I'll be honest and say that I and quite a few of my friends would rather pay a monthly price rather than have to deal with the micro transactions. It screwed up KotoR, EQ2 and a pleather of other games that we quit because of this.

If you go to a monthly charge keep it that way and don't change it later on. STO did this after many paid for a lifetime sub. The majority of them quit the game shortly after it went F2P. Fallen Earth is another example. After it went to F2P it's population dropped drastically.

If you were to charge a monthly stipend I would be happy to pay if the game is as good as it looks. But if you were to "waffle" later on, as many games have, I would toss you to the side as I have many other games.

 

If it meant tons of content sign me up!

 

The problem isn't Sub based or F2P with monitization.

The problem is starting as one and then switching later on.

If a game starts as sub based, it needs to grab a community damn quick, and it needs to be able to hold onto that community... if at any point the game then goes F2P, people will hold them to the same standards as the gave when sub based, which just isn't possible with monitization.

I would say that any game coming out now that is sub based is destined to fail. Tabula Rasa, Warhammer online, Age of conan, ESO, Wildstar, and the plethora of other sub based games are either 1. already f2p 2. Going to go f2p in the future or 3. dead games. World of warcraft peaked at 12 million subscribers and even that is now at 6.8 million... People don't want to pay a monthly sub fee when there are so many free to play games on the market already.

Not only are there plenty of f2p games out there, there are also plenty of pay to own games (Guildwars 2 is a prime example here) where you buy your product and then play for free, a lot of these are based on the model of you buy it and can play whenever you like, but large content DLCs will be periodically released which you must purchase to be able to gain access to said content.

My personal preference is the Pay to Own model, it reduces a lot of the risks of F2P, It does have "some" monitization but is less reliant on it that F2P, and it means that I don't have to pay x amount per month to play a game I already own.

 

I would mind. I am not paying 120$ a year to play a ****ing video game. Excuse my French. I am already paying for dcuo and that is hard enough. Better yet, I am paying for an add on to dcuo. It isn't even the game. Oh, and dcuo is a mmo.

 

Here's my thing:
This game sounds amazing and I want to play, but there's no way I could afford a monthly fee.
Then there are systems like you have on SWTOR, better but... Still have complaints. It's free to play, but if you pay for a subscription you get perks. If you stop paying for the subscription you are moved to "Prefered" and receive only some of the perks. My only complaint here is that it feels a little "Pay to Win". Not extreme, but you definitely feel the difference.
However, and I feel like I should be putting my foot in my mouth, money has to be made to keep adding features and keep the servers working so finding a way to make money with an in game market/credit system does make sense. However, you go selling a GAU-19 and 10k round chains for it or some insane stuff like that and I think you will have a rebellion amongst the cheap feks like me. Not that we will last long in an argument with the GAU...

 

I would gladly pay 10 bucks a month, F2P allows too much players with a bad attitude in the game.

 

If the game is worth paying for (updates, gameplay, community wise,..) I would gladly pay up to 10 bucks a months or so to play the game.
It will 'most' of the hackers away and I think only serious people will play the game.

 

This is the best argument for me. I won't mind paying around 10 bucks a month if it means keeping the "uncivilised" crowd out, more content, and better customer service. And fyi, 1USD where I live is enough for one full meal + drinks, so I think that's saying a lot.

Not to sound like a spoiled aristocrat or elitist here, but I'd spend more money into a game that has a conducive and mature community any day in the blink of an eye instead of playing for free surrounded with kids and kids-at-heart. I'm sure I'm not alone when I say that all of us who have already spent most of the day worrying about work, family, and other real-life stresses would want our gaming time to be enjoyable rather than irritating.

TL;DR No, I won't mind paying a subscription fee at all.

 

Yeah. I rather pay 10 bucks a month for high quality content, support, patches etc then F2P. But we won't get this, SOE is a F2P company. Luckily SOE is one of the good ones, I don't know if you heard of Gamersfirst but they ask 50 euros for a weapon (amongst other things) lol.

 

Dang, man. I don't know, and I don't wanna know, a game publisher who does that. lol

 

There are loads of them.

Check it: http://www.gamersfirst.com/marketplace/ingame/index.php?gameID=20

500g1c = 5 bucks I believe.

So if you go to the weapons tab you can buy weapons but only for 30 days which is 5/10 bucks depending. Or if you want it permanent you pay 25-50 depending on the popularity of the weapon.

 

Nope. Just...nope.

I mean I'd rather spend the money on actual Steam games, or if I'm really into that particular game, into developing my guild/clan/whatever.

All in all, I'm glad H1Z1 will not be taking that road. People will love SOE for that.

 

I'd gladly pay a monthly fee, because I think it would have a positive long-term effect on the game. It ensures a relatively predictable cash flow which makes it easier to plan ahead, it reduces the amount of undesirable players (trolls, griefers, etc.) that often plague free-to-play games in particular, and it means SOE won't need to rely on alternative potentially immersion-breaking ways of financing further development (such as integrated options for micro-transactions in various in-game menus). In my experience, when subscription-based games change to a free-to-play model, quality always goes downhill.

 

Well, to be honest.. first, i tought NO.. but after i start thinking a little, i start realize that if there will be such a thing, it will be so good because first: there won't be microtransactions, second, there will only be mature players.. third, and i hope its true, you guys gonna have more high quality content than a f2p game...

So.. no, i wouldn't mind 10 dollars, that for europe would be 8 euros, 8 euros isnt that much..

 

I'm guessing you've never played World of Warcraft or the plethora of other pay to play MMOs out there... trust me when I say they are NOT all mature.

 

Well, i played only EVE, and to be honest, i didnt find so many kids playing, because its simple, not all parents are giving to litte badass kids that are ruining the game, money every month for games, lol, I for esample would not give to my son moneys for this, every month, i don't want it to sound too bad but .. he have to study and so on, not going to pay for him every month for games lol

 

Oh Eve is largely a mature playerbase, I'll give you that... but you should try World of Warcraft, Elder Scrolls Online or Wildstar before you think that a monthly sub fee will weed out the immature asshats... it really doesn't

 

I would pay a sub fee for the game. Having said that, I'm not too concerned about the microtransaction's. In the past few years there have been some games that I've been really excited for (APB anyone?) ruined by pay to win MT's. Whilst PlanetSide 2's microtransaction system isn't the greatest I don't think it can be considered pay to win, so I'm relatively confident that H1Z1 will handle it well.

 

Eve is mature because the game itself requires maturity to play well and understand, its the games that decide the audiance not really the wallets.