Free to Play question

[Sangius]

those who have the willingness to put forth the effort should be capable of everything that people with money can do.

/sign on that.

[Suigi]

That's how I'd like to see it done as well. Whether that's a feasible approach to successfully finance a F2P game, I really can't say

[primetide]

Well,
from a developers point the questions is easily answered: We need to make enough money to sustain oursleves and a team creating new content. And pay back whatever investor we may find.
How we do that I really have no particualr prefernce for, so we are going with: What works best for the target group.
Many here and in other discussion have expressed their feelings toward "item selling". In my mind there are a few simple roads to go:
- pay to play - so subscriptioon or download. This reduces the number of initial plasers by something like 70% to 80% and make sit very hard to get anyone outside the core group of players. It could be an option for a seperate server perhaps, though-
- freemium - play until you run into a block. This may be contentwise (cannot get to Berlin unless you pay to unlock) or as in WoT with regards to functionality (limited team size, limited tanks types etc.)
- virtual items- this can be anything from only vanity items to power selling.

The latter is the one you can have the most widespread of consequences from. If you only sell time vs money (so you sell stuff anyone can get, but you need to grind for or you sell accelerators like Karma Bonus or Qucik Heal etc.) I still believe it is the fairest model and it does fit wel with the Shadowrun paradigm.

Let me say one thing- we really wouldn't want to alienate our potential fan base - but the bottom line needs to work as well. So any middle ground we can find, will be where we want to stay

[Dimetime]

If the decision is made to go adopt the latter I hope it is done including it as an option amongst the others and that they are separated servers. The idea of competing against others who can just spend real cash to go from "power" below or ahead of me in just a few minutes is not very appealing. I'd like to have the option of not being in that environment.

[Decivre]

If the decision is made to go adopt the latter I hope it is done including it as an option amongst the others and that they are separated servers. The idea of competing against others who can just spend real cash to go from "power" below or ahead of me in just a few minutes is not very appealing. I'd like to have the option of not being in that environment.

I think it should be noted that Shadowrun isn't really a competitive game. At best, I'd be fine if the advantages that one could pay for don't benefit you in a PvP environment. I have no problem with some guy buying the Golden Gun for his character, so long as he can't use it against mine.

[primetide]

if we have several payment models we have several servers.
PvP should always be voluntary and we could easily offer "No premium item" PvP matches, so the pumped up guys can dish it out in their own arena

[Dimetime]

I hope that a subscription based choice is in play then. I don't believe that real world financial luck or means should have a direct effect on fictional world success or prowess. That certainly takes away a thick layer of "fun" in my view.

Time spent in the world doing missions, building connections and overall contributing to the world are what I think should determine station and stature in game and would hope to see a server choice where time spent in game was the factor.

[Decivre]

Since this game runs heavily on instancing, I don't think having separated servers is a necessity. All server clusters could be linked so that all characters share a single world, with separate servers being used to offload the instanced missions and events, where it isn't necessary for them to interlink. In this way, you probably won't need servers like in other games... just one unified world.

I'm fine with a subscription-based model, but only if it gives subscribers an improved experience while not hobbling or eliminating free players. Freemium games bother me (it's not a free account, it's a demo), and subscription-only games sum to ransomware. This is the primary reason I spend my money playing Billy vs SNAKEMAN... I know that my character won't disappear if I stop paying to play, but paying has enough incentive to make it worth my cash.

As for me, I'm not bothered by premium items that can be purchased to give your character a short term edge with money as opposed to time. As long as money <= time, it won't phase me in the least.

[Tashiro]

Many here and in other discussion have expressed their feelings toward "item selling". In my mind there are a few simple roads to go:
- pay to play - so subscriptioon or download. This reduces the number of initial plasers by something like 70% to 80% and make sit very hard to get anyone outside the core group of players. It could be an option for a seperate server perhaps, though-
- freemium - play until you run into a block. This may be contentwise (cannot get to Berlin unless you pay to unlock) or as in WoT with regards to functionality (limited team size, limited tanks types etc.)
- virtual items- this can be anything from only vanity items to power selling.

The latter is the one you can have the most widespread of consequences from. If you only sell time vs money (so you sell stuff anyone can get, but you need to grind for or you sell accelerators like Karma Bonus or Qucik Heal etc.) I still believe it is the fairest model and it does fit wel with the Shadowrun paradigm.

Let me say one thing- we really wouldn't want to alienate our potential fan base - but the bottom line needs to work as well. So any middle ground we can find, will be where we want to stay

You could go the Guild Wars model:  Buy to Play.  People pay an initial up-front cost to get the game, but playing it is free.  Anything you'd pay real-world money for is cosmetic only, and doesn't have in-game mechanical benefits.  That way, nobody feels forced to pay for something just to compete, but can get cosmetic outfits or such which make them look snazzy and can be shown off without having an edge in play.

If every single person who plays the game is shelling out $30 for the game itself, just to play, that's probably better than having $30 of goods in the game-store that may or may not be purchased by each player.  And if someone buys the game, plays for a few months, then sets it aside, you've already got the $30, and they might come back and play more since they don't feel forced to have to grind all the time to get their money's worth (I'm looking at you, WoW).

Keeping the store limited to cosmetics helps to prevent hard feelings.  Things like minipets (drones, paracritters, or whatever, but with no game-based benefit), outfits in different themes and styles, exclusive to the store itself, tattoos, etc, could all be available in the store only for a reasonable price, and you could even release holiday-themed outfits on top of that.  It means not needing to put a mechanical benefit into it, and comparing it to other things for balance or what have you.  People like well-made cosmetic items, so if you have someone skilled at laying out costumes and such for the game, it shouldn't hurt to sell them.

My requirements for ever joining an MMO are 1) if I have to pay to use the game, and 2) if people get an actual edge from buying things in the game store.  GW is my #1 MMO because beyond just buying the game, there's never a need to drop another cent into it.  However, each time a new costume set comes out, I'm willing to shell the $5 to $10 to pick them up, because I like the costuming, and I know I'm supporting the company without needing to feel obligated to spend anything.  It's a pretty nice balance.

[Tashiro]

if we have several payment models we have several servers.
PvP should always be voluntary and we could easily offer "No premium item" PvP matches, so the pumped up guys can dish it out in their own arena

Bingo.  I really, really dislike PvP.  I'd rather be allowed to avoid it at all costs.  On the other hand, people who enjoy PvP should be given the option.  That would probably mean two servers (ala DCUO).

[primetide]

pay to play or even pay to start kills the vast majority of potential users from the get go. It does put the remaining people on equal footing, but it isn't really a good model if you are looking for a good number of players unless you have tons of marketing pushing people into buying the game.
F2P done well is still the best option in my mind - how to do it well is an entirely different kettle of mutated three eyed fish

[Tashiro]

pay to play or even pay to start kills the vast majority of potential users from the get go. It does put the remaining people on equal footing, but it isn't really a good model if you are looking for a good number of players unless you have tons of marketing pushing people into buying the game.
F2P done well is still the best option in my mind - how to do it well is an entirely different kettle of mutated three eyed fish

Guild Wars 1 didn't have much marketing, but has sold well enough that they did very well for themselves.  The thing is, B2P means that the price you set up is a guarantee for each person coming in, where with F2P, you're not guaranteed that each person would spend that much in the store, but you still have to spend resources supporting the player.  If you're selling a $30 game box for people to get in, that's not too bad - can you guarantee everyone on a F2P game is willing to spend $30 in the store, though -- without forcing them to feel like they have to?

[Decivre]

Guild Wars 1 didn't have much marketing, but has sold well enough that they did very well for themselves.  The thing is, B2P means that the price you set up is a guarantee for each person coming in, where with F2P, you're not guaranteed that each person would spend that much in the store, but you still have to spend resources supporting the player.  If you're selling a $30 game box for people to get in, that's not too bad - can you guarantee everyone on a F2P game is willing to spend $30 in the store, though -- without forcing them to feel like they have to?

You forget that Guild Wars 1 took 5 years to complete and had the financial backing of NCsoft. Shadowrun is likely to have around a single year's worth of development time, and has no significant financial backing yet... it's even a browser game. You'd be hard-pressed to market it as a game that can be sold for $30 upfront when players will have high-end options like GW2 at the same price-point.

Trying to compete on the same terms with such games would be financial suicide.

[Tashiro]

You forget that Guild Wars 1 took 5 years to complete and had the financial backing of NCsoft. Shadowrun is likely to have around a single year's worth of development time, and has no significant financial backing yet... it's even a browser game. You'd be hard-pressed to market it as a game that can be sold for $30 upfront when players will have high-end options like GW2 at the same price-point.

Trying to compete on the same terms with such games would be financial suicide.

Ah, I didn't know that Shadowrun is a browser game.  That makes things significantly different - I thought it was closer to an actual MMO.  Hmm.  Yes, I could see $30 being a bit much for a browser game.  Well, the alternative could be - while setting it F2P, you can set a one-time fee for certain perks.  Allowing the full campaign and setting on the onset, but specific ... actually, thinking about this.

Level 1 (Free) - basic cyberware, bioware, spells, complex forms, etc.
Level 2 (One-Time-Fee of X) - Tailored Bioware, Betaware, Initiation, Submerging, Sub-Species (Night Elf, Dryad, Giant, Oni, Etc)
Level 3 (One-Time-Fee of Y) - Non-Metahuman Races (Shapeshifter, Pixie, Centaur, Etc)

Just a throw out, obviously.  But something along those lines.

[ghostmode]

I wonder...

why not have the Free users get whats in SR4: core rule book(plus or minus a few things) and then pay for suppliments(not unlike buying Arsenal or Wired) to expand the game a little. This shouldn't give too much of an edge to people who pay for these expansions since they'd still have to get the Nuyen or Karma to use them like everyone else. And I bet my left that even the most casual player would shell 5 dollars to unlock "Arsenal" just to have some sweet new weapons and armor options.

and if it were to be allowed to have players pay for money or karma(which I am kind of against), just don't mix the Pay to be a badass players with the ones doing work. Two world modes or something, one where you know people earned the stuff they have with SR blood and sweat, and one where everyone payed to be awesome out the gate where they can all run around and troll each other. lol