How do you feel about paid subscriptions?

[Noobc0re]

If there are zero microtransactions and the cost is reasonable, then I have no issues with subscription based models.

[isturbo1984]

Paid subscriptions of what? There are many types of subscription based models that work well and I am fine with... and others, not so much. A "Netflix for games" subscription is actually a really neat idea. "Pay to play online" for consoles is okay, as long as you are getting a good experience. But a lot of your episodic games that give you the option to pay for the game in sections, giving you a "season pass," turning the entire game into a subscription model... that is bogus.

[Hopeless Wombat]

Would prefer subscriptions over microtransaction overkill. It seems more sane to me of the two.

Developers receive a stable lifeline that they have to try hard to keep alive by releasing content (at least both in theory and assuming publishers aren't being abusive with it). Of course, that doesn't happen.

[Collierider12]

Subscription based games to me would be better, since they don't require large amounts of grinding or atrocious wait times if you want to go through the game naturally. To me, subscription based games are cheaper in the long run and help both the player and the developer.

[Zenryu]

I actually prefer subscription-based MMOs. F2P games tend to become Pay2Win or put cosmetics behind a pay wall (usually way overpriced), which for me, is an absolutely necessary feature for MMOs. This is why I love FFXIV. I have most cosmetics available to me (I believe most of the paid cosmetics are old event costumes) and doesn't become as ridiculously grindy as F2P ones. Many of the other things that are locked behind a paywall are things I can live without. I usually go off and on that game. I won't be willing to touch any Subscription-based games that still has a somewhat Pay2Win mentality or still puts many cosmetics behind a pay wall.

[Merlin]

I despise games that sell upgrades and powerups. I would rather pay a subscription than have to suffer through pay2win garbage.

I like it the most when I only have to pay for a game once, but I can understand that devs who want to maintain and update their game after release might need some money to support them. They better show that game some real love though.

you see, this is what is so fascinating about what Blizzard is doing right now. I'm sure you and others here are aware of it, but it makes sense.

CHINA

Chinese players are totally okay with the idea of pay to win games and seem to prefer the free to play, pay to win type games. And what is Blizzard geared to do? Well, the writing on the wall was when Overwatch stopped making real updates to the game. They have a team making an update to warcraft 3's graphics which is not resource hungry but will make them big bucks. Finally they moved all their best developers to mobile games(their words not mine) working with a chinese company on the first of many mobile pay to win games.

China is a huge emergent market. Western markets and Japan/S.Korea are saturated markets, while China is still open to growth. So if they can, Blizzard will make a huge push to this market, and thus, is following the trends the players there know at the expense of their loyal fans who they expect to just suck a fat one and go along with it. Ultimately I think they hope to be strong in China and don't care long term about other markets anymore. Unlike China, we are picky consumers, and we have shown that we have standards to some extent and can make a stink. Will they be successful? I don't know. It is hard to know as an outsider much of how Chinese players feel and think. I don't even know if they have a concept of brand loyalty or how long they stick to a single game. But if they can, then Blizzard will want to get people hooked on their brand and their games and get invested in it. If they succeed then don't expect any "good" by our standards, games from them ever again. They won't have to deal with pesky laws stopping how they monetize. Sure they have some draconian rules, but at the end of the day, they can MTX the crap out of players and make millions off of basic mobile games.

What I think will happen is that the future of western games will be boutique games made by small teams of disenfranchised former AAA devs and artists who have either been fired or quit. AAA developers have pretty much alienated the best talent of yesteryear and these folks still need to make a living. I think the future will be the AAA mtx heavy games as service type stuff against the short experience single player primarily games with cosmetics at most or DLC or monthly fees if multiplayer.

The people with a pulse on the hardcore crowd(by that I mean people in the know, not people who like the hardest games) will be independent games studios. I don't see them getting rich, but filling the gap left by the direction AAA devs will go. Outside of that I can only see Sony and Nintendo trying to make classic love note type games to sell their consoles, and Microsoft is a totally different beast.

The future I think is a less homogenous market, we are already seeing it as it is. I think the problem is they are marketing the wrong games to the wrong people. Diablo Immortal is the right game for China, but they showed it off to the wrong market. Same with Fallout 76, it was clearly a B team game made for a niche audience who like games like ARK where bugs are overlooked for the experience had in exchange(though it was a bit more than just a few bugs). They were trying to appeal to Fallout fans, when they should have appealed to survival fans outside of their E3 announcement and made it clear who it was for, and not to consider it fallout canon. Also a special edition like that was a bad idea too, but I digress.

In time the companies will figure it out, and I suspect might wisely make sub companies for each genre of game so that players don't get the wrong idea who the games are for any longer.

But that is just my crazy prediction and ranting. The whole system might just implode worse than when it did during the 80s.(thanks E.T.)

[Pantsu Hunter]

So far the best model for me is buy to play with cosmetics shop just like Guild Wars did it before they decided to make core game F2P. Then subscription. Both B2P and sub models dont require game to be grindy hell and in most cases have a good adult community without bratty kids and bots trying to sell you money every 10 seconds. All F2P games can suck my little nuts cuz of all the kids, bots and grind.

[Astraea]

Technically you don't need it, but in reality you'll get sick of it pretty fast not having your unlimited crafting bag etc. For me it would be unplayable without it.

[Odyssey]

Paid subscriptions is a good paying scheme for massive games. They are server based and multiplayer only and with the subscription rate your are paying so that the company could make some profit. And is therefor interested in keeping the service up and running.

Using Pay2Win instead is just fraud. If someone isnt able to play a game, why should money change that fact?

[ethansito]

I despise games that sell upgrades and powerups. I would rather pay a subscription than have to suffer through pay2win garbage.

I like it the most when I only have to pay for a game once, but I can understand that devs who want to maintain and update their game after release might need some money to support them. They better show that game some real love though.

[CovertAgent]

He might mean old ESO. It caused me to stop playing after I lost my free gametime.

[Yoshi]

I don't have a fundamental aversion to subscriptions, but they don't work for me anymore. I paid for years of SWG and (pre-cosmetic item) WoW and a few months of ToR. Now I just don't have the appetite for that type of game to justify playing enough hours to make the subscription worth it. For the record, I don't subscribe to PS+ or SBLG anymore either, though I have in the past. The discounts alone used to pay for the service for me, but not since essentially everything comes to PC now.

[Matcam89]

As long as the game is good, adding more content at no extra charge i am ok with it - You aren't signing a life contract so you can cancel at any time. I know some people who play F2P games and have ended up spending many times more than the game is worth in my opinion.

[Merlin]

EIther one or the other for me. I don't think its good to have to pay for the game, then pay for a monthly fee. Even worse if there are mtx beyond that. Thats one of the reasons I didn't ever get into WoW originally(also because dial up and being poor).

[Calen]

You don't NEED a subscription for ESO, you're just handicapped if you don't get one.