Paying to Multiplay?


Would/Do you pay monthly for multiplayer?  

103 members have voted

  1. 1. Would/Do you pay monthly for multiplayer?

    • Yes
      22
    • No
      81


Recommended Posts

Thing is you mentioned all those games that dont have persistent worlds, THATS why they charge you to play on them, server space, bandwidth, wages etc..

Neverwinter Nights is free and it has endless amounts of worlds that can be created...

And with Warcraft 3 you can create custom maps, which then may be downloaded, that takes up lots of bandwidth, but do you see them chargin? And mods make the game ever expanding. Granted D2 doesn't have mods online, @ least where I play, and most other games have mods, which is all your updates for games are, just large mods, which anyone can make, its just that they have to be made well is all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Neverwinter Nights is free and it has endless amounts of worlds that can be created...

And with Warcraft 3 you can create custom maps, which then may be downloaded, that takes up lots of bandwidth, but do you see them chargin? And mods make the game ever expanding. Granted D2 doesn't have mods online, @ least where I play, and most other games have mods, which is all your updates for games are, just large mods, which anyone can make, its just that they have to be made well is all.

Still dont get it do you, none of those you mention are persistent worlds, its not the game that they pay to upkeep, its the server you play on, persistent worlds are ones that are always on, you move an item from a house to the shed, its still there when you log on again, its not like some RTS with the same map with the same things in the exact same place that reset every time you reload the map.

Money has to come from somewhere for the upkeep of those persistent servers, not one time then reset, always on, world saved, characters saved, items saved, monsters saved.

Now i realise exactly why Nintendo wont jump on the Online bandwagon, no ones ready for it just yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You dont get it do you, if they didnt charge you to play then there would be no server to play on, well at least not over a long period of time,

I hate the mentality of some people thesedays, its a wonder developers even bother.

well then how dus free web hosting keep its head up, Sure some ppl pay for web sites but not that many.

most ppl [as this survey points out] would't pay and the servers are still free.. [some of the mn e way]

:yes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would love to play massive online games. But only one problem, I dont have a credit card so it makes the paying part lil hard :( Like UO. It might be old but its so much fun. I would like to try out Star Wars Galaxies and hmm... Everquest maybe too. Planet side could be lots of fun. But mostly I prefer MMORPG's :blush:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still dont get it do you, none of those you mention are persistent worlds, its not the game that they pay to upkeep, its the server you play on, persistent worlds are ones that are always on, you move an item from a house to the shed, its still there when you log on again, its not like some RTS with the same map with the same things in the exact same place that reset every time you reload the map.

Money has to come from somewhere for the upkeep of those persistent servers, not one time then reset, always on, world saved, characters saved, items saved, monsters saved.

Now i realise exactly why Nintendo wont jump on the Online bandwagon, no ones ready for it just yet.

Dude, any rts is just like a persistant world... lets say me and my buddy r in a wc3 game. Halfway through we want to stop playing. We stop, leaving our pcs running with the game on. Come back 2 days later and everything is still there as we left it. The server holds that info on where our units and character are, including hit points and what not. You also i believe in WC3 you can actually pause a game and come back to it at a later time if both partys agree. They can afford to make the servers. Bandwidth? Ha they prolly get it at a discount for all the stuff they do. If they have the hardware to create these games, they def have the hardware to host the servers which i bet could hold a good number of peeps. And your comment how u see Nintendo isnt jumping on the bandwagon, because Nintendo has its own problems to worry about (bringing out a decent system). Im sorry but i think a lot of people will agree, but the GC is a slap in the face. Its sales are horrible, and Nintendo is losing money. They wouldnt go down this path yet becuase "people arent ready for it", they arent going down it because bringing a game like that to GC would just be worthless. Wait till their next gen system to show some muscle (hopefully it will show some). GC has lost the war vs PS2 and XBOX, just hope Nintendo gets its act together when the next gen comes around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why you pay for MMORPG's

You pay for them because they need servers, and they need people to run the servers. They also need mods to make sure people arn't cheating. Where are they going to get the money to pay for all these people? By making you pay to play, thats how!

I just buy the year pass cards at EB that way I don't have to use a credit card.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely yes. IF I don't have to pay for the initial game purchase. Anarchy Online lets you download the basic client for free, and gives you a week's free trial. If you want an expansion pack, then you pay.

The benefit in paid online games is that it keeps most of the 12-year old riff-raff out. Some of them still leech off their parents Mastercards, but they can usually keep themselves in check, or else risk getting their paid account banned.

Also, if I pay, I am guaranteeed a good user experience. I know that the servers will be quick, with little lag, and I know I can get support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly. Do you realize how much profit these companies are making?! I bet you don't because you probably can't imagine that much wealth. Buying new server is pocket change to these companies. There are still servers running for NOX which came out in 1999, Diablo II is still running servers and the still are UPGRADING the freakin game, and I don't pay monthly for them!! MechWarrior 4 still has servers, Warcraft 3 still has servers, for Gods' sake Tiberian Sun still has servers! Paying monthly for games only increases what is going into the companies pockets, you actually think they put all that money towards servers/game development? No they don't, and you can argue that they do til your blue in the face, but you'll never be right. Companies rape us for games as it is, a cd is a penny to buy and the couple years that goes into making it (although a long time) isn't worth the millions they make off new games released. I'm sorry but there is no reason to pay for playing, and there never will be.

First off Strategy games (war3,C&C) are hosted by a Client PC. have you ever joined a server which was deadicated? Dont say the server's on Westwood online/Battle net are dedicated and hosted by them. All there service does is allows players to join the the servers and monitors the servers created by players. NOx/Diablo are on the same lines.

FPS's are played on a dedicated server because the games requires high speed. These are hosted on Regular computers and can be hosted on a nomal dedicated ISP connected(with a good upload speed). Usually these servers are dedicated by ISP's but not most of the time. MMORPG's on the otherhand require Expensive Connection(no normal ISP can handle this) . You will not be able to host a Everquest server on your machine , Especially with hundreds of players connected to the server.

The usual game support's a maximum ammount of players of 32.

Of my head games like half-life, Quake support about 32 players, Warcraft, Starcraft and diablo support about 8 players (not 100% sure). MMORPG's support a hell of alot more because thats what is the whole point of 'MMORPG'.

Alot of Players = Alot of bandwith.

Last of all is maintainence and updates.

When you play a game that is not 'pay to play' usually is final. There will be no more major game addons besides bug's and minor things.

The reason why people get addicted to MMORPG's is because it never end's. They are constantly adding items and quests (so i've been told). The programmers need to be paid for this.

Personally i would not pay, But i do think it would be worth it.

equest1b.jpg

EQ servers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude, any rts is just like a persistant world... lets say me and my buddy r in a wc3 game. Halfway through we want to stop playing. We stop, leaving our pcs running with the game on. Come back 2 days later and everything is still there as we left it. The server holds that info on where our units and character are, including hit points and what not. You also i believe in WC3 you can actually pause a game and come back to it at a later time if both partys agree. They can afford to make the servers. Bandwidth? Ha they prolly get it at a discount for all the stuff they do. If they have the hardware to create these games, they def have the hardware to host the servers which i bet could hold a good number of peeps. And your comment how u see Nintendo isnt jumping on the bandwagon, because Nintendo has its own problems to worry about (bringing out a decent system). Im sorry but i think a lot of people will agree, but the GC is a slap in the face. Its sales are horrible, and Nintendo is losing money. They wouldnt go down this path yet becuase "people arent ready for it", they arent going down it because bringing a game like that to GC would just be worthless. Wait till their next gen system to show some muscle (hopefully it will show some). GC has lost the war vs PS2 and XBOX, just hope Nintendo gets its act together when the next gen comes around.

Yeah but the thing is YOU are hosting WC3, the CLIENT pc, im talking about mmogs not just mmorpgs, wether they get a discount on bandwidth or not it still costs something, likewise with servers, they dont run forever, you have to upgrade them and/or fix them at some point, then theres wages for the people that upkeep the server, then wages for people to bugfix and/or create new things.

As for Gamecube, i wasnt asking wether the console was popular or not, Nintendo stated that Online play wouldnt be a major part of the GC because the world isnt ready for it just yet. As for the power of the Cube i dont see how you can compare consoles, yeah they play games but they are all good at what they do, and if you want to get really picky the Gamecube is a lot more powerful, why do you think that Square ENIX want to bring Final Fantasy back to its roots on the Nintendo consoles, because the GC has FSAA routines built in, a powerful graphics core etc..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

always fun to see people bitch about the monthly charges on mmogs without even having a clue about how a mmog works. i want to see how your stupid wc3 servers are going to bend an oracle database into its knees like SWG did by hosting item data of about 100k-120k players. yes, you read that right, the east coast datacenter cluster hosts 120.000 people. that's HUNDRED TWENTY THOUSAND!

kthxbye.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

$10/?10 a month is nothing, what will $2.50/$2.50 a week buy you these days, not something that will provide you endless replayability value i can tell you.

i completely agree :yes::

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you dont pay real money to get game money, you just pay to play online, i dont really see what the problem is ffs, thats it im out of this thread, sick and tired of trying to explain, like talkin to a brick wall...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hmmm I dont at the moment... its stupid

But I probably will when FFX1 online comes out. Thast gonna be a monthly thing... Hopefully it'll be cheap... but they are going ot make LOADS of money out of selling the game, and charging people online... why dont they just give u a key??? :cry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you dont pay real money to get game money, you just pay to play online, i dont really see what the problem is ffs, thats it im out of this thread, sick and tired of trying to explain, like talkin to a brick wall...

Yes well you started preaching that all online games are the same... and then decided to tailor your argument for a very specific breed of games. The kind of person who'll spend his entire evening wondering around virtual worlds trading chickens *will* be willing to spend ?10 a month, because they don't get out. The don't spend money on drinking and other social activities.

The rest of us actually do enjoy a normal sex life, and can't commit a set amount of money each month (I'm guessing the guy who said ?10 is nothing lives at home still) to something that we may only use for a few hours a week.;);)

And then, as EVERYONE else has pointed out, most games don't require persistant-world style servers. Games can be hosted locally, private / public 'non-official' servers can be created. If the game is good enough, servers are never in shortage.

Whilst you are right to an extent Cpt.Winters, you've completely missed the point for the majority of online gaming IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(I'm guessing the guy who said ?10 is nothing lives at home still) to something that we may only use for a few hours a week.

Now, now - that's not necesarily so. Money does simply have different values to people, after all. To a lot of people ?10/$17-18 a month for recurring, unlimited entertainment /is/ nothing - even to some people with healthy, regular social lives.:p:p

Perceived value is all in the eye of the beholder, after all - even with me in my current unemployed state, I'd find $17 a month to be nothing, -if- there was a game out currently that I even enjoyed playing a few hours a week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

;)

I love you.

Its not that funny. I do think that you should have to pay for some online games. It costs a lot of money to run these servers, and its not going to get repaid by the sales of the games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its not that funny. I do think that you should have to pay for some online games. It costs a lot of money to run these servers, and its not going to get repaid by the sales of the games.

I thought it was :p

They've seem to have been doing fine for the past couple of years and for new release games, I think they just want an excuse to make more money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(I'm guessing the guy who said ?10 is nothing lives at home still) to something that we may only use for a few hours a week.

I know i said i wouldnt but i just had to,

Dont just assume, i pay over half of my wage out per week on bills, then theres shopping and stuff to buy, so dont give me that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.