Announcements

Join the ongoing conversation on Discord: https://discord.gg/w6Tpkp2

Please read the current update for instructions on downloading the latest update. Players with Mac versions of the game will not be affected, but you will have a slightly longer wait for your version of the new maps. Please make a copy of your character folder before running the new update, just to make sure you don't lose any of your custom work.

It looks like we can give everyone a list of minimum specs for running City of Titans. Please keep in mind that this is 'for now' until we are able to add more graphics and other system refinements. Currently you will need :
Windows 10 or later required; no Intel integrated graphics like UHD, must have AMD or NVIDIA card or discrete chipset with 4Gb or more of VRAM
At least 16GB of main DRAM.
These stats may change as we continue to test.

To purchase your copy of the City of Titans Launcher, visit our store at https://store.missingworldsmedia.com/ A purchase of $50 or more will give you a link to download the Launcher for Windows or Mac based machines.

subscriber versus non-subscriber level of access

4 posts / 0 new
Last post
Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 months 1 week ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
subscriber versus non-subscriber level of access

In other threads it has been discussed that the hybrid model that CoX had in year 8 of its existence was not unlike many other freemium models in that you had non-subscribers complaining that the game was constantly throwing roadblocks at them to get them to pay for stuff. I wanted to post my ideas about which specific parts of the game would be annoying to deny to non-sub players versus which parts are probably best reserved for the subscriber. This is all my take, your mileage may vary:

1. I think the more complicated sub-systems in the game like SG base design and Mission Architect were time-intensive enough that you could argue that the subscribers ought to have exclusive access to things like that. These are not common, every-day things that every hero and villain used, they were things you had to learn the various controls of and that took an investment of time that I think a subscriber would make but the non-sub probably usually doesn't. I don't think denying access to these things would annoy the casual non-sub gamer to the point of rejecting the game. There might be dedicated player who simply don't want to pay a monthly sub that want to do these things, but I think at that point it's an understandable place to draw a line in the sand and say "nope, you gotta pay for that"

2. A little less complicated to learn were the crafting system and auction house screen. I can see everyone wanting to be able to make IOs out of the stuff they accumulate, buy/sell them etc. This is a place where I think SOME access should be allowed but more/better access could be offered to the subscriber in the form of more inventory space, more buy/sell slots on the market, etc. I don't think this difference would, all by itself, be enough to make anyone pay a sub for $15 a month, but it would give the sub player basically unlimited buy/sell/craft abilities while the non-sub has the ability to do that stuff, just not the ability to try to get rich by playing the market 24/7 and maybe it costs the non-sub more Influence to craft the things they craft than the sub. I'm toying with the idea of only letting the non-sub have ONE buy slot and ONE sell slot in the auction house, so as to force them to get their buying and selling done in a short time frame, whereas the subscriber can use multiple slots of both and play the long term price game better.

3. Chat channel access. This is a sticky wicket for me. I like the ability to communicate and I feel annoyed when people can't talk to me because they aren't subscribed. I would prefer to only limit non-subs in the sense that they can't post to very public channels to advertize things (to avoid spamming by non-sub people and bots) and maybe also don't let the non-sub have the ability to start a new channel, only let the sub player do that. I feel everyone ought to be able to send private texts to people one at a time. If there is the ability to send private tells to batches of people with one command, let the subs do that exclusively. The non-sub ought to be able to communicate with everyone on Team, local,and SG channels, but not advertize publicly on Broadcast or be able to make their own chat channels.

4. Character costume and power animation graphics. I could see making a limited version of the costume avatar builder for the non-sub and a better one for the subscriber. The non-sub might only get like 4 skin hues and 16-24 costume colors, a limited set of textures, etc. While the subscriber get's like WAY more skin hues and colors and textures. I can see making the "change your power animations" thing be subscriber only. I would envision that in such a way that the subscriber can make his fire blast power shoot out of his mouth or eyes but the non-sub has to settle for hands only. The sub can make the flames black and purple, the non-sub has to settle for the default red and yellow, etc. If your sub lapses, the settings you had are saved but the powers revert back to the "factory default" settings for as long as you're non-sub and when you re-up your subscription you get your cool looking version re-activated with it.

5. Zone access. I can see cutting off access to the SG base or personal lair of the non-sub for as long as they're not paying a sub, then allowing access to that stuff once they're paid up again. I would allow non-subs to enter the bases of subscribers though, and use the teleporters, etc. I'm not a fan of gating access to open-world areas like this though. Navigating the open world in general should not feel gimped to the non-sub, I feel. Just getting around town can be the MOST annoying thing if you're not allowed to do it as quickly as the subs can, and I see this as a major problem that I would want to avoid hitting the non-subs with.

6. Premium content. Like the Incarnate system CoX had, I can see offering some form of end-game content in the form of missions, arcs, task forces, trials, etc that only the subscriber has access to in general. I would allow the non-sub to access that in a limited fashion by charging them money on a pay-per-run basis for the trials, tfs, etc and maybe pay-once-to-unlock for soloable missions/arcs (like the Signature Story Arcs in CoX). This idea has it's own thread elsewhere and I'm only including it here for completeness. If you love or hate this item enough to respond about it, please see my other thread entitled "Pay to raid?" for more discussion of that.

In all cases I think it would be best to avoid putting something cool right in front of the non-subber and then stopping them from accessing it in the form of a "sorry, you have to pay a sub for that" message. It would be better to make it so that the subscription-only stuff is somewhat invisible to the non-subber in the first place. That is, they can see someone else's SG base and even access it while teamed with one of those people, but they can't make their own, and doing that would require going to the trouble of learning the controls and so forth anyway, which would be a tutorial you'd do in some location you can find as a sub but it's overt or advertized largely to the non-sub. Go to the City Planning office and talk to the NPC, etc. The non-sub wouldn't even know where that is or be able to open the door to the building. I think even the premium content can be obscured such that you wouldn't trip over it if it weren't available to you.

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

Sol
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 4 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 11/13/2014 - 09:43
I do believe that subs should

I do believe that subs should get more and better than nonsubs, while at the same time encouraging nonsubs to sub... and that line is a very tricky line to draw. Personally, I think matters of convenience is the best way to go about it. That said, if I may share my thoughts?

On this first one, I am in compete agreement. Barring nonsubs from things such as personal/SG housing, and User Generated Content or hiding it behind a paywall would be one encouraging factor to subscribe. These ar not necessary features, in my mind - I'd be more than happy to play the game, even if it didn't have them - so only giving subs these features and all the perks that come with, gets an okay from me.

I can understand this auction house one. More AH slots... Maybe even a special sub-only AH tab? (Though no idea how that would work) Maybe even a way to check on your bids and listings outside of the AH? Buyout option? This would be a good convenience for subs and enticement for nonsubs. Not sure about crafting, so I can't really give you heads or tails on that one. I would suggest that instead of more personal inventory space, give subs more bank space, instead.

I'm iffy on the chat channels, too. It would be much easier to put spammers and bots on the ignore list, and even then, buying the box seems to get you a limited-time sub? So the point would be moot on that, as they would be a sub and able to use all chat channels. I do agree that nonsubs shouldn't be able to create their own chat channels.

Iffy on the fourth one. Character customization - while definitely a good way to earn money - is probably better being left to in-game item malls where everyone has to pay. The base costumes, powersets, and animations are a huge thing and should be given to everyone. Otherwise, I think more flak than subs will come out of it.

I agree with you on zone access, for the most part. If it's open world, it's open world. And nonsubs should not normally be allowed access to bases and such, except for certain circumstances such as being in the same party as the sub to which it belongs/can be accessed by.

For this last one, I've already stated my opinion on it in your other forum and shall not be delving into it here.

So there's my two cents. Hopefully it's well-received!

~Sol

Gangrel
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 3 days ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/15/2013 - 15:14
Radiac wrote:
Radiac wrote:

1. I think the more complicated sub-systems in the game like SG base design and Mission Architect were time-intensive enough that you could argue that the subscribers ought to have exclusive access to things like that. These are not common, every-day things that every hero and villain used, they were things you had to learn the various controls of and that took an investment of time that I think a subscriber would make but the non-sub probably usually doesn't. I don't think denying access to these things would annoy the casual non-sub gamer to the point of rejecting the game. There might be dedicated player who simply don't want to pay a monthly sub that want to do these things, but I think at that point it's an understandable place to draw a line in the sand and say "nope, you gotta pay for that"

I can get behind the Mission Builder. That is easy enough, and it isn't too divisive. You could even sell the ability as a one time store purchase for the non sub people to still be able to do it (if they wanted).

Not so sure on the "base design" section though, especially if you are allowing non sub people to make SG's/Be an SG leader. If anything limit THESE options to "sub only" if you are planning to restrict base options. If you stop subbing though, then they would still be in that "position of power".

If the person stops playing (or doesn't log in for 30 days), then have an option where the Guild Officers can institute a "transfer of power" vote.

Quote:

2. A little less complicated to learn were the crafting system and auction house screen. I can see everyone wanting to be able to make IOs out of the stuff they accumulate, buy/sell them etc. This is a place where I think SOME access should be allowed but more/better access could be offered to the subscriber in the form of more inventory space, more buy/sell slots on the market, etc. I don't think this difference would, all by itself, be enough to make anyone pay a sub for $15 a month, but it would give the sub player basically unlimited buy/sell/craft abilities while the non-sub has the ability to do that stuff, just not the ability to try to get rich by playing the market 24/7 and maybe it costs the non-sub more Influence to craft the things they craft than the sub.

Quote:

So far so good

I'm toying with the idea of only letting the non-sub have ONE buy slot and ONE sell slot in the auction house, so as to force them to get their buying and selling done in a short time frame, whereas the subscriber can use multiple slots of both and play the long term price game better.

And then you basically shoot the idea in the foot. Limiting buy/sell slots to just ONE each, whilst better than 0 is not that much better. Especially if subbers get "unlimited" slots. Hell, in SWTOR (which uses the traditional AH style of bid/buyout) they limit the total number of "sell slots" to sub players as well (I believe its 25 in total), and give non Sub/premium players access to 5 "sell slots". There are no "buy slots" (well there is the bidding on items... but I believe that is a dying system... althouhg you can sometimes pick up some decent deals that way)

Quote:

3. Chat channel access. This is a sticky wicket for me. I like the ability to communicate and I feel annoyed when people can't talk to me because they aren't subscribed. I would prefer to only limit non-subs in the sense that they can't post to very public channels to advertize things (to avoid spamming by non-sub people and bots) and maybe also don't let the non-sub have the ability to start a new channel, only let the sub player do that. I feel everyone ought to be able to send private texts to people one at a time. If there is the ability to send private tells to batches of people with one command, let the subs do that exclusively. The non-sub ought to be able to communicate with everyone on Team, local,and SG channels, but not advertize publicly on Broadcast or be able to make their own chat channels.

When you say "very public" channels, are you referring to purely "zone wide"/"game wide" channels or "everything that can be construed as possibly annoying other players". And how would you define "advertising"? Because if it is to avoid "annoying other players with ad's", can it also be used to stop annoying idiots from just talking in channel if I don't like their point of view?

Better to change the tune and get some chat filtering in place before you start limiting it this badly.

Especially if I have to already pay a fee to get into the game.

Quote:

4. Character costume and power animation graphics. I could see making a limited version of the costume avatar builder for the non-sub and a better one for the subscriber. The non-sub might only get like 4 skin hues and 16-24 costume colors, a limited set of textures, etc. While the subscriber get's like WAY more skin hues and colors and textures. I can see making the "change your power animations" thing be subscriber only. I would envision that in such a way that the subscriber can make his fire blast power shoot out of his mouth or eyes but the non-sub has to settle for hands only. The sub can make the flames black and purple, the non-sub has to settle for the default red and yellow, etc. If your sub lapses, the settings you had are saved but the powers revert back to the "factory default" settings for as long as you're non-sub and when you re-up your subscription you get your cool looking version re-activated with it.

I wouldn't remove the customisation on loss of sub fee. I would have it set up so that if I changed away from that piece (or colour) when remodelling my character's outfit (and confirm the change), then I cannot change back to the costume piece.

Don't remove the piece because my sub fee stopped.

Quote:

5. Zone access. I can see cutting off access to the SG base or personal lair of the non-sub for as long as they're not paying a sub, then allowing access to that stuff once they're paid up again. I would allow non-subs to enter the bases of subscribers though, and use the teleporters, etc.

I can see some bases temporarily being locked out from their paying player base due to the SG leader "payment problems". Which can and will happen.

See other problems if the SG leader leaves the game for any reason

Quote:

I'm not a fan of gating access to open-world areas like this though. Navigating the open world in general should not feel gimped to the non-sub, I feel. Just getting around town can be the MOST annoying thing if you're not allowed to do it as quickly as the subs can, and I see this as a major problem that I would want to avoid hitting the non-subs with.

I can see some area's being limited to only sub fee players. Hell, I can see content being done this way as well. But I think that this would be content that is "cash shop only" in terms of limitation.

Queue discussions on that topic in a separate thread

Quote:

6. Premium content. Like the Incarnate system CoX had, I can see offering some form of end-game content in the form of missions, arcs, task forces, trials, etc that only the subscriber has access to in general. I would allow the non-sub to access that in a limited fashion by charging them money on a pay-per-run basis for the trials, tfs, etc and maybe pay-once-to-unlock for soloable missions/arcs (like the Signature Story Arcs in CoX). This idea has it's own thread elsewhere and I'm only including it here for completeness. If you love or hate this item enough to respond about it, please see my other thread entitled "Pay to raid?" for more discussion of that.

In all cases I think it would be best to avoid putting something cool right in front of the non-subber and then stopping them from accessing it in the form of a "sorry, you have to pay a sub for that" message. It would be better to make it so that the subscription-only stuff is somewhat invisible to the non-subber in the first place. That is, they can see someone else's SG base and even access it while teamed with one of those people, but they can't make their own, and doing that would require going to the trouble of learning the controls and so forth anyway, which would be a tutorial you'd do in some location you can find as a sub but it's overt or advertized largely to the non-sub. Go to the City Planning office and talk to the NPC, etc. The non-sub wouldn't even know where that is or be able to open the door to the building. I think even the premium content can be obscured such that you wouldn't trip over it if it weren't available to you.

The thing is, some of these limitation would be suitable if there was no up front fee for the game.

However there is a box price associated with the game, so quite a few of these you need to think differently on and not apply the standard "F2P limitations on".

Instead of looking at CO/Neverwinter/LOTRO/DDO limitations (because they are F2P), look at what Guild wars 2/The Secret World do instead, because those 2 games are B2P (TSW has an optional sub fee as well)

Quote:

1) I reject your reality.... and substitute my own
2) Not to be used when upset... will void warranty
3) Stoke me a clipper i will be back for dinner
4) I have seen more intelligence from an NPC AI in TR beta, than from most MMO players.

Lutan
Lutan's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 2 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 02/02/2014 - 15:08
I concur with Gangrel on this

I concur with Gangrel on this topic. Even though I will very likely take the full subscription package anyway, the box prise should at least cover acess to all of the core game contend.

As for the free month, I do not know how that would fit into the microsubscription model Segev wants to implement. Maybe you would just get enough stars with your game purchase to afford one month of the full package? If so, you could leave the free month out of consideration, because not every player would use those stars to subscribe. Especially those who are yet uncertain if they really want to subscribe would first take a look at the free content and base their decision on what that experience will be like. But then again, we can not know for sure.

To 1.: The issue with supergroup bases is difficult. It is after all a group of players, not one player alone. My solution for that would be that every member can donate ingame currency and stars as much as they want to the group. And the leader can then use those ressources to rent space for their base. The smallest plots would be free, the moderately sized would cost ingame currency and the bigger ones stars. The same thing could apply to personal bases.

To 2: The access to crafting and auction house should not feel crippled, I would say full access to crafting, fife slots for buying and selling each.

To 3: I say let them have full chat access.

To 4: I agree, the look and style of the character is where the money is. If everything gets handled with microsubscriptions and not with one time purchases, that could get difficult... But I think most of the costumes, colors and animations should be available for everyone.

To 5 and 6: I fully agree with you there, Radiac