a system that encourages it. That is in fact designed with that as a core principle.
Blockchain in the way you're decribing it doesn't open the doors to possibilities that make a better game. They just open the door to a toxic experience. And that is the fastest way to alienate any but the toxic players. We have plenty of that on the market. Many (most?) of the people here are desperately hoping to escape all the toxicity that exists in the market now from these very kinds of systems.
Just because a thing is new doesn't mean that it is good. Or that it applies well to all industries, or all facets of a given industry. What you're describing is like saying that if you invested in a biochemical company that you'd damn well expect them to embrace full telework for their employees. Telework is relatively new. It's embraced heavily, especially in this COVID world. But it doesn't mean that its even slightly intelligent to have practical application biochemists doing their job from the basement in their home.
You do have a good point about gold sellers. However, you will be dealing with gold sellers and farmers in some form of currency, fiat or crypto. That will still need to be dealt with regardless. VR will have tight controls. maybe tokenizing items get ruled out, based on your reasons above. I am good with that. you still have to deal with the gold sellers anyway. It's better to have more tools then less. The Blockchain can also be used as a payment system for your subscription. keep in mind, every item is serialized on the blockchain. I bet they could find a way to flag an items/tokens as non-transferable. As the ERC-1155 token is developed further, more options for solutions will come along. To say, "No, No Blockchain!! it will be the death of the game! is not accurate. You just need to find how it will help your game. Even if your saving on tranactions fee for monthly subs. don't throw the baby out with the bath water.
Caine said:You do have a good point about gold sellers. However, you will be dealing with gold sellers and farmers in some form of currency, fiat or crypto. That will still need to be dealt with regardless. VR will have tight controls. maybe tokenizing items get ruled out, based on your reasons above. I am good with that. you still have to deal with the gold sellers anyway. It's better to have more tools then less. The Blockchain can also be used as a payment system for your subscription. keep in mind, every item is serialized on the blockchain. I bet they could find a way to flag an items/tokens as non-transferable. As the ERC-1155 token is developed further, more options for solutions will come along. To say, "No, No Blockchain!! it will be the death of the game! is not accurate. You just need to find how it will help your game. Even if your saving on tranactions fee for monthly subs. don't throw the baby out with the bath water.
I'm not strictly saying that it's bad for the game. More specificaly I'm asking you to define the problem you're trying to solve. Or the improvement to gameplay that you'r trying to achieve. So far all you've been able to state is that "it's new!".
Feyshtey said:Caine said:You do have a good point about gold sellers. However, you will be dealing with gold sellers and farmers in some form of currency, fiat or crypto. That will still need to be dealt with regardless. VR will have tight controls. maybe tokenizing items get ruled out, based on your reasons above. I am good with that. you still have to deal with the gold sellers anyway. It's better to have more tools then less. The Blockchain can also be used as a payment system for your subscription. keep in mind, every item is serialized on the blockchain. I bet they could find a way to flag an items/tokens as non-transferable. As the ERC-1155 token is developed further, more options for solutions will come along. To say, "No, No Blockchain!! it will be the death of the game! is not accurate. You just need to find how it will help your game. Even if your saving on tranactions fee for monthly subs. don't throw the baby out with the bath water.
I'm not strictly saying that it's bad for the game. More specificaly I'm asking you to define the problem you're trying to solve. Or the improvement to gameplay that you'r trying to achieve. So far all you've been able to state is that "it's new!".
Correct. anything that will give VR an advantage for the future. I cool with subs and expansions, but I don't want to see a cash store or the likes of one. I am cool with VR bookmarking the blockchain stuff, but make allowances for it, should a really nice solution to a problem be dicovered and could be presented and implemented, without laborish intergration.
Vandraad said:Kilsin said:Community Debate - Subscription-based MMORPG's, What would you pay per month to play and what would you want to be included? #MMORPG #CommunityMatters
$20-$30 a month, no restrictions on content*, 24/7 GM coverage, strict monthly updates on bug fixes/server patches,no less than annual server-wide events, Terminus specific holidays (not in anyway related to or coinciding with real world holidays) no less than annual expansions at $30-$60 depending upon the size of the expansion.
*this doesn't mean content cannot be locked behind flags, keyes or other in-game require prerequisites, just that how much you pay has no bearing.
I agree with this, it pretty much hits the nail on the head for me.
I would be quite happy to pay £20 - £25 a month, which equates to around $27 - $34 at the current exchange rate. I wouldn't expect annual expansions, though. Reason being, one thing I intend to enjoy in Pantheon, which differs to what I was able to do in EQ, is actually experience playing more than just a main character, and an alt. This is predominantly because the XP curve is supposed to be a little less extreme than it was in EQ, and as such, I'll be able to explore more of the races / classes than I was ever able to in EQ.
If expansions came out every year in Pantheon, I'd struggle to keep up with the content, especially when trying to experience it on more than just a main / alt, so bi-annual expansions would be pretty much perfect for me, as long as they add a substantial amount of content given the elapsed time between releases.
I want to circle back on this topic , I realize most of us are willing to pay $20-25 a month for a sub.
The real question is what is someone willing to pay that is not already active in the community, the average AAA sub is 15.00.
If I have never knew about this game , why do I want to pay almost twice the sub cost? Because you are a start up ? How is that justification to a brand new player, from there perspective?
If they even did some research , and most won't that is a no right off the bat. Let's say for a second they do some research , hay .. my friends play it , let me google it and see what it's about!
This game is from a unknown developer , that failed a kickstarter, that was already supposed to be launched or in Beta years ago, with a now deceased founder / visionary of the game tenets and you want them to pay twice the cost of a already established AAA title or a future game from a already established studio ??? See my point ???
This is a nice interesting read that covers this topic : https://massivelyop.com/2020/07/09/massively-overthinking-how-much-should-mmos-cost-in-2020/
Xxar said:I want to circle back on this topic , I realize most of us are willing to pay $20-25 a month for a sub.
The real question is what is someone willing to pay that is not already active in the community, the average AAA sub is 15.00.
If I have never knew about this game , why do I want to pay almost twice the sub cost? Because you are a start up ? How is that justification to a brand new player, from there perspective if they even did some research , and most won't. This game is from a unknown developer , that failed a kickstarter, that was already supposed to be launched or in Beta years ago, with a now deceased founder / visionary of the game tenets and you want them to pay twice the cost of a already established AAA title or a future game from a already established studio ??? See my point ???
This is a nice interesting read that covers this topic : https://massivelyop.com/2020/07/09/massively-overthinking-how-much-should-mmos-cost-in-2020/
Being a gamer that's sick to death of monetization schemes and broken promises, if paying $30/month ensures that's the only fee I'm ever going to see and what I get is always getting better, I'll pay it.
Being a big production studio pushing out a "AAA title" means you can throw money at big graphics teams. It means you can market it widely. It means you can coerce gamer rags and streamers to talk highly about your product. It means you can bully distributors to push your product hard. It means you can fund massive presentations and industry shows. It means you have a huge platform from which you can denegrate your compeition and talk about why your stuff is the best. But it doesn't inherently mean you have a good product.
There's a growing portion of the gamer world that's been so deeply disappointed with a lot of flash and not a lot of follow thru, and who have learned that they've been sold a bill of goods over and over for a decade or more from those big studios. They are educating themselves not just on the content of games, but the character of the producer.
You havent lied about the history of VR. But another way it could be phrased is: Because its independent. This game has a pedegree that dates back to the founding of MMOs , that didnt give up when the first kickstarter failed, that didnt succomb to pushing out an unfinished ill-designed product quickly, that didnt fold when the founder / visionary of the game tenets passed and continues forward with that vision, and isn't yet another of those AAA titles from a bloated corporation that doesn't give a **** about game quality.
My opinion:
As a basic MMO (no persistent housing, no micro trasnsactions) $14.99/mo. That should include everything available at release - all character slots, all bank/inventory space... nothing should be a "micro transaction" to gain access to something that already exists in the game but is just being denied to you just because you didn't pay enough money (Paywall) because you are "paying" a subscription.
Exceptions I would be ok with would be expansion fees applicable to the amount of content being added (couple of extra dungeons $20-$30, but an entire new continent with new game mechanics and levels $60-$80) and customer service fees of $25-$50 to make additional profits for shareholder interests.
Customer service fees could be things like server transfers, name changes, character model appearance changes (like if you made your character too thin or too short or without scars and wanted to change it years later to reflect your character's RP experiences).
1. Being a gamer that's sick to death of monetization schemes and broken promises, if paying $30/month ensures that's the only fee I'm ever going to see and what I get is always getting better, I'll pay it.
2. Being a big production studio pushing out a "AAA title" means you can throw money at big graphics teams. It means you can market it widely. It means you can coerce gamer rags and streamers to talk highly about your product. It means you can bully distributors to push your product hard. It means you can fund massive presentations and industry shows. It means you have a huge platform from which you can denegrate your compeition and talk about why your stuff is the best. But it doesn't inherently mean you have a good product.
3. There's a growing portion of the gamer world that's been so deeply disappointed with a lot of flash and not a lot of follow thru, and who have learned that they've been sold a bill of goods over and over for a decade or more from those big studios. They are educating themselves not just on the content of games, but the character of the producer.
4 You havent lied about the history of VR. But another way it could be phrased is: Because its independent. This game has a pedegree that dates back to the founding of MMOs , that didnt give up when the first kickstarter failed, that didnt succomb to pushing out an unfinished ill-designed product quickly, that didnt fold when the founder / visionary of the game tenets passed and continues forward with that vision, and isn't yet another of those AAA titles from a bloated corporation that doesn't give a **** about game quality.
I just want to comment on this post.
Re 1: This is about retention of a sub and the value of the final product, the current standard is 15.00 so you need to be able to justify the cost increase. As for broken promises or schemes , as stated this has nothing to do with this discussion , that is for Pantheon to prove there different then other studios.
Re 2: This still has nothing to do with final product and the standard being 15.00 a month , I understand what you are saying and that is there issue to handle as a company, not for the consumer. I expect a even higher quality product if I am paying more for a service , not a excuse .. The we are a start up , or do not have the pull etc is still not a justification of a higher price point , unless there is a higher quality associated or other reason for a justification.
Re 3: Once again , excuse. I entirely agree , with what you are saying BUT that is still not a justification for a higher price point. That is for Pantheon to prove there different , how you where treated in a previous MMO has no bearing on this MMO. I am a educated consumer as you put it , this is why I am pointing these view points out.
Re 4: I simply call a spade a spade. I do not suger coat anything or simply give them a pass on anything because of there situation, in fact im highly critical in most of my posts because I want this game to have success... BUT this mmo will be in competition with those studio's , just a fact.
Sorry, I jacked up the quote :/ I am not going to rewrite it :p
Asking a question like this in this forum is not going to give a fair, representative answer. It is going to skew very high because everyone who can post in here has already pledged money to the game long before it has released. The kinds of people who are willing to advance pledge more money than the eventual launch price of the game are bound to be willing to pay more per month, especially if it means gating the game from filthy casuals. And that generally includes my opinion to an extent. But I have to weigh the desire to have a game that is exclusive to an elite set of gamers against the costs of a high barrier to entry that keeps away the majority of gamers. If nobody outside of us early pledgers ever play Pantheon it will inevitably hurt the game from lack of business growth. With a subscription-only model, every game needs (at the very least) new players joining as fast as old ones quit. You can’t do that with a $50/month price tag. To truly succeed, this game will have to attract more people who are not among our ranks than there are of us.
Most gamers I personally know outside this community are not willing to pay much more than the standard $15/month ($10/month with annual discount). Granted more than half of them would end up spending more money in a cash shop if there was one than the sub fee. It doesn’t make a lot of sense, but for some reason many of my friends are very sub-fee-phobic while at the same time willing to dump X times that amount in microtransactions.
I have seen how free-play games have a hard time controlling the economy; how there is little respect for the game, or within the game; how it makes life easy for gold farmers to make armies of bots; and I have seen the terrible concessions those developers must make to keep the lights running - namely pay-to-win style cash shops. I think the opinion here is overwhelmingly against pay-to-win. I have seen arguments both ways about non-pay-to-win cash shops (ie. cosmetics and services). It seems like more people are fine with account services and whatnot, but it skews heatedly over cosmetics shops.
Anybody in this forum who is willing to outright condemn cash shops is being 100% hypocritical. Every one of us have already pledged extra money and are receiving extra stuff for it - the very definition of a cash shop. We are getting Game Titles, Nameplates, Extra Character Slots, Cosmetics, Bags, Backpacks, Vanity Pets, Rings, Rename Vouchers, Illusions, Exclusive in-game areas, and so on.. If you cry foul about cash shops that include the types of things we are already getting for paying money into the “early-cash-shop” I don’t know where your problem lies. Don’t you think that people who eventually play the game should be able to access the same kinds of things we accessed by paying more? Should they forever feel like second class citizens simply because they didn’t hear about Pantheon until launch?
It may be that there is no right answer. The reason no game has come up with a solution that everybody loves is because there is no solution, only lesser degrees of bad.
Thinking about the possible pay-structure components:
Subscription Fees (direct or in-game tradable subscription tokens) - I lean against tradeable subscriptions that allow players to pay for sub-time with in-game currency because it leads to people with loads of real money to exchange it directly for massive in-game riches. Also, Subscription Tiers are just package deals that include various cash-shop items below.
Account Services (character slots, name/sex changes, server transfers)
Expansion Purchases
Content Gating (individual prestige races, classes, mounts, dungeons, questilines, level/aa/skill/gear tier limits, daily xp caps, Guilds)
Bling (Nameplates, Gear Transmogs/Cosmetics, Wings, Vanity Pets, Titles, Particle Effects, Emotes, Dances, Player Housing Items, Flags)
Boosters (faction/tradeskill/xp boosts, starter gear, tp scrolls, Bags, Alt-level boosts, refer-a-friend boosts, corpse summoning, fast travel tokens, )
Perks (exclusive spells/abilities akin to veteran rewards)
Outright Pay-to-win top tier gear and max level for money (worst idea)
Now Down to the original Question. What I think reasonable prices would be.
I can’t see a no-sub model working without nearly everything else being on the table.
For a $15/month - $120/year sub fee I think it would be reasonable to also pay for yearly Expansions, Account Services, and a handful of the Bling/Boosters.
For $20/month -$160/year I would expect Expansions to be included, but still paid Account Services, and a handful of the Bling/Boosters.
For $25/month - $200/year I would expect Expansions and Account Services to be included, and all the other stuff to be rolled into earned Veteran Rewards Token Shops.
If the goal is to attract a larger player base to this game then sadly I have to lean more toward the $10-$15/month than the $20+ : Even though I would be personally happy to pay more.
@ Telepath - I'm one of those that paid in as a supporter (obviously). I'm also one that's 100% against cash shops. Now I'm going to have to honestly consider the hyprocrisy that you pointed out. You suck.
All I can say for the moment is that I pledged as a backer/supporter and not to get stuff. And that I've pointed out to a few here that they should consider that money as a path toward the game being released someday, and not a promise of extra goodies.
@Xarr - You've failed to understand any of the correlations the thiings I noted have to subscription fees.
Feyshtey said:Being a gamer that's sick to death of monetization schemes and broken promises, if paying $30/month ensures that's the only fee I'm ever going to see and what I get is always getting better, I'll pay it.
Xarr said:Re 1: This is about retention of a sub and the value of the final product, the current standard is 15.00 so you need to be able to justify the cost increase. As for broken promises or schemes , as stated this has nothing to do with this discussion , that is for Pantheon to prove there different then other studios.
The current standard is $15. Another current standard, even with a $15 sub, is that there will also be other BS monetization schemes. The fact that I specifically said that I'd pay $30 (above-standard) if it meant that I wouldn't have to deal with monetization BS (cash shops, paywalled content, etc.) would ensure my prolonged subscription remaining active. I believe this to be true because in the absence of monietizaton schemes the game itself is more healthy. IE better. IE more valuable. I don't believe I'm completely alone in this, though $30 might be a bit high for many. The correlation of my statement and the subscriptions topic should have been easily detectable.
Feyshtey said:Being a big production studio pushing out a "AAA title" means you can throw money at big graphics teams. It means you can market it widely. It means you can coerce gamer rags and streamers to talk highly about your product. It means you can bully distributors to push your product hard. It means you can fund massive presentations and industry shows. It means you have a huge platform from which you can denegrate your compeition and talk about why your stuff is the best. But it doesn't inherently mean you have a good product.
Xarr said:This still has nothing to do with final product and the standard being 15.00 a month , I understand what you are saying and that is there issue to handle as a company, not for the consumer. I expect a even higher quality product if I am paying more for a service , not a excuse .. The we are a start up , or do not have the pull etc is still not a justification of a higher price point , unless there is a higher quality associated or other reason for a justification.
This is precisely related to the value of the product and the sub fees I'm willing to pay. I don't suggest that VR should charge a higher price simply because they are a startup. I suggest that because they are independent from the giant corporations that dont give a crap how good their games are, because VR relies soley on the quality and percieved value of Pantheon for their existence (for now), because they don't have a bully pulpit to push **** games into the market and yet still get lots of media saying how great it is, VR is incentivized to do better. Much better. They have to have a product that speaks for itself. Because they stand alone and are not a part of the big corporations that have proven repeatedly that they are not only willing to be, but are designed to be predatory (including but not limited to monetization schemes), I'd rather spend more for a game thats not pulling that **** on me, and not abusing its development staff. Even if Pantheon were of equal quality to something that (insert a dozen corporations here that I dont think forum rules allow me to name) produced, I'd pay more for Pantheon simply so that I am not putting money into the pocket of people I believe to be theives and liars if thats what it takes for VR and Pantheon to exist. And if VR goes down that path I will go without an MMO in my life at all, and I'll regularly spend the money on $20-$50 Steam games from indie studios instead.
Feyshtey said:There's a growing portion of the gamer world that's been so deeply disappointed with a lot of flash and not a lot of follow thru, and who have learned that they've been sold a bill of goods over and over for a decade or more from those big studios. They are educating themselves not just on the content of games, but the character of the producer.
Xarr said:Once again , excuse. I entirely agree , with what you are saying BUT that is still not a justification for a higher price point. That is for Pantheon to prove there different , how you where treated in a previous MMO has no bearing on this MMO. I am a educated consumer as you put it , this is why I am pointing these view points out.
And once again this is precisely about what I'm willing to pay. What you seem to be saying is that you don't particularly care about how unscrupulous a particular company happens to be. You'll just pay, and every game should be the same price. I won't. Period. I really want to play Star Wars Squadrons, but I wont ever give EA another red cent. Ever. They have proven repeatedly to be deceptive, double-talking, manipulative, double-dealing, lying crooks. I don't care if their game is the best thing that's ever been on the market. I wont play it for free, let alone open my wallet for it. But so much of the industry has succumbed to these methods that the options are thin, unless you're going with a smaller indie studio. I will pay a permium to an indie studio if for no other reason that to give a finger to the shady corporations. (And no, I don't think all corporations are shady, but in this particular industry....). Hell, I've bought games off of Steam before that I have no intention of ever playing purely to put money into the pocket of young up and coming designer talent that's not trying to screw me over. I want them to have their shot, free of the pressures from the giant studios.
Feyshtey said:You havent lied about the history of VR. But another way it could be phrased is: Because its independent. This game has a pedegree that dates back to the founding of MMOs , that didnt give up when the first kickstarter failed, that didnt succomb to pushing out an unfinished ill-designed product quickly, that didnt fold when the founder / visionary of the game tenets passed and continues forward with that vision, and isn't yet another of those AAA titles from a bloated corporation that doesn't give a **** about game quality.
Xarr said:I simply call a spade a spade. I do not suger coat anything or simply give them a pass on anything because of there situation, in fact im highly critical in most of my posts because I want this game to have success... BUT this mmo will be in competition with those studio's , just a fact.
I'm not at all unlike you. I've had many posts where I've been critical. You've been involved. VR slightly alters their conviction on the cash shops topic, I speak up against that change. You and I went back and forth on that a bit. I've done the same with at least another dozen topics. I've had threads removed from these forums because they were critical about how certain things are handled. There are several things about the current direction that I'm not particularly happy about. Time will tell if the game is of sufficient quality to keep me. But the cost of the sub fee is a minor factor in whether I stay. If paying $30 keeps a game I'm enjoying alive and free of other means to make money that I simply will not tolerate, I'll pay it.
$20.00 a month I am good with that, cheapest entertainment around when you realize that is for a whole month of logging on. Cheaper than going to a movie..or the bar. :P
Oh also willing to pay for new expansions of course.
Cana