RMT Is Polarizing
Players are quitting EverQuest and EverQuest II left and right. Players are becoming interested in EverQuest and EverQuest II left and right. Players are dismissing BioWare’s MMO left and right. Players are becoming interested in BioWare’s MMO left and right. There’s a middle ground, but using an model (even if it’s free-to-play) for an MMO is polarizing. It pisses people off, and it makes people happy. There are emotions, good and bad, associated with the very thought of real-money-transactions.
The subscription model is still the safe option, in that most people are ambivalent about it. Merely announcing RMT is enough to cause an explosion of inanity, while announcing a subscription model is received with “meh.” If you make a good game, you WILL make money using the subscription model. This has been proven. Mediocre MMOs at least break even after a while. Free-to-play with RMT has still not been proven by a major MMO title. It might work, but we don’t know.
Will it work in America? I really don’t know. With every service, we tend to move away from microtransactions and toward subscriptions when we can. The internet used to cost money based on how much you used it. Now we can use it as much as we want for a flat fee. Even rumors about charging for use cause a major stir. TV used to have a microtransaction model. Now it has tiers of subscription service, with a few microtransactions as icing (pay-per-view).
Really, just about anything you can look at that we pay monthly subscriptions for used to be closer to the microtransaction model. But with games, we started backwards, so now we’re trying to see if RMT can work.
What about me? Well, yeah, I’m on the south pole. I don’t like RMT. My thoughts about it diminishing achievement and whatnot aside, I have other reasons. First of all, I like subscriptions. I like knowing I’m going to pay exactly $15 a month, then I can set it to recur. Then I forget about the subscription. It’s there, and it costs money, but I don’t have to have that money in front of my face all the time. Fire and forget… the American way.
But perhaps the most significant reason is the following scenario, which has been repeated in the 3-4 RMT games I’ve ever played for more than a few days:
- Ryan gets the free-to-play (and free to get) game.
- Ryan plays the game for free.
- Ryan feels left out and left behind by those who are paying for things.
- Ryan spends real money on virtual stuff.
- Ryan realizes he spent more than $20 on fake crap.
- Ryan uninstalls the $hit out of the game.
In short, I spend too much on RMT games. I have to protect myself from myself and not play them. So I don’t. The free-to-play RMT model might work in the US. It might not. Maybe a tiered model would work… free for basic stuff like playing and leveling (antenna channels), cheap for some stuff like questing (basic/standard cable), extra for premium options like raiding or PvP (movie channels). Who knows? We might find out if BioWare’s MMO is microtransaction-based. We’ll see.
Thanks to Mercury on Broken Toys for making the observation that RMT is polarizing; it’s obvious, but insightful.
My only feeling on the matter is that I prefer that a game’s business model be either subscription OR micro transaction based. I’m just not sure I’d want to play a game that I had to pay to access and further had to pay to get certain items.
I think you and I are similar, BG, in that we love the smell of a new game…we play new games a lot…but ultimately…we know that cancellation day is coming. Most of the time, it’s not even the game’s fault. It’s just on to the next thing because it is new. Time and time again. And it doesn’t even have to be better.
I’ve been playing MMOs and gaming for over 20 years, and I’m just grasping the fact that I like the process of starting a new game, studying the design and then moving on. A friend even called me fickle a couple months ago. Maybe that will be my new blog name…the Fickle Corebear. I also realize that with that in mind, I’m probably a terrible guild member. LOL. Who wants a guildie who is almost guaranteed to unsub after the first month?
At least you can see where there might be a problem in buying $20 of fake crap. When your threshold is met, you move on.
A lot of people don’t see it, though. A lot of people are fairly loyal to their game of choice. The whole group of people in CoW is the exception and not the norm. We look at the gaming world as a whole, with each game being just a part of our interest. My aforementioned friend and my entire guild back in EQ2 is the opposite. And they are drooling over the RMT.
They see the game as an investment over the last five or six years. And they’re willing to invest more. They don’t have that switch in their heads that tells them “ultimately, I’m going to unsub and delete this game”. Maybe they won’t. The reality is that they will. But that’s their game and they are going to play forevah!!!
But yeah…it is another component that is polarizing.
Pardon me if I’m wrong but hadn’t Nexon already “proven” the microtransaction market?
Personally, I’m not terribly polarized by it I suppose. The real difference between RMT and Subs is… well the difference between upselling and retail sales. At the end of the day, either you’re using your money to give the players the best experience you know how to give, or you aren’t. If you’re business model is getting in the way of that, whichever one it is, I would prefer to drop it. If it doesn’t get in the way of that, and it keeps the servers running, then hey whatever works.
I would say “no” to Nexon proving it. Proof is when a massive-budget title ($40 million+) is as successful with microtransactions as other similar titles are with subscriptions.
I agree with you in that I like paying a subscription. I much prefer paying a monthly sub than paying for individual items, be they merely fluff or vital to the game.
If RMT is the future of the MMO, I will sadly move on to other things.
There’s nothing good that comes from RMT other than it making companies a little more profit. In return, they have the pleasure of slamming their player base against the walls, laughing by themselves with a demonic high-pitched executive laugh.
It’s lame and I refuse to play. I don’t care if I invested 4 years into the game. See-ya!
If you think you know drama just imagine what it would be if raid content had to be unlocked via RMT and someone gets denied their loot roll by the raid leader on a boss he payed real money for LOL!!
Besides that a tiered model without monthly subscription would feel much nicer than micro transactions.
My major stigma with micro transaction only games is that I think they’re “cheap.” I don’t know why. I just feel like that without that solid $15.00 a month x 250,000+ users the game can’t succeed.
As far as spending too much though I do have to point out a minor issue. I recently played the heck out of Saga, a RTMMO (I highly recommend it). I didn’t mind buying the cards to a point for one key reason, most games I purchase on the old model will demand $49.99, $59.99 or $79.99 up front for the box.
If the software was free, until I spend $49.99 I feel like I’m ahead.
Well, some micro-transaction games most of the time just create crap for you to waste money on. The reason it might work a little better for EQ and EQ2 is people will pay for things that may be a little more meaningful to their gameplay. I’m not THAT familiar with what SOE is doing and I’m not really studied in micro-transaction games. But they’re not just putting new graphical clothing and pets up that all the kids with OMFG want that!!! However, I still can’t get past paying more money for a piece of data.
only $40 million? sweet! at that cost, sulake (the makers of the free habbo hotel) can spit out about 3 “massive-budget” titles a year! and nexon makes enough to fund a few sulake-sized companies — again: each year. not to mention it has 7 times the registered users as wow.
…well. in that case, lemme do some math here.
[scribble, scribble, scribble]
yep. nexon made more money in the 3rd quarter of this year than mythic spent making warhammer over the course of 4 years.
i’m not sure you’re quite grasping the enormity of cash there is to be made in the free/rmt space. nexon is approaching blizzard-level yearly revenue. i’m pretty sure they qualify to have a seat at any table where mmo business model viability is being considered.
you’re a smart mmo guy, tho. so, of course you already knew that.
m3mnoch.
If subscription models are generally favored over RMT in the West, and vis versa in the East, what do you think might be the cause of that divide?
Is it because Americans are wealthier overall or have more financial stability? Perhaps Americans are more skeptical of transactions (subscriptions are simple), since we have milder business regulations and a greater variety of products? Is the divide economic or cultural? I know next to nothing about Chinese and Korean business, so I don’t claim to know.
Aaron, I’m not sure it’s political or economic driven. I think American’s just know what we want: Quality. Microtransaction models do make a lot of money and they attract a lot of players. However, the fact remains that microtransaction gaming pales in comparison to subscription based scope and gameplay.
I think Ferrel hit it right on the head with an interesting note. Micro-transaction, free-to-play, RMT, immediately devalues the game and alienates users. All of a sudden, you’re staring down a free-to-play game and wondering why it’s free? Is this game going to be around for 4 years? Do they really have the staff to maintain the game?
There’s just too much doubt, and a huge risk, without a subscription model.
Agreed 100% that microtransactions/free-to-plays are polarizing, as this thread proves it. I can certainly see the validity of a number of points, but I can’t really agree that sub. only games are quality games. Unfortunately, there have been a number of ‘crap’ free-to-plays that have flooded not just the western market but the eastern as well, and they give the concept as a whole a bad name. Has a western developer ‘proven it’ (by Ryan’s standards) – no. Are there western developers working on AAA titles with microtransactions in place? Yes. EA’s working on Battlefield Heroes, and dropping hints about microtransaction in Star Wars:The Old Republic (granted, perhaps Riccitiello mis-spoke). All in all, I think it comes down to a matter of choice. Subscriptions are not bad. Microtransactions are not bad. It’s all a matter of individual playing preferences. And isn’t having a choice better than no choice at all?
m3mnoch:
Do they really make that much? I’ve never seen figures from them that noted how much money they’re making. If they are making that much cash, they’ve at least proven it can work if a game is designed for it. Even if that’s the case, I’ll still maintain that there’s no proof that a big-budget traditional achievement-oriented MMO (EQ, WoW, etc.) can go microtransaction-based and be successful.
“All of a sudden, you’re staring down a free-to-play game and wondering why it’s free? Is this game going to be around for 4 years? Do they really have the staff to maintain the game? There’s just too much doubt, and a huge risk, without a subscription model.”
Yeah, no subscription games have gone bye-bye
The only concern I have about the new Station Cash and its effect on EQ and EQII is how it will change future development. Now that they offer Exp Bonus potions of the 10%, 25% and 50% variety, will it change their view on how to construct the leveling curve should they increase the level cap? Can they resist the urge to make it 50% harder to encourage the purchasing of the 50% bonus potions? We’ll have to wait and see…
“Yeah, no subscription games have gone bye-bye”
You’re not catching what I mean. It’s how people likely perceive the model.
@Jason: Exactly… Which is why this is lame. Add to that, Imagine if I come in with friends. Imagine that they have money to blow on those pots, and I don’t. These games are about advancement. Do you think they’re going to wait around for you to “keep-up”? Another reason why this is sad. I rather not deal with it.
The future of MMO’s is Guildwars. It’s free to play with micro-transactions that are not required; just optional with fast-content every 3 months.
We all know that RMT is polarising. Some players hate it, some love it (or at least use it), some do not care at all. I assume that these 3 groups are about the same size (the online polls I have seen so far give me that impression).
There have been endless discussions on RMT, so the arguments of any of these groups are well known.
Basically the RMT lovers say: It is my money, so I can do with it what I want. And it happens anyway, whether officially allowed or not.
Those who don’t care say: As long as I don’t do RMT it doesn’t affect me. If it affects you, it is your fault that you let it affect you in your brain. It’s just a game after all.
Those who hate it say: RMT gives an unfair advantage to those with a bigger wallet, and therefore it’s unethical.
Of course there are still some more arguments. And for the record: I myself am an avid RMT hater. It’s just in my psychology I guess
I quite playing all SOE games back in 2005, when they introduced Station Exchange for EQ2. Some friends did understand, some did not; some also left, some stayed. But I never regretted my decision (much more so right now).
Now looked at it from a larger viewpoint, any company has to realize that these 3 different groups exist, and likely will always exist. All talk of “revenue system XYZ is the future” is just propaganda.
Therefore, different revenue models have to exist, since there is a market niche for each of them. No matter what you do, F2P with microtransactions, base flat rate per month, single lifetime payment, item/plat trade for RL money allowed or not allowed… you will always find a significant amount of players who like your model and who hate your model.
But the important thing is that a given game needs a certain continuity. If your model is base flat rate per month without item shop, you have attracted a good bunch of players, who hate item shops. If you now suddenly introduce an item shop into your game, a lot of players (though not all) will feel cheated and leave in disgust. If a lot of people leave, this is bad for your community, even for those “non-carers” who stay.
I guess that SOE did some math, and SOE obviously expects they make more money with their Station Cash than they loose money from leaving subscribers.
I think they will fall flat or their nose. Why?
We know they also did some math before the NGE came, and we know how they failed.
We know they also did some math before the Station Exchange came, and I am pretty sure they failed here too (SOE claims that the SE was a success, but I don’t believe it, simply because SE was not introduced to any other SOE or non-SOE game ever since).
Short summary: As company, choose the revenue model you want. All is fine, but announce it before the game goes live and don’t make sudden changes after release.
It’ll be interesting to see how this all goes. The only MMO that I can think of that should have went from subscription-to-RMT (ShadowBane) didn’t, so… who knows. EQ’s already tried to do things a little different with the Legends server, so this isn’t entirely out in left field for SOE, but nobody’s done *this* before…
My question is, since they are going to continue with subscriptions, are they still going to fix bugs and more importantly update the game with additional content?
I have actually thought about having a nulti tiered system somewhat like you suggest. Where you allow people to play for free from 1-20. You would have group and raid instances, PvP, etc. for these levels (Basically, to get them hooked). Then to actually be able to get past that point you would need to start paying the subscription. The subscription gives you access to content from 20-30. Then have micro transactions of $5-10 to gain access to levels 30-40, 40-50, etc.
Then it would just be a matter of making sure that the people that have paid for the additional content stay interested in the lower level content so those areas aren’t ghost towns.
As one of those in the middle ground who really doesnt care one way or another about RMT or MT/F2P models I do tend to be amused by those who continue to predict the end of EQ2 due to their latest action. Well its been 5 years and they seem to still be here so either those someones have been wrong or SOE has been lucky. One of the two. I also wonder if those complaining the loudest about the evils of RMTs are those with the least amounts of disposable incomes? (and no dont respond by flashing your epeens at me about your uber job, I dont care, Im just ruminating).
SOE has stated they intend to retain their current subscription model. As with all of their other controversial moves they will lose a certain percentage of their player base. That has happened in the past and despite those who question their compentency, they can add and subtract and obviously decided that in light of the state of the game this was a worthwhile risk. I really dont see them changing their policies towards bug fixes and additional content as long as they continue to charge a monthly fee. Doing that would IMO be more damaging than allowing someone to pay $5 to buy a dodad for their house.
They mentioned that the additional money would go towards the team. I will assume that means to help keep them making more content.
I’d say that it’s a bit more complicated, you have Free to play vs Subscription, and you have RMT vs No stuff for money.
Some free games manage to go by using advertisement generated revenue (I know it’s not easy). So in effect you can have a grid of 4 different types of games, and on each axis – it’s polarizing, look at Runescape Free servers and compare the community and players with those of paying gamers. I know people to whom F2P is like a stigma for a game that is heavy on interactions (like MMORPG games are), because you will have loads of spammers, scammers and 10-14 year olds unable to speak full sentences (though Free to play web strategy games are a lot more bearable, as it’s a lot more difficult to scam/spam in them, and frankly – there is no point, also – you can annihilate anyone you don’t like, and bam – he’s gone).
So if you would look at “The Reincarnation” a niche web based strategy game, it’s free, but a lot of people would quit the second someone can buy in game stuff that gives any kind of strategic advantage.
If you would suddenly make it possible to play WoW for free, I’d guess it would become a gold farmer hellhole with every spawn camped by 20 guys.
I personally would rather play a Pay to Play + RMT than a Free to Play game that is not designed to separate me from people that I don’t like and don’t want to deal with