| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (100)

Posted: Sep 10th 2011 2:35PM Gaugamela said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Breaking news: water is wet.

Posted: Sep 10th 2011 2:51PM Rheem said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I disagree. I think older people are more apt to prefer subscription based mmo's than f2p games with a cash shop, perhaps because the ratio to older to younger people is higher than in f2p games. I could be wrong. But that's my opionion.

Posted: Sep 10th 2011 7:36PM Saerain said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Rheem

I think that's because cash-shop games don't realize that their pay model is more appealing to adults. Evidence: their content is childish.
Reply

Posted: Sep 10th 2011 10:01PM Celtar said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
>>Rheem said

>>I disagree. I think older people are more apt to prefer subscription based
>>mmo's than f2p games with a cash shop, perhaps because the ratio to
>>older to younger people is higher than in f2p games. I could be wrong. But
>>that's my opionion.

Actually I like to pay a subscription "and" have access to pay shops for things like storage space, mounts, fluff items etc. That's as a retired ex military person. :)

I like to support the game company who makes the game I am enjoying. I realize that it costs the game company continued money to operate, pay for building(s), T lines, employees, Dev depts who design further content etc etc etc. Basically I want the game company to be there to support the game I play, so yes I believe that the pissant sum of $15.00 to $20.00 dollars a month isn't asking much for 24/7 access to a great product.

If it isn't a product I enjoy then I wouldn't be playing it, so these silly debates of "is it worth it" never ring true to me. In my opinion most appear to want something for nothing. Even my kids can earn the price of a monthly subscription and then some. Lunch costs me more then the price of a monthly subscription.

I just don't get the continued issue with pay subscriptions or cash shops even. As long as cash shops are not required to do well or be competitive in the game. If buying items from the cash shop are required to do well, then that is a fail in my opinion.



Reply

Posted: Sep 10th 2011 11:14PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Celtar: I'm with you. I can't even imagine a game that I'm not playing because it has a subscription fee, which I WOULD be playing if it were cheaper.

Fun game? I'll drop $15/month without a second thought.

Not fun? I don't have time to waste playing it, even if it's free.
Reply

Posted: Sep 10th 2011 3:04PM Tom in VA said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The issue is more convenience than time with me -- and I also tend to be a sucker for certain kinds of vanity items (armor, inventory space, neato mounts, etc.). In GW, for example, you don't really need the mercenary heroes to play the game, but I loved the idea of them, and so I bought myself some. But "to save time"? No, I'd hardly ever pay extra to to do that.

I would pay, however, to avoid something yucky and grindy (like grinding for rep); that, however, is less due to time than it is to frustration against monotony. I LIKE slow progression. I prefer it, in fact -- which is good since I usually am playing about 85 bazillion alts. :)

Posted: Sep 10th 2011 3:09PM HiroProtagonist7 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Massively - please research your stories. Surveys and studies don't mean jack shit if they're not done by an INDEPENDENT body with NO INTEREST in the market they're studying.

The study is by Flurry Analytics. They help Mobile Game companies sell Mobile games. So a Mobile gaming marketer released a study that shows companies will make more money with them.
http://www.flurry.com/advertisers/index.html

Also, they are again trying to twist the numbers. If the older gamers consist of 29% of the market and 50% of them spend $14, the real number is 14.45% of older gamers spend at most, $14 in cash shops. That also means that 85.55% of these same gamers DO NOT spend $14 in a cash shop.

The study isn't linked here or on MSNBC and is self serving to MSNBC because they are also in the business of trying to get people to make micropayments through their mobile games. The more "acceptable" they can make it through their "News" marketing extensions the more money they make.

Massively - If you walk like a marketing extension and talk like a marketing extension, it really doesn't matter if you aren't a marketing extension.

Let me fix this for you using the same shaky reasoning. Since 85.55% of older gamers don't spend $14 in a cash shop, it means that 85.55% are absolutely disgusted with the general direction of the market and would like to see the return to a sub-model instead of an ala-carte rip off.

Gamers - please think this F2P thing through. You buy potions from the people who directly control your need for said potions. If you need XP boosts to rocket through content it means the content is too boring to put up with. The more boosts you buy, the more encouraged the devs are to release boring content to increase your need for the XP boosts.

Posted: Sep 10th 2011 3:12PM HiroProtagonist7 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@HiroProtagonist7
edit - wrong place
Edit - bad math
Also, they are again trying to twist the numbers. If the older gamers consist of 29% of the market and 50% of them spend $14, the real number is 14.45% of GAMERS in general spend at most, $14 in cash shops. That also means that 85.55% of these same gamers DO NOT spend $14 in a cash shop.
Reply

Posted: Sep 10th 2011 3:41PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@HiroProtagonist7

It depends on the game. I was terrified when I first heard LOTRO was going F2P. My exposure to F2P games was that you can't do much of anything unless you pay something.

Once they made the conversion, I was very pleased. Most of the stuff in the LOTRO store can be earned in game somehow. There are a few cosmetic items/mounts that are store exclusive. You can easily earn Turbine Points just by playing the game so there really isn't any reason to pay if you don't want to.

There is one particular item that can only be gotten in the store that is somewhat important, but by the time you need it you will have more than enough TPs to buy it (more than once if necessary).

I agree that some F2P games are really just money pits. I stay away from those like the plague. LOTRO isn't one of them.
Reply

Posted: Sep 10th 2011 11:30PM Sean D said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@HiroProtagonist7

I haven't verified the information you've presented here, but if it's true, and if the numbers are even somewhere in the ballpark, you're a hero for making readers more aware and inspiring them to question the veracity of *everything* they read.
Reply

Posted: Sep 10th 2011 3:10PM HiroProtagonist7 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Edit - bad math
Also, they are again trying to twist the numbers. If the older gamers consist of 29% of the market and 50% of them spend $14, the real number is 14.45% of GAMERS in general spend at most, $14 in cash shops. That also means that 85.55% of these same gamers DO NOT spend $14 in a cash shop.

Posted: Sep 10th 2011 5:54PM Sente said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@HiroProtagonist7

Your calculations are somewhat flawed. The article states that players spend on average $14 per transaction when they spend money. It does not say how often people make a transaction - it could be daily, weekly, monthly, yearly and probably differ a fair amount.

Those 50% of the "older" age group is also only up to 34, so you are not part of that group and there is no info in the article about numbers for those aged 35+.

There is simply not enough information to draw any conclusions about people not paying.

Personally I am not religious about payment models - if I feel they provide good value for the money it does not matter which approach they use. However, that being said it can be easier to see the value sometimes if you pay piecemeal rather than a generic subscription fee.

If I like a game I make sure I pay something usually, if there is something to pay for.I'm 46, so I am part of the 20% the article did not cover at all.
Reply

Posted: Sep 10th 2011 3:17PM Keeop said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm almost 40 and definitely prefer subscription over f2p or cash shop. Guess that makes me an additional exception as well. The study does seem to center around mobile gaming rather than pc-based MMO's. Their data was gathered from Android and iOS. So I'm a little hesitant to put much stock in the data at all as far as what we usually discuss here.

Posted: Sep 10th 2011 3:21PM HiroProtagonist7 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm 40 in November. I don't play item shop games either - only subs. The only way I'd play an item shop game is if as a subscriber EVERYTHING in the item shop was free.

However, by their own numbers we're not an exception. 85.55% of all gamers, not just older ones, feel the same way.

Posted: Sep 10th 2011 3:24PM Eric Francis said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I wonder how many gamers like me (36) have stopped playing MMOs altogether because the magic is gone with games being available that are either

A) Un-creative re-hashes

B) a nickel and dime operation where money hamster threadwheel is thought of first and fun second.

Posted: Sep 10th 2011 3:45PM Keeop said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Eric Francis I'm pretty sure something like that is happening to me. I enjoyed the hell out of MMO's between '02 and '07ish though. I still love the idea of them, but finding a great game with an equally great community over the last few years has been a tough task.
Reply

Posted: Sep 10th 2011 4:01PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Eric Francis
I currently am not playing one and am certainly feeling very similar as you.
Thing is I want to be playing one, my 15$ per month is screaming TAKE ME TAKE ME.
Only problem is I'm not willing to spend it on crap.
Reply

Posted: Sep 10th 2011 4:19PM smartstep said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified)

Same here. I want nice production deffno not "easy race to end-game grind treadmill". + no items shops at all.
Offering even more than standard rate. I could offer up to 22$ / mth , but there is no takers on market :(
Reply

Posted: Sep 11th 2011 2:33PM Budukahn said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Eric Francis

You've got nearly a decade on me in age but I feel the same way. The "magic" of joining a virtual world is gone and game after game seems to be nothing more than a list of tick box features with a cash shop operation on the side.

Sometimes, I think it's time to discover a new hobby.
Reply

Posted: Sep 10th 2011 3:27PM Vundal said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I have spent , more then likely, 100 or more dollars on League of Legends. I have had the game since beta...so its not too much in retrospect. but its always awesome to have all the champions available. with how much i play i usually spend 10 a month. thank god for the IP system in LoL

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW