tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826986957606858027.post5547842404836642839..comments2023-06-19T10:45:56.724-04:00Comments on Player Versus Developer: Is Accessibility Really A Choice?Green Armadillohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15564045048380177626noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826986957606858027.post-8407048212842136312009-08-17T12:12:13.861-04:002009-08-17T12:12:13.861-04:00Spinks, all of them, absolutely not. Many that I&...Spinks, all of them, absolutely not. Many that I've spoken to? Yes. That's a selling point; they don't have to think about it. It's a recurring argument; people don't want to make the choices that come with microtransactions, and would rather just toss out $15/month. They don't even look at how much they actually play per month and wonder if they might get a better deal with other plans, they just go with what they know and never question it. I can't help but think that, considering the friends that I have playing the game and how many are in this camp, that it's not an uncommon situation. (Though I may be wrong in this, and would love to see some numbers from studies on it.) I will always fight that sense of inertia, in all sorts of things. It's reflexive. (And note, I agree with GA that King's Isle could and should do better to make their price sheet open, and that it's priced wonkily.)<br /><br />You're right that for some, it's easier to budget subscriptions for things with recurring costs. That's true in a lot of consumer goods, from magazines to TV to housing. In fact, providers *count on that* to keep people paying longer than the service or goods actually offer good value for the price. (See also: housing and the insane focus on the monthly bill, say, the subprime mess.) Just because it's easier doesn't mean it's wiser. <br /><br />Though even there, yes, sometimes it is, as in the case of a player who would go ballistic on microtransactions. A subscription is perfect for that consumer in that case, and there's nothing "inferior" about that. On the flipside, though, that customer would be more valuable *to the provider* under an MT system. It's the inverse of the dreaded freeloader player that subscription systems either capture or ignore (though mostly ignore at the current price point), but are a drain on the F2P or MT models. I've seen more than a little antagonism toward that player, which might be termed "elitism".<br /><br />Perhaps I overreact to GA's obvious antagonism towards the F2P and MT models, though. *shrug*<br /><br />They all have their place, and each will be superior for any given player's budget. Different strokes and such.<br /><br />In an article about accessibility, though, the business plan really does need to be a part of the analysis. It's another potential barrier to entry and sustainability. If short session, low monthly play time, casual, "accessible" gaming is to be the mainstream of MMO play in the near future, subscriptions may well not be the best fit. (Though should be retained as an option for those who *do* calculate it as the best for them.)Teshhttp://tishtoshtesh.wordspress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826986957606858027.post-63622030456353648542009-08-16T05:06:55.844-04:002009-08-16T05:06:55.844-04:00Tesh: I'm sensing an air of eliteness about F2...Tesh: I'm sensing an air of eliteness about F2P, do you really think people prefer subscriptions because they like to have their hands held? Maybe it's just genuinely more convenient and easier to budget for.Copperbirdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00100865526015929517noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826986957606858027.post-87565497013699938502009-08-16T04:51:18.018-04:002009-08-16T04:51:18.018-04:00"My question is what do you do if it turns ou..."My question is what do you do if it turns out that the majority of players CANNOT make the choice to group?"<br /><br />Then you will trend towards a game that favours small groups, quick groups, ad hoc groups, groups that only form at primetime and solo play.<br /><br />It's not a tragedy for you, but a good thing. It may gut the gameplay that was the reason I got into MMOs though.<br /><br />Alternatively, it will still be worth making group content for the minority of players (because it might be cheaper in terms of cost to entertain each player, and because grouping players may tend to be your hardcore) and players will have to not expect to be able to do everything in game and accept that it's more of a smorgasbord.Copperbirdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00100865526015929517noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826986957606858027.post-58570323245522854472009-08-14T16:16:09.463-04:002009-08-14T16:16:09.463-04:00Agreed, the bulk discount for the $80 purchase is ...Agreed, the bulk discount for the $80 purchase is messed up. Notably, it's not too far removed from a "lifetime subscription" plan from other guys (especially the Champions Online "buy now, sight unseen, or forfeit the right to a lifetime sub")... but then, I'm not too fond of those either.<br /><br />Still, the onus is on the consumer to pay attention and make choices that make the most sense for them. Those who want their hand held will always have subscriptions.<br /><br />You're right, the options that KI offers really could and should be better, and they could do more to inform potential customers (though registration is free, so it's not like you have to make a purchase to get the information), but at least it's a step in the right direction. It's not a perfect system, no, but it's a lot better than others.Teshhttp://tishtoshtesh.wordspress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826986957606858027.post-70773359646591445712009-08-14T15:43:20.728-04:002009-08-14T15:43:20.728-04:00@Tesh: There certainly is a very specific type of ...@Tesh: There certainly is a very specific type of very infrequent game who gets significantly better value out of the access plan, so it's not a bad thing that they're offering it. It's less laudable that they escalate the zone prices such that a player who consumes a constant amount of content will end up paying an increasing amount over time, possibly passing the point where they would have paid less had they been on the subscription continuously. Now the access player does have the option to return to the old stuff they had previously purchased, but, as you point out, that's only value if you actually choose to use that option. <br /><br />Also, don't they offer some insane bulk discount like double the crowns for purchases of $80 at a time? (I can't verify this information because they don't publish it on any public portion of their website - it's as if they don't want parents to have access to that knowledge when deciding whether to let junior make an account.) "Pay us $80 non-refundable up front or everything will cost you twice as much in the long run" is hardly what I think of when I think of low commitment.Green Armadillohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15564045048380177626noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826986957606858027.post-23385950327844573492009-08-14T15:28:53.514-04:002009-08-14T15:28:53.514-04:00Oh, I don't agree with the barbarian thoughts,...Oh, I don't agree with the barbarian thoughts, either. That mentality is just what I see often when defending subscriptions, and it's a ridiculous argument, especially when the "barbarians" have money that they are willing to spend.<br /><br />With W101, you never have to purchase a subscription, so that's a nonissue, but yes, someone who buys a sub later on top of the Access Passes is paying double in a way, but note a couple of things:<br /><br />One, you've already played that older content, so you're paying a subscription for the newer stuff you haven't played. Saying you're paying double for content you're not using anyway is a bit disingenuous. Yes, a subscription is paying for everything in the game (or more accurately, "access" to everything for a window of time), but the player who "shifts gears" as you suppose will be paying very specifically for that late game content, not to start a new character from the ground up (which they could do <i>without</i> paying for more, which is the point of the perpetual access of Access Passes).<br /><br />Two, even that gear shifted player will retain access to the Access Pass content after the sub runs out. They don't lose access to the content they paid initially for.<br /><br />In short, you're manufacturing a reason to be grumpy on that count. It's true that a player who finds their schedule changing (or their aptitude in-game changing) may be on the bubble between Access Pass and Subscription valuation, but ultimately, it's their call on how to use the options that KI has provided. Perhaps the valuations could be closer together (though such would require an assumption of how much the "ideal" player plays per month, and that they have a consistent pace of consumption), but it's remarkable that such options exist at all, side by side.<br /><br />As for whether or not the Access Passes are a better deal, it depends entirely on how much you play per month. For some, a sub most certainly <i>will</i> be a better deal. For others, buying the equivalent of small Guild Wars packages will be a better deal. That's my point; different people have different budgets (time and money), and offering choices for both (one definition of "accessibility") is a wise business move. It's up to each customer to make the choice that is right for them, but with W101, they have more than a binary sub/nosub choice, and that's a good thing. It opens up the market segmentation curve.Teshhttp://tishtoshtesh.wordspress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826986957606858027.post-51368074584523078242009-08-14T15:09:43.688-04:002009-08-14T15:09:43.688-04:00@Tesh, indeed, accessibility can mean a whole bund...@Tesh, indeed, accessibility can mean a whole bundle of things, and a monthly fee does have the effect of forcing a choice. I don't agree at all that the fee "keeps the barbarians out" - if anything, the more elite players would prefer to exclude the guy with money but not enough time to learn to play and farm up the appropriate gear and consumables, rather than the student with a poor concept of spelling and grammar but a solid grasp on the gameplay. <br /><br />I can't speak to Puzzle Pirates, but Wizard 101's pay-by-the-zone plan (up to $3 per zone) sure looks like it becomes prohibitively expensive compared to their subscription fee ($5 per month). If you have to break down and subscribe as you get to more expensive content, your subscription includes paying a second time for content that you already bought.<br /><br />@Spinks: My question is what do you do if it turns out that the majority of players CANNOT make the choice to group? My experience from having been forced to leave groups that ran long has been that it is irresponsible to join a WoW 5-man with less than 90 minutes of uninterrupted time in front of you. <br /><br />Even if the group game is on the verge of collapse due to lack of critical mass, there is a demographic - in my view a very large one - that does not actually have the ability to responsibly choose to group. No game, not even one with as much revenue as WoW, would be better off if it lost 80%, 50%, or even 25% of its current subscribers, even if that did help focus the game's critical mass in the "correct" direction. Perhaps that is going to shape the direction of player behavior and perhaps that is a tragedy, but someone has to pay the bills.Green Armadillohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15564045048380177626noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826986957606858027.post-64998112701763549522009-08-14T12:47:05.625-04:002009-08-14T12:47:05.625-04:00The reason I called it 'tragedy of the commons...The reason I called it 'tragedy of the commons' is that it's fine if one (or a few people) make the decision to play solo (for whatever reason. But if the majority do then the basic way people expect to play the game will evolve, and it may cut out people who like to group because they need a critical mass of people to group with.<br /><br />So we need to watch out for if that critical mass looks likely to disappear is all.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826986957606858027.post-61513005627245214412009-08-14T12:27:47.038-04:002009-08-14T12:27:47.038-04:00When a game respects that I have a life outside of...When a game respects that I have a life outside of the game, it earns bonus points. Atlantica Online's Autorun feature is one such brownie-earning nugget of design. WoW's increasing "accessibility" (including low system specs for the baseline) also earns brownie points.<br /><br />Of course, in my casual world, a subscription is one of the biggest barriers to accessibility, which is why I'll play (and pay for) Wizard 101, Guild Wars and Puzzle Pirates over WoW. I suspect that it's just this "accessibility choice" for casual schedules that will see microtransaction systems becoming more prominent in the next few years. Subscriptions are great for the addict who plays 40 hours a week, but not for those of us who have other commitments.<br /><br />WoW is pretty good with accessibility, but the subscription is still a significant barrier. They may like it that way (rationalizing that it keeps the barbarians out), but it has kept me from giving them money, and I'm probably not the only one. Of course, maybe I'm a barbarian or one of those vilified gold farmers...Teshhttp://tishtoshtesh.wordspress.comnoreply@blogger.com