Lifetime Sub?

Uhh... what won't you be able to buy access to (outside of the VIP server)?

It seems like access to just about everything will be for sale a la carte from what we've seen so far. Have you seen anything saying what won't be for sale?

Originally Posted by Nethergoat it's NEVER too late to pad your /ignore list!

Was mentioned that VIPs will have exclusive access to certain things.

Emphasis mine.

Well, yes and no. It depends on the return of those lifetime subscriptions.

Interesting comparison. We have Jack, quoted often as saying that the average MMO player plays for about a year and then moves on. And we have post-CoH Cryptic trying to develop multiple MMOs and selling lifetime subscriptions. The philosophy is obvious: the average player won't be around forever, so there's a break even point on lifetime subs, and if you charge a little more than that you can make more money, and also accelerate your cash forward. Also, if players are going to leave anyway, then you make more MMOs for cross-sell opportunities. They might leave one game, but you can try to sell them on the next game.

Then we have Paragon Studios, constantly harping on City of Heroes player retention rate. Suggesting that we have a better than average player account lifespan. And we don't sell lifetime subscriptions. That also makes sense: if you think your players stick around longer, and some will stick around literally forever, lifetime subscriptions are a losing proposition: the players most likely to want them are the ones that will most likely cost you money by buying them.

Selling lifetime subscriptions basically says this: we think the average player will play us for a year, maybe eighteen months, and then leave. Some of the players we sell lifetime subs to will stick around much longer than that, but the ones that don't will make up for the ones that do. It can also say that if most of our revenue is going to come from microtransactions anyway, whether we keep or lose the subscription revenue for players that stick around for years isn't as big of a deal either way.

City of Heroes isn't that kind of game, and it doesn't seem to be the perspective of the devs that the goal is to frontload revenue on the players. They hope to be making long term revenue streams from their players. If they want the long term player, and they are aiming for the long term player, and they hope to convert as many players as possible into long term players, then lifetime subscriptions don't make sense. The sub is worth more than that.

Counter-intuitively, the single lifetime subscription is a stronger indicator that the game might be thinking of nickel and dimeing you in the future. Because its a devaluing of the potential subscription revenue.

I believe, in the absence of hard data, that the small portion of the COHF community that would take advantage of a lifetime subscription plan would not reach the point of negitive returns for the company. Nor is it reasonable to assume that, even with the purchase of a lifetime subscription, that no more money will be spent by players in the Paragon Pagoda (or whatever we wind up calling the item shop). Since Paragon Studios has decided to switch the game to a hybrid model, then it follows that the issue of a lifetime subscription is within the realm of possibility, economic or otherwise.

Speaking of the character of a game company that offers lifetime subscriptions, I have not found that my enjoyment of a game or the quaility of the game company has been affected by the presence (or absence) of a lifetime subscription, item shop, etc. I think there are bad examples from both sides of the fence. I have been very impressed with the decision making process and costumer focus here at City of Heroes and I believe that they are capable of designing a lifetime subscription that would continue the tradition of great entertainment AND profitablility.

NCSoft would prefer the opposite

Please provide links to the unbiased third party company that interviewed the entire CoH community, and collated the datamining that proves beyond any shadow of doubt that the number of customers that would take advantage of a lifetime subscription is as you are claiming a small portion of the customer base.


<crickets>


Yeah that's what I thought.

You heard it here first: crickets play this game by Jimminy!

I never said they didn't.

The guy admitted that something was his belief and that he had no hard data and you're asking him for unbiased sources?

That's like me saying "I believe in unicorns, no I don't have any proof." Then you're all like, "SHOW ME EVIDENCE," and I'm all like... "ASDFGHJK!"

Well there's no way to really know if a game will be a huge success at launch so a limited time offer of lifetime subs then can help a new game recoup its development costs faster.

A popular game will attract enough players to negate the longterm effects of the few lifetime subbers.

An unpopular game will go the route of a certain other super hero game we can't mention here.

Don't like it? Tough turnips.

The thing is, assuming that way has been disproved. Look at Cryptic's offerings that had lifetime subs. Despite banking on average retention rate, they did prove slightly problematic economically.

However, as Paragon Studios has stated, CoH has a higher-than-average retention rate. With that in mind, even offering the lifetime subs would be a horrible move economically. In fact, offering lifetime subs in the middle of an MMO's lifespan is generally a bad idea. Lifetime subs are a launch maneuver only.


All that said, if Paragon sees fit to offer lifetime subs, and I have the spare money for one, I would certainly get in on that. Considering how much fun I've gotten out of it in the past, and knowing I'll likely still enjoy it going forward, I'd be a fool not to, but for that same reason, Paragon Studios would be a fool to offer them.

Essentially, 90% of those who buy in on lifetime subs at this point, would also be willing to throw down their money for an extended period of time. So lifetime subs would only cause a decrease in overall income.

Originally Posted by Back Alley Brawler Did you just use "casual gamer" and "purpled-out warshade" in the same sentence?

Just to be clear, I'm not asserting a success bias between offering and not offering lifetime subscriptions post launch. Games can be wildly successful both ways. What I *am* saying is that a wildly successful game that offers lifetime subs is more likely to be basing their business model on acquiring new players, not retaining old ones. They are relying on churn. Every lifetime sub that sticks around too long costs them money. To reverse that, the correct price to set for lifetime subs is a function of average retention, and the higher that is the higher the price has to be. A wildly successful game that refuses to offer lifetime subs is more likely to be basing their business model on retaining veteran customers than rapidly attracting new and limited lifetime customers. A lifetime sub is counter-productive in that environment.

I believe City of Heroes' core business model is still based around the long-term subscriber. That is where Paragon expects to get most of their money. The primary purpose to the freemium program is to create a constellation of players that they can market VIP access to.

That's in contrast to some other games where the freemium program appears to be the center of mass of the model, and subscription is really more of a bulk rate for ala carte gaming.

While this was true in the past, I'm not so sure anymore. The vibe I got from this month's producers and posi's letter is one of "reward our existing players while expanding the new customer base."

I described the shift to a hybrid model as a paradigm shift for a reason. While I will be pleased if new players sign up for a subscription, the hybrid model is designed to make money through micro transactions. Not long-term subscribers. With this change in focus, a lifetime subscription becomes a option. The actions of other companies and other variables do not directly impact Paragon Studio's ability to offer a lifetime sub. I believe they have crunched the numbers and they know if it is going to work. Hence my original question, what are the chances for locking in permanent VIP status?

I will be pleased with COHF with or without a lifetime sub. I would really like the option though in order to free up currently budgeted subscription money to spend on the Paragon Market beyond the monthly bonus points.

The term "hybrid model" is a term barely out of diapers, and it encompasses games with a subscription base and microtransactions coexisting. You can't make deductions simply from the use of the term. You seem to be suggesting that because the devs *call* the system a hybrid system, that *means* it focuses on the microtransactions as the primary source of revenue. What justifies that leap in logic?

The model isn't defined by what its called, its defined by what it does. If subscriptions were intended to be only a small part of the total revenue base and the focus was on microtransactions, there would be no need to make a program for specifically going out of their way to reward subscribers over and above premium players. In fact, that would be economically illogical: you'd be spending additional resources for less gain than focusing them on the microtransaction side of the house.

How are you going to know if the devs really are focused first on their subs and then second on their MTX population? Simple: see if the sub experience grows or shrinks. But you won't be able to tell in Issue 21. Issue 21 is far too packed with content: it honestly wouldn't be fair to judge sub content in Issue 21 because its going to be blockbuster huge. Issue 22 might be fair, but its also likely to still be heavily affected by the Freedom release pipeline. So it will be I23 when we will likely be able to judge if the devs are really supporting their subs strongly: it will be the first moment when they really show their true colors. Until then, subs will *definitely* see an improvement. We just won't be certain why.

But that's why all the doom and gloom is doubly dumb. Even if you think the devs are going to shaft the players, its stupid to predict they will do so immediately in ways the players will see. You're just going to destroy your credibility because the devs have stuffed the pipeline for the Freedom launch. The best even the strongest, but not brain-dead skeptics, should be saying is "you'll see, come late 2012, you'll see."

But I guess that doesn't really have the same punch, does it.


Since your assumptions don't match the devs' intentions, zero.

The meaning of the new model is, at least to me, made clear through the official information being given out all this week. "Hybrid" is their way of saying F2P. Posi's letter goes out of the way to comfort the existing player base by saying that, before finalizing COHF, close attention was paid and lessons learned from what Paragon Studios determined to be errors made by other F2P change overs. My logic is thus:

Hybrid:F2P:micro transaction:lifetime sub option:my desire for said option: possible?

I really did not mention doom, gloom, sub numbers, armchair economic analysis, or any negative game argument.

I'm excited about COHF and, since the decision has been made to go with some new fundamentals for one of my favorite games, are we going to be offered the chance to purchase a lifetime sub?

Well, can't say I didn't try. I'd recommend asking the devs directly, because only an answer from them will satisfy you, if that. While you're at it, mention your theory on what their business model entails, in spite of everything they've said about it. I think it would place your request into its proper context for them.

Calling it a "hybrid approach" is their way of not emphasizing the "free" part in "free to play". Instead, they are emphasizing the fact that subscribers get a ton of awesome stuff -- and instead of entirely shutting off your account when your subscription lapses, they give you a bit of access and the ability to purchase extra tidbits between payments.

They are going SUPREMELY FAR out of their way to make sure subscriptions are their cash cow -- even so far as to revamp the veteran rewards to make it more enticing to players to stay subbing longer (the longer you sub, the more likely you are to keep subbing - outside of financial stresses - because of time investment). If they are doing so, that means the likelihood of them offering lifetime subscriptions really low, and the longer they intend to be in business, the lower the possibility of lifetime subscriptions becomes.

Originally Posted by Dispari I don't know why Dink thinks she's not as sexy as Jay was. In 5 posts she's already upstaged his entire career.

Well after 7 years of Doomies predicting the game will fail 6 months later it's hard to find any skeptical prediction believable.

It isn't about the long-term bargain, it's about the short term output.

I didn't say anything about them not seeing it as a bargain, I mentioned the average lack of funds to shell it out all at once. A point that has been mentioned by many at DCUO, CO, and LoTRO forums.

A point that seems to also be an actual practice, from the conversations I've had with different Devs. Not once have I heard during such conversations that Lifetime subs have out-numbered the recurring subs. What I have heard is the opposite.

Not saying CoH should have a LTS. All I am doing is stating evidence I have heard to the contrary of the LTS becoming problematic in relation to the revenue generated from the recurring subs.

I don't buy a LTS, myself. I just don't have that much faith in most MMO developers that I will enjoy the game that long-term anymore.