Saturday, April 21, 2012

Is this info true?

"Like Ive said before, they are charging 1/6th the purchase of the box per month. That means your getting 6 months of development and 4 years of development time at the same price plus the box/free play that goes with it, thats less than 1/8th the original box value and they are still making profit on the original 60$ box which means insane profit from the subs. Then you see that they only kept around 40% of the original staff working on the game, that means your actually getting less than 5% the original value which they are probably already making more than a 100% return on.



Its nothing but a scam in my opinion, and you take into account the 10$/month is going into fixing these bugs for the non-subs/subs alike and you see your really getting extremely little for your investment. Disgustingly little actually, but I do love how these people think they are "supporting" these great developers like its some sort of charity case."



Seems like they are ripping people off on this game, is any of this string of info true?|||That's a nice piece of math. I don't think my old math teacher would agree with it though.|||The OP is very much oversimplifying things, but yes I am amazed how many people are willing to have gaming companies deduct cash from their credit cards every single month - and lose all of the little perks they bought upon cancellation of the subscription.

I do hope people realize that monthly subscriptions will put customers at the disadvantage in a great many ways - and that this business model will die very soon and get replaced by a fairer one (at least as an option)- like the Lifetime subscription both LotR and Hellgate had (unfortunately only for pre-orders). I don't have a problem with giving a company a larger, one-time payment if I get _permanent_ access to that game's features in return, in contrast to the _temporary_ access a subscription model provides.|||Quote:






View Post

I don't have a problem with giving a company a larger, one-time payment if I get _permanent_ access to that game's features in return, in contrast to the _temporary_ access a subscription model provides.




Same, which is why I purchased the lifetime subscription. I just hope I get my money's worth out of it.|||I am willing to pay like $150-200 once for a Lifetime Sub but I didn't had a chance cause I have no pre-order key...

And if FSS in the future make in another way for a players to get that Lifetime Sub I think that I will pay it gladly.|||Not alot right now thats just for subscribers since they have been more focused on destroying bugs and such. I know both patch .7 and patch 1.0 will have more subscriber only content.|||Quote:






View Post

I do hope people realize that monthly subscriptions will put customers at the disadvantage in a great many ways - and that this business model will die very soon and get replaced by a fairer one




People have been saying monthly subs will go away for years. Oddly enough, most MMOs are still launching with them.

There's nothing inherently wrong with charging a monthly fee for the ongoing support and development of a game, the issue is that many companies that are doing so are not providing content/support that is of a reasonable value in return.

Hellgate has so far had the Halloween and Guy Fawkes events which were supposed to be for subscribers only. Is that content, plus the online servers, worth the $15 (1.5 months)? For me personally, no it wasn't. Both events were fun to start with, then annoying with all the random pointless drops. I'd say that's closer to $5 value than $15.

However the real proof of the pudding will be "Patch 1" and whether they can back up for "Patch 2". If the content in Patch 1 is actually significant and interesting and they can follow it up with an equally good Patch 2 in a reasonable period of time and continue in that fashion, then the $10 a month will seem much less of a "scam".

If Patch 1 is just the Stonehenge "station" and a bunch of areas using the same tilesets, monsters, items etc and then Patch 2 is some other "station" and little else, I think people will have a right to be pissed. It would still be more than some other games offer, however.


Quote:








I don't have a problem with giving a company a larger, one-time payment if I get _permanent_ access to that game's features in return, in contrast to the _temporary_ access a subscription model provides.




And that would be the beauty of providing both options - not everyone wants to pay in a lump sum, some would prefer to pay only during times they're actually playing, subscribing and unsubscribing as appropriate. $10-15 a month is also generally a lot more affordable in a budget than trying to find $200. And if a game closes down shortly after subscribing, the "temporary" subscriber only loses $10-15... |||So it is a rip off? Is it really 5% the content compared to the original box, the rest is just sucked up as profit then? How can people still defend subs? At first it sounded like a good deal but now i think im just gonna stick to private servers if this is fact, I dont even want the holiday event stuff.|||The OP is making way too many assumptions...

From what I've seen, this game has not been a very big money maker at all and probably won't be. Although it's Asian release may be better received, since Asians seem to like grindfest type games more.



Also, conceptually, I think the HGL model is sound. The only thing is that execution has been really spotty. We'll see in a few months... Also, the new Stonehendge thing is supposed to be a new tileset... But I'm not holding my breath

For me, the game has somehow been growing more unstable in the last week or two. I've experienced a lot of disconnects and crashes. As a result, I've removed the game disc from my computer and won't play again until the new patch comes out. (thank god I didn't waste my money on the founder offer lol!)|||Quote:








So it is a rip off? Is it really 5% the content compared to the original box, the rest is just sucked up as profit then?




I can't see any way we could possibly calculate how much of the $10 is pure profit. We don't know how much they're spending on server maintenance and bandwidth, no idea how much on customer service and no idea how much their programming staff is costing them.

Obviously the ongoing content is going to start out small in proportion to the full game. 5% added for Patch 1 would not surprise me, if it's even as high as that. But that extra content is then there for you to play whenever you want, not just for however many months fees went into it. So you could pick the game up next Christmas, pay your $10 sub and have access to Stonehenge just like everyone else.

Right at the present moment, if you're not going to buy a lifetime sub I wouldn't advise paying for a monthly sub either. There's really not much benefit to it right now, as I believe most everything except the extra stash space has been given away for free or, in the case of the Halloween and Fawkes content, has been retired until next year.

Right now? Yes, I would class it as a rip off. Yes, you could pay the $10 now and get the warm fuzzies for supporting Flagship, or you could wait until they actually release Patch 1 and pay then so you can get in and see Stonehenge and whatever else is added for subscribers, if anything. Until Patch 1 there is not $10 value in your $10 subscription.


Quote:








As a result, I've removed the game disc from my computer




The disc isn't supposed to be required for online play. Does it not work without the disc or have you just not tried?

No comments:

Post a Comment