Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Anyone ever heard of a subbased MMO (or game in general)....Follow

#1 Aug 07 2013 at 1:11 PM Rating: Sub-Default
****
4,957 posts
that had micro transactions?
#2 Aug 07 2013 at 1:15 PM Rating: Good
****
6,898 posts
Many of the F2P games, such as lotro, swtor, etc, offer this. You can sub and have access to everything in-game, but there are still items, costumes, packs, etc that you can buy separately, or you can be F2P and buy everything through microtransactions. I don't think there is a sub-only game with microtransactions however.
____________________________
Bartel Hayward--- Ultros Server
The Kraken Club <ZAM>
50 WAR • 50 MNK • 50 MIN • 50 GSM • 50 ARM • 50 LTW • 50 CUL • 50 WVR
thekrakenclub.shivtr.com
#3 Aug 07 2013 at 1:20 PM Rating: Default
****
4,957 posts
well im refering to games that REQUIRE a monthly fee (not a game thats has an optional monthly fee) that has microtransactions.
#4 Aug 07 2013 at 1:23 PM Rating: Excellent
Guru
Avatar
*****
11,072 posts
Would say WoW and some pets fit this bill. FFXI and the Tidal Talisman and CD/furniture piece did, too.
____________________________
Violence good. **** bad. Yay America.
#5 Aug 07 2013 at 1:24 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
1,208 posts
DuoMaxwellxx wrote:
that had micro transactions?


Yes, DC Universe has a combination of Subscriptions and F2P...

Supposedly they are doing the same thing with Everquest Next also.
____________________________
The Kraken Club - (Ultros FC)
Character Name: Meat Mithkabob
#6 Aug 07 2013 at 1:25 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
970 posts
The Secret World launched as you say Duo. It quickly reverted to F2P.

You can't have your cake and eat it too as TSW found out. To do this is like proclaiming that your product is superior in every way to the competition.

WoW is probably the only game in terms of quality and subscribers that might pull that off. They just started doing it though. We will see if those subs plateau or rise or plummet even further due to this.

I don't think Duo meant optional sub. I think he meant a P2P that has microtransactions on top of the sub price.

Edited, Aug 7th 2013 3:26pm by sandpark
#7 Aug 07 2013 at 1:42 PM Rating: Good
***
3,438 posts
Blizzard is going to do that in their Asian markets. And as has been said above, FFXI had things like the Tidal Talisman.
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#8 Aug 07 2013 at 1:48 PM Rating: Default
****
4,957 posts
Hairspray wrote:
DuoMaxwellxx wrote:
that had micro transactions?


Yes, DC Universe has a combination of Subscriptions and F2P...

Supposedly they are doing the same thing with Everquest Next also.



DC isnt a game that requires a monthly fe eto play (like FFXIV for example) yet still has microtrancastions..

now you CAN pay for legendary status (monthly fee) and have microtrnascations but legendary status is not REQUIRED to play
#9 Aug 07 2013 at 1:53 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
970 posts
Archmage Callinon wrote:
Blizzard is going to do that in their Asian markets. And as has been said above, FFXI had things like the Tidal Talisman.

Yeah but that type of stuff didn't happen until way in the lifespan of FFXI. I think it has 200-250k subscribers now?

I don't even agree that sub model games should charge for expansions, especially mini expansions. That is the whole purpose behind the argument of F2P vs P2P. You get everything for a monthly fee versus being nickled and dimed over content you wish to access.

Edited, Aug 7th 2013 3:58pm by sandpark
#10 Aug 07 2013 at 2:07 PM Rating: Good
Guru
Avatar
*****
11,072 posts
sandpark wrote:
I don't even agree that sub model games should charge for expansions, especially mini expansions. That is the whole purpose behind the argument of F2P vs P2P. You get everything for a monthly fee versus being nickled and dimed over content you wish to access.

I can get behind this, but at the same time, can potentially understand the need as the size of the expansion and the newly created assets may warrant some injection of cash. XI was pretty terrible about releasing expansions 20% done or so, though. At least they were kind of honest about breaking Abyssea up into parts.
____________________________
Violence good. **** bad. Yay America.
#11 Aug 07 2013 at 2:23 PM Rating: Good
***
3,438 posts
sandpark wrote:
Archmage Callinon wrote:
Blizzard is going to do that in their Asian markets. And as has been said above, FFXI had things like the Tidal Talisman.

Yeah but that type of stuff didn't happen until way in the lifespan of FFXI. I think it has 200-250k subscribers now?

I don't even agree that sub model games should charge for expansions, especially mini expansions. That is the whole purpose behind the argument of F2P vs P2P. You get everything for a monthly fee versus being nickled and dimed over content you wish to access.

Edited, Aug 7th 2013 3:58pm by sandpark


I don't have a problem with a sub-based game charging for full expansions. I do see your point there though, I just don't think it's a major problem.. so long as an expansion is nice and meaty.

FFXI's mini-expansions though, yeah.. that was cash grabby. Charging for what amounted to a good quest line is not in the spirit of an expansion.

As for the Talisman.. it was a few years in, but not really THAT long a time. Also I have no idea how many subscribers FFXI has now. Do they publicize that number .. ever?

Quote:
XI was pretty terrible about releasing expansions 20% done or so, though


THAT annoyed me. It took them .. what? 5 years to finish the Wings of the Goddess story? I know it just happened pretty recently. Releasing new raid tiers in patches is fine, but have a development cycle!.
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#12 Aug 07 2013 at 2:26 PM Rating: Excellent
*
100 posts
Eve online is a required subscription, with minor microtransactions, and the ability to buy game time increments with cash outside of game, transfer them into an In-game item, and resell that item for game money. Or as a player, pay for your subscription with In-game cash through a CCP controlled system, that is balanced by massive Perma-loss in game.

All expansions ( big or small, there are a lot of minor bits) are included for the sub.

Of course... there is the fact that you're then playing Eve, and obviously insane, or obsessed with Excell masquerading as a Spaceship game.

(insert Woody Woodpecker laugh here)


Edited, Aug 7th 2013 4:28pm by OtosanOokami
____________________________
Synapsis Ataxia 50 WHM~ Ultros
XI From Beta to Sea, Retired. 75 WHM/THF+few other ones I liked playing less...
#13 Aug 07 2013 at 2:29 PM Rating: Good
***
1,218 posts
sandpark wrote:
Archmage Callinon wrote:
Blizzard is going to do that in their Asian markets. And as has been said above, FFXI had things like the Tidal Talisman.

Yeah but that type of stuff didn't happen until way in the lifespan of FFXI. I think it has 200-250k subscribers now?

I don't even agree that sub model games should charge for expansions, especially mini expansions. That is the whole purpose behind the argument of F2P vs P2P. You get everything for a monthly fee versus being nickled and dimed over content you wish to access.

Edited, Aug 7th 2013 3:58pm by sandpark


I don't mind paying money above the normal sub fee for additional/expansion content, as long as that content is substantial enough.

The one thing that WoW did with expansions that really drove me up a wall was deliberately ignoring class imbalances, flaws, or quality of life issues so that they could be packaged as a "feature" of the expansion. You could tell when Blizzard had either just announced a new expansion or was about to announce one when they starting making mass "What would you change about your class?" solicitation threads on their own forums.

It really rubbed me the wrong way when they'd acknowledge that some class needed a change in some area, talk about how it was on the drawing board, and then two years later when the new expansion came out, it was packaged in with that, instead of fixing it a year or two sooner when the problem and potential solution had been identified.
#14 Aug 07 2013 at 2:35 PM Rating: Good
***
3,438 posts
KarlHungis wrote:

The one thing that WoW did with expansions that really drove me up a wall was deliberately ignoring class imbalances, flaws, or quality of life issues so that they could be packaged as a "feature" of the expansion. You could tell when Blizzard had either just announced a new expansion or was about to announce one when they starting making mass "What would you change about your class?" solicitation threads on their own forums.

It really rubbed me the wrong way when they'd acknowledge that some class needed a change in some area, talk about how it was on the drawing board, and then two years later when the new expansion came out, it was packaged in with that, instead of fixing it a year or two sooner when the problem and potential solution had been identified.


Not all problems are obvious. Not all solutions are simple.

Their rationale for packaging major class changes into expansions is to make sure classes work fundamentally the same way within a single expansion. For instance, adding Holy Power to paladins mid-wrath would have been profoundly stupid because suddenly every paladin in the game would have to relearn their character-in the middle of a raid tier or pvp season. Instead, they package major changes like that into expansions so that players have some leveling time to get to know their class again.

World of Warcraft has some of the most well-balanced class mechanics of any existing MMO, and class balance in that game is constantly improved.
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#15 Aug 07 2013 at 2:36 PM Rating: Default
**
487 posts
DuoMaxwellxx wrote:
that had micro transactions?

Wow does now, TSW did before it went f2p. Dont remember if Lotros store came ut before f2p
____________________________
BANNED
#16 Aug 07 2013 at 2:48 PM Rating: Good
**
259 posts
LotrO store came out after F2P.

Didn't WoW charge like $25 for a mount a few years back? That counts right?
#17 Aug 07 2013 at 3:07 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
29 posts
Blade & Soul KR is subscription based and has recently added a cash shop. It contains the standard cash shop items; teleport scrolls, revive scrolls, potions, costumes. I'm not sure how necessary they are to the game like F2P games make their cash shop.
____________________________
Eve Aeterna
#18 Aug 07 2013 at 3:26 PM Rating: Good
***
1,218 posts
Archmage Callinon wrote:
KarlHungis wrote:

The one thing that WoW did with expansions that really drove me up a wall was deliberately ignoring class imbalances, flaws, or quality of life issues so that they could be packaged as a "feature" of the expansion. You could tell when Blizzard had either just announced a new expansion or was about to announce one when they starting making mass "What would you change about your class?" solicitation threads on their own forums.

It really rubbed me the wrong way when they'd acknowledge that some class needed a change in some area, talk about how it was on the drawing board, and then two years later when the new expansion came out, it was packaged in with that, instead of fixing it a year or two sooner when the problem and potential solution had been identified.


Not all problems are obvious. Not all solutions are simple.


Right, but I specified problems whose solutions had been explicitly identified by developers, and in many cases were very simple things to fix. For example, doing away with ammo or soul shards taking up inventory space, or tuning down the magnitude of mortal strike abilities, etc. Those are the sorts of things whose coding and dev time cost is less than a typical bug fix, yet were kept from being implemented until they could be rolled into a new expansion.

I can't speak for MoP, because I quit halfway through Cataclysm, but every expansion prior to that, their entire list of class "features" for the expansion read like a list of complaints from the previous expansion. They deliberately avoided fixing things in many cases so that those long awaited fixes could be part of the next xpac's hype machine.

All things considered it wasn't enough to prevent me from playing the game for a long time, but it was still kind of shady.

#19 Aug 07 2013 at 3:29 PM Rating: Good
***
1,218 posts
Arjuncorpse wrote:
LotrO store came out after F2P.

Didn't WoW charge like $25 for a mount a few years back? That counts right?


Wow has had multiple cash store mounts, and a multitude of vanity pets for cash, either directly through the blizzard store or indirectly through the old CCG loot cards. All of this on top of the various convenience for cash services like name change, race change, server change, etc.
#20 Aug 07 2013 at 6:19 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
972 posts
WoW has a cash shop already. It has for quite a long time. It's just not in-game. Same with FFXI's. I'm sure FFXIV will probably have microtransactions and we just don't know what they will be.
#21 Aug 08 2013 at 8:36 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
970 posts
KarlHungis wrote:
Arjuncorpse wrote:
LotrO store came out after F2P.

Didn't WoW charge like $25 for a mount a few years back? That counts right?


Wow has had multiple cash store mounts, and a multitude of vanity pets for cash, either directly through the blizzard store or indirectly through the old CCG loot cards. All of this on top of the various convenience for cash services like name change, race change, server change, etc.

Now that's just wrong. A subscription game shouldn't be charging micro-transactions for anything game related. That's the whole reason why the P2P bunch doesn't like F2P argument. Expansions maybe since some agree with that. I can see server changes costing money. But the rest, no way in ****.

Here I thought WoW was well off only due to the sheer size of subscribers. I wonder if they will go micro-transaction crazy to make back what they lost from re-buying themselves from Vivendi?

I got to level 60 in Tera without spending a dime and so far in EQ2 I have spent five dollars. Unless I am wrong that five dollars would get me to level ninety. Isn't F2P suppose to cost more? In my opinion EQ2 is pretty high quality too.

I hope if ARR is going to go that route, they at least wait until a couple of years.
#22 Aug 08 2013 at 10:35 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
**
837 posts
OtosanOokami wrote:


Of course... there is the fact that you're then playing Eve, and obviously insane, or obsessed with Excell masquerading as a Spaceship game.

Edited, Aug 7th 2013 4:28pm by OtosanOokami




Nothings wrong with that! Smiley: lol
____________________________
YaY signature!! (i was never good with signatures >_<)

Grim Reaperz (Ultros server)
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 67 All times are in CST
Callinon, Anonymous Guests (66)