Sevens said:
Rivacom said:
The issue is, Sub based MMO's are a very very thin market now. As you see, if we take WoW out of the picture, there really isn't any other MMO who can stand on a Sub based game. So in the market where F2P is taking more and more people in. I think raising the price of a very very niche game like Pantheon is risking the price. I think it might be nice to be able to give a little more here and there if need be but I don't think raising the price will help it in the long run.
I know were sick of cash shops in MMO's but it might be worth having tier'd sub models that maybe would add non beneficial features to users who choose them.
Actually sub based games are not that rare...in fact unless you are going by the mobile f2p apps then most MMOs do actually run a sub along with their cash shop / F2p model...EQ EQ2 Planetside TESO SWTOR LoTR et al uses a Hybrid of F2P and Subs
In a sense yes, but your actually just paying 15 dollars to the store and not a pure subscription model. A pure sub model would be you get everything with a sub, where as there are still portions of locked content for games like TESO and SWTOR. Plus although there are people who end up doing the sub for the games. There are a lot of players who just use the players stores. So I think we need to count only pure sub based games which in a sense if only a few games in the PC world.
Rivacom said:
In a sense yes, but your actually just paying 15 dollars to the store and not a pure subscription model. A pure sub model would be you get everything with a sub, where as there are still portions of locked content for games like TESO and SWTOR. Plus although there are people who end up doing the sub for the games. There are a lot of players who just use the players stores. So I think we need to count only pure sub based games which in a sense if only a few games in the PC world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massively_multiplayer_online_role-playing_games lists more then 20 MMORPGs for PC that are pay-to-play, just for mixing in some random facts in the discussion. ;-)
Sub price has gone up over the course of MMO genre's life span. When EQ first came out it was $9.99 month.
A few years later it moved to $12.99 a month , and I could be wrong but I think that is the sub price WoW and EQ2 started with.
It then went up to its current $14.99 a month and has sat there for years.
While I wouldn't mind spending $20 a month, I don't think it would be wise to go past that and I also think that it will cause some backlash in the gaming community. Though it would be best to launch with the higher sub rate than increasing it later on down the road. I would also like to add in regards to Brad's comment , that I wouldn't want to see more than 1 expansion a year and that 9months might be a little short between them.
I think a year or so is a good time frame for putting out expansions
Would I pay $20 - $30 a month? Absolutely. Even at $30 that's less than a dollar a day.
Unfortunately though, we are in an era where people delude themselves into thinking F2P means FREE to play.
I have a friend who has spent several hundred dollars more than once in a MONTH on a F2P MMO... does everyone do that? Of course not - but I think it's fair to say that there are a lot of people who play for "free" that spend money a dollar, or five dollars at a time on their MMO - with the net sum being more than $15 a month on average... especially when that money is hidden behind things like "Station cash" - so that you are spending "points" not dollars.
AND - MMO's that are charging these days? Still charge $15. I think you'll be able to charge more when Blizzard ups the fee for WoW, or releases another MMO that charges more.
A "food for thought" different idea:
1) Charge the $15 a month with the typical rate reductions for longer term subscriptions
2) Offer perks that don't impact the game for a few dollars more (say stuff like "get into the expansion 5 days early plus automatic inclusion in expansion beta" for $5 a month or whatever...
3) Crowd fund expansions
Man, I love this community. I knew this was a can of worms as I was writing it and I knew that I couldn't personally think or put down even a fraction of the pros and cons in an OP. Though so far you guys have done a great job bringing out some of the big negatives and positives. The maturity of the debates in these forums really have me in awe.
I do want to state that I will not play another FTP game and I'm not particularly happy with cash shops. Even one that adds cosmetic items due to the fact that they start to border on what I don't want to see in games like modern accessories or other immersion breaking items etc. I also HATE games that are released and then the SAME damn day they release DLC for the game at an extra cost... If you make a game you sell the game... you don't break it up and try to screw people out of more money. That's cheap and dishonest in my humble opinion. I'm not for a tiered sub as I believe everyone is equal and I'm not a huge fan of elitist.
Now some more points I'd like to bring up or emphasize from other posts. I think everyone knows that it takes money to run a game and they also know that as time goes on inflation happens. I think most games have stuck to the $15 because their market people have told them if they raised the price, X number of people wouldn't play. I agree that we might turn some people off with a higher sub, though... with less people paying more... we get a better quality of service. It's just like my company... if I have 100 clients all paying a low rate instead of 50 clients at a higher rate making the same or more money... I can support the 50 clients much easier due to less people meaning I have to cater to less needs/wants/complaints. So while we might not have 100,000s of people playing... we will have a tight knit group of thousands that will play and have such a great experience that word of mouth will bring more as people leave. Also... less people complaining less means I get to work on extras for those same people. As long as I don't get greedy I can keep those 50 clients super happy with timely continued support and extras at the same time. I think this model would work well for a game not trying to cater to the masses.
For a simple number comparison 10,000 people paying $15 a month, 7,500 people paying $20 a month, 6,000 people paying $25 a month is all the same money. Think of how much easier it would be to support almost half the people. How quickly would the guides be able to respond to your help ticket when an epic mob just died under the world and your guild can't loot it... How often could we have in game events like city invasions like the old EQ/Asheron's call days? How much time could they spend adding details/lore instead of trying to maintain all those extra bodies. Think of the smaller number of servers we would need to support the smaller population.
Last thing I wanted to discuss is that fact that the only reason I brought this up is that I'm also open to the idea that the game might have a hard time finding funding due to it not trying to cater to the masses. I want this game to happen so badly that I'm willing to sacrifice some extras of my first world problems to make this game happen... I'm sure if I or any of you were in a position to fund the game solely you or I would do so in a heartbeat as I feel we all have a very unique bond here and want to make this happen. So if paying more money is going to get it done... then paying more money is what I will do.
Anyway I don't want to ramble in one post too long...
Ok, a different idea just popped into my head:
We all know that expansions are typically $50 or so for the basic expansion, and something more for the deluxe version...
Why not offer people the chance to "pay as you go" on expansions?
That is:
- Standard monthly rate = $15 a month
- Regular expansion = $5 a month (at one expansion a year)
- Deluxe expansion = $10 a month (at one expansion a year)
Now you have the potential to have some up front cash (people paying for their expansions in perhaps easier doses of $5 - $10 a month), and people just waiting to buy their expansion when it releases.
Rivacom said:
The issue is, Sub based MMO's are a very very thin market now. As you see, if we take WoW out of the picture, there really isn't any other MMO who can stand on a Sub based game. So in the market where F2P is taking more and more people in. I think raising the price of a very very niche game like Pantheon is risking the price. I think it might be nice to be able to give a little more here and there if need be but I don't think raising the price will help it in the long run.
I know were sick of cash shops in MMO's but it might be worth having tier'd sub models that maybe would add non beneficial features to users who choose them.
Technically, those "issues" are what people who want to play FREE games, have. Not those looking for a premium, oldschool MMORPG experience, which are whom Pantheon is seeking. You simply can't worry about "other people"...
Secondly, Pantheon is a MMORPG, not a MMO..
The reason there is so much free, is because there is so much MMOs, which are just cash cows. Pantheon is a MMORPG which is different. Sub based MMO are dumb and pointless... a subscription based MMORPG on the other hand, is a traditional concept and a subscription model for a ticket into Brad's Story World, is acceptable and been around for nearly 20 years.
Potential customers for Pantheon are everywhere, they are not just one demographic. $20/month is not a problem for 10 million players.... but Pantheon is only looking for 200k members, to become another classic. I do not see $20 a month being a barrier, or issue for those seeking whats inside. If anything, VRI will have to turn people away... and that will make people want it more.
I think Pantheon will have a better community, better start & better stability if they charge $49 Game, plus subscription. Plus $49 for every expansion.
I also think that VRi needs to go back to the Pledge levels and open them up a tad... offer more incentives in each. Similar to Shroud, & offer trinkets for houses, or other swag.
I just had to comment on the last statement that Wandidar just added and all i have to say is I LOVE THAT IDEA !!! Way to use the old noggin ). Not only would that add move revenue but it would also give a great reason to raise subs with out adding in anything that would give any player and advantage or turn players away. I believe people would gladly pay it knowing they will get their content for the extra money and wont feel like they are just being charged more. Me personally i would gladly pay 20 to 25 dollars a month for this game (well it will be x2 have to pay for the wifes account to) but i am not the one you have to try to sell the game to. I am already in and sold. I just think this would a great model to get other player to play at the basic MMO rate and if they like what they see i believe they would gladly pay the extra a month for new content.
New Content would be an Expansion Pack, at roughly the cost of $49 bucks. ($4 x 12 months = $48 bucks...?)
I don't see having the COST of an expansion pack spread out over payments, as a big boon for most of the target audience for Pantheon. That is what a credit card is for...
Hieromonk said:
New Content would be an Expansion Pack, at roughly the cost of $49 bucks. ($4 x 12 months = $48 bucks...?)
I don't see having the COST of an expansion pack spread out over payments, as a big boon for most of the target audience for Pantheon. That is what a credit card is for...
Possibly - but Brad's question was, essentially: "Would you pay more month to month to give us cash to work on content"
The idea is one that gives them some cash to do that. It also serves as a boon of sorts to a player who is on a budget - enabling them to not have to worry about dropping $50 - $100 in one shot when an expansion launches.
The idea was a "brainstorming" thing. Throw it on the wall, see if it sticks.
Radio head released an album but allowed customers to pay what they felt the thing was worth
Many restaurants are allowing customers to "pay" what they feel like paying
Maybe PROTF could have a volunteer sturcture
15 a month for everyone
20 bucks a month because you really like the game and want to support it
30 a month because you really love the game!
50 bucks a month just cause youre man crushing on Mr. McQuaid!
Theun said:
I just had to comment on the last statement that Wandidar just added and all i have to say is I LOVE THAT IDEA !!! Way to use the old noggin ). Not only would that add move revenue but it would also give a great reason to raise subs with out adding in anything that would give any player and advantage or turn players away. I believe people would gladly pay it knowing they will get their content for the extra money and wont feel like they are just being charged more. Me personally i would gladly pay 20 to 25 dollars a month for this game (well it will be x2 have to pay for the wifes account to) but i am not the one you have to try to sell the game to. I am already in and sold. I just think this would a great model to get other player to play at the basic MMO rate and if they like what they see i believe they would gladly pay the extra a month for new content.
The only problem with that model is if they can't come out with an awesome expansion on the promised time frame. Any game or software development cycle I have ever been apart of has had some type of delays. I would not in the least be surprised if I opened a dictionary one day and looked up the word 'delay' and saw a picture of a software developer next to it lol!!!... It would be like the one time if my life I have ever seen a plane take off early.
Regardless I also wouldn't want them to rush the expansions to meet their subscription obligation. I could just see people raging if the expansion pack wasn't released exactly X months and they paid for it. I also think that 9-12 months per xpac might be too soon if we are planning for a really slow leveling curve. I would also hope that the expansion packs are not just haphazardly added and provide real story to the world.
What I would I would like from the expansion packs is a continuation of the story attempting to use the existing lands if possible in most cases. I don't want a new continent or to travel to outspace every time a new expansion is released. I also don't want all end game content for my expansions. What I would propose is that these things happen with expansions.
- You use the existing lands to create expansion packs, you don't create new land to further your story. It could be pre-dated to a huge GM lead event where orcs try to take over the city and if we can't fight them off they actually do take it over and the elves are displaced. This opens up a new line of quests from elves that are displaced and a new quest/raiding area. The expansion pack is basically the story of the world we know growing and evolving. We could add new races very far and few between if we wanted.
- I also don't want all expansion packs to be just for the end game... I would love to see new stories around the lower level areas as well as this would create a reason for people to start over and see this new content and be apart of the continued story of the land.
This game should feel like we are playing a never ending story so to speak and the world should be evolving around us as we play. The expansions don't have to be HUGE either... they could be much smaller well thought out patches that have a deep lore and story and reason behind them.
Make the players characters of the history book Pantheon and they will be hooked!
Of course a lot of planning would need to go on and I would like to make sure that the team keeps a copy of the vanilla code just because one day they might want to open a server from the start to remember it all and play it all over again for old or new players alike.
Niien said:
Theun said:
I just had to comment on the last statement that Wandidar just added and all i have to say is I LOVE THAT IDEA !!! Way to use the old noggin ). Not only would that add move revenue but it would also give a great reason to raise subs with out adding in anything that would give any player and advantage or turn players away. I believe people would gladly pay it knowing they will get their content for the extra money and wont feel like they are just being charged more. Me personally i would gladly pay 20 to 25 dollars a month for this game (well it will be x2 have to pay for the wifes account to) but i am not the one you have to try to sell the game to. I am already in and sold. I just think this would a great model to get other player to play at the basic MMO rate and if they like what they see i believe they would gladly pay the extra a month for new content.
The only problem with that model is if they can't come out with an awesome expansion on the promised time frame. Any game or software development cycle I have ever been apart of has had some type of delays. I would not in the least be surprised if I opened a dictionary one day and looked up the word 'delay' and saw a picture of a software developer next to it lol!!!... It would be like the one time if my life I have ever seen a plane take off early.
Regardless I also wouldn't want them to rush the expansions to meet their subscription obligation. I could just see people raging if the expansion pack wasn't released exactly X months and they paid for it. I also think that 9-12 months per xpac might be too soon if we are planning for a really slow leveling curve. I would also hope that the expansion packs are not just haphazardly added and provide real story to the world.
What I would I would like from the expansion packs is a continuation of the story attempting to use the existing lands if possible in most cases. I don't want a new continent or to travel to outspace every time a new expansion is released. I also don't want all end game content for my expansions. What I would propose is that these things happen with expansions.
- You use the existing lands to create expansion packs, you don't create new land to further your story. It could be pre-dated to a huge GM lead event where orcs try to take over the city and if we can't fight them off they actually do take it over and the elves are displaced. This opens up a new line of quests from elves that are displaced and a new quest/raiding area. The expansion pack is basically the story of the world we know growing and evolving. We could add new races very far and few between if we wanted.
- I also don't want all expansion packs to be just for the end game... I would love to see new stories around the lower level areas as well as this would create a reason for people to start over and see this new content and be apart of the continued story of the land.
This game should feel like we are playing a never ending story so to speak and the world should be evolving around us as we play. The expansions don't have to be HUGE either... they could be much smaller well thought out patches that have a deep lore and story and reason behind them.
Make the players characters of the history book Pantheon and they will be hooked!
Of course a lot of planning would need to go on and I would like to make sure that the team keeps a copy of the vanilla code just because one day they might want to open a server from the start to remember it all and play it all over again for old or new players alike.
Valid points - and I thought of them even as I was posting the idea. I think there are ways around it, but those ways also have problems...
For example, instead of stating it as "get your expansion" - state it as "pay extra to not have to pay more at content releases" - then you aren't on a set time table... BUT - you run the risk of someone waiting until you say you are going to release content, and upping to that extra amount the month before.
It's an imperfect idea to be sure - but I threw it out there anyway - figuring someone might be able to turn it into something more concrete.
Wandidar said:
Hieromonk said:
New Content would be an Expansion Pack, at roughly the cost of $49 bucks. ($4 x 12 months = $48 bucks...?)
I don't see having the COST of an expansion pack spread out over payments, as a big boon for most of the target audience for Pantheon. That is what a credit card is for...
Possibly - but Brad's question was, essentially: "Would you pay more month to month to give us cash to work on content"
The idea is one that gives them some cash to do that. It also serves as a boon of sorts to a player who is on a budget - enabling them to not have to worry about dropping $50 - $100 in one shot when an expansion launches.
The idea was a "brainstorming" thing. Throw it on the wall, see if it sticks.
Yup, tossing around the idea that frees up VRi to do their thing. Seeing that they are not a finance company, someone's CC can easily take payments, instead of having VRi's backbone handle it.
We are, after all, talking about financing $49 dollars... I don't see too much sticking to the wall.
I made this point in another thread and it brings a reality to the topic, Pantheon @ $20/month is $240/year.
-A bag of weed is $200..
-A Pro Sport ticket for 2 is $150 for one evening.
-A round of Golf (including the 19 hole) is $40~$75
The things I listed, are other forms of entertainment that are NOT limited to once a month... all three can be 1 weekend, or even the same day. I love brainstorming....
Sevens said:
Radio head released an album but allowed customers to pay what they felt the thing was worth
Many restaurants are allowing customers to "pay" what they feel like paying
Maybe PROTF could have a volunteer sturcture
15 a month for everyone
20 bucks a month because you really like the game and want to support it
30 a month because you really love the game!
50 bucks a month just cause youre man crushing on Mr. McQuaid!
VRi can alleviate some pain, if say they announce $25/month subscription rate ($300/year), but offer a discount for those who purchase a years subscription upfront for $275. Saving them $25 as an incentive, etc.
I do agree the Pledge Store needs to be redone, and more perks added for those who want to invest into Pantheon. And for those who want to help develop Pantheon.
I don't think anyone is or should be surprised that we are all pretty much on the same page within this community on this increased subscription fees. I'm right there with you all; $25-$50/month for the game I am envisioning in my head, NO PROBLEM.
However, I can't imagine this very same topic picked up and put in a different game, or a different forum (MMORPG.com for instance) would have NEARLY the same unanimous sentiment. Increased subs are not going to be well received by outliers and people jumping on the bandwagon down the line. Which means the team needs to calculate their opportunity cost for raising sub fees. Does the team stand to make more by keeping the sub fees low and getting potentially more subs? Or by making the sub fees higher and losing some potential subs? Likely too early to tell at this point, but certainly worth considering.
Wow, I tried to quote one post and it deleted what I said and then quoted everything I deleted haha!!!
Anyway @Wandidar, I wanted to say that I agree your brainstorming on these kinds of topics is exactly what we need in order to come up with the best possible solution to a very real problem for the game starting out. So please continue to throw ideas on the wall as it might even help someone else think of something.
Vortikai said:
Oh, sorry. I meant that as a response to the OP and Brad's question. Have a good game first with major investors giving financial advice before you start charging even more than planned (else it end up like the TESO nightmare).
Haha, that's funny... you know what they will say... dumb it down so you can bring it X number of more people for X number of months to grab as much cash as you can grab at once and then dumb it X number of months later to a FTP model. Companies are all about money and profit all companies want to continue to grow because they and the people that run them are greedy.
Zandil said:I have always wanted to see how a tier payment system would work i.e. you pay for pure game time per month/week
$5 - gets you 20 hours for a month
$10 - gets you 40 hours a month
etc etc
If i'm a hard core gamer you have a maximum of say $25-$35 a month and you get unlimited access a month, but if I know I only play a few hours a week I could cut my costs and go a cheaper month sub.
If your max lvl and just a weekend raider you could pay less for your game time, the only restriction in the sub is once you reach your time limit per month you lose access till month roles over or you pay for extra time?
I am actually rather fond of this concept but I imagine the numbers would have to be worked out. I think in general people would probably willing to pay up to $20 a month if that is what was chosen BUT I think there is likely a better way. The reason FTP does well is because it creates the illusion of lower cost which any marketing person could tell you is important. Easily digestible numbers often hide total cost behind it. A pay as you play billing cycle akin to what we used to do for phone bills might be something that could work but it would have to have the option for going over you amount of "minutes" or whatever. I imagine that the relative feeling of predatory practices from the phone industry is something that Brad and the team would not feel great about, in the same way they are opposed to FTP.
On a side note I have a buddy that is an economist at a game company, would anyone (read devs) be opposed to me dropping a line to him and brain storming? I mean I don't represent Pantheon and its not a conflict of interest but this is a closed forum and I do wonder as to some limit of what is appropriate. On the other hand my roommate is a AI game research and I have already talked to him about Pantheon and possibly types of AI, so...
Just reiterating that it is a really bad idea to gather the opinions of us investors as we are only a small part of the larger target audience. We are a bit different in that we have some money to invest in the game. Wait until Pantheon has larger investors who can give adequate advice for the business model of the game before changing anything.
The whole "we need to charge more because it is a niche game. And if they don't like paying $25/mo, then they can not play, because that means faster ticket response times!" rhetoric is beyond "unwise" and really bad for the community.
Nikademis said:
I don't think anyone is or should be surprised that we are all pretty much on the same page within this community on this increased subscription fees. I'm right there with you all; $25-$50/month for the game I am envisioning in my head, NO PROBLEM.
However, I can't imagine this very same topic picked up and put in a different game, or a different forum (MMORPG.com for instance) would have NEARLY the same unanimous sentiment. Increased subs are not going to be well received by outliers and people jumping on the bandwagon down the line. Which means the team needs to calculate their opportunity cost for raising sub fees. Does the team stand to make more by keeping the sub fees low and getting potentially more subs? Or by making the sub fees higher and losing some potential subs? Likely too early to tell at this point, but certainly worth considering.
I agree Nikademis, though I feel if they try to come in low and then try to raise the prices it would cause more heartache. Better to set expectations ahead of time. I think if they start advertising that there will be a $25 a month fee they can gauge the interest and if there isn't enough support for it... then they can take the appropriate measures and reduce it. Though I don't think they should buckle just because a few people complain about not being able to buy five happy meals from McDonald each month.