Topic

Why Would I Subscribe?

Enjoying the beta-testing of Glitch, quite the fun and addictive game. So, I headed over to see what I get for subscribing that I don't have now.

Voting: to me, I honestly don't care about that. I'm sure some do, but I'm not one of those people. I can play this Gltich without it and be just as happy while letting other players worry about upcoming changes and the like.

Teleports: while I can see how this could be important, I think I'll be able to have loads of fun in Ur without it. At this stage, I don't understand how/why teleporting is a real incentive.

Store Credits/Subscriber-only Items: The store is filled with vanity items, and I'm one of those people who simply do not care a whit about such things. It's the game I enjoy, not the dress-up. I know folks do love playing dress-up and will pay some real life cash for it. But I, and certainly plenty more like me, don't see why we'd need that.

So are there planned changes to the store to include selling items that effect gameplay, or make certain streets/zones "purchasable"? As it stands right now, there's no reason for me to purchase a subscription, or even a few credits.

EDIT: Some sample ideas of what might incentivize me to get a sub:

- Real Money Real Estate: over the basic 1 or 2 home types, deluxe homes are only purchasable with store credits/combination of credits/currants, or an insane amount of currants.
- Downloadable Content: Certain zones/activities can only be accessed by first purchasing them from the store, or only eligible to subscribers.
- Purchasable-only Skills: Make some higher level skills/skill trees only eligible for subscribers.
- Additional Durability: Every tool we have that degrades, offer a version in the store that is double/triple as durable. Additionally, take the appliances (grills, machines, etc.) that don't degrade, make them degradable and require repair like tools, and sell non-degrading versions in the store.

Just some thoughts.

Posted 17 months ago by Sean of the Moor Subscriber! | Permalink

Replies

Previous 1 2
  • You support the game. 
    Posted 17 months ago by Mr. Dawgg Subscriber! | Permalink
  • +1 to "support the game"

    This game is a labor of love, but it can truly only be sustained by subscribers.
    Posted 17 months ago by Spellbound Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Sean: do you have Teleporting Skills?  I didn't think it was important until I got it.  No turning back now, I'm addicted to teleporting.

    Plus, I care a great deal about vanity/wardrobe items.  Of course, to have a fashionable Glitch you must keep up to date on the newest outfits.

    From what I understand, the only benefits to having a subscription are limited to visual advantages and no real game play advantage, and I believe the devs want to keep it that way.
    Posted 17 months ago by Laurali Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I enjoy that I don't feel burdened to subscribe to get the full experience of the game. Too many games are going the "pay for privilege" route these days, and it creates a divide between haves and have-nots. Glitch gives you things when you subscribe. It's up to you to decide if those things are worth the price they want for them. Withholding some elements like streets, or even offering a fast-tracking for those who pay would create a separation in a community that is very much about teamwork and self-sacrifice for the sake of helping others. It feels like it runs counter to the spirit of the game.
    Posted 17 months ago by Lathian Subscriber! | Permalink
  • If it doesn't seem worth it to you, you don't have to get one.  I bought a subscription basically to reward TS for making a really excellent game, but I can easily afford to do so.  The TP tokens are a nice perk, and I am interested in seeing how the voting works out, but I mostly ignore credits.  Occasionally switch clothes.
    Posted 17 months ago by larky lion Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Most folks don't play a game and give the developers money just out of the kindness of their heart. I certainly hope that wasn't in their business plan when they approached people to fund this venture.
    Posted 17 months ago by Sean of the Moor Subscriber! | Permalink
  • They must think there are/will be enough people who do find the perks worth it.  
    Posted 17 months ago by larky lion Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I disagree, Sean.

    In league of legends, sure there is the incentive to invest in the game because it puts you on the fast track. But everyone I know who has invested money into the game says they did it because they love the game and want to support it. I've recruited at least 5 friends, who have recruited many of their friends to the game. And we all say the same thing.

    Now, obviously, that doesn't account for everyone, but it's certainly enough of a trend to say that there's enough people who enjoy the perks, but also enjoy the fact that they're insuring the game is going to stay for a while.

    Because ultimately, if you like the game, and you enjoy your free ride for a long time, you should, at some point, feel compelled to invest in the game so that it lasts for as long as it can. Otherwise, the game is going to go away.
    Posted 17 months ago by Mr. Dawgg Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Uhm, I agree half & half. Though Sean of the Moor's OP was based directly off of his own personal opinions & matters, I think that with subs you certainly don't get what you pay for. I mean, we're in Beta, so our subs are doubled, but once the game is released, those subs are only going to last you 6 months. Personally, I wouldnt buy the subs the way they are now, the amount of credits per month is really low, and I dont know much about the voting system but I can see that subbing for TP tokens & Votes would only be practical to get Molybdenum, which is 80 dollars, for 6 months of that sub. Regardless of my opinion, or that number, I agree that "supporting the game" isnt a good reason, because like sean said "Most folks don't play a game and give the developers money just out of the kindness of their heart" but I do hope whichever path Tiny Speck takes, they can keep this game open for a long time.

    Edit: Holy crap I need to turn my brain on. I made SO many errors here.
    Posted 17 months ago by Taylor Swift Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I paid a good chunk of money to have the little heart next to my username. I love my little heart. *hugs it*
    Posted 17 months ago by Cerulean Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Does anyone have an example of an MMO that succeeded financially by giving everything away for free, yet derived significant income from vanity items/goodwill subscriptions from die-hards?
    Posted 17 months ago by Sean of the Moor Subscriber! | Permalink
  • If you have ever heard that loud sucking sound emitted by Nexon cash....
    Posted 17 months ago by Nanookie Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Habbo Hotel

    AdventureQuest Worlds
    Posted 17 months ago by Mr. Dawgg Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Shoot, League of Legends. You don't have to pay a single dime to play, and you can be as competitive as the most competitive player. Paying just let's you get your champion faster. And, yes, they give 'vanity' items to paying players as the sole benefit to being a paying player vs a non-paying player.
    Posted 17 months ago by Mr. Dawgg Subscriber! | Permalink
  • agree that "supporting the game" isn't going to work.

    but look at cyworld in south korea, which made loads of money simply by selling virtual goods to people. virtual knick knacks similar to people paying for glitch clothing.

    dunno where cyworld is now, but it is sort of the prototype for virtual goods supported sites.

    failed in the US, sure, and south korea is a special place, but it may well be possible that glitch could support itself *solely* through virtual clothing and decoration sales. not a given by any means, but certainly a possibility.

    personally, i am not going to spring for that stuff unless it is a nice bonus for getting something else that's much less cosmetic. i know a lot of people probably feel similarly. i have no idea what glitch will do for people like us, but i'm not sure they need our money in order to profit.
    Posted 17 months ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink
  • striatic, i know you didn't say this, but i just want to make my point clear, is that I by no means suggest that Glitch become a 'donationware' game or anything.

    They should provide some perks for paying members. Tit for tat. But ultimately, they don't actually give you anything. Everyone, surprise surprise. A virtual good isn't an actual 'thing' that they give you. It's a non-thing that has no true value. They relinquish little by giving you bonus perks.

    In fact... you should be Thankful that there are so few perks if you are a free player. Guess what, for as long as you were a free player, you got 99% of the game for free. You like the game after playing it For Free after 6 months or whatever? Well you should invest 10 bucks or whatever into it. 

    So, your primary purpose for subscribing to the game should be to support the game. They may incentivise it however they will, but really, at the end of the day, your money is going into supporting the game. And, that, should be *why* you invest in it.

    If your reason is only for the perks, it comes off as being petty in my opinion.
    Posted 17 months ago by Mr. Dawgg Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Sean: Probably not (re: finding an example of MMO giving things away), but er...these guys have so far received $5 and then $10 million investments, plus possibly founded Tiny Speck and/or are continuing to develop the game with money from their sale of flickr. I'm not saying that they won't/don't need money from subscribers to sustain things (because I don't know and am speculating based on available public information); but I am saying it's possible they don't need it...or don't need it much. Who knows, they may be will continue to get outside investors? 

    Also, Lathian echoed what stoot has said numerous times: They don't have plans (and stoot seems committed to not doing this) to give any true gameplay advantages (such as you suggest) for subscribers. I'm not saying I necessarily agree or disagree with that per se, but just letting you know what he has stated in various forums. He's also said he hopes Glitch runs for several years. Thus I assume Tiny Speck has a business plan in mind to support that...maybe not necessarily dependent on subscriptions. Just interesting thought to me.

    FYI, I bought mine both for the clothes/TP tokens and to basically show that I feel the game is worthy of support, in case they DO need subscription money. If that makes any sense:).

    ETA: I guess people did find a couple examples after all....
    Posted 17 months ago by RM Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @ Rascalmom - (and Im only responding to this because I've seen this same point made before) - Investors give them money, but from that they are supposed to generate a profit. Thats probably why (and I never played this game) Fauna Sphere was shut down. I mean, Stoot didnt sell Flickr & get investors so that he could create a game that would only diminish his resources. But like my old post said, however they plan on doing it, I wish them luck.
    Posted 17 months ago by Taylor Swift Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Well that's probably true, Taylor. Like I said, I don't know:) Just guessing subscribers aren't dead important...yet:)
    Posted 17 months ago by RM Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Look at it this way too guys.

    The game isn't done, and A/B players are already supporting it?

    When they show that to an investor, that helps them tremendously to get more funding. I'm late to the party, so I know I wasn't able to contribute at the time, but everyone who did, you helped them get more investment money.

    I know KT signed-on for reasons other than  monetary ones, but I don't see it unrealistic for him to be interested in the financials of the game before he made a huge life changing decision. If he did, and he saw how many people already subscribed, I'm sure that was incentive for him as well.

    So there's a lot more to it at this stage in the game than just money. All I'm saying is that ultimately, no matter what online game you are playing, when you pay the monthly fee, or buy the virtual good, you aren't getting a physical good. The company isn't selling you anything, really. You are investing in their game so that they can continue to provide it and to develop it further. 

    I think we forget that if you even want to play some MMOs that you have to pay. There are no perks for paying players. You *have to* pay to play.
    Posted 17 months ago by Mr. Dawgg Subscriber! | Permalink
  • "Who knows, they may be will continue to get outside investors?"

    you see, the thing about investors is that, generally speaking of course, they like to be repaid. with interest. at some point glitch needs to generate significant revenue, so either the subscriptions have got to be compelling or they need to find some other revenue source.

    "If your reason is only for the perks, it comes off as being petty in my opinion."

    look, if glitch is about to fall apart at the seams and without my donation it'd blow up and sink into False Creek never to return then yeah i'd donate money to support the cause but the truth is they are nowhere near that point and if they really need my money i'm sure they'll ask for it.

    and they'll probably ask for my money by offering me some kind of improvement to my glitch experience that is compelling to me. they haven't yet, so i'm just going to assume they don't want my money for the time being, and that's a-ok with me.
    Posted 17 months ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink
  • The guy who ran farmville said that they expect 5% (iirc, but either way, a small ass amount) of their users to actually invest in the game.

    So, I mean, are they going to get that? I don't know. What is there expectation? I don't know. What I do know is that the incentives in farmville are purely 'vanity' as well. So we know that it can work. 

    Fortunately, Glitch has vanity and other things, and on top of that, it's going to be a game people love and want to support.
    Posted 17 months ago by Mr. Dawgg Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I bought mine also for the clothes/TP tokens, but mostly to show them how much i love this game and  as Rascalmom said the game is worthy of our support, I think this game deserves it.
    and lets hope this game runs for years to come,

    so paying or not we all support Tiny Speck and I for one am so grateful to be in on this game.
    Posted 17 months ago by gill288 Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I don't like the thought of making suscribing nearly compulsary. I'dike it to be still fun to play even without a subscription. Just make it like, awesomer with a subscription. Like never breaking down tools. Or using credits to buy things that cost an insane amount of currants.
    Posted 17 months ago by KitkatCat Subscriber! | Permalink
  • My feedback on the ideas:
    +/- Real Money Real Estate
    : over the basic 1 or 2 home types, deluxe homes are only purchasable with store credits/combination of credits/currants, or an insane amount of currants.
    I wouldn't like a distinct change between payers and freeplayers. I would more likely like this rule for your 2nd house. Or make second houses available only to payers.

    - Downloadable Content: Certain zones/activities can only be accessed by first purchasing them from the store, or only eligible to subscribers.
    Nah, divides people too much.

    -- Purchasable-only Skills: Make some higher level skills/skill trees only eligible for subscribers.
    Definitely a no from me, skills should be equal, else you have a big disadvantage if you don't pay. Paying should generate a bonus, like the wardrobe, which has no or very limited effect on gameplay.

      + Additional Durability: Every tool we have that degrades, offer a version in the store that is double/triple as durable. Additionally, take the appliances (grills, machines, etc.) that don't degrade, make them degradable and require repair like tools, and sell non-degrading versions in the store.
    I like this idea very much :)My own ideas:
    +
    Additional banking storage: Everyone should get some general banking storage, with banks spread over Ur. Subscribers get an extra slot.

    + Additional storage in your house: I would very gladly pay for more storage in my house. Subsribers get the option of purchasing an extra chest. Or a refrigerator (would love to store my veggies in there).

    + Bigger bags: Bags which are 1,2,3 spots bigger then the biggest there is now. Ofcourse they still cost currants, but you can't buy them without a subscription. (This includes toolboxes!)

    + Bigger gardens / split gardens (meadow/pasture and veggie garden): You get a bigger garden, which is split in two, so you can place your animals in one part and trees, vegetables in the other. Or maybe the vegetables seperate and safely away from the animals (I am always annoyed they get in my way when tending the garden.)
    Posted 17 months ago by Miriamele Subscriber! | Permalink
  • No one has mentioned how free players are/will be supporting Glitch:  "If You're Not Paying For It; You're The Product".  Flickr, for example, lowered the initial subscription rate after it got large enough.

    More important during testing than the number of players who get subscriptions is the conversion rate.  What percentage of the testers are purchasing subscriptions?  That is a measure of support that can be used when making future financial projections. 
    Posted 17 months ago by WindBorn Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Disagree with OP. Agree with  Miriamele 
    Posted 17 months ago by Aero Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I subscribed because I wanted to support Tiny Speck's venture 'cause I liked the concept of Glitch. I agree the benefits of my subscription seem a little thin, but I'm sure more will come, and if not, being a subscriber is worth it to me for gettin' in on the ground floor and teleportion. Also, did I mention all the kool kids subscribe? They don't complain, they step up and subscribe! 
    Posted 17 months ago by MeherMan Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I subscribed because I'd like to see the game stick around for a while. :)
    Posted 17 months ago by Pirate Apples Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Miriamele, I am loving those ideas!
    The idea of increased durability is very appealing. Especially with the grinder!
    But extra storage would be great! Just now everything's dumped on my floor. It's not something that will affect gameplay, purely aesthetics, but would make my Glitch life a bit easier.
    The bigger bag idea is great.
    I used to think that to get the top level of a skill, you should be a sub, but now I agree that skills shouldn't be limited.
    Posted 17 months ago by Duck Bill Platty Subscriber! | Permalink
  • The staff has made it very clear in the past that subscriptions will never offer any significant benefit to those who buy them. Vanity benefits only :)

    Also, Meherman, it's Tiny Speck ;)
    Posted 17 months ago by Cupcake Subscriber! | Permalink
  • The way I see it, I drop $60 for a xbox game, play it for a month or two and put it on a shelf. At least with Glitch I am pretty sure I will be playing it for many years based on the fact that I am still playing it after several months already.
    Posted 17 months ago by Jepro Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @Cupcake  good catch - I will fix!  LoL
    Posted 17 months ago by MeherMan Subscriber! | Permalink
  • 1. I subscribed on impulse to support the game. It's not a big moral decision... More like: I love you Glitch I want to support you....
    2. I'm glad the perks for subscribing are more in the vanity area.. somehow it feels like cheating to pay for skill branches, etc, since there is some strategic decision making that goes into learning skills. A little cheating might not be so bad, but I wouldn't want the game to have entire skill areas only available to people with cash...
    3. I like all the clothes... A lot of the energy human beings expend on clothes is social anyway. Why should Ur be different?
    Posted 17 months ago by sakmet Subscriber! | Permalink
  • +1 for buying things for your house (decorations, cabinet).
    +1 for buying things for your garden (how about a scarecrow?)

    Even more vanity: I'd like to have patches on my big bags to easily ID which is which... A cabbage badge/emblem for my food bag; a ruby on my mining bag; etc.)

    I'd shell out for that kind of stuff.
    Posted 17 months ago by emdot Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I subscribed for one reason and one reason only.

    I enjoy playing the game. I want the game to continue to exist. Games that don't turn a profit don't continue to exist long.

    Sure, I enjoy playing dress-up with my avatar, and I have spent a bunch of credits, and I even (on occasion) use my teleport tokens (although not as much as I thought I would).  But the bottom line for me is that it's worth money out of my pocket to keep playing a game I really enjoy.
    Posted 17 months ago by Krikket Subscriber! | Permalink
  • You should never sell anything which seriously affects gameplay with microtransactions as it seriously upsets the balance of the game. As for making certain areas only available for paid members, why would you want to divide the community like that?

    Here is a really interesting video about micro transactions (which I guess extends to subscriptions as well)
    http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/extra-credits/3689-Microtransactions
    Posted 17 months ago by baggyn Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Wow, I was totally gonna post that.

    But anyway, many devs have specifically said that subscribers are not going to have much of an advantage over non-subscribers. I am sure they were all horribly poor students at one point and know that money can be hard to come by sometimes.
    Posted 17 months ago by Ani Laurel Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Miriamele has some well thought out refinements of the OP's ideas, and seems to understand the difference between convenience and performance very well.

    "Or make second houses available only to payers."

    i like this idea the most. i'd pay for a subscription for this. i don't like to change clothes much, but i could totally use a pied a terre somewhere.

    "[regarding additional tool durability] I like this idea very much."

    i like this idea.

    "Subsribers get the option of purchasing an extra chest. Or a refrigerator (would love to store my veggies in there)."

    i like this idea.

    "Bags which are 1,2,3 spots bigger then the biggest there is now."

    i like this idea.

    "Bigger gardens / split gardens (meadow/pasture and veggie garden):"

    i don't like this idea. too big a split between free and paid performance. having access to an additional house would be more than enough.
    Posted 17 months ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I am sure others have stated what I am about to write - but I could not be bothered reading every single response -  I bought a sub to a game that I hope over the next year will grow and get better and better.  It is a sort of investment.  Like if I go into a game shop and by an EA game or my son buying a Steam game.  I have bought into this game.  Also I hope to support the people who are using their time, knowledge, skill and know how to make it more enjoyable for me to play.  As for suggestions, I believe that Tiny Speck want us to input our ideas and clothing has a place just as much as your valid comments.  Personally I want to be able to move about more than just left and right, I want to be able to put things around my house in various places and not just in a line and I want to have a reminder note for myself so I don't keep forgetting how to make and mix stuff.  Unlike some, I have a life and a child to take care of and my memory does not extend as far as remembering where particular trees are which waste a lot of my game play looking for them.  As for whether some of my ideas get put forward, voted on or discarded is neither here nor there.  The game is a bit of fun and worth the support.
    Posted 17 months ago by Really Pissed Off Subscriber! | Permalink
  • On second home/pied a terre ownership: perhaps not a full house but limit it to an apartment (or to keep the supply of inexpensive primary housing open, a special 'studio/pied a terre' only open to those who already have a home)?  Although group halls/keys to friends' homes/other improvements might obviate the demand for this sort of thing.
    Posted 17 months ago by jasbo Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Ok, call me petty if you like, but the thing thats going to make me buy a subscription, is the colors, hairstyles etc. and house upgrades. I agree, its great to support any game or organization you want to succeed, but that $30 or $58 is grocery money to me. I've been fighting with myself for the past 2 months, wanting a sub, lol. Its just been "not yet". But dang it, I *like* my hair this way! So I will buy a subscription before the time is up, then be able to use the colors I like. And when things get better here, I'll definately pay to support the game in a more general way. A day without Glitch is......a day without Glitch. :-[
    Posted 17 months ago by Phoebe Springback Subscriber! | Permalink
  • "(or to keep the supply of inexpensive primary housing open, a special 'studio/pied a terre' only open to those who already have a home)?"

    sure. i'd buy a sub for that, even if it was limited in the way you describe, because it'd be something i'd use.
    Posted 17 months ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I'm petty. A subscription for the wardrobe and vanity, yeah. It would be awesome to get a little attaboy or attagirl for putting our money where your game is since money into a game will keep the investors happy, hopefully, and keep the game alive.

    Another thought along the lines of inexpensive additional housing: extra housing is only attractive for the added storage for me. I would be overjoyed to have the ability to buy a stand-alone storage cabinet with a subscription. I'm thinking it would be awesome to have lockers in the subway.
    Posted 17 months ago by ~Alice~ Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Bought the subscription for the tokens and because I love playing, but really 99% of the reason was for one thing only...Blue Bunny slippers.  I'm not sure they would have disappeared when my Beta Sub ran out, but I wasn't going to take that chance.
    Posted 17 months ago by Menoboo Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Personally, I played League of Legends, a free to play game and have dumped money on it just because.  Didn't buy anything that helped game play, just different skins (outfits) for the characters I play in game.

    I love the concept that free to play and paying people are on the same grounds game wise.  Let people buy unique clothing, unique housing accessories, but not advantageous items in game.  No bigger (carrying) bags, or better tools.  That ruins games like this.  Maybe a bigger storage in home at most.  Just my 2c.
    Posted 17 months ago by Mahphisto Subscriber! | Permalink
  • "No bigger (carrying) bags, or better tools.  That ruins games like this."

    but surely teleportation tokens confer a much greater gameplay advantage than larger bags or more durable tools.
    Posted 17 months ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink
  • WindBorn, while I agree with that post (If you're not paying for it, you're the product) in regards to 'Web 2.0' crap, I had to ask myself how does it apply to a FTP MMO?

    Free players bring what 'products' to the table. They bring their personality and game-selves to the paying players. They are more kids we get to play with. So there's some truth there.

    In a Web 2.0 site, members actually bring stuffs to the site.  DeviantArt, Flickr, etc users bring images. Digg members bring news. Wiki editors bring information. These things are somethings that the site actually uses.

    Free members to games simply don't bring that. At best, they recruit their friends and buy things, and their recruited friends recruit friends and buy things. At worst, they play for free and never buy anything and never recruit any friends. So, ultimately, at the end of the day, we're still looking at the game being the product, and the free players are just 'free salesmen.'

    EDIT: Forgot to say that I agree with the thoughts that paying players should get few to no game benefits. I like vanity only.

    EDIT: Forgot to say that I don't mean to call anyone petty. Just saying that the idea of subscribing only for non-existent things seems petty to me. I don't believe anyone thinks that way when they subscribe. I know Sean isn't petty, and that he was questioning the subscriber incentives and their quality themselves.
    Posted 17 months ago by Mr. Dawgg Subscriber! | Permalink
  • even if free players don't pay for content and don't recruit friends, they are still providing company to those who have paid and even if they aren't supplying that, they make the game seem larger and more full of activity and even if they aren't supplying that there are many aspects of massively multiplayer games that require critical mass to work and even if they aren't supplying critical mass they are still potential future subscribers.

    and besides, deviant art and flickr need commenters, no? if someone signs up for flickr and doesn't upload a single photo they are still valuable because they leave comments and mark favourites and what have you.

    and if none of that makes any sense i can merely mumble that tiny speck 'has their reasons' and that should be sufficient explanation, no?

    i once read caterina fake write of flickr that the photos were on some level an excuse to interact with one another, and that the 'real product' is the community.

    well, except she didn't use the term 'real product' : ]
    Posted 17 months ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink
  • +1 stri.
    Posted 17 months ago by Jellybelly Baby Subscriber! | Permalink
Previous 1 2