Lifetime Subscription

[Starlord]

With a life time sub:

-The company is banking on you to either 1) quit before you exceed the value of the lifetime subscription in game time, OR

- become a hardcore contributor to the game community and economy, making it easier for the monthly subscribers to stay in the game. It really does help them a lot to get the larger amount of cash up front, even if they end up losing money on you later. Content is developed waaay in advance, so the extra money means they can invest more into getting that content out sooner.

Especially with a new, unproven game, the lifetime sub can earn a company extra cash in the case where the game doesn't do well and the lifetime subbers end up quitting before they get their money's worth.

It's a Gambler's Move, I wouldn't roll on that to me at least.

[rina_inverse]

How bout inflation?

[Abriael]

300 bucks life time? when 120*7=840 bucks? I highly doubt they will do that to lose 400 bucks per person that goes this route. They would lose money in the long run.

You don't "lose 400 bucks" because there's no insurance that that person would actually stay for all that time otherwise.

It's a Gambler's Move, I wouldn't roll on that to me at least.

No. It's not. It's a simple tradeoff.

This may be overly naive but if ffxi lasted 9 years ffxiv could last 20 years... and value of 20 years of playing is easily past 1k...

And all those that played the game lasted those 10 (not 9) years right?

[Starlord]

You don't "lose 400 bucks" because there's no insurance that that person would actually stay for all that time otherwise.



And all those that played the game lasted those 10 (not 9) years right?

You have to be stupid, to not try the game out first before doing something as putting a " Lifetime Sub". The game has to be entertaining enough for the person to even consider doing that option.

[Roaran]

They would be wise to not give a singular lifetime subscription offer.

However, I see no reason that Square Enix could not offer the option for players to pay larger lumps of cash for larger periods of game play.

[Kirito]

They would be wise to not give a singular lifetime subscription offer.

However, I see no reason that Square Enix could not offer the option for players to pay larger lumps of cash for larger periods of game play.

They've done it before so I don't doubt they will do it again...

[Alhanelem]

They would be wise to not give a singular lifetime subscription offer.

However, I see no reason that Square Enix could not offer the option for players to pay larger lumps of cash for larger periods of game play.

As I explained before, it can be a good deal for them if the game isn't as successful as they were hoping to be. And even if it is more successful than they expect, giving out lifetime subs means people who quit can come back to the game very easily, which means a slightly stronger playerbase later in the game's life.

The same is true for many free to play games. The people who invested money in them are much more likely to keep playing, and come back if they quit.

[Abriael]

You have to be stupid, to not try the game out first before doing something as putting a " Lifetime Sub". The game has to be entertaining enough for the person to even consider doing that option.

You're doing the usual mistake of judging a commercial move on your personal values.

Money has a different value for different people. There are a ton of people around for which 300 bucks are less than a fifth or a tenth or less of their monthly wage, and they have no problem dropping that kind of cash to support a game they're excited about, receiving a fair advantage in exchange.

I suggest checking kickstarter. That'd give you a fair example on how much money many people are willing to drop on a game that hasn't even started development.

[Starlord]

You're doing the usual mistake of judging a commercial move on your personal values.

Money has a different value for different people. There are a ton of people around for which 300 bucks are less than a fifth or a tenth or less of their monthly wage, and they have no problem dropping that kind of cash to support a game they're excited about, receiving a fair advantage in exchange.

I suggest checking kickstarter. That'd give you a fair example on how much money many people are willing to drop on a game that hasn't even started development.

You're doing the usual mistake of judging a commercial move on your personal values.

You can say what you have to say without "attacking me" or I should say, you could have excluded that line. I know your going to say I'm not attacking you, but when you say things like " Your doing the Usual mistake", I feel that's attacking me. The first line was not needed at all.

Back on topic, the term Lifetime means pay now and never pay again, If everyone were to do this option, where would there money come from after the initial payout to SE? I'm not saying everyone would do that option if they offered it, but if that were to be the case where would there money come from exactly?

[Mjollnir]

I have lifetime subs on a few MMOs. I don't feel the obligation to play them particularly, as I can log in whenever I want. However, if I've paid for a month of gaming, I'm more inclined to spend my spare time playing due to the restriction on access. For myself and perhaps others in the same situation, a lifetime sub is not much of an incentive to play. Sure, it's a financial bonus, but I like giving money to S-E so they can spend it on making/improving their games.

It's not so much about not wanting to try something new, more that S-E is high-calibre enough to attract players without needing to resort to offering a discount (and yes, the Legacy discount is appreciated, but I would have paid a regular subscription anyhow).