Would you RATHER they charge for the game (one time fee)?

[Obiyer]

I voted no, because I think F2P will get more people and keep more people playing. On that note, I am worried about the hackers, they will come in droves, and it's going to be up to the community to deal with it. SOE will need moderators on 24/7 on all their servers. Hopefully, the increased revenue they get with F2P will pay for more moderators.

[RadarX]

This is some very interesting feedback and we appreciate it. We have absolutely no intention of charging for the game, but concerns regarding hacking and free accounts are of course being considered.

[Sabin]

Gotta each lunch. I hope someone picks up on my defense of "Yes." :-D

[i see you naked]

pay 2 play = game will be dead soon
1 time pay = game will be dead soon because they cant keep the server up


f2P = steady income from impatient people

[Goku]

Originally Posted by Sabin

PS1 is a monthly charged game. That is more of a reason than an initial charge. I do not believe a initial fee would stop anything. If PS1, Counter-Strike, Starcraft, etc, etc. could be some of the most popular PC games of all time, and charge an initial fee (PS1 had the monthly and was busy in it's day), then PS2 will be fine.

If people can afford computers to play PS2, you can afford a small initial fee.

Still there is a up front cost to the cost that will deter many people from playing. SOE knows what they are doing here otherwise they wouldn't be bothering. A game that is going to be needing a whole bunch of people like this is best of F2P.

[Sabin]

Originally Posted by i see you naked

pay 2 play = game will be dead soon
1 time pay = game will be dead soon because they cant keep the server up


f2P = steady income from impatient people

No.. I'm suggesting a 1 time pay, but with the other good parts of f2P ---- like charging for whatnot (sidegrades, etc.)

[Sabin]

Originally Posted by Goku

Still there is a up front cost to the cost that will deter many people from playing. SOE knows what they are doing here otherwise they wouldn't be bothering. A game that is going to be needing a whole bunch of people like this is best of F2P.

Well, PS1 and WoW did it somehow without that. This will be better because there will be no monthly fee. THAT is what will hold players.

Ultima Online too.

[Luieburger]

Assuming that they can effectively keep the hackers at bay, I am 100% behind Free To Play.

[Neurotoxin]

Reduce repeat offenders, start people off with 2000 SC for a $20 purchase, that's fine by me. Or $10 for PS2 and 1000 SC. Or even $5 for PS2 and 500 SC.

Isn't necessary, but I'd buy it if they went that route.

[Kurtz]

Hackers and Monthly fees didn't kill PS1, it was content (BFRs and core combat) that a. was bad and b. split up the pop.

PS2 needs to tred carefully on the releasing of content. even a new Continent added after release can help to split the population.

When you are pushed to release new content, but know you can literally kill the game by doing so, you walk a fine line.

[Goku]

PS1 I don't think broke 100K sales. WoW? You cannot compare the two.

[kaffis]

Originally Posted by Neurotoxin

Reduce repeat offenders, start people off with 2000 SC for a $20 purchase, that's fine by me. Or $10 for PS2 and 1000 SC. Or even $5 for PS2 and 500 SC.

Isn't necessary, but I'd buy it if they went that route.

This is a model I could certainly get behind, though I'd steer clear of going all the way up to $20. If we can run it without the front-loaded cost without problems, more power to 'em!

[Raymac]

Originally Posted by Sabin

It's like that because of the month fee. Also, consider this. In 10 years, the price of the game will lower to an insignificant price. Even @ $5-$10, it'd take persistent hackers to keep purchasing them.

That argument just doesn't work. I've come across plenty of hackers in "one time fee" games. Call of Duty is a perfect example.

One of the best defenses against the inevitablity of hackers are people enforcing it. You may not remember, but the early days of Planetside had a very strong CSR presence. In fact, there was almost no swearing in any of the public chat channels because you would get a warning from a CSR. They did a great job. After awhile, the CSR's faded away, and Planetside became much more wild west, but the concept was already shown to work.

I think the best thing for the game is keeping the entry level at $0 and having active CSR's monitoring the game. I'm hoping it's not a choice of one or the other.

[Mastachief]

F2P please. Whilst paid subs/game may deter the masses of hacker out there it also deters our content (the players) in what is soon to become a market filled with F2P mmo's it's nice to see a company like SOE riding the front of the wave rather than cutting corners to catch up.

The microtransactions will help keep SOE honest regards keeping hackers out, because let be honest we wont pay money to them if we are being killed by hackers/exploiters.

The current "websites" offering subtle planetside hacks will i'm sure be closely monitored by SOE as to how they circumvent any built in security.

Overall i think that the F2P model in a game SOE have $millions to recoup and then profit will actually help to keep the game as hack free as possible.

[i see you naked]

well I personally going to pay 50€ i think it that way:

ive waited so long for the PS sequel because PS was the biggest and best fucking game i ever played in my life, since they went the F2P route im still gonna pay 50€ for some station cash just because to support them and paying for this great game.