EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire

 

Go Back   EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire > EverQuest II > General EverQuest II Discussion > General Gameplay Discussion
Members List Search Mark Forums Read

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-03-2012, 07:28 PM   #31
General_Info

Lord
General_Info's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 658
Default

entrailsgalore2 wrote:

People just want everything for free. They won't want to work for it, they don't want to pay for it, they just want it free and now. If something's not free, then the world is horrible, the government sucks, and some sort of justice must be served!  If the rules to something ( such as EQ2's subscription model) don't fit in your "lifestyle", then don't fit it into your lifestyle. That's pretty basic. Don't be lazy and don't complain. It is, what it is, either take it that way or don't. These threads won't stop coming....

This. it's a simple binary choice people ether give soe $15/month for gold sub or they dont.

All the limits are meant to get people to sub who have the finances and will to do so. the op is yet to show even a basic example how soe could make at least the same amount of money a year per person if silver had no restrictions.

__________________
General_Info is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 08:15 PM   #32
Tollymore

Augur
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 112
Default

General_Info wrote:

the op is yet to show even a basic example how soe could make at least the same amount of money a year per person if silver had no restrictions.

I'll do that for him then.

100 Station cash buys a permanent 10 plat increase in your characters Bank limit while Silver. This is repeatable.

A book of stamps, to send 10 letters, costs 150 Station cash.

Access to the new 'Qho Must Die' Adventure Pack is 1500 station cash for silver people, free to subscribers. 'Death of Qho' will be coming out next release, and is also free for our valued Gold members !

1500 Station Cash buys you a shared bank.

Tollymore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 08:22 PM   #33
yohann koldheart

Loremaster
yohann koldheart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: harrisburg,PA
Posts: 1,601
Default

everyone has the chance to buy a full year of gold for 30.00 USD multiple times a year. so people that want the restrictions eased on silver/bronze accounts will never see any sympathy on these forums.

there is nothing wrong with the current f2p matrix and restrictions .

yohann koldheart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 08:30 PM   #34
Tollymore

Augur
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 112
Default

yohann koldheart wrote:

everyone has the chance to buy a full year of gold for 30.00 USD multiple times a year. so people that want the restrictions eased on silver/bronze accounts will never see any sympathy on these forums.

there is nothing wrong with the current f2p matrix and restrictions .

Yohann,

I dont want the restriction eased - I want to be able to buy them off with cold, hard cash.

The problem I have with the matrix is that it's remarkably unsuccessful at getting me to part with money.

Sell me fluff ? Nahh.

Sell me content - Im interested.

Tollymore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 08:35 PM   #35
Regolas

Loremaster
Regolas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 603
Default

The trouble with the OP is he gives no valuable argument for having extra plat on silver vs the reasons why it is capped. Also, it's very hard to read as he's got spelling and grammar mistakes galore in all his posts. If his first language is English then he needs to learn how when to use their, there, your, you're, etc. Also, if you've playrd eq2 since release then silver is free. The only way you could have paid $15 for it is right at the start of EQ2X being introduced and you started a new account. EQ2X is not the same as this F2P model, although it is based on it.
Regolas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 09:57 PM   #36
General_Info

Lord
General_Info's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 658
Default

Tollymore wrote:

General_Info wrote:

the op is yet to show even a basic example how soe could make at least the same amount of money a year per person if silver had no restrictions.

I'll do that for him then.

100 Station cash buys a permanent 10 plat increase in your characters Bank limit while Silver. This is repeatable.

A book of stamps, to send 10 letters, costs 150 Station cash.

Access to the new 'Qho Must Die' Adventure Pack is 1500 station cash for silver people, free to subscribers. 'Death of Qho' will be coming out next release, and is also free for our valued Gold members !

1500 Station Cash buys you a shared bank.

repeatable does not mean someone will infinitely buy it i see people spending enough so they can hold three digit plat but even then people will stop at some point. as for the mail stuff i dont see people going mad and buying a ton of those.

another adventure pack is still just a once only payment, your paying for the content in it not for future content outside of expansions.

by the line of logic you've stated *because* there are research reducers, xp&hp potions on the marketplace that enough people will spend $15 or more worth on stuff every month (or at least $120/year) to make the change a petty matter which it wouldn't be plenty of people would be happy to drop to silver with no restrictions and i doubt many would reinvest that money on fluff or potions to make up for the loss.

*if* someone can spend $15 on items a month they can decide for themselves wether they want items or restriction free gameplay for $15 a month. you have to pick one or the other, you cant expect both for the same price.

__________________
General_Info is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 11:56 PM   #37
Tollymore

Augur
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 112
Default

General_Info,

Your mind is still in a subscription model, where people play *a* MMO.

There is a very big market out there of people who play a number of them, and pay as they go.

I'd like Sony to be able to make more money off these people than the current model enables.

Tollymore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 12:06 AM   #38
The_Cheeseman

Loremaster
The_Cheeseman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,285
Default

Tollymore wrote:

General_Info,

Your mind is still in a subscription model, where people play *a* MMO.

There is a very big market out there of people who play a number of them, and pay as they go.

I'd like Sony to be able to make more money off these people than the current model enables.

While this is an admirable goal, I have to question whether that's the best strategy for a game like EQ2. As it was born as a subscription-based game, EQ2 is a very deep, complex, time-consuming experience. It is designed to require heavy investment on the part of the player into both the advancement of his character and the development of his social network within the game. Free-to-play games generally lack the depth of EQ2, and I would claim that it simply isn't possible to get the full experience of playing this game if you're spreading your attention too thin. This is why I don't think making the bronze/silver membership levels more attractive as a long-term option is really a wise course of action.

__________________
The_Cheeseman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 12:51 AM   #39
Tollymore

Augur
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 112
Default

The_Cheeseman wrote:

n as a subscription-based game, EQ2 is a very deep, complex, time-consuming experience. It is designed to require heavy investment on the part of the player into both the advancement of his character and the development of his social network within the game. Free-to-play games generally lack the depth of EQ2, and I would claim that it simply isn't possible to get the full experience of playing this game if you're spreading your attention too thin. This is why I don't think making the bronze/silver membership levels more attractive as a long-term option is really a wise course of action.

Cheeseman,

What you say is reasonably true for raiders.

There are less than two thousand raiders in EQ2. There are less than five hundred "progression" raiders doing bleeding edge content.

You cannot sustain a MMO on that. You *have to* have a flow of casuals and returning players, and that means you need to make them welcome, even if they dont come with a guaranteed $15 a month each.

Tollymore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 02:42 AM   #40
General_Info

Lord
General_Info's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 658
Default

Tollymore wrote:

General_Info,

Your mind is still in a subscription model, where people play *a* MMO.

here is a very big market out there of people who play a number of them, and pay as they go.

I'd like Sony to be able to make more money off these people than the current model enables.

First my mind is on that because P2P is how the game started and even if it isn't any longer it is still an intial condition and people who have played for a long time at least some of them are still subscribed, others like myself jonied recently and saw fit to subcribe.

what incentive would people have to subscribe at the -very- least if there was no-coin limit and no broker restrictions? people coming in would mroe likey stay on free or silver and contribute less as a whole.

The profit SOE is getting from the gold subscribers would be reduced with this change definitly some may spend that savings on the marketplace, however some would also not spend that money on the marketplace. in buisness terms it is a risky course of action they could lose more money then they gain from the new and old silver players putting money into the marketplace. they ether break even at the least or they dont.

also remeber that the restrictions are a rental in a sense for gold subs most of the items on the marketplace aren't purchases with that dynamic can fluctate more easily then the current system as opposed to a semi-assured gain from gold subs on a month and quaterly basis.

it's a choice on SOE's end ether a stable system they have now which they have used for ages or a system which can give high gains or high losses every month.

__________________
General_Info is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 03:29 AM   #41
Onorem

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,155
Default

I think my brain just had a heart attack.

__________________
_________________________________
"EQ2 is not a "free to play" game, so microtransactions are unlikely to ever have the "front seat" role that they have in F2P games" - SmokeJumper - 4/20/2010
Onorem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 03:33 AM   #42
Onorem

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,155
Default

Tollymore wrote:

The_Cheeseman wrote:

n as a subscription-based game, EQ2 is a very deep, complex, time-consuming experience. It is designed to require heavy investment on the part of the player into both the advancement of his character and the development of his social network within the game. Free-to-play games generally lack the depth of EQ2, and I would claim that it simply isn't possible to get the full experience of playing this game if you're spreading your attention too thin. This is why I don't think making the bronze/silver membership levels more attractive as a long-term option is really a wise course of action.

Cheeseman,

What you say is reasonably true for raiders.

There are less than two thousand raiders in EQ2. There are less than five hundred "progression" raiders doing bleeding edge content.

You cannot sustain a MMO on that. You *have to* have a flow of casuals and returning players, and that means you need to make them welcome, even if they dont come with a guaranteed $15 a month each.

I know quite a few casual players that would argue with that. Cheeseman's statement wasn't at all one of raider vs. others.

__________________
_________________________________
"EQ2 is not a "free to play" game, so microtransactions are unlikely to ever have the "front seat" role that they have in F2P games" - SmokeJumper - 4/20/2010
Onorem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 06:28 AM   #43
Starbuck1771

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 59
Default

bunnykiller69 wrote:

Due to the fact Free to play accounts could then be made easily to funnel money from gold sellers I do not see this changing its also why FTP cant send game mail the spam would NEVER END!

 

PS: I am FTP and I understand why its this way

You are wrong. No matter the limit gold farmers always find a way plus most farmers use paid accounts. It is the sellers that use the free accounts because once they start spamming they get banned.

Starbuck1771 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 11:57 AM   #44
Senvares

Loremaster
Senvares's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 81
Default

The concept of seller using free account is not true I see the sellers with sub accounts then free when im on FT i get no spam emails from gold sellers what so ever but when i subscribe i get them like fly's on a rotting corpse.

The fact i have not put any creditable w/e for my SUGGESTION is not true, For one the idea is to get more people into the game so that they what to subscribe, im not asking to change everything in the game at all everything else is fine its the coin limit thats hurting SOE and losing them money. either way a FTP account has to pay for everything with SC SOE is still making money changing the limit to how much coin you can hold is NOT going to effect them on getting more money its going to make them more money.

Im both a sub and FTP player, if i was a new player coming into the game the coin limit is what would kill the game for me i would not play the game and leave to go play something els SOE is now lost a custumer that would of payed for a sub if it wasn't for the coin limit. Things like this hurt them buisness wise.

I understand they are trying to make money here but you also have to learn to how to convince people its worth paying for the subscription and right now its not. That one time 5$ for silver isn't the only money that is spent.

You have 17 class packs worth 750 SC each That's 12,750 SC which = 130$, Race packs 5 each @ 750SC that's 3,750 SC which = 40$, freeblood @ 2,000 SC which = 20$, character slots @ 1,000 SC each max 7 slots 7,000 SC which = 70$, Any exspansion @ 3,999 SC which = 40$ all this togather is 300$ thats more then 1 years worth of Gold sub.

to top it off you have other items that will continuesly make in money Backpacks, Broker tokens, Experience potions,  others that will rack in money mounts, extra bag slots, house item character clothing The list goes one so you saying taking away or raising or charging for the coin limmit is not going to affect them getting money at all. they are making more money with the silver then they are with gold. with gold 1 year subs are loosing them money because there giving you 60$ worth of SC within that year for reacuring sub Losing them money.

if this doesn't please you as having a good argument then i dont know what will because i have to say thats hell of good evidence to say  the coin limit is not going to effect them any. If that was your plan then that would be considered trolling.

free acounts cant use the mailing system which is what most even if all use is the mail system to post out there sites, i see the majority of both farmers and sellers using subs.

Senvares is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 04:01 PM   #45
Gilasil

Loremaster
Gilasil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 907
Default

Rijacki wrote:

Even though I pay for a Gold subscription, I wish there were more 'unlocks' available and even some timed unlocks. For the "pay your way" concept, I think there should be a way to ala-carte unlock everything of a subscription but by doing it ala-carte be roughly twice the cost of Gold. It would only work, though, if unlocks could be time based. Examples: 500SC for a 30-day unlock that increases the the coin limit, 1000SC for a 30-day unlock to make it unlimited. 200SC per bag/bank slot for a 30-day unlock. And so on.

While I strongly disagree with the op for reasons others have already stated, I have no problem with 'unlocks'.  It appears to me that people who rely on unlocks can easily end up spending more then a gold subscription.

If someone prefers to play a-la-carte instead of all you can eat that's fine by me.  As long as they're paying to get beyond some basic level.

Gilasil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 05:38 PM   #46
retro_guy

Loremaster
retro_guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 935
Default

Rijacki wrote:

Even though I pay for a Gold subscription, I wish there were more 'unlocks' available and even some timed unlocks. For the "pay your way" concept, I think there should be a way to ala-carte unlock everything of a subscription but by doing it ala-carte be roughly twice the cost of Gold. It would only work, though, if unlocks could be time based. Examples: 500SC for a 30-day unlock that increases the the coin limit, 1000SC for a 30-day unlock to make it unlimited. 200SC per bag/bank slot for a 30-day unlock. And so on.

SO 500+1000+200 per slot (1) = 1700SC

Or you could use the current unlock:

1500SC and unlock everything for 1 month??

Buy SC on a triple SC day and the true cost is 1/3. So basically 500SC to unlock everything for 1 month.

__________________
retro_guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 07:39 PM   #47
Tollymore

Augur
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 112
Default

retro_guy wrote:

But SC on a triple SC day and the tru cost is 1/3. So basically 500SC to unlock everything for 1 month.

You are neatly showing why retail has moved to an Every Day Low Prices model, rather than having regular sales ... because then people wait for sales, and that cannibalises your existing sales.

Regrettably for all of us, SOE isnt particularly good at this "selling stuff to people" stuff.

Tollymore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 07:53 PM   #48
Senvares

Loremaster
Senvares's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 81
Default

Gilasil wrote:

Rijacki wrote:

Even though I pay for a Gold subscription, I wish there were more 'unlocks' available and even some timed unlocks. For the "pay your way" concept, I think there should be a way to ala-carte unlock everything of a subscription but by doing it ala-carte be roughly twice the cost of Gold. It would only work, though, if unlocks could be time based. Examples: 500SC for a 30-day unlock that increases the the coin limit, 1000SC for a 30-day unlock to make it unlimited. 200SC per bag/bank slot for a 30-day unlock. And so on.

While I strongly disagree with the op for reasons others have already stated, I have no problem with 'unlocks'.  It appears to me that people who rely on unlocks can easily end up spending more then a gold subscription.

If someone prefers to play a-la-carte instead of all you can eat that's fine by me.  As long as they're paying to get beyond some basic level.

what others have stated are not good arguments there saying SOE will lose money because of this but as i state a silver pays more then what a gold does and they lose more with gold subs, Gold farmers/sellers are more frequent with gold subs because silver blocks out what alot of those gold farmers and sellers need which is a way to advertise that website and getting the gold which is impossible without the broker. There claims are not quite evident that coin limits effect this.

It shouldn't be a timed coin limit, Im saying a one time 1000 SC for a 2-5plat increase per lvl and cant be raised anymore insted of the 20 gold per lvl. if you do timed it just makes it even more complicated.

extra bank bag slots max u can get 3 could be more like 750SC per slot.

to top it off that FTP account cant really farm gold when im a gold subscriber i can make 150+ plat within one week on silver i cant even get near that its hard to even get 5 plat in a week, so you can see if someone on gold can make that much plat i highly doubt a silver account even with the coin limit removed can remotely farm/sell gold.

Senvares is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 09:34 PM   #49
General_Info

Lord
General_Info's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 658
Default

Senvares wrote:

what others have stated are not good arguments there saying SOE will lose money because of this but as i state a silver pays more then what a gold does and they lose more with gold subs, Gold farmers/sellers are more frequent with gold subs because silver blocks out what alot of those gold farmers and sellers need which is a way to advertise that website and getting the gold which is impossible without the broker. There claims are not quite evident that coin limits effect this.

I'm sorry but what you are suggesting is a financial fantasy people on silver paying more then gold do permonth/year is an exception and not the norm.

You act as though *if* someone spends more then $15/month on silver that they are entitled to limits being removed because they spent that money and didn't invest it in a gold sub.

If someone can afford to spend $15 a month on EQ2 they have choices those three choices are 1) dont spend money on EQ2 2) use that money on a gold sub for EQ2 3) use that money to buy items of the marketplace.

you pick one of the above, not complain till the cows come home because you bought something and someone else spent the same amount on something else you wanted but couldn't afford to get both.

__________________
General_Info is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 10:20 PM   #50
Senvares

Loremaster
Senvares's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 81
Default

General_Info wrote:

Senvares wrote:

what others have stated are not good arguments there saying SOE will lose money because of this but as i state a silver pays more then what a gold does and they lose more with gold subs, Gold farmers/sellers are more frequent with gold subs because silver blocks out what alot of those gold farmers and sellers need which is a way to advertise that website and getting the gold which is impossible without the broker. There claims are not quite evident that coin limits effect this.

I'm sorry but what you are suggesting is a financial fantasy people on silver paying more then gold do permonth/year is an exception and not the norm.

You act as though *if* someone spends more then $15/month on silver that they are entitled to limits being removed because they spent that money and didn't invest it in a gold sub.

If someone can afford to spend $15 a month on EQ2 they have choices those three choices are 1) dont spend money on EQ2 2) use that money on a gold sub for EQ2 3) use that money to buy items of the marketplace.

you pick one of the above, not complain till the cows come home because you bought something and someone else spent the same amount on something else you wanted but couldn't afford to get both.

i never claim or acted as if someone spends more then $15/month on silver that they are entitled to limits being remove, your mistaking me for someone else who claimed that not me i saying raising the coin limit up. and everyone els is claiming that SOE will lose money and gold farmers/selling will be worse when indeed it will not.

there saying money is the plan and that they will lose money by raising the coin limit when it does and i had proved it doesn't lse them money but make more.

i dont know whos comment you were reading but it sure the hell wasn't mine to be saying just because you spend 15 your intitled to more. point is money isn't the issue for silver member its a issue with gold for SOE while they lose money.

What i did say is that a silver membership can have almost the same benifits that a gold has with just a simple 1 time SC purchase while gold members are getting screwed paying the monthly sub. i mean sheesh after 7 yrs of paying for a sub you would figure those accounts would be free with everything on it just because of all the money that was spent they could buy everything thats on the SC store.

these people are saying that money would be a issue for SOE when it isn't i dont know how that becomes a great argument at all i see that to be very poor.

Senvares is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 10:29 PM   #51
SOE-MOD-17

Community Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 30
Default

This post has moved: /eq2/posts/preList.m?topic_id=51679...post_id=5753278 Removed for bypassing the filter. Please review the forum guidelines.
SOE-MOD-17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 10:35 PM   #52
The_Cheeseman

Loremaster
The_Cheeseman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,285
Default

Several people, including myself, have explained the reasoning behind the current limits imposed on the FTP bronze/silver account levels. Whether you personally agree with them or not really isn't relevant, they are in place for said reasons, and you have failed to present any persuasive argument for their removal. No offense to you, but I trust SOE's marketing department to make the right choices determining the pricing of their service more than a random player on the forums. The features matrix for the various subscription levels in EQ2 is actually the least restrictive of those I have seen among MMOs that have transitioned to free-to-play, so I don't really see what there is to complain about.

__________________
The_Cheeseman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 10:36 PM   #53
The_Cheeseman

Loremaster
The_Cheeseman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,285
Default

Senvares wrote:

[Removed post]

Care to cite sources for this statistic, or indeed any of the other totally unsupported statements you've presented in this thread as if they were facts?

[Edited for quoting removed post.]

__________________
The_Cheeseman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2012, 12:26 PM   #54
Senvares

Loremaster
Senvares's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 81
Default

The_Cheeseman wrote:

Several people, including myself, have explained the reasoning behind the current limits imposed on the FTP bronze/silver account levels. Whether you personally agree with them or not really isn't relevant, they are in place for said reasons, and you have failed to present any persuasive argument for their removal. No offense to you, but I trust SOE's marketing department to make the right choices determining the pricing of their service more than a random player on the forums. The features matrix for the various subscription levels in EQ2 is actually the least restrictive of those I have seen among MMOs that have transitioned to free-to-play, so I don't really see what there is to complain about.

if this is true then what are they because none seem to be good argument since i have voided them out by all means of why that make anyone happy. and i have put up plenty of prusuasive arguments. you say gold farmer and sellers are a problem but thats not the case for bronze or silver majority to all have a gold subscription, then you say money is the problem i prooved that a gold membership is loosing them money while silvers are paying more.

Senvares is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2012, 04:44 PM   #55
yohann koldheart

Loremaster
yohann koldheart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: harrisburg,PA
Posts: 1,601
Default

Senvares wrote:

 im sorry but more then half of the community would like to see a raise in the coin limmit compaired to the very few that dont and the few who dont care.

you are very wrong, the only players that want anything changed are those that are silver or bronze and there is no way that is more then half of the community.

yohann koldheart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2012, 02:23 AM   #56
General_Info

Lord
General_Info's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 658
Default

Senvares wrote:

if this is true then what are they because none seem to be good argument since i have voided them out by all means of why that make anyone happy. and i have put up plenty of prusuasive arguments. you say gold farmer and sellers are a problem but thats not the case for bronze or silver majority to all have a gold subscription, then you say money is the problem i prooved that a gold membership is loosing them money while silvers are paying more.

i'm sorry but not only have you failed to prove SOE is loosing money because they dont raise the coin limit furthermore you have failed to get even a single supporter in this thread.

We have outlined the reason why they have put the limitations in and why it is a bad buisness decision to take them out when silver players aren't contibuting to the game ever month.

__________________
General_Info is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2012, 06:18 AM   #57
Tollymore

Augur
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 112
Default

General_Info wrote:

i'm sorry but not only have you failed to prove SOE is loosing money because they dont raise the coin limit furthermore you have failed to get even a single supporter in this thread.

We have outlined the reason why they have put the limitations in and why it is a bad buisness decision to take them out when silver players aren't contibuting to the game ever month.

General_Info,

Not quite correct. I support Silver people being able to raise the coin limit.

I just think they should pay to do so.

Likewise, I think they should be able to pay to equip Fabled and Legendary items, and pay to equip Master spells, neither of which non-subscribers could do, back in the day.

Sooner or later Sony is going to realise some people wont subscribe, and will go 'right, so how do we get money out of them'. At that point, I hope they will force me to buy stamps to send mail (just like I can buy stamps to sell stuff on the broker), force me to buy adventure packs to visit certain new dungeons (just like I had to buy Destiny of Velious) and force me to spend real money to raise my coin limit.

Tollymore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2012, 09:45 AM   #58
Caethre

Loremaster
Caethre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,167
Default

Tollymore wrote:

I support Silver people being able to raise the coin limit. I just think they should pay to do so.

((They can. They can purchase a Gold subscription.))

Likewise, I think they should be able to pay to equip Fabled and Legendary items, and pay to equip Master spells, neither of which non-subscribers could do, back in the day.

((All of which are available for that aforementioned Gold subscription.))

Sooner or later Sony is going to realise some people wont subscribe,

(( They already realize that.

My view on it is "well, if they don't want to subscribe in the end, they will hit the buffers of those restrictions full on, and they will accept it, pay up or get out.))

and will go 'right, so how do we get money out of them'. At that point, I hope they will force me to buy stamps to send mail (just like I can buy stamps to sell stuff on the broker), force me to buy adventure packs to visit certain new dungeons (just like I had to buy Destiny of Velious) and force me to spend real money to raise my coin limit.

(( Not that I approve of any further move of the game in this direction, the only way it could work economically is the way mentioned earlier in the thread, ie, that any unlockers of the things that are the most annoying to live with the restrictions, could only be purchased for a time period. Such as, unlock coin limit for 30 days costs X (and on Day 31, the restriction is back in full force, unless you pay again). That way would force people to either keep paying regularly or accept a restriction that they hate. But the cost of these "individual" short-term unlockers, added up, should then cost more than a Gold subscription, making the next choice the obvious one.

This is deliberate. Put roadblocks up to easy play for F2P. We do not really want long-term freeloaders, we need people paying to play the game, paying for its continued support and development. If you want a pure microtransaction game, go find one designed to be that way. ))

(( There are freeloaders in every walk of life, their arrival here now we have a F2P model is no surprise.

EQII was never designed as a microtransaction game and, most importantly, does not have a microtransaction-friendly playerbase. Many of us detest that model, and want this to remain a subscription-based game.

Yes, F2P has now been introduced, with the precise aim of getting new players to try it out. But the commercial objective remains the same as it ever was ... to get new subscriptions.

The restrictions are deliberately designed to become very annoying for anyone who keeps playing, and that is how they should remain. There should never be a situation where a non-paying player gets to play long-term almost unaffected by his/her non-subscription status, it should bite and bite hard, and in a variety of ways that are very significant, not just in terms of fluff.

So, if you are here as a deliberate freeloader, with no intention of ever subscribing, but are whining about the restrictions, you are going to get precisely zero sympathy from the rest of us.

Like I said earlier, if you won't pay, then deal with the restrictions or leave, your choice. ))

__________________
Countess Felishanna Silorielenwe [92/320 Templar|92 Sage](Koada`Dal)

Lady Lorianna Ardinwena [92/320 Monk|92 Carpenter](Koada`Dal)

Lady Suzanna Narinyaare [92/320 Conjuror|92 Woodworker](Koada`Dal)

Lady Annaelisa Lorinfinlinde [92/320 Fury|92 Tailor](Koada`Dal)

Lady Silvianna [92/320 Illusionist|92 Jeweler](Koada`Dal)

Jennianna [92/320 Dirge|92 Weaponsmith](Koada`Dal)

Aurielle [92/320 Wizard|92 Alchemist](Koada`Dal)

Valerianna [92/320 Guardian|92 Armourer](Koada`Dal)

Sarahanna [92/320 Swashbuckler|92 Provisioner](Koada`Dal)

Katherianna [92/286 Beserker|92 Sage](Koada`Dal)

Guildleader of The True Path - A roleplay-based guild (level 77) on Antonia Bayle
Caethre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2012, 04:04 PM   #59
Senvares

Loremaster
Senvares's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 81
Default

i'm sorry but not only have you failed to prove SOE is loosing money because they dont raise the coin limit furthermore you have failed to get even a single supporter in this thread.

(((actually i have with out it being raised they are loosing customers people dont want to play the game because it doesn't give them a chance for the game, not only that they are loosing money from gold memberships because they lose 60$ for every reacuring gold sub.))))

We have outlined the reason why they have put the limitations in and why it is a bad buisness decision to take them out when silver players aren't contibuting to the game ever month.

(((i have not seen one good reason to not to saying its bad buisness is not a promising reason because you do not know that its bad until they try. And silver player contribut more then what a gold will ever do they are making more money with the silver then they do with gold, they are making 300$ off of silver unlocking the races and classes that is more then 1yrs worth of sub plus some, i put the math up there for you already of how much they rack in just from the first things you can buy with sc so you cant say silver is not contributing because gold members are not.))))

and to think about it gold members are not the ones really contributing if your getting a 1 yr your getting 60$ back while the silver is giving the more money so to sit here and say gold is contributing is just a load of crap because silver's are doing alot of the work.

Senvares is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2012, 04:20 PM   #60
Senvares

Loremaster
Senvares's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 81
Default

Im going to sum it down for ya more easier, Gold members are no longer contributors anymore Gold member get to sit back an relax earning free money that SOE is loosing not gaining but LOSING, while the silver member they are the true contributors filling in the pot holes that gold members leave behind, i can have almost a gold membership just from buying out a lot of the station cash store stuff very easily and never have to pay monthly again and just get w/e i need from the store Broker tokens, potions, bags that's making them a crap ton of money, where the gold members in all of this sitting at the bottom relaxing and enjoying there free cash that SOE is losing.

so to sit here and think that silver isn't contributing is crap because they are contributing more then gold ever will. You say its bad business i say its good because its bringing in more money. i mean i own a business and im very very successful at it i know the ins and outs to knowing what to to do and what not to do.

Senvares is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:55 AM.

vBulletin skin by: CompleteGFX.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All threads and posts originally from the EQ2 and Station forums operated by Sony Online Entertainment. Their use is by express written permission.