This is the place to discuss anything regarding Factions. Post suggestions, ask questions etc...

Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK : Pay to Play or Play 4 Free

Postby RockSauron » Thu Apr 05, 2012 12:45 am

Hm... so, are you suggesting the ability for the player to purchase recipes, which could then be made over and over by said player?

That... doesn't sound so bad.
User avatar
RockSauron
 
Posts: 243
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:48 pm
Medals: 1
2012 Silver Medalist (1)
Total Points: 1,563.22 W¢
Bank: 3,552.10 W¢

Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK : Pay to Play or Play 4 Free

Postby TheeLord » Thu Apr 05, 2012 1:26 am

Yes, and only different visual flavors of an item.

And I must state again, we have NOT decided on a revenue scheme yet...
User avatar
TheeLord
Lead Programmer
 
Posts: 763
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:26 am

Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK : Pay to Play or Play 4 Free

Postby DOTDOTDOT » Thu Apr 05, 2012 2:07 am

TheeLord wrote:Yes, and only different visual flavors of an item.


Like a forum name color change, but like a Cloak that comes in different colors?


An appearance-based cash shop really does sound much better in my opinion.
User avatar
DOTDOTDOT
 
Posts: 120
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:05 pm
Total Points: 920.00 W¢
Bank: 2.48 W¢

Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK : Pay to Play or Play 4 Free

Postby Triadian » Thu Apr 05, 2012 9:02 am

DISCLAIMER: This idea is just that an idea, it hasn't been adopted and nor has it been finalized numbers here are just arbitrary and could differ from greatly from the real numbers should this theory become a reality, it is provided here only to give you an idea of where the theory lies at this present time. once again this theory probably wont ever make it into the game so don't make any rash or hasty decisions based upon it.


lets try to explain this once more

the theory of blueprints in a cash shop (not yet decided upon)

2 players are blacksmiths lets call them freeplayer and cashplayer.
free player has no real-life commitments and spends 24/7 playing the game
he learns a new sword recipe called basic iron sword (design1).
...
lets cut away for a second to explain that in game we have 8 versions of this basic iron sword
Image
all exactly the same in stats and material cost however all different designs visually

...
so freeplayer makes 10 basic swords (design1) on his 10th one (random) he learns how to make design7, he still doesn't know 2,3,4,5,6 or 8 he goes off to party at his new discovery.
over to cashplayer, he works 24/7 and only has time to play on the weekends, he also has just learnt a new sword recipe called basic iron sword (design4). knowing that he can purchase different styles in cash shop he looks to see if he has unlocked any new styles
...
lets cut away again to explain filling the cash shop could work
without manually learning 1 design from a set a player cannot buy any other design
a player can only buy a new design after it has been used extensively ( for the sake of this example we are saying 10 uses = enough )

...
as cashplayer has unlocked basic iron sword designs he now see's only basic iron sword (design1) in the cashshop
...
he doesn't see design7 as freeplayer hasn't created enough to make it pass the used extensively threshold
...
he decides to purchase the new design1 sword recipe
freeplayer looks in the shop to see how exclusive his design7 is
he only sees his design1 in there so knows his design7 has not yet flooded the market and rushes off to make 10 of them
...
cashplayer didn't yet make his design4's so they remain out of the shop until he makes 10 of them
...
on freeplayers 6th building of the sword (at random remember) he discovers design4



so in summary - does the cash shop bring in anything that isnt already in game ??? no
does the cash give a player an edge over another, while we could argue that it allows him to get an instant discovery - on the whole its not given him an advantage because whatever he buys has already been in the game world and produced to a degree that no longer makes it unique.
"it would separate this project from others because the devs are cool and have a clue :-)"
User avatar
Triadian
Website & GUI
 
Posts: 1174
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 2:44 am

Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK : Pay to Play or Play 4 Free

Postby DOTDOTDOT » Sat Apr 07, 2012 4:54 am

So a fair shop that maintains the funness for freeplayers while giving cash users a worth for there buck? Yes, yes, yes.
User avatar
DOTDOTDOT
 
Posts: 120
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:05 pm
Total Points: 920.00 W¢
Bank: 2.48 W¢

Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK : Pay to Play or Play 4 Free

Postby Red » Mon Apr 09, 2012 8:23 pm

I'll start off with my opinion.
If you are going to be honest and true about your sandbox. No pay to win, EVERYTHING is player made, etc. Then a monthly fee is the best option. I side towards 5-10 euros a month. (10-15 USD per month).
I also side towards a monthly fee, because it scares away many younger/immature players. And with a sandbox game, a bad player base will ruin the game in an instant.

Depending how your land claiming system works, Real money would be a good option for people to buy w/e means it will be to claim land. That way you don't have people who want to claim land to protect their things burning out on the game while trying to earn enough in game cash to claim land.
Again, that also depends how your land claiming system works.

Another idea would be to have the game be free to play, but you can only reach a certain level before needing to go premium. This model may allow you to gain more customers.

Lastly, depending how you decided to do your economy, you could make a decision as to an equivilence of in-game currency and real life currency, i.e. 10 gold = 1 USD. If this is the case you could allow players to buy money in certain quantities from the cash shop. Also realise if you do this, even though you as a dev set the price as 10gold = 1 USD, players inside the game will bend the economy to make things somewhat cheaper, and may begin to sell in game currency themselves for ~65% its actual "worth".
Obviously its pretty easy to argue that this system is pay to win, but if the only trading going on in game is between players, then its not as simple as pay to win, since sooner or later another player has to agree to trade with you.
And if a player is willing to donate $50 to the development of the game for 500gold in game, why shouldn't they?
Again, realize that the economy will still be controlled by the players, and those who buy money will probably find out they could have just spent some time in game to make money.
It's an interesting system, and Wurm Online does it. But where they go wrong is you can buy certain non-player made items from npc traders. But in factions that wont be an issue. And the developers can make some extra money from lazy people, and people who donate to the developers will have compensation.

tl;dr? Monthly Subscription is my first choice. With maybe some extra ways to make money
Realism and Sandbox are a couple that fight sometimes but have great sex.
User avatar
Red
 
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2012 3:27 am
Location: Missouri, USA
Total Points: 79.66 W¢

Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK : Pay to Play or Play 4 Free

Postby Thezookeeper » Sat Apr 14, 2012 5:26 am

I personally don't care much for those games that have gone "free to play". I have no problem what so ever paying monthly to play a game that I enjoy. I do find that many games, once they go free to play seem to become over run with a player mentality that just sucks the relaxation out of play.
As for cash shops, if you are talking about one where you can purchase "vanity" type items such as WoW has done with companions and mounts then I see no problem with this. These would lean towards cosmetic purchases versus something that would give an unfair advantage to one who is working/playing hard in game towards an item.
Thezookeeper
 
Posts: 63
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 1:48 am
Location: Texas
Medals: 1
2012 Gold Medalist (1)
Total Points: 25.00 W¢
Bank: 8,270.95 W¢

Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK : Pay to Play or Play 4 Free

Postby Triadian » Sat Apr 21, 2012 10:22 am

Red wrote:Depending how your land claiming system works, Real money would be a good option for people to buy w/e means it will be to claim land. That way you don't have people who want to claim land to protect their things burning out on the game while trying to earn enough in game cash to claim land.
Again, that also depends how your land claiming system works.

hate on so many levels - only the rich control the land :(

Red wrote:Another idea would be to have the game be free to play, but you can only reach a certain level before needing to go premium. This model may allow you to gain more customers.

restricting free players soon gets round thats its only a free trial - as we dont have levels as such its gonna be hard to restrict it that way

Red wrote:Lastly, depending how you decided to do your economy, you could make a decision as to an equivilence of in-game currency and real life currency, i.e. 10 gold = 1 USD. If this is the case you could allow players to buy money in certain quantities from the cash shop. Also realise if you do this, even though you as a dev set the price as 10gold = 1 USD, players inside the game will bend the economy to make things somewhat cheaper, and may begin to sell in game currency themselves for ~65% its actual "worth".
Obviously its pretty easy to argue that this system is pay to win, but if the only trading going on in game is between players, then its not as simple as pay to win, since sooner or later another player has to agree to trade with you.
And if a player is willing to donate $50 to the development of the game for 500gold in game, why shouldn't they?

again hate on so many levels - only the rich get the goods with an ingame auction house the best weapons will be easily available and knowing that there is no limit to the coin in game they will put stupid prices on stuff forcing the normal players out of the market and we have pay to win at its finest :(
"it would separate this project from others because the devs are cool and have a clue :-)"
User avatar
Triadian
Website & GUI
 
Posts: 1174
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 2:44 am

Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK : Pay to Play or Play 4 Free

Postby Blah64 » Sun Oct 21, 2012 5:16 am

I much prefer free to play games.
The industry has moved past the subscription model. A subscription model will just limit the player base because people will not want to pay to try an indie game.

My personal opinion on the matter is that I don't like subscription because it means that I am paying even whilst I am not playing. I can't take any breaks from the game, and that just always makes me feel uncomfortable.
This has lead me to avoid subscription games where possible, but then every F2P game I've played I've spent a minimum of $500... even when it is just donations like in City Life RPG 2. I like to give money to devs of games that I enjoy.

I can understand why people would want a subscription though. The increased player base is not always desirable. Games like these tend to have small communities, and they like to keep it that way. The large player bases can be plagued with griefers and other such 'scumbags'.
User avatar
Blah64
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 5:53 pm
Total Points: 0.00 W¢
Bank: 119.00 W¢

Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK : Pay to Play or Play 4 Free

Postby Triadian » Sun Oct 21, 2012 11:24 am

Blah64 wrote:I can understand why people would want a subscription though. The increased player base is not always desirable. Games like these tend to have small communities, and they like to keep it that way. The large player bases can be plagued with griefers and other such 'scumbags'.


this sums up my thoughts on F2P precisely, but let me just say its not the fault of the f2p model its the fault that the griefers and scumbags tend to navigate towards the F2P games
"it would separate this project from others because the devs are cool and have a clue :-)"
User avatar
Triadian
Website & GUI
 
Posts: 1174
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 2:44 am

Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK : Pay to Play or Play 4 Free

Postby Recon » Mon Dec 10, 2012 12:07 pm

I like to give a little input first I dislike F2P, but sadly thats where the market is headed, F2p has TO be done right and in a sandbox its not easy always..

If this was my games, I would do B2P, 30 bucks US and sell Fluff because most smaller companys do not have a steady flow of cash thats why alot do Subs , guess what most are getting away from IT, Xsyon F2P or Sub, Mortal online is F2P limited skills.

The reason FLUFF because for the people who want fancy stuff they will spend money, and that will help pay the bills.



I also would offer a trial for limited skills for 30 -60 days.
Because you always need new players and people are scared to pay for a game that they may dislike, so letting them test the waters a bit, you could even restrict them in areas even if you wanted , so they can't grief , cheat etc. Well it would be less likely..
Recon
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 12:43 am
Total Points: 70.00 W¢

Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK : Pay to Play or Play 4 Free

Postby TheeLord » Mon Dec 10, 2012 6:48 pm

Thank you for the input recon!
User avatar
TheeLord
Lead Programmer
 
Posts: 763
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:26 am

Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK : Pay to Play or Play 4 Free

Postby levijgraham » Thu Dec 20, 2012 8:32 am

The game needs to be f2p with p2p elements. (Skill caps, Item and Construction restrictions) they would need to be balanced of course to make the f2p accounts still fun and so the p2p accounts get something for their money.
levijgraham
Programmer
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 8:28 am
Total Points: 50.00 W¢

Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK : Pay to Play or Play 4 Free

Postby Triadian » Thu Dec 20, 2012 8:51 am

where do you think the line is drawn between p2p elements. (Skill caps, Item and Construction restrictions) becoming play 2 win ?
"it would separate this project from others because the devs are cool and have a clue :-)"
User avatar
Triadian
Website & GUI
 
Posts: 1174
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 2:44 am

Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK : Pay to Play or Play 4 Free

Postby levijgraham » Thu Dec 20, 2012 9:05 am

Lets say the f2p can't use heavy armor allowing them to still take on the role of the fast agile warrior instead of a tank. So you pay for the role of the tank. Construction is a little tougher with the fact of having a well fortified base. The f2p could maybe build everything but only to a certain strength so its a bit weaker than the p2p but still a dis-advantage.
levijgraham
Programmer
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 8:28 am
Total Points: 50.00 W¢

Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK : Pay to Play or Play 4 Free

Postby mookyNUKE » Fri Dec 28, 2012 3:29 pm

I agree, why not have both worlds in one.

Pay 2 Play : Pay monthly sub to unlock everything in the game for all character slots and servers, play as it was intended. Also recieve 250 Faction Coins or FC per resub per month.

Free 2 Play : Don't pay a monthly sub, but game play has some locks. Like only gain 50% exp per hit/kill/action. Backpack slots reduced by half and can only have one Backpack. Total amount of coin allowed set at x amount of gold. No FC per month. No item cosmetic discoveries through crafting. Unable to own, operate or craft structures and siege weapons. Unable to own or ride a boat, horse and or wagon, chariot, etc.

P2P and F2P : Both able to earn and or purchase FC for Webstore.

Earning Faction Coins : Completing ingame Quests or mail services, either document and or package runs, further away = greater coin reward (may as well tie that idea with this hehe I been reading up, also FC reward is system provided, not player). Rare world game drops, places which require some coop effort and or special mob; Dragons, War Troll Lord (FC drop packages can be traded). Player City Conquest FC reward (system provided). System provided Faction coins need to be minimal amounts or balanced, don't want to make actual FC purchase option pointless.

Webstore F2P : Able to purchase unlocks within a F2P account (like in Lord of the Rings Online) BUT it is for that one character only, on the server it is located on. If a F2P player wants to unlock coin restriction for his main character and all his alts .. he will need to purchase that unlock for each of them OR subscribe hehe. But it does allow a F2P player to customize how they play, maybe they don't need all the features to be unlocked, just certain ones based on how they play, without breaking their tight wallet monthly in troubled times. Kinda like, sub 6 months out of the year and survive off FC by unlocking what would have been unlocked by subbing year round, based on how they play.

Anyhow, theres the bare bones of that idea .. with other ideas by others as well.
mookyNUKE
Art Team
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 6:04 am
Location: North Carolina
Total Points: 45.00 W¢

Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK : Pay to Play or Play 4 Free

Postby Triadian » Fri Dec 28, 2012 6:21 pm

mookyNUKE wrote:I agree, why not have both worlds in one.

Pay 2 Play : Pay monthly sub to unlock everything in the game for all character slots and servers, play as it was intended. Also recieve 250 Faction Coins or FC per resub per month.

its intended as only 1 char slot and only 1 server

mookyNUKE wrote:Free 2 Play : Don't pay a monthly sub, but game play has some locks. Like only gain 50% exp per hit/kill/action.

this would be a no from the start i was a GM for a major F2P game that had this system, nothing but moaning from the community, so instead it would have to be f2p get normal xp and monthlies get 2x xp, whats the difference ??? none until you look at who gets gimped and who gets boosted.

mookyNUKE wrote:Backpack slots reduced by half and can only have one Backpack.

backpacks are based on weight not slots... and you currently only have 1 backpack ( although there are 6 places to keep items while travelling, along with unlimited home/bank areas )

mookyNUKE wrote: Total amount of coin allowed set at x amount of gold. No FC per month. No item cosmetic discoveries through crafting. Unable to own, operate or craft structures and siege weapons. Unable to own or ride a boat, horse and or wagon, chariot, etc.

community would revolt for the most part

mookyNUKE wrote:P2P and F2P : Both able to earn and or purchase FC for Webstore.


why would p2p need/want to purchase FC ?
mookyNUKE wrote:
Earning Faction Coins : Completing ingame Quests or mail services, either document and or package runs, further away = greater coin reward (may as well tie that idea with this hehe I been reading up, also FC reward is system provided, not player).

there are no ingame quests and the system doesnt create anything all coins are player made,

mookyNUKE wrote: Rare world game drops, places which require some coop effort and or special mob; Dragons, War Troll Lord (FC drop packages can be traded). Player City Conquest FC reward (system provided). System provided Faction coins need to be minimal amounts or balanced, don't want to make actual FC purchase option pointless.


the only way for any world monster war troll or such like to obtain coins would be to have looted them off of its previous player kills or previous monster kills that killed players.

mookyNUKE wrote:Webstore F2P : Able to purchase unlocks within a F2P account (like in Lord of the Rings Online) BUT it is for that one character only, on the server it is located on. If a F2P player wants to unlock coin restriction for his main character and all his alts .. he will need to purchase that unlock for each of them OR subscribe hehe. But it does allow a F2P player to customize how they play, maybe they don't need all the features to be unlocked, just certain ones based on how they play, without breaking their tight wallet monthly in troubled times. Kinda like, sub 6 months out of the year and survive off FC by unlocking what would have been unlocked by subbing year round, based on how they play.

re: earlier response 1 char 1 server = this point moot

mookyNUKE wrote:Anyhow, theres the bare bones of that idea .. with other ideas by others as well.


there was some nice thoughts in there so please keep them coming however i have seen most if not all before in other games and most if not all have created a void between the f2p players and the p2p players and almost always provide the game with a bad community who feel they are being hard done by given all the restrictions of f2p

i know its probably impossible but if we do choose a f2p payment model i would ideally like it to not restrict the f2p player in anyway and only add cosmetic or time based enhancements.
"it would separate this project from others because the devs are cool and have a clue :-)"
User avatar
Triadian
Website & GUI
 
Posts: 1174
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 2:44 am

Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK : Pay to Play or Play 4 Free

Postby TheeLord » Fri Dec 28, 2012 7:36 pm

Thank you for the well thought out post mooky. I agree with 90% of what tri said, though I think if we do f2p we could limit what players have access to, not Nerf the stuff they have access to. So it would be treated more like a trial system then pee f2p, but that is just my personal thought..
User avatar
TheeLord
Lead Programmer
 
Posts: 763
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:26 am

Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK : Pay to Play or Play 4 Free

Postby Khranos » Sat Jul 06, 2013 5:18 pm

EDIT - Just realized I brought this thread back from the dead; sorry about that!

Honestly, I'm not too fond of a monthly fee; if I'm having a tough month (possibly even a few), paying for a game subscription will be the last thing I pay for. However I like the cash shop idea that was brought up earlier (With the iron sword examples), you could possibly use a mix of that and a game with a higher 1 time fee.

If you price the game at, say, $50-$60 or so, you'd get enough revenue off of one person to hold their weight on the server for a good bit of time with enough extra to make a profit. By doing this, the player gets the perk of having unlimited access to the server (being no monthly fee, they basically pay up front) while paying enough to keep it afloat until the next person buys the game.

However, by calculating in the cash shop mentioned before, you could pull in a bit more revenue for server and personal needs of the developers. In my eyes, this seems fit enough from a profit standpoint and a server cost standpoint.
"We're kept alive, by artificial means. But have lost our souls, to a world of machines" Ayreon, Natural Selection.
User avatar
Khranos
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Jul 06, 2013 3:32 pm
Total Points: 0.00 W¢
Bank: 346.44 W¢

Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK : Pay to Play or Play 4 Free

Postby Triadian » Sat Jul 06, 2013 5:47 pm

Khranos wrote:EDIT - Just realized I brought this thread back from the dead; sorry about that!



no threads are dead until we kill them :P

thanks for the feedback on the payment system you prefer.
"it would separate this project from others because the devs are cool and have a clue :-)"
User avatar
Triadian
Website & GUI
 
Posts: 1174
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 2:44 am

Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK : Pay to Play or Play 4 Free

Postby TheeLord » Mon Jul 08, 2013 6:38 pm

Thanks for your feedback, and we actually need feedback on any and all of our questions of the week still. So don't feel bad for bringing this topic back, we really welcome the feedback.

It's nice to see that not one person has said they want FTP because they are cheap. It seems like everyone who has commented has been realistic about their suggestions. :thumbsup:
User avatar
TheeLord
Lead Programmer
 
Posts: 763
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:26 am

Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK : Pay to Play or Play 4 Free

Postby Triadian » Mon Jul 08, 2013 6:51 pm

well they know if they say they dont wanna pay anything we will hate them :P so there gonna state what they think we want to hear :P whether its true or not

NB: not saying anyone above is lying just trying to be objectional :P
"it would separate this project from others because the devs are cool and have a clue :-)"
User avatar
Triadian
Website & GUI
 
Posts: 1174
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 2:44 am

Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK : Pay to Play or Play 4 Free

Postby austino » Fri Jul 19, 2013 6:41 am

FTP! FTP! FTP!!!!
just kidding hehehe
User avatar
austino
Composer
 
Posts: 166
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2012 1:06 am

Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK : Pay to Play or Play 4 Free

Postby RajCaj » Tue Jul 07, 2015 4:20 pm

TheeLord wrote:This is my personal opinion and not the direction factions will take, but wouldn't the sandbox community be willing to pay more per month for a quality game with exactly the features they want? Why do I hear so many people saying $15 a month is too much, we are talking about a small portion of the MMO market which wants a hardcore sandbox game, to support a development team for such a small customer base there needs to be higher per player revenue it would seem.

Let the "mass market" games have their $5, $10 and $15 month subscriptions, they have enough players and don't need to charge more obviously and $15/mo is probably very greedy by them. Don't be afriad to pay $20/mo or $100 for a single payment for the game you really want to play. I think until gamers realize they will have to pay a larger premium for a more specific game and developers are not scared to make the huge investment, the niche gamers may never get what they want.

To put it in to perspective.. Mortal Online which is a pretty quality game kind of close to Factions in ideas only has around 1,000 subscriptions, compare that to WoW's 8,000,000 and you will begin to see what I am referring to.

The video game business and consumer needs to learn this fact of supply / demand just as most every other industry has.


BINGO! I think most folks need to learn the law & influences of supply / demand in general, for many other things than understanding why a premium for a niche game may be necessary, but that's for another discussion thread LOL

The longer it takes to break even on costs, the less "niche" a game can afford to be because there is an absolute requirement for the game company to not only break even, but to also make a reasonable profit as well.

Not being able to recoup costs within a certain period of time may require the game company to change mechanics in the game as to lower barriers of entry & make things more palatable to a larger audience in effort to bring in enough subscribers to make something like $5 a month charge economic. However, if it's $15 a month, then less subscribers are needed to make ends meet, and the game mechanics do not need to be watered down or altered in a way that goes against the spirit of what is trying to be achieved by the Factions team.

Also, a lot of folks don't recognize or appreciate that starting ANY business not only involves cost to pay for labor + resources....but also involves RISK. Gaming is in a highly competitive market and you all should be compensated for taking a risk that could potentially drain all your income, savings and could even put you in a significant amount of debt.

There has to be a payoff to motivate people to take that leap of faith that has a higher upside than just breaking even after 2-5 years.

All that said...I'd say my max price point would be between $15 - $20 a month....with the high end for a game that was satisfying enough that it became my primary go-to game that I was putting a lot of time in.

A single $100 payment is also a very reasonable cost...given most standard games have a box sale of $60, with some collector editions exceeding $100. Even if the $100 doesn't cover a box sale, that still comes in cheaper than paying $10 a month for 1 year.

Micro-transactions for cosmetic things are fair, but those items should also be available in game for those willing to work for it.
RajCaj
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 3:54 pm
Total Points: 245.00 W¢

Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK : Pay to Play or Play 4 Free

Postby TheeLord » Tue Jul 07, 2015 4:56 pm

Thanks Raj, we are still very much debating which direction we want to go or how much to charge. Though it seems (at this point) monthly payments will be unlikely as they are becoming more and more rare in the MMO market.
User avatar
TheeLord
Lead Programmer
 
Posts: 763
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:26 am

PreviousNext

Return to FACTIONS GENERAL DISCUSSION

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron