Having read Segev's stuff on the payment model here and at cohtitan, I am pretty comfortable waiting to see what they have as a more fleshed-out plan by alpha. Personally, I would like to see a sub option, even if it is just a convenient package of something equivalent in value to what you could buy ala carte from the store.

If they end up considering 'exclusive' perks of subscription, I'd prefer to see them be perk-like. It bugged me that CoH non-subs had some important basics gated (interfering with their ability to participate in teams and whatnot, or to pay rent on bases they had build over the years). Earlier, people had discussed the number of missions you could have in play at once. Something like that could be an example of a quality-of-life perk that wouldn't break the game... if non-subs had 3, for example and subs could carry eight or whatever.

For my own part, I expect to sub regardless... if I like the game I'll want to contribute to their bottom line in some ongoing way.

Felpyre wrote:

Wow, not used to my posts getting attention.
Gangrel: There definitely those days where "I'm just gonna play for an hour" doesn't quite work. however Players who run out of time because of that will either get a subscription or spend a little extra each month. Having it automatically go over to subscription really isn't fair to those who chose subscription. What about if someone gets a subscription for the month but only plays 1hr before their computer dies (or something else) and they don't get on for the rest of the month? Should they get a refund? As for the "block of hours" forcing them to play, maybe have extra time roll over as long as you buy more min. the next month. Ex: you buy 300 month A, but only used 200, then next month you buy 200, You'd have 300 again, but if its month C instead you would only have 200. Oh ya you said something about points, I was thinking it would just be a point/$ spent system with subscriptions getting a bonus because of the subscription

The design we have in mind is this:
A subscription is not for time, but for credit. In effect, you have a monthly stipend for the subscription allocated monthly. You cancel your sub, you still have the credits in your account.

Agreed.

Having these people play the game is a benefit in and of itself, whether or not they spend money in the store. I'd rather have these 'cheap skates' on my team, talking in chat, or even just see them doing their own thing than sit in a zone by myself thinking, "Whoa. Ghost town."

I think you'll find very few people who consider SWTOR's approach to F2P to be good or positive, and they have essentially taken the approach Radiac proposes.

I don't believe I ever did try CoH's F2P model. That may well explain why I did not.

Back on target. As explained by MWM so far, to my understanding, the situation with CoT is this:

City of Titans is a buy-to-play (B2P) game. If you are playing the game you have bought the game, thus you have as much right to play it as anyone else.
Subscribers obtain [i]additional[/i] benefits ("credit"), none of which entail additional or exclusive access to content.

To further torture the metaphor, nobody in CoT can be a second class citizen because they must be first class citizens to get in.

To expand upon my "second class citizen" comments, I offer the following (and this is probably an "agree to disagree" in the end, which I'm fine with).

1. I was giving with the original post asked for, which is my personal opinion. I personally intend to either play this game as a subscriber with the possibility of going on a break and not play it at all, then come back refreshed and play some more. I can't guarantee I'll always be on, and if I find I'm not logging in for weeks at a time, I may well decide to go dormant for a while and recharge a little. I think this happens to gamers in general, and certainly to me. I installed MechWarrior 4 on my old computer, beat it, and then uninstalled it again like 5 times. I've done the same with other games, like real time strategy games (Star Craft, etc). I can play and replay games over and over, but I do tend to take breaks from one and focus on another then waft back to the first one, etc. I drift in and out of Magic: the Gathering like that from time to time too. So since I only intend to play the game while subscribed or else not play it at all, I personally don't care how left-out the non-sub people feel, because I intend not to be one of them.

2. I totally understand that not everyone who would play this game can be relied upon to pay a sub. Kids, especially those old enough to play CoT but too young to have jobs being a big part of that, and I'm all for those people having enough fun to keep them interested. That said I still think that when you look at it, making the monthly sub the MOST economical option for the frugal player who wants the full featured game experience is the way to go.

3. CoH had multiple separate servers, and I remember on Triumph (the one and only server I ever played on) in year 8 it was a ghost town during the day pretty much everywhere and the PVP zones were usually empty all the time. But that was one of the problems of a "lots of servers, take your pick" system. CoT will be all one big happy single-server family with a lot more "Atlas Park 55, Atlas Park 56, ...etc" stuff going on. So for this reason the subscribers alone will most likely make the place feel full most of the time. Seriously, there only have to be about a minimum of 100 other people on to make the server you're on feel like it's a great big super hero party. On Triumph I used to look for teams just to see the full list, and sometimes it was only 20 people, but you have to believe there were like 20 people on a lot of the other servers at the same time. That's like 100-200 right there, and that was when CoH was "dead". So as far as the world feeling full, I don't think that's going to be the same problem that CoX was in the later years no matter what.

4. The non-sub player does pay for the download, that's a very good point. But that up-front price includes some amount of subscription time. In the old days, you used to buy a game, play it, beat it in like a month or three, then put it on the shelf. Companies made the game and sold it then that was it. With online gaming you have to have servers and support etc, and that costs the company money each and every month to provide for, and that money has to come from someplace. So let's assume the monthly sub is $15 and the "box" costs $50. Maybe you get 3 months "free" for the initial $50, if so that's the cost of 3 months plus like $5 more just for the game itself. If it's more like 6 months "free" for the $50 box price then those people have nothing to complain about when their account goes non-sub, because they got a really good deal. So the solution to the "but they're not free loaders, they paid for the game" lies in the exact details vis a vis how much sub time you get for your $50. And yes, you CAN keep playingt he game forever, but you lose some perks. It's the exact amount of and usefulness of those perks that's open for debate. I personally think it should be enough to make people either want to pay a sub, or else just leave the game, at least until they get the itch to come back and subscribe again for a while.

5. Every non-sub player puts a little more strain, overhead, and wear and tear on the company, and all of that costs money. You'll need more forum mods and helpdesk people and just more everything to support more players, and if the majority of those player aren't paying anything after the first few months but continue playing the game for like 2 years, that will become burdensome to the company in a big way. There will be less new content and stuff because they have to spend the money they ARE getting just maintaining the game they have, then the game just dies. I don't want that, and I think the non-sub peole who hang around for 2+ years after JUST paying the initial $50 are what killed it.

6. I keep coming back to the following problem: if all my sub buys is a bunch of unnecessary bell and whistles that I feel I don't need, then why subscribe? I mean for me, the answer is "to support the game I like playing so that it doesn't go out of business and I can keep playing it." but most people I know don't think like that. The average gamer I've met is trying to figure out ways to eek more out of the game for less money or no money in most cases, or better yet to MAKE money for themselves off of it wherever possible. This is what attracts some people to Magic: the Gathering, in point of fact, and there are online MMO games that people have succeeded in making money off of in terms of gold farming etc. These are the same people I know whom I've mentioned in other posts that go to the comicbook store, play games all weekend long, try to cut lopsided deals with kids that don't know what their cards are worth, then won't even buy a F$%$ING soda-pop from the store. This behavior, and the people engaging it, kill comic shops and F2P games, and the sad part is, they're destroying something they enjoy purely out of a sense of entitlement and the expectation that the thing they're bleeding to death will never die, or if it does, "it wasn't MY fault".

7. It bothers me that "free" has become the expectation for everything, yet many thing that are more expensive than playing CoX was are not the victims of the "it has to be free or I'm out" attitude like MMOs are. If you go to the movies about once a weekend, like I used to do when I was highschool-college age, it will cost you like $10 for a ticket, give or take. That's $40 a month without even commenting on the inflated prices they charge for snacks and drinks. The movie theaters I go to are generally still in business and making money like always, despite the fact that they've raised prices over time with inflation, etc. While it's true the snacks are something a lot of people would call you a sucker for even thinking about buying, the fact is the $40 a month you're paying for about 8-10 hours of non-interactive entertainment that you had to drive somewhere to get is still way more expensive than paying a $15/month sub to play a fun, interactive, social game like CoT is going to be without having to leave your own house. It's way more entertainment time for your money and better entertainment (in some ways) to boot. It's cheaper than movies and cheaper than playing Magic: the Gathering (online or with real cards) so why does it have to be free? And if it does, then why do those same people still have no problem with paying money to go to the movies and/or play Magic anyway?

I've already weighed in a few times on this thread, so please pardon my repeats, but I want to give Radiac a bit of support here so he's not perceived as a lone voice. Most of this has been said before, so I'll try to keep it brief (not an easy task for me!).

Maybe "second class citizen" is too strong, but I do believe any game with ongoing maintenance and development (Radiac's point 5 above) should, through whatever means, strongly [i]encourage[/i] players to subscribe. While there is some evidence that some non-sub players can spend more than the amount of a sub, it's unpredictable income to support a service with primarily static ongoing costs. Some non-subs may spend nothing in the store for months, while still contributing to server load etc, as Radiac pointed out.

Which brings us to the next problem: in order to entice non-sub players to keep spending the money required to keep the game running, the devs are forced to devote resources to putting a new "funny hat" in the store with regular frequency. Those of us who played CoX should be familiar with their attempts to keep interest in the store alive with (often disappointing) weekly specials and little bits of junk with limited appeal. Sure, we all like a new costume or floating carpet once in a while, but f2p forces devs to be working on this kind of stuff constantly, and to release it piecemeal to attempt to keep up the constant flow of income through purchases -- income that a sub inherently provides. When devs have a steady stream of subscription income, it allows them to work for a couple months on a new zone or power set without diverting resources so players can constantly haz cake nao.

Finally, there's an aspect that to me is more important than money: the community. As I've said before, I believe subscribing changes the nature of the relationship between player and devs from one of consumer and quick-stop-shop to one of patron and artist, where the focus is less on making a quick buck and more on a shared vision of a virtual world. A relationship where, sure, money changes hands so that the lights can be kept on, but in the background, so we can all concentrate on making the world awesome and fun to play. I want us all to be invested in this project together like that.

Mind-Freeze wrote:

**speed boost on Cinnder** !!!

Aaaaaa -- now I keep getting stuck on Circle of Thorns cave torches!!

One more thing I just thought of: all of what I typed above ignores the effect of in-game paid advertizing. I have no idea how that works, what the numbers are, etc, so I've factored it out entirely. I don't know how much extra business CoX got JUST from being featured on the Big Bang Theory as much as it was, but I have to think exposure like that must have been really good for them. As I've said before, being a dyed-in-the-wool CoT fan will make me want to support the game and by extension any products that the game is getting as advertisers (one possible exception to that being other games that try to advertize to suck people into more other games). I've stated on other threads that if a company like Hanes or Levi's wants to put in some game unlock like a jeans costume piece or a "tighty-whities" costume piece, I personally would buy something in RL just to get the unlock code from proof of purchase or whatever. And then in my wildest dreams, I'm still constructing that Weezer Task Force for the whole "summer concert tour tie-in" angle.

So if they need to pump up the numbers of players (sub or non-sub) just to make more money via the advertizing route, I'm perfectly fine with doing whatever seems like the most advantageous for the company in that regard. As I've said, I don't know the numbers so I can't crunch them.

It seems like I'm in the minority on here in favor of actually charging the non-subs for ANYTHING AT ALL, so I'll turn around and pose the same question as the OP but from the opposite point of view:

Radiac's question for everyone else: What things should the non-sub players not get or have to pay a la carte for that the subscribers get with the subscription?

If you feel you need a dollar value on the monthly sub, call it $15/month just to have a hard number to play with. And remember, there has to be SOMETHING that rewards people for subscribing in the first place, or else nobody ever will. Also, it has to be a good enough deal that those of us who DO subscribe don't feel like complete suckers for choosing to do so. So there it is, you tell me a system that makes the $15/mo actually feel like a good deal for the subscriber while simultaneously NOT offending the non-sub player to the point where they quit over feeling unappreciated. So far I've heard a lot of "Let's not make them pay extra for [some specific thing]." followed by "Agreed, and let's also not have to pay for [other specific thing].". It's easy to hand out freebies when you're not the one who has to sign the employees' paychecks every month.

I just thought of something else you could charge for or make unavailable to the non-sub: stats. Remember on CoX when you could look at all of your various recharge rates and set bonuses and whatnot? And you could see in real time the effects of the Hasten when it kicked in, etc?

Let subscribers see that stats page stuff, make it unavailable to non-subs. Then the non-subbers can buy a "stat analyzer" that works for a set number of hours or days or uses or whatever.

Radiac wrote:

What things should the non-sub players not get or have to pay a la carte for that the subscribers get with the subscription?

Better approach (for effect, I will quote Segev): "What would be helpful is discussion of what a subscriber might expect to get for his subscription that a free player might not have."

The thing that tends to stick in my craw about this discussion is the insistence on the "let's take stuff away from other people" approach.

We already know that MWM intends to provide store credit / currency that is greater than the value of the subscription. That alone already provides subscribers with more than their money's worth.[color=red]*[/color] Most of the ideas that I can think of easily, and have been suggested in previous discussions, are 'tangible', direct value for money matters (e.g. store discounts, free character or costume slots).

The intangible benefits are more difficult to generate. Possibilities that have been put forth include earlier access to new content, such as zones, ATs, or power sets. This could potentially include a head start on test server access for the same.

In answer to the idea, or argument, that non-subscribers are not contributing to the game or company:

Segev wrote:

Obviously, anybody paying a monthly rate for any reason is going to be contributing to the support of the game. [b]The point I was making was that the model I'm hoping to implement means that even free-to-players who get their hands on Stars[/b] [store currency] [b]through in-game activities are contributing to the support of the game.[/b]

[br]
[color=red]*[/color] If that isn't enough, this is clearly not a value for money concern but a desire to create a 'haves' versus 'have-nots' dichotomy.

Cinnder wrote:

Darth Fez wrote:
The thing that tends to stick in my craw about this discussion is the insistence on the "let's take stuff away from other people" approach... If that isn't enough, this is clearly not a value for money concern but a desire to create a 'haves' versus 'have-nots' dichotomy.

[Usual disclaimer regarding my respect of your opinion -- though I think you already know I do, Darth.]
For my own part, I don't want to create such a dichotomy for its own sake, but only if & where it would encourage people to subscribe, because I believe subscribers are better for the life and quality of the game. If I could see hard evidence that gating specific stuff behind a sub causes significantly more loss in non-sub store purchases than it increases the number of people who subscribe, then I would not advocate any such separation at all.
And, if I can be forgiven for being just a bit picky: none of us has anything in CoT yet, so nothing can be taken away from anyone. How much stuff MWM should give people for free seems to me to be a different and fair question for discussion.

I understand where you and Radiac are coming from and I support your goals.

I stated my position strongly because I wanted to highlight my feelings that it is important to distinguish between

"What can I take away from a non-subber to make them want to sub?"

and

"What can benefits can I provide with a subscription to make people want to subscribe?"

To me, the implications and even the terminology associated with the former ("second-class citizen") are those of wanting to shame people into subscribing. It is a message built on negativity that makes the phrase "pay up or GTFO" run through my mind.

I don't want people to approach this game with the attitude, "Wow, this game sucks without a subscription."[color=red]*[/color] I want them to come to City of Titans and say, "Wow, I want that (micro)subscription!"

As I'd said in a previous post, I do want to see most people subscribe to the game and make c-store purchases. My hope is that they will want to subscribe, or to make those purchases, because they think it's great, not because they feel hobbled or like a second-class citizen without them.

To reiterate, I support your goals. I do, however, have strong reservations about the proposed methods.

[br]
[color=red]*[/color] Another danger of this approach is the perception that, even though people bought the game and technically no subscription is required, they can't play the 'real' game unless they pay for a subscription.

Sooooo... you would let Freeloaders try before they Buy?!? ;) like 2 hours only every week for the 1st 3 months?
Gotz'ta let'em see what'z they'd be missing out on. Like trying to get someone hooked on smack? :)
But this is smaller samples multiple times. We'll show those dealers who's tactics are better. >;D

Gangrel wrote:

One thing though that I would NOT do, is put game mechanics behind an "all or nothing" wall. Give people a taster, a tease. They might like it and decide to pay for it.

This is why I am for allowing people to access new content on the test server, at a minimum. It needn't be long enough for them to experience everything, but at least let them test drive it to whet their appetite.

Interdictor wrote:

One thing that is going to be a big money-maker for this game (if the devs keep going the way they are going) is going to be character customization stuff; costume parts, power animations/skins, new power sets, character slots, boosters etc (plus base or mission editor items maybe?).

I have wondered if emotes (RP-oriented animations, if you will) are something that would be worth adding to the list. It would also be worth inquiring if people would be willing to pay for additional space for the mission builder.

I am not against subscribers obtaining some such items for free, but they should also have to pay for the lion's share of the c-store items (even if it is at a discount). The subscription does provide store credit (Stars), so MWM will want to make certain that subscribers spend those Stars rather than hoarding them. If nothing else, it's pointless to be handed Stars if most of what those Stars could be bought is also freely available.

Recall that Stars will not expire even if a subscription lapses, so all in all it is preferable that even subscribers purchase such items and they remain unlocked, whether or not the individual subscriber maintains their subscription.

Darth Fez wrote:

I am not against subscribers obtaining some such items for free, but they should also have to pay for the lion's share of the c-store items (even if it is at a discount). The subscription does provide store credit (Stars), so MWM will want to make certain that subscribers spend those Stars rather than hoarding them. If nothing else, it's pointless to be handed Stars if most of what those Stars could be bought is also freely available.
Recall that Stars will not expire even if a subscription lapses, so all in all it is preferable that even subscribers purchase such items and they remain unlocked, whether or not the individual subscriber maintains their subscription.

Oh - indeed - I didn't directly address subbers in my post because I understood that they were going to be getting a generous stipend to get the newly-released items in the store. I wasn't implying that subs get everything ON TOP OF the stipend (otherwise what use would the stipend be apart from some account-level stuff). I'll make one little edit which should clarify.

I've heard people quote the devs as having stated that they're trying to make sure that the subscribers are getting "more than their money's worth" out of their monthly sub. I think that's a bold statement, actually, because it implies that the subber get's, for $15/mo, a bunch of stuff that the non-subber would have to pay at least $16 for a la carte each month. Now if you assume that a lot of that is total gravy stuff that isn't really required, then the non-subber just doesn't buy it and the subber is paying $15/mo for a bunch of useless stuff nobody really cares about anyway. I want to avoid that problem. I want to provide the non-subber with a GOOD reason to pay a sub, instead of giving them a functional and complete game full of good reasons not to bother.

Here is a list of individual options, which CoX either had or could have had, and for each one I challenge this forum to give me your personal opinion on them. By that I mean I want you to vote for "free" meaning the non-subber just GET'S the item or "not free" meaning the non sub has to pay for it, but the subber can either use monthly credit to get it or it just comes with the sub. In many cases these are things that are either "turned on" or "turned off" in the sense that they're services which are either available or not available. In other cases they're things that you buy them once and then you have them forever. In other cases, they might be things you have to buy more than once (i.e. consumables).

new power sets
new costume pieces
new masteries
new missions
new zones
PVP event access of some/any kind
the ability to form a SG
ability to access SG bases (self or others)
the ability to look at your toon's stats in real time
additional server slots beyond the first 1-3
respecs
unslotters
additional build slots (i.e. the ability to save different specs for one toon and switch between them)
additional costume slots
the ability to change the colors of the powers
crafting
storage space for for swag/gear
auction house access
the ability to generate user-written missions
the full-function map
faster more efficient travel, like "TP to mission door" stuff, etc
something else you thought of that I didn't

On a related subject, I think that if the plan is to only charge for new content as it rolls out, then you're immediately on the hook to roll out SOME new content every month to get people to pay you, and I think it's been demonstrated that this model is unsustainable because people will generally get bored of new content faster than devs can generate it.

The "We don't sell items, we sell a service." idea makes me think they ought to be giving the subbers more "inner circle" or "high roller" type access to stuff that the "people who had to wait in line to get into the club" don't get or have to pay for or spend hours grinding for or whatever. In this way you're not on the hook to generate ever more new content to sell to people every week but rather your players are paying to be treated like patrons while the non-subber saves money and is paying a la carte for those specific things they feel they want without paying for the full blown all-access pass.

As for what the words "I think they should..." is supposed to mean, what I mean in those statements is "If I were the devs, I'd do it this way because I think this is the way that makes you the most money while limiting the amount of money you have to spend on overhead costs." In other words when I say "They should do this." it can be taken to mean "IF they want to be financially successful while providing a fun game that I personally will love to play, and will happily pay for, they should do this."

As for the "First one's free." or "Let's just give them a taste." idea, I think the up-front cost of the game is supposed to come with some amount of subscription time from the start, which ought to cover that nicely, I would think. I mean, the person who buys the game and activates an account will be a subscriber for their first few months or whatever, so they'll get the all-access pass to start with. In that sense, you truly are "taking something away" from them when they choose to go non-sub, or to put it maybe more accurately, they're "deciding to relinquish something" when they go non-sub. It's a matter of how much and what specifically they lose by dropping down to non-sub status that's the issue at hand, I feel.

Cinnder wrote:

You used the term "should" several times, which implies an empirical rule of some sort. Can you give evidence of this -- in other words, why should it not? -- or was this just meant to indicate your personal preference, i.e. actually meaning "I would prefer if CoT did not..."

Perhaps it is more of a personal preference, however, In the case of UI functionality, I would have ethical qualms about hampering a players experience as a means of getting them to subscribe.

Darth Fez wrote:

I understand where you and Radiac are coming from and I support your goals.
I stated my position strongly because I wanted to highlight my feelings that it is important to distinguish between
"What can I take away from a non-subber to make them want to sub?"
and
"What can benefits can I provide with a subscription to make people want to subscribe?"
To me, the implications and even the terminology associated with the former ("second-class citizen") are those of wanting to shame people into subscribing. It is a message built on negativity that makes the phrase "pay up or GTFO" run through my mind.
I don't want people to approach this game with the attitude, "Wow, this game sucks without a subscription."* I want them to come to City of Titans and say, "Wow, I want that (micro)subscription!"
As I'd said in a previous post, I do want to see most people subscribe to the game and make c-store purchases. My hope is that they will want to subscribe, or to make those purchases, because they think it's great, not because they feel hobbled or like a second-class citizen without them.
To reiterate, I support your goals. I do, however, have strong reservations about the proposed methods.
* Another danger of this approach is the perception that, even though people bought the game and technically no subscription is required, they can't play the 'real' game unless they pay for a subscription.

This is pretty much My thoughts on the matter, better written then I could hope to do.

To relate my experience with the Star Wars stipend, what I usually did was buy one of the gambling packs each month (especially if there was one available at a discount) and kept the remainder of the coins in case some big ticket item came along that I might want. I will note that, even though I had some small interest in some of the vehicles they offered, I never bought one because (to the best of my knowledge) they were quite expensive and were unlocked per character.

[br]
To take this conversation aside for a moment, I would argue that CoT is not a game that requires faster XP accrual (rest XP, XP boosters, etc.).

The primary reason faster leveling makes some sense for other MMOs is that they are heavily invested in end-game content. Many, if not most, players want to take their characters to the 'real game' as quickly as possible, which is understandable for that perspective.

Another, rather weaker, argument is so that someone who has less time to play can use the rest XP to catch up to any friends who have more time to play.

CoT is not going to be end-game oriented. It adheres more to the 'the journey is the goal' philosophy. Anyone who does feel the need for an XP boost can likely have that need met with a farming mission or two.

Out-leveling a friend is obviously a non-issue because, hey, one of CoH's best features that will be available in CoT.

Hello everyone,
I dont usually post many things on the forums but wanted to let you know how another game I played for over 10 years operated in a similar regard.

This game had a standard subscription as well as a Premium one.

Standard subscription was like 10$ per month...had 3-4 character slots and access to all normal content (bank, vault (for storing items), merchants, special events etc)

Premium subscription was 15-50$ per month.... had up to 10 additional character slots, all normal content Standard players had, and the following additional perks:

1) larger vault storage of 20 additional items able to be stored for each 6 months of "continuous" Premium Subscription. This also included a special entrance to the vault which bypassed the standard vault que.

2) the ability to exchange currency between the various lands of the game in the bank at no additional charge ( standard subscribers were charged a small in game fee for this exchange)

3) a monthly stipend which could be used to purchase in game items no longer in circulation (ie, old quest items for quests no longer active)

4) special areas set aside for Premium players that allowed shortcuts in the game... for example, banks and traders were normally within the cities so that if you were out hunting and needed to sell your items, get repairs, or deposit your loot into the bank you would need to travel a while to get back to the nearest city...Premium areas were more like hunting preserves with club houses right in the area which had amenities right on the premises so that you could do your hunting and not have to travel very far to dispose of you loot

5) the ability to run in special GM hosted events (weddings, fairs, etc) in which live GM's would participate in the guise of traders, priests, or fellow travelers for a interactive and fun event. Standard subs got GM participation but on a more limited scale (1 or 2 Standard GM participants as apposed to the 5-10 Premium GM's that might show up at the same event.

The point I am trying to make is this:

I feel no game mechanic should be denied to any players regardless of their subscription level, but the scope or ease of use for those mechanics could be made available to the higher paying subscriber. This way nobody feels left out or deprived of any game function but look upon the paid subscription as something that makes a great game even greater.

Thanks.

Investment, to me, means putting my money into something whose real dollar value will increase over time such that I can sell it in the future for more than I paid for it today, while getting dividends from it while I own it, like any commonly traded stock on the stock market. The inherent idea being that I, the buyer of the stock, make money on that deal. I don't see where any MMO is going to do that for me based solely on it's monetization scheme. Sure, I might be able to make a bunch of toons, get them all geared up, then sell my account to someone, but that sort of aftermarket profit is basically gold farming, which is money the game developers don't really make money off of, as I see it.

On Magic Online, one of the most popular formats of Magic game play is the Booster Draft Tournament, where you buy 3 packs of digital cards and pay like 2 "event Tickets" for a dollar each, and that entitles you to jump in a queue to play in a small 8-person tourny. At the end, if you did well enough you might have won anywhere from 1 to 8 packs of digital cards as prizes. The cards get traded back and forth for tickets, people use tickets as a surrogate currency in trading and people have bots written and running 24/7 ready to buy/sell cards for tickets and visa versa. It's also possible to just get like 12-15 tickets and use that as your entry fee for a booster draft, the game software then gives you the packs before the draft starts.

Okay, if you look at that system, it takes about 1-2 hours to play in a booster draft tournament, and for that you paid about $12 or so. That's 1-2 hours of interactive fun (and possible griefing over chat) for approximately $10 (you might win prizes, so $10 is a better average for the cost to you).

If City of Heroes had worked like this, you'd have had to pay like $10 for every Statesman TF or Incarnate Trial etc you ever opted into, assuming it actually managed to start. I'm not seriously suggesting that anyone pay $10 for a TF, but is $1 out of the question? I feel like there could be content that you have to pay to do every time you do it as a way to create repeat business. The idea being the subscriber can use monthly sub points or whatever to pay for this stuff until that runs out and then pay money after that.

Edit: Maybe make this paid-per-play content more rewarding in the form of extra merits upon completion, etc?

People still wanted to finish/successfully complete trials and TFs anyway though, and people still tried to optimize their toons too. I mean, nobody ever wanted to start a TF that didn't finish. And the most popular ones were the ones that got more rewards. I'm not suggesting making everything pay-per-play, just SOME trials and TFs. Maybe make new ones pay-to-play (with added merits/rewards for completion) at first then make them free (with fewer merits/rewards) after a set period of time. I mean, let's not forget, new content like that costs money to make, so I don't see why it has to be totally free to do. CoH charged for some of the new story arcs in the last year or two, which I mostly skipped, even though I was paying for VIP, but I probably would have paid a buck or two to do a really awesome task force or trial if it was the thing everyone was doing, and if I could have used some of my VIP swag to subsidize it. I'm also not suggesting that we make type of gear the sort of thing that you MUST pay for, just that the paid TFs should give players an added incentive to do them. I've already said that I think there should be company-sponsored PVP events that furnish some kind of prizes for the winners, and I think charging a $1-2 entry fee for those wouldn't be inappropriate either.

Admittedly, one big problem is people going AFK for a large part of the TF. If that happens, and the leader kicks the guy, then the leader is basically taking the guy's money, and in the case of someone with a legitimate emergency, that could be a problem. Maybe this would best be handled by team vote or by appealing to the devs for the right to deny the AFKer merits upon completion or something, I don't know.

As someone who didn't find TFs to be the most enjoyable part of CoX (but did them occasionally if my friends wanted to, or if I needed a badge) I think having to pay for them would ensure I never did any at all.

I'm not sure what incentives to work for me but, if i enjoyed the game to the level that Idid CoH then I'd be happy to pay a sub (priced within reason) to ensure the game continued to run...

I'm sorry, but no, I would not pay for a TF. Especially if it's one I would like to do multiple times. I couldn't tell you how many thousands of times I did the ITF in CoH. If I had to pay a dollar for every time I ran it, yeah I wouldn't be running it. I understand where you are trying to come from in trying to get money in the hands of the developers, but what good would that do if they developed an ITF that nobody ran because they didn't want to pay for it? That would be wasted time and resources. I'd rather focus on paying a dollar for other things like Super Inspirations, Special Enhancements, Costumes, Character Slots, etc. Quality of life stuff is fine, but not game content.

I would not be adverse to a one-time purchase to unlock all content that could be unlocked through regular game play. I would go so far as to include all content and not just TF's. There were times where I wanted to participate in some content from CoH, but hadn't unlocked it yet through regular play and was frustrated that I couldn't join my friends until I had. Some of that content took a matter of a few minutes, but some took longer. So yeah, I could see purchasing a one-time, account-wide ticket that would unlock all content if there is content that has to be unlocked. That would make sense. Just not buying it over and over and over again every time I wanted to do it.

In general, I agree with Darth's comment where paying for convenience rather than flat-out unlock is ok. For me, having Stars be the only way to unlock a TF would effectively be a discouragement to teaming.

Now, if access to this content is a perq that came with a subscription (i.e. a subber didn't have to spend his/her stipend to unlock) then that kinda negates my complaint, but I can't speak for how that would make the non-subbers feel.

Given that there's an argument often posted (not by me) against providing a solo path for everything that says "then few people would play the team-only content" -- doesn't that imply we want fewer barriers to team content, not more?

I think we can all agree we want CoT to be successful, long lasting, and make money.

What do I think should the subscriber get beyond the stipend?
Early access to new content (a new TF/trial/raid/zone arc comes out and for the first week only subscribers can play) Early access to Power Sets/Animations, Bonus items - This could be anything from temporary buffs/powers, to costume sets, to even powers given to anyone subscribing at the time. Access to Beta Server, Loyalty Rewards - such as bonus character slots, rename tokens, and respecs for subscribing a given number of months

What do I think should be sold in the store? Character Slots, Costume Slots, Costume Sets (both global unlocks for available in the game and exclusive to the store sets), Power Sets, Power Animations , Inventory Expansion, Mission Creator Access (to create, ability to play free), Mission Creator Slots, Additional Builds (PvE & PvP), Character Rename, Respecs, Temporary Powers, Temporary Buffs.

I want to look at monetizing from another direction. I play Guild Wars 2, a game I quite enjoy. It is buy to play with a cash store. I've spent money on it here and there, and have gotten gem cards from friends which I cashed in. Now if I had an option to subscribe for $10-15 a month and get say $15-20 worth of gems and some other assorted goodies I would have in a heartbeat. In the long run NCsoft and Arenanet would have gotten a lot more money off of me. I'm sure I'm not the only one who would have taken a subscription if offered, even if it was just for a couple of months.

Now let's go back to CoH. Like all subscribers I received a stipend of points for the store. Knowing every month I had points coming I would spend them quite freely. That meant I was sometimes left with no points when new costumes or power sets wanted to play with. so, I dropped more money on the store. I can't tell you how much exactly I spent on points through the run of Freedom but it was well over $100 dollars. That is on top of the subscriptions, CoV, GR, and I think 4 of the mini-booster sets over my time in the game.

I think the the plan to monetize the game should not be built upon getting people to subscribe. It should be built to entice people to spend at the cash store. If someone (like many of us on these forums) want to subscribe, that's great, and they should be rewarded (beyond the stipend). Spending their stipends at the store will eventually lead to the impatient dropping more out of pocket on the store.

The people who are going to subscribe though, are already the true believers. We want the money from those who are not. As the model stands right now, CoT is asking players to buy the game in order to play. Some will decide the subscription is worth it by the time the starting subscription ends. Others will realize how much they like it after a month or two without the benefits. Some people will not pay a subscription but will spend a good amount in the store over the course of the year.

Are people against limiting the frequency of lair run-through available to non-subscribers? I think it's a great way to monetize and encourage a death penalty without locking content behind a barrier so that the player can never experience it.

The frequency can be bought in in-game or out of game currency. Like buying an insurance policy before you go in saying.. "If you can't hang it'll cost ya"

This may not be seen as a popular opinion, but mission content restrictions is not a way i would like to see the sub go personally, though i do think Subscriptions should get first access before a public release, access to a test server that F2P cannot get, being able to create things in the mission architect (is there going to be one? I think if there is one f2p should be able to access it and play created missions, just not make their own, at least without "buying" some form of token) as well as first access to new masteries and powers before it releases on the public cash shop.

Maybe even early access to paid expansions? say as a f2p i preorder the "Horde of Doom!" expansion, so does bob the subscriber. Bob could be playing the new content, exploring the new areas, messing with the included while being able to come back and excitedly tell me how exciting the new Doctor Dementia quest path is while i still have to wait a week for the "official" release ;-p.

This is on top of what we already know, a monthly stipend so the subbers can go wild in the cash market, and allows for some sweet features and benefits i think can be appreciated by subscribers and make them feel VIP, without making the f2p players feel like second class citizens

City of Titans will be buy to play (B2P). People really need to get away from this notion that anyone who plays the game is there as F2P. Anyone who is playing the game has already spent money on it, or someone has spent the money on it for them. Subscriptions are not intended to provide access to content. Subscriptions, to the extent that has been explained so far, are a good deal - potentially the best deal - for buying Stars. To me, that says that if there is any content that needs to be purchased through the store every player will have to purchase it, whether they obtained their Stars through the subscription deal or by buying them on the spot to purchase that content.

I'm not sure this is what MWM has in mind, but what if B2P means anyone that buys the "box" can play the game with only whatever features are there at release, but anything (literally anything) that comes along afterwards has to be paid for by each player in one way or another? While I agree that someone who never spends another penny after initial purchase would end up being a financial negative if they are still using server resources 5 years later, what are the chances that someone would really want to be still playing just what's in Issue 0 at that time?

Hmmmm... Good points for consideration...

In that case, what is to keep a player from doing as Radiac mentioned and continuing to play for years without ever spending a penny beyond the original "box"? If the original purchase covers what was developed at release plus a month or two of subscription, how do we ensure that there's enough "must buy" stuff in the store that such a player isn't getting all the new development plus server and support time for nothing? I'd like to think that MWM won't still be working for free years down the line, even partially.

Ok, so I am going to transform myself into someone who isnt a subscriber, and has just bought the game today(in the future).

I just got home and installed COT. I spent $25 for the game and jump into the CC. I am building my character and notice that a pricetag is building up for some of my power/costume selections. I find this a bit frustrating as I have to rethink my charater. (I just spent money and they are already asking for more???) I get through the CC and jump into the game. I see characters running every which way and notice that 2/3 of them are wearing the same (default) costume. (They dont look like bots, but what is so cool about that costume?) As I am playing through my first mission I notice the global chat lighting up with requests for team events and guild charters(raids/TFs/ect..). After my first mission I see other low lvl characters calling for more team members. I ask to join and am immediately asked do I have a sub. No I tell them and then am informed I cant join. The global team shout out then changes to "must have sub". (Im am starting to wonder what I paid for)

I understand this is not an all inclusive laid out idea/storyline, but putting myself in the shoes of a new player, I can feel a bit of frustration that I not only just bought the game and am smacked in the face with what I cant do, but I am frustrated about being frustrated this early in the game. If we are trying to advertise this game for its personalization and customization, being hit with additional "fees" to actually get what I thought I just bought could be enough to make me walk away on the spot. Not to mention the damage a profesional game critic publishing that kind of article could do.

Whatever MWM decides to do with subs vs. non subs, please dont encourage frustration and preasure to buy a sub from day one.

I believe Izzy is correct that some limited sub time is intended to come with the "box" purchase, but perhaps that just delays charlieranger's scenario. Does that mitigate the frustration at all, knowing that a player gets full access for at least a while, after which one can subscribe or purchase the bits he/she has tried and decided he/she likes? I think that "try before you buy" strategy has been well argued above. I also take the points above regarding separation, but I still wonder how we remunerate MWM for all the hard work they put in to develop a new area of the city if everyone will get access to it for free? I'm not saying I'm a big fan of the idea I posted above (everyone -- subbers and nonsubs alike -- having to pay for anything developed after initial release); I'm just wondering what ideas are out there to ensure that everyone who plays helps to fund the ongoing life of the game.