143 replies to this topic

[Mabusian]

Hajile, on 25 July 2011 - 09:26, said:

$17.59 is the cost of a one month subscription. If they're making less than that on average across their entire customer base, then they are making less per capita that they would on a standard subscription model. If that's the case then it was all a waste of time and they would have done better to not bother with all this cash shop nonsense, simply up their promotion of the game and attract more players under their old model.

Which is why they're clearly scrabbling to get more players to spend money on points - I don't think they are making more than $17.59 per player any more.

That's why ALL major MMOs are offering rebates on long time subs. And if you look at other MMOs gone F2P like AoC or EQ2, LotRO still has the fairest payment model in the market, even with the all the new store additions around. That is because a) you don't need them and they are either one time or once per year sales.

With an F2P model you cannot really compare the earnings per player anymore. You cannot even compare it to the $99 for 12 months they are currently offering.

[Trinsec]

I thought it was around $15 for one month subscription. Many people might go for the $30 for 3 months. So I'd put $10 as the minimum per month?

Some of my friends even went for the $99 for 12 months. Turbine's really advertising that one, so they seem to want at least $8 plus something monthly from the players. The $17.59 is quite double that.

(And I can't find updated prices and I don't want to have to log in the myaccount section. Why is Turbine not displaying the monthly fees clearly? Unless I'm grossly overlooking it, feel free to give me a link to the clear overview of current prices.)

[Hajile]

Trinsec, on 25 July 2011 - 09:39, said:

(And I can't find updated prices and I don't want to have to log in the myaccount section. Why is Turbine not displaying the monthly fees clearly? Unless I'm grossly overlooking it, feel free to give me a link to the clear overview of current prices.)

Nah, you can't see the prices up front on Turbine's account system unfortunately. I had to go most of the way through the subscription process just to find out how much they cost.

[Trinsec]

Hajile, on 25 July 2011 - 10:09, said:

Nah, you can't see the prices up front on Turbine's account system unfortunately. I had to go most of the way through the subscription process just to find out how much they cost.

Now that's just being asinine... Pfft. I can see why they had to advertise that $99 for 12 months heavily then.

[cossieuk]

The standard prices without any offers or founders plan are

$14.99 per month
$41.85 per 3 months
$77.70 per 6 months
$143.40 per 12 months

found here http://forums.lotro....lan-Information

One other thing to take into account when working is that there is a larger player base since F2P so even if everyone on average is play less per month the overall income could be larger

[Spheric]

Hajile, on 25 July 2011 - 09:26, said:

Guesswork and generalisation, really.

$17.59 is the cost of a one month subscription. If they're making less than that on average across their entire customer base, then they are making less per capita that they would on a standard subscription model. If that's the case then it was all a waste of time and they would have done better to not bother with all this cash shop nonsense, simply up their promotion of the game and attract more players under their old model.

Which is why they're clearly scrabbling to get more players to spend money on points - I don't think they are making more than $17.59 per player any more.

I don't think that's how the model works. Would you rather have 100,000 players spending $17.59 a month or one million players spending $5.00 per month on average? 1.7 million dollars income vs 5 million income?

There is some additional cost associated with greater numbers of players, but it is not significant enough to drastically mess with the model.

IMHO

[Fuin]

Indeed lifers are Turbine biggest mistake. These most loayal players that should be base of income were turned into freebies. Maybe part of issues with CM was that they offered too many lifetime deals, knowing they won't keep the licence. Regardless I can imagine why they wanted to change whole payment methond into something new.

Yet I don't get why they kept the deal with lifers with F2P launch. Surely they'd have to give new updates for free, but free turbine points? Or having same status as paying VIPs? While I can imagine this wouldn't be popular, no free points for lifers or overall worse service than paying VIPs, would bring some money from most loyal/addicted players. Also this would give more incentive to pay monthly and be VIP, even for lifers. Sure some would never do it or leave, but then they aren't paying anymore, so...

Anyways now they are bound to offer same deal for those who pay monthly and lifers. So for example sweetening deal with 1000TP would also mean less income from selling points to lifers. Thus also more and more cash shop exclusives even for VIPs, forcing them to pay for it, which makes whole deal less attractive than premium account. Sadly I doubt they'll find any better way now, than milking game to death by offering more and more advantage in shop.

[Vardiel]

I'm a lifetimer. Prior to F2P and the Store, lifetime subscriptions must have seen like a big mistake. Now that we know how much (read: how LITTLE!) those "free" 500 TPs a month can buy, I'm not so sure. The cost of Lifetime was around 12 to 14 months of pay per month subscription? After that it's all money saved. Something like that anyway... The way I see it, after preordering Isengard (without even hardly starting Mirkwood quests mind) I've not saved that much yet. All this Store junk is getting more and more questionable, that is, more "mandatory" for anyone who plays seriously.

I haven't indulged myself yet, but I can see how a good deal of these "freeloaders" who don't have to pay for their VIP anymore would be keen on buying more points. 500 a month burns in relic removals and other legendary itemizations, not to mention storage, (slayer) deed accelerations, wardrobe and costumes... A lifetimer is less likely to leave the game, more likely I would even say, to buy more points to add value to the investment already made. Besides, all that money from the Lifetime subscriptions has to have amounted a nice whoopin' deal of dough to spend on projects like say, more content for Lotro.

This is all speculation without numbers of course, which we can't access to anyway. But I have no doubt that F2P has brought enough preciousss dollars to counter for all the money "lost" by Lifetimers not paying each month.

[cossieuk]

Fuin, on 25 July 2011 - 13:18, said:

Indeed lifers are Turbine biggest mistake. These most loayal players that should be base of income were turned into freebies. Maybe part of issues with CM was that they offered too many lifetime deals, knowing they won't keep the licence. Regardless I can imagine why they wanted to change whole payment methond into something new.

Yet I don't get why they kept the deal with lifers with F2P launch. Surely they'd have to give new updates for free, but free turbine points? Or having same status as paying VIPs? While I can imagine this wouldn't be popular, no free points for lifers or overall worse service than paying VIPs, would bring some money from most loyal/addicted players. Also this would give more incentive to pay monthly and be VIP, even for lifers. Sure some would never do it or leave, but then they aren't paying anymore, so...

Anyways now they are bound to offer same deal for those who pay monthly and lifers. So for example sweetening deal with 1000TP would also mean less income from selling points to lifers. Thus also more and more cash shop exclusives even for VIPs, forcing them to pay for it, which makes whole deal less attractive than premium account. Sadly I doubt they'll find any better way now, than milking game to death by offering more and more advantage in shop.

If they were to not give lifers the same deal as VIP then they would be opening themselves up for lots of law suits

[Fuin]

cossieuk, on 25 July 2011 - 13:53, said:

If they were to not give lifers the same deal as VIP then they would be opening themselves up for lots of law suits

And why so? I thought the main deal with lifetime was getting free updates(except expansions) and access to game. I see no way extra points or "conveniences" for paying subscribers(lets call them platinum) break that.

[Calendae]

not that again.

[cossieuk]

Fuin, on 25 July 2011 - 14:22, said:

And why so? I thought the main deal with lifetime was getting free updates(except expansions) and access to game. I see no way extra points or "conveniences" for paying subscribers(lets call them platinum) break that.

There has never been any difference between a life time sub and any other sub, they are the same thing and were sold as the same thing, so they have to remain the same.

[Mabusian]

Fuin, on 25 July 2011 - 13:18, said:

Indeed lifers are Turbine biggest mistake. These most loayal players that should be base of income were turned into freebies.

Well, how many of those lifetimers would NOT have bought Isengard now because they had already left the game? Take a look at AoC, EQ2, etc. They all turned into F2P games without having lifers. As nice as this theory sounds it's simply wrong.

[Fuin]

cossieuk, on 25 July 2011 - 15:11, said:

There has never been any difference between a life time sub and any other sub, they are the same thing and were sold as the same thing, so they have to remain the same.

Was that written exactly into lifetime ToS or it's just Your logic? I'm seriously asking.

Anyways they could easily made up something like special 3+ month deals with bonus packs or platinum 20$ subscription, that's better than regular one. Just like they went with RoI pre-orders just for real cash after promising expansions buyable for points(I mean who said anything about pre-orders )

@Mabusian
Same question would be how many lifetimers didn't buy RoI because they wait for it to be in store for points they gathered since F2P? Any my theory isn't that LOTRO went P2P -> F2P because of lifers. I'd say they did it for more money. I'm just thinking lifetime deal while sweet for players was a bad deal for Turbine.

[cossieuk]

Fuin, on 25 July 2011 - 15:26, said:

Was that written exactly into lifetime ToS or it's just Your logic? I'm seriously asking.

When I got mine it was advertised as getting the same as monthly sub.

Quote

Anyways they could easily made up something like special 3+ month deals with bonus packs or platinum 20$ subscription, that's better than regular one. Just like they went with RoI pre-orders just for real cash after promising expansions buyable for points(I mean who said anything about pre-orders )

They could bring out another level of sub and take the monthly points off of both lifers and current VIP's but I would imagine this would upset a lot of current players.  As for RoI you will be able to but it with points, just not yet.

Quote

@Mabusian
Same question would be how many lifetimers didn't buy RoI because they wait for it to be in store for points they gathered since F2P? Any my theory isn't that LOTRO went P2P -> F2P because of lifers. I'd say they did it for more money. I'm just thinking lifetime deal while sweet for players was a bad deal for Turbine.

Lifetimes were good for Turbine at the start as it would have recouped a large chunk of the money they spent making the game.  Also lifers help to keep the population levels up which can be useful when new players come.  The mistake was to offer lifetime subs for so long.  

As for your theory that it was money that dictated the change, that is a given as Turbine themselves have said LOTRO was do well and making money before the change but F2P would open up the game to a larger player base

[Dalthalion]

One thing that is forgotten in this discussion is the matter of Middle-earth Enterprises (f.k.a. Tolkien Enterprises), and it relates to the aforementioned prediction that DDO will outlast LOTRO.

Just Google "Tolkien Enterprises" and "Iron Crown Enterprises", and you'll find some interesting stories about the licensing pull-out that occurred in the relationship between the two.  Now, I won't tell the long and sordid story, but I do want to point out that, when ME (TE) gets the slightest hint that the return on their investment is declining, they have no qualms about rescinding the granted license, because their sole goal is profitization (something they have no hesitation to state).  While that in itself is not a fault, they also have a perceived history of being rather ruthless in their pursuit of profit.

Personally, I consider it somewhat funny that WB/Turbine will have their ruthless business model, which will result in an eventual loss of profit for WB and ME, as the cause of the loss of license from ME, according to their own ruthless business model.  It's only a matter of time, and I've seen it before.

As for me, being a lifer, I've played for free for some time.  I have no further expectations, nor do feel any guilt over getting what I've gotten so far, as I justify my subscription as a good-faith initial investment in the success of the game.

[Fuin]

cossieuk, on 25 July 2011 - 16:02, said:

When I got mine it was advertised as getting the same as monthly sub.

We all know Turbine advertisements and promises...devil lies in details as usual. I was just asking is base for those mass lawsuits was strong or just some Turbine ad or promise.

cossieuk, on 25 July 2011 - 16:02, said:

They could bring out another level of sub and take the monthly points off of both lifers and current VIP's but I would imagine this would upset a lot of current players.  As for RoI you will be able to but it with points, just not yet.

Well if done properly this could upset, but I think only some lifers and I guess there would be enough Turbine Defenders to explain it properly. After all lifers aren't paying anymore + their deal wouldn't be that bad at all.  But it'd also give the chance for more profits for Turbine and brought less cash shop "conveniences" for those who want to pay subscription. Worse deal for lifers, better for paying customers, sounds quite fair for me.

I'm also sure they could dress it up and advertise properly. If they could bring gear to cash shop, oh excuse me, stat tomes and make those perceived as okay, just because stats are not on some kind of special "robe of awesomeness", they wouldn't have trouble in making new subscription plan. But they didn't. Kinda pointless to speculate on that matter too much.

cossieuk, on 25 July 2011 - 16:02, said:

Lifetimes were good for Turbine at the start as it would have recouped a large chunk of the money they spent making the game.  Also lifers help to keep the population levels up which can be useful when new players come.  The mistake was to offer lifetime subs for so long.

Yeah lifters weren't just necessary evil, but in the end deal was much better for players than Turbine. I don't have anything against people who bought it, just pointing out that those decisions will affect everyone via more cash shop items. It also explains why VIP isn't as good deal as it'd seem.

Yeah that's not a theory, I just thought Mabusian understood me as making "lifetimers brought F2P on us" theory. Thus the wording. Prolly me and my English, excuse non native speaker, please

[Dalthalion]

When I asked Patience specifically about the Lifetime deal during SoA beta, I was told in certain terms that it was a one-time deal specifically for beta players that would not be available later.  With that in mind, I and others at the time jumped on it.  At the time, it was a good deal for both parties, as we would get to play in perpetuity and Turbine would get 20 months of subscription per player (US $199.00 divided by the other special deal monthly rate of US $9.99) immediately to fund their continued development efforts.  It was a fair trade.

As others have pointed out, the mistake came when this one-time deal was extended.  Again, those players who saw the long-term benefit jumped at the chance to get off the monthly rate rut.  To blame lifers for this is a flawed approach.  The fault was solely with Turbine, who didn't realized that introductory offers like that should stay introductory.  The F2P model that came later could be attributed to a poor decision on Turbine's part, coupled with the larger WB corporate desire for higher profits.

[Raedwulf]

Vardiel, on 25 July 2011 - 13:34, said:

The cost of Lifetime was around 12 to 14 months of pay per month subscription? After that it's all money saved. Something like that anyway...

As far as I remember, the original subscription was £11.99 / month, whilst the lifetime was £99. The figure that has always stuck in my mind is that I was playing free after about 8 1/2 months. I've been here over 4 years now. I can hardly complain.

[Raedwulf]

Vardiel, on 25 July 2011 - 13:34, said:

All this Store junk is getting more and more questionable, that is, more "mandatory" for anyone who plays seriously.

I haven't indulged myself yet, but I can see how a good deal of these "freeloaders" who don't have to pay for their VIP anymore would be keen on buying more points. 500 a month burns in relic removals and other legendary itemizations, not to mention storage, (slayer) deed accelerations, wardrobe and costumes... A lifetimer is less likely to leave the game, more likely I would even say, to buy more points to add value to the investment already made. Besides, all that money from the Lifetime subscriptions has to have amounted a nice whoopin' deal of dough to spend on projects like say, more content for Lotro.

I don't agree with any of those points either, I'm afraid. I'm a serious player. I just don't think that the little increments that store-only items bring add anything significant. If you give me a straight choice between a player with "standard" kit that knows how to play their class, and some e-peen berk with bells, whistles, and go-faster stripes... I'll take Mr Competent every time.

I'm a freeloader. I'm not spending money on points; my investment paid off years ago. Not least because I see little at the moment to persude me that there is a long term future in the game. LotRO could be be dead on its feet in 12 months. Why waste money on points? The occasional bunch of slayer deed tomes when they're on offer lasts a remarkably long time, the rest of the ones you mention don't appeal. And as I've already pointed out - the lifetime subs were almost certainly intended to pay off the capital investment in the game. They do not represent on-going investment in the game.