Smedley acknowledged that consumers are used to the subscription based model (as is SOE, considering their long history of subscription based MMOs), but said that they "believe very strongly that this is the future of MMO gaming, but we also know that it is something that players have an issue with... There's going to be an aftermarket, and we want to control it so that players don't get duped into having something switched out from them."
So instead of paying a gold farmer or a rare-item hunter to hook you up with in-game goodies, Sony wants to have you pay them for the loot in a controlled manner so you don't have to deal with shady dealers. Also, this way you don't have to pay a subscription fee -- you just pay for what you want, in an a la carte method. An interesting idea all around, but sure to be controversial. Which would you rather do, pay 15 dollars a month in subscription fees or pay 5-20 dollars a month (depending on what you buy) in micro-transaction fees?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
8-23-2007 @ 5:41PM
Kevin said...
"meaning there would be no subscription fee like World of Warcraft."
WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!?!
Reply
8-23-2007 @ 5:45PM
Kevin said...
my bad i read it wrong
Reply
8-23-2007 @ 5:46PM
mccomber said...
I think I'd rather go with the microtransaction route... depending on what items cost. If it ends up costing more than $10-15 a month just to keep yourself in supplies, screw that. If there's a way through playing the game that you can keep yourself supplied, only spending money on truly optional items, I'd applaud that.
Reply
8-23-2007 @ 5:48PM
Simstim said...
You guys never played MapleStory?
Also Disney is trying something like this with Toontown.
And then there is Puzzle Pirates.
And also Bots which I haven't tried out yet.
Micro-transactions works guys. Also I quit EQ2 just before Sony implemented a pay-for-stuff server node. But Sony has been playing around with ideas like this before.
Reply
8-23-2007 @ 6:07PM
doug said...
as long as its paying for "epic" items then thats cool with me and id definitely pick it up since i am more the kind to get it myself anyways
Reply
8-23-2007 @ 6:23PM
Darkdrium777 said...
Actually it's "à la carte", not "al a carte" :)
We'll see what this "free to play" means. However I fear it might end up like Runescape, which has a free area and a member's area (Just using Runescape as an example though, 'cause it's the only one I know from friends who used to play it).
Reply
8-23-2007 @ 6:58PM
Paul said...
It depends on how much cost is involved and how far reaching it is. Where will it end? I'm not familiar with the game mentioned in this article but lets say they do this for an RPG. Will leveling your character be fee based? If there is any PvP, peeps more willing to spend money will always have the best stuff. What if you're crumping with you buddies and you go to an area that someone in your group hasn't paid for?
Until I see more details, I'm gonna say I think it's a stupid idea. I'd rather pay a subscription and have access to everything than pay a little at a time for aspects of a game that I already paid for.
Reply
8-23-2007 @ 7:08PM
JKPierce said...
One factor keeping me from MMOin' is the susbscription plan. I ran on Final Fantasy XI since its North American debut, but the family life has changed. My daughter means more as far as time and money goes; it doesn't seem practical to me to have a monthly fee with the limited playtime I have. Guild Wars has been providing pretty well considering.
Reply
8-23-2007 @ 11:47PM
TJ said...
I like the microtransaction route. I'm still a student, and during the school year, its tough to get on as much. I don't get the full value of my subscription. I also don't have to have the shiniest sword or biggest house, so I think free subscription and microtransactions work better for me.
Reply
8-27-2007 @ 1:00AM
longming50 said...
asdasd
Reply