The last topic on fees was in Aug 09, with different active members so I figure it'd be a good discussion with the new active crew.
Pros and Cons.
-Monthly Fee, or Subscription.
Pros-
-More support
-Likely better serve upkeep
-More cowbell, I mean ban-hammer policing.. (duping, lvling, an so on)
-More DLC
Cons-
-Less people buying the game
-Less green in your wallet
No Fees.
Pros-
-More people buying the game
-More green in your wallet
Cons-
-Likely less serve support
-Less thorough mod/hack policing.
-Less DLC
At first thought a while back I was completely opposed to the idea. Than last night I was reading how fees can greatly improve re-playability and rust storms (anti moding/hacking) in games. After figuring Blizzard would likely land the fee at $10-$15 a month, I compared that to things I spend money on each month. I came up with this list of things I could cut back on.
-Food- $50-$150 (Eating out, helping my parents with groceries)
-Alcohol- $5-$50 (I'm 21 HA-HA!!!)
-Friends- $0-$20 (Though they eventually pay me pack)
-Haircut- $10-$20
-Gas- $50-A LOT
If I cut back on just one of those things, I would pay the fee without any problems, or added spending. The question at that point comes down to, how much will my gaming experience improve if I pay this fee, that's the real question. Anyone can pay $10 a month, it's the question of value for the money.
So what are your thoughts on a fee as Diablo 3 looms ever closer?
“We act as though comfort and luxury were the chief requirements of life, when all that we need to make us happy is something to be enthusiastic about.” - Albert Einstein
As long as theres a large playerbase we'll get plenty of patches/support, and content every now and then through expansions. Diablo, to me (and probably most people here,) is a game thats fun enough to play through on multiple characters so I'd rather do that then have to pay for new content in order to stay interested. And if an expansion comes out every year or 1.5 years, thats fine with me. I'd much rather than compared to a monthly fee. Not to mention that it would probably end up hurting Blizzard by making it so that some people have to decide whether to pay the monthly fee for Diablo or the fee for WoW. In the end, its not an MMORPG, so its not like they could just keep adding content that adds on to this whole world. They'd have to add on Acts or something of the sort, which is a considerable difference. And judging by the support SC2 has gotten since its release I don't think we have to worry about things like people getting away with hacking just because we don't pay them money to constantly police the game.
I think this topic has been very thoroughly discussed in the past.
The thing is that a game doesn't necessarily need a monthly fee to finance itself. Even a MMO. Guild Wars has been a great example of how expansions can keep the money flowing to further develop and support the game.
Anyway, that all seems kinda pointless if we think that Blizzard already said that while the financing of the game isn't set in stone, they're pretty far from a pay to play model. So far what we knows is that it's going to be like StarCraft II. Meaning that each market will have a different way of financing. While North America will be the price to buy the box (same as Europe), in Russia it's probably going to be a small fee to buy the game and small monthly fees to play online and so on.
Either way i'd play the game. I don't mind a constant flow of content, like WoW, but i can also live without it as i did with Diablo II.
I will not buy a game and then continue to pay for a game that I bought, that just sounds like extortion to me. If the game was free and all you had to do was pay a monthly subscription than I might consider it. The monthly subscription would have to be $5 or less.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
On Strike and supporting Fallout 4 Mod Makers
Some fallout 4 mod makers have had their mods stolen and uploaded and downloaded on Bethesda's site for the Xbox One.
I support a subscription feature of this game because I believe the model worked out very well for WoW. I appreciate the fact that content, updates, services, etc. all are updated regularly and have kept that game going for a long time. I imagine what this would have done for Diablo 2....
I support a subscription feature of this game because I believe the model worked out very well for WoW. I appreciate the fact that content, updates, services, etc. all are updated regularly and have kept that game going for a long time. I imagine what this would have done for Diablo 2....
Diablo 2 is still going strong compared to other games that are at least 10 years old.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
On Strike and supporting Fallout 4 Mod Makers
Some fallout 4 mod makers have had their mods stolen and uploaded and downloaded on Bethesda's site for the Xbox One.
I support a subscription feature of this game because I believe the model worked out very well for WoW. I appreciate the fact that content, updates, services, etc. all are updated regularly and have kept that game going for a long time. I imagine what this would have done for Diablo 2....
Diablo 2 is still going strong compared to other games that are at least 10 years old.
Very true, and I appreciate that fact, but for me the game got redudant around the 5-6 years of playing it mark. I would have loved more expansions and content. I like how you can see the graphical differences in WoW from the old worlds to the new worlds. So much improved over that time span and the game grew along with it. I guess the biggest thing for me is that I like to stick to a good game for a long time and I want it to keep me engaged and exciting. I feel WoW being on a subscription model kept it fresh and kept it in Blizzards warm dev arms
I also like the fact that the community is policed and not left to wild wild west style gaming. Although that is fun in it's own right, duping and such ruined the game in many ways.
I like playing D2 mods since for the most part they added a lot to the game.
I know that I would get bored with WoW quite quickly and I do not like playing online that much to begin with. The thing that I do not like is that they try to please the larger fan base and quite often I do not fit into that base since I want a game that is a lot more difficult.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
On Strike and supporting Fallout 4 Mod Makers
Some fallout 4 mod makers have had their mods stolen and uploaded and downloaded on Bethesda's site for the Xbox One.
I like playing D2 mods since for the most part they added a lot to the game.
I know that I would get bored with WoW quite quickly and I do not like playing online that much to begin with. The thing that I do not like is that they try to please the larger fan base and quite often I do not fit into that base since I want a game that is a lot more difficult.
Agreed, I rarly fit into that bell curve myself. Although I find myself more casual as I get older, and not finding as much time for gaming as I use to.
A game that must be constantly given new content to stay entertaining is not a game I would play. Building the game on replayability is much better and it is what Diablo 3 is based on. If a game is replayable then it doesn't need content patches. Expansions should be more than enough to refresh the game.
Players host the games on the SC2 Battle.net model so there are no massive server costs like for MMORPGs.
I have never needed support, I use Google for that, so I don't see why I would want to pay for support.
Expansions, yes, Diablo 2 had one in 10 years and WoW has had many. But you're right, there is not a massive server cost.
Very true, and I appreciate that fact, but for me the game got redudant around the 5-6 years of playing it mark.
Thats all? 6 years for a game?
Geeze, thats so -low-. Of course, we want subscription fee and a total of 500$ spent on a single game over a decade just to make it last longer.
We don't have enough developers ripping us off, now there's people demanding it even more.
Yes, 5-6 years on one game with the same content is enough for me. No one was "demanding" anything of the such, no need to exaggerate my point to make your own. I would just prefer paying a small fee for new things to keep it interesting.
Simply put, I will not pay for a game I already own. I put a lot of effort into learning if a game is going to be worthwhile for me to purchase before I pick it up and if I think I will not enjoy it for at least several years then 50-60 bucks is too much for me to spend on it anyway. If I have to pay an additional $60 to play each year, That is way too much of an investment for me. I can't justify it no matter how good the game is.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If that made sense to you, Bravo! I think I even confused myself...
Well he was mainly pointing out that if people end up playing D3 for as long as they've played D2, it would cost $900 to play for 5 years with a $15 subscription. As opposed to $120 for 3 xpacs (if they cost $40, or $150 if they cost $50 for some reason,) the last of which would probably come 4-5 years after the original game. Not to mention that a subscription would probably also involve expansions. The extra game content might work for you, and be worth it, but I'd much rather a game like D2 where the replayability comes from a core game thats exciting enough to play multiple times for loot, along with interesting characters so its fun to play it all the way through with them.
Just getting one of each character to the max level will be 5 playthroughs through Normal, Nightmare and Hell. If an expansion came out every 1.5 years, that means that you'll be playing through with another 2 classes (if we're going by LoD standards) along with the extra act. Thats already a lot of hours by itself, and we're not even considering plans for PvP and the endgame. I personally prefer that system compared to paying $15 a month, especially when I'm leveling up because that just feels like you're playing a part of the game you should have just gotten for the original price.
The vast majority of games don't have a monthly fee. Why should D3 have one just because its associated with the company that makes WoW? Just because its an RPG doesn't mean it automatically works well with the pay to play model, which is why the vast majority of games that don't have a huge world in the first place (which D3 doesn't, despite the map of Sanctuary on the main site) don't go with subscriptions.
I dont think paying a monthly fee will somehow help server upkeep. They have been working on this game for so long that im sure they want it to be perfect.
I don't think a monthly fee would be right for Diablo 3. However that doesn't mean Blizzard has to go without additional income besides the game purchase price. I'm thinking micro transactions (a special dye, a non combat pet, character name change, etc). This should bring in more than enough money to give proper maintenance, without affecting those that do not wish to spend a penny beyond the game box.
I will not buy a game and then continue to pay for a game that I bought, that just sounds like extortion to me. If the game was free and all you had to do was pay a monthly subscription than I might consider it. The monthly subscription would have to be $5 or less.
Do you pay for T.V. each month? Internet? Did you pay a "connection fee?" If you answered "no" to any of those questions, you're in the large minority.
If Blizzard is providing an ongoing service, to the extent that WoW does (or better), then you're not "continu[ing] to pay for a game that I bought," you're paying for all of the services that are being rendered you. I would MUCH rather pay a monthly fee and have better tech support, content updates; higher performing, updated, and maintained servers, stronger ad campaign to bring more fresh gamers into the D3 universe, etc etc etc etc.
Look, I'm sensitive to people who are broke, I was once too. But not since I was 10 years old was I incapable of coming up with 15 dollars a month. I'd just hate to see the maximum potential of this game diminished by catering to people who can't come up with 15 bucks.
Those who say D2 has good replay value are almost right. It HAD good replay value, back around 2002. Gaming has changed, consumers expect more, and I would rather pay a monthly fee than watch D3 slowly die a boring death because there wasn't a resource commitment to keep the game fresh.
My 2c. I know many disagree, and I'm interested in discourse on this matter.I honestly don't mean to sound condescending, even though it's difficult not to be interpreted that way. Just providing a different point of view.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions."
-Thomas Jefferson
I'm sorry, but the backward reasoning you used to come up with the pros sounds ridiculous to me. Paying a monthly fee is absolutely no guarantee for any of that! Take a look at a easy example, World of Warcraft. The only thing you could argue came out of monthly fees is more content (DLCs), and beside that, a lot of the pro benefits turned out to be cons! WoW is constantly being tinkered with by Blizzard and nothing is ever set in stone, serving to piss off a large part of the players. One day your class is "over-powered", the next day it's useless. I'd rather have one concrete version of the game which is close to perfect, rather than constantly changing "balancing" crap.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Pros and Cons.
-Monthly Fee, or Subscription.
Pros-
-More support
-Likely better serve upkeep
-More cowbell, I mean ban-hammer policing.. (duping, lvling, an so on)
-More DLC
Cons-
-Less people buying the game
-Less green in your wallet
No Fees.
Pros-
-More people buying the game
-More green in your wallet
Cons-
-Likely less serve support
-Less thorough mod/hack policing.
-Less DLC
At first thought a while back I was completely opposed to the idea. Than last night I was reading how fees can greatly improve re-playability and rust storms (anti moding/hacking) in games. After figuring Blizzard would likely land the fee at $10-$15 a month, I compared that to things I spend money on each month. I came up with this list of things I could cut back on.
-Food- $50-$150 (Eating out, helping my parents with groceries)
-Alcohol- $5-$50 (I'm 21 HA-HA!!!)
-Friends- $0-$20 (Though they eventually pay me pack)
-Haircut- $10-$20
-Gas- $50-A LOT
If I cut back on just one of those things, I would pay the fee without any problems, or added spending. The question at that point comes down to, how much will my gaming experience improve if I pay this fee, that's the real question. Anyone can pay $10 a month, it's the question of value for the money.
So what are your thoughts on a fee as Diablo 3 looms ever closer?
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the news team.
DiabloFans: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Live Chat
The thing is that a game doesn't necessarily need a monthly fee to finance itself. Even a MMO. Guild Wars has been a great example of how expansions can keep the money flowing to further develop and support the game.
Anyway, that all seems kinda pointless if we think that Blizzard already said that while the financing of the game isn't set in stone, they're pretty far from a pay to play model. So far what we knows is that it's going to be like StarCraft II. Meaning that each market will have a different way of financing. While North America will be the price to buy the box (same as Europe), in Russia it's probably going to be a small fee to buy the game and small monthly fees to play online and so on.
Either way i'd play the game. I don't mind a constant flow of content, like WoW, but i can also live without it as i did with Diablo II.
Diablo 2 is still going strong compared to other games that are at least 10 years old.
Very true, and I appreciate that fact, but for me the game got redudant around the 5-6 years of playing it mark. I would have loved more expansions and content. I like how you can see the graphical differences in WoW from the old worlds to the new worlds. So much improved over that time span and the game grew along with it. I guess the biggest thing for me is that I like to stick to a good game for a long time and I want it to keep me engaged and exciting. I feel WoW being on a subscription model kept it fresh and kept it in Blizzards warm dev arms
I know that I would get bored with WoW quite quickly and I do not like playing online that much to begin with. The thing that I do not like is that they try to please the larger fan base and quite often I do not fit into that base since I want a game that is a lot more difficult.
Agreed, I rarly fit into that bell curve myself. Although I find myself more casual as I get older, and not finding as much time for gaming as I use to.
Expansions, yes, Diablo 2 had one in 10 years and WoW has had many. But you're right, there is not a massive server cost.
Geeze, thats so -low-. Of course, we want subscription fee and a total of 500$ spent on a single game over a decade just to make it last longer.
We don't have enough developers ripping us off, now there's people demanding it even more.
Yes, 5-6 years on one game with the same content is enough for me. No one was "demanding" anything of the such, no need to exaggerate my point to make your own. I would just prefer paying a small fee for new things to keep it interesting.
Just getting one of each character to the max level will be 5 playthroughs through Normal, Nightmare and Hell. If an expansion came out every 1.5 years, that means that you'll be playing through with another 2 classes (if we're going by LoD standards) along with the extra act. Thats already a lot of hours by itself, and we're not even considering plans for PvP and the endgame. I personally prefer that system compared to paying $15 a month, especially when I'm leveling up because that just feels like you're playing a part of the game you should have just gotten for the original price.
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the news team.
DiabloFans: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Live Chat
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the news team.
DiabloFans: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Live Chat
This isnt an mmo..
Do you pay for T.V. each month? Internet? Did you pay a "connection fee?" If you answered "no" to any of those questions, you're in the large minority.
If Blizzard is providing an ongoing service, to the extent that WoW does (or better), then you're not "continu[ing] to pay for a game that I bought," you're paying for all of the services that are being rendered you. I would MUCH rather pay a monthly fee and have better tech support, content updates; higher performing, updated, and maintained servers, stronger ad campaign to bring more fresh gamers into the D3 universe, etc etc etc etc.
Look, I'm sensitive to people who are broke, I was once too. But not since I was 10 years old was I incapable of coming up with 15 dollars a month. I'd just hate to see the maximum potential of this game diminished by catering to people who can't come up with 15 bucks.
Those who say D2 has good replay value are almost right. It HAD good replay value, back around 2002. Gaming has changed, consumers expect more, and I would rather pay a monthly fee than watch D3 slowly die a boring death because there wasn't a resource commitment to keep the game fresh.
My 2c. I know many disagree, and I'm interested in discourse on this matter.I honestly don't mean to sound condescending, even though it's difficult not to be interpreted that way. Just providing a different point of view.
-Thomas Jefferson