Long Term development ideas

Frogboy

Join Date 03/2001

+2419

Long Term development ideas

What do you think?

Here is the way the PC game industry operates today:

Game is released
Game gets patched
Expansion pack made
Wait years for possible sequel

This model is not ideal IMO. And I wanted to get a discussion going with fellow Sins players on what they'd like to see.

With Stardock games (GalCiv and Sins) we release a lot of free updates after release. That's because we budget for that. But even our games eventually have to be "retired". After all, without revenue, companies go out of business.

We've been throwing ideas around the office on how we could create a business model that supports players not for months but years with new updates and features and content. I think digital distribution may finally getting to the point where we could let players keep purchasing or subscribing to a game (OPTIONALLY) in exchange for regular, meaningful updates in an on-going way.

For example, if we created a persistent multiplayer universe for Sins in which new ships, new techs, new maps, new features, new campaigns, multiplayer tournaments, new scenarios, etc. were released on a regular basis, do you think users would subscribe to this? How about if such updates were packaged as micro-expansion packs at say $9 apiece or something?

Now, with Sins of a Solar Empire, we have v1.04 coming out, then it's on to v1.1 and of course the expansion pack. But we want to start thinking about the future too.

The same is true on Galactic Civilizations. We're planning for Twilight of the Arnor to be the last big expansion pack for it. And we don't have any sequel plans to GalCiv in the foresable future. So even in that case, would users subscribe or purchase mini-expansion packs in order to support continued development?

Anyway, the point being is that I think we all have a list of games that we wish were continually updated for years and years. I woudl love to still be updating Total Annihilation or getting new mini adventures for Baldur's Gate and I know i would pay or subscribe to get them.

What do you guys think?

Locked Post

Advanced Search

Watch this post

Do not email me updates for this post Email me updates for this post

Successfully updated karma reason!

Another idea is to partner with other game developers and offer a bundle pack of various games (must be new releases) for a low monthly subscription rate.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I like Innociv's idea quite a bit. I was thinking of something similar before I read all these posts. You could get the reliability of subscriptions without the annoying monthly fee and also have the mini-expansions that add value. For people who would only want their "premium membership" to extend to the game they purchased you could make a yearly subscription at a lower price point which just covers the game that they're interested in. You could even bundle one year of a single game membership in with the games that release that support the platform.

Of course, like almost everyone here has said you have to keep the multiplayer online community cohesive. So many games I play online are broken up by who has what map or what expansion. It's pretty annoying.

Successfully updated karma reason!

innociv, xbox live covers a great many games that you can switch between after buying and your subscription benefits will follow you. It's an apples and oranges comparison. Sins is just one title (and maybe several titles in the future), and although I'll grant that it's an amazing title, it doesn't have the same interest sustainability as support for a big library of games from different genres.
-----------------------------------
Kruelgor, you didn't mention one very important feature of subscription gaming, particularly if it concerns only one title: regular influxes of new and privileged content.

I don't agree with your gaming time analysis, because most gamers don't just play ONE game (exception: world of warcrack). 2 hours a day of gaming on a single title is way more than a "casual" gamer would put in.

-- Retro

Successfully updated karma reason!

How the hell did this topic get so lop-sided? We went from discussing Long Term development ideas to trying to rationalize and find a reason for using subscription fees... WTF?

Please, pretty please with a great sugar-frosted caramelised cherry on top, stop trying to promote subscription fees as a good idea.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Welcome to the very near future buddy. You guys can complain until you're blue in the face. Games have been costing $50 for 15 years. It's just not feasible anymore unless you want a poor quality game.

It's possible, that a subscription method could generate a continuous flow of revenue for the devs which would make LONG TERM DEVELOPMENTS possible.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Welcome to the very near future buddy. Games have been costing $50 for 15 years. It's just not feasible anymore unless you want a poor quality game.

Then bump it up to $60 (or whatever amount gets things back on the feasibility track). A great many people aren't going to pay single-game subscriptions without knowing what they're getting.

If this is, indeed, the future of gaming, then I'm most likely out. I'm not going to pay a company $10 a month for the privilege of 'hoping' that they'll give me something in return.

Successfully updated karma reason!

A great many people aren't going to pay single-game subscriptions without knowing what they're getting.

That's why it would have a free trial.

I'm not going to pay a company $10 a month

I think that is a lie from most people's mouths in attempt to save some money. They will pay. Good games are addicting and people will pay for their addictions.

Successfully updated karma reason!

It's just not feasible anymore unless you want a poor quality game.

How the hell do you figure that? I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say you're full of it

I just can's see how the price can rise like that? The market is growing, so the price must grow too?

Successfully updated karma reason!

I appreciate the sentiment. But why would Ironclad ask us about what their future is? If the plan is to use the upcoming Impulse program then do it and record the results and either change the gaming business as we know or drop it like a bad habit when it proves unsucessful.
This kind of question is for people that have received higher education in the marketing, business, economics fields and the like. Not for the frenzied horde of fans on your own message boards. Of course they are going to exult over this because you are dangling the posability of future content (above just minor tweaks) over their heads for a game they enjoy.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I appreciate the sentiment. But why would Ironclad ask us about what their future is?

A wise businessman seeks the opinions of his consumer base. It's perfectly fine. It doesn't mean he has to agree with it. I've seen many closed-minded know-it-all business leaders ignore the outside world and they end up failing in the end. Frogboy is obviously a shrewd businessman.

Successfully updated karma reason!

That's why it would have a free trial.

A free trial now doesn't tell me what I can expect in terms of future content. That would do nothing to address my concern.

I think that is a lie from most people's mouths in attempt to save some money. They will pay. Good games are addicting and people will pay for their addictions.

Well, think what you want but I'm still not going to give someone my money unless I know what I'm getting. I'm not going to drop $10 a month on someone's word that they're going to give me worthwhile content.

I'm willing to pay extra money for content and as I said, I'm all for mini-expansions and the like. With those, I know exactly what I'm getting and can choose what I actually want to pay money for.

Successfully updated karma reason!

A free trial now doesn't tell me what I can expect in terms of future content. That would do nothing to address my concern.

That's a lame excuse. Simply cancel your monthly subscription if you become dissatisfied in the future. Play the free trial.

I'm not going to drop $10 a month

You speak as if you would be forced to pay $10 per month for the rest of your life. Hahaha! Just cancel your monthly service if you become dissatisfied. Case closed cheap skate.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Or play another game that doesn't charge a monthly fee. Whatever.

If Ironclad/Stardock wants to adopt this model and lose my business, it's no skin off my back. They're certainly not the only game in town.

And I have to ask, why exactly do 'you' support a subscription-based model over a micro-expansion (or simply a standard expansion) model? Especially when you're suggesting that people simply cancel subscriptions once they've gotten what they wanted which, essentially, has the same effect. As a customer, why would you want to spend more money than you need to?

Successfully updated karma reason!

You're right, it can't be $50 premium membership for one game, Sins.

It needs to be $50 for it and lots of other publishers offer things like tournaments, beta access to games, etc.

If say Unreal Tournament 3 was on impulse, and there where Impulse tournaments for it, encouraged by the publisher or whatever.

Or say THQ gave earlier beta access to Impulse Premium membership people, such as for Dawn of War 2.
That's the kind of stuff it needs to have.. just for examples.

I said nothing about it being $50 just for sins.. it needs to benefit a lot of games.

You guys are missing that Impulse is supposed to be supported by other publishers. I think Brad mentioned THQ was one.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Agreed, innociv. But there's still an awful high percentage of gamers that do not play online, and subscription elements like tournaments and beta testing (which is essentially work-for-free) will simply not reach or appeal to them. They'll buy a substantial expansion pack with a single-player friendly element, but they won't buy a game that just upgrades their lobby.

I'd really like to know the percentage of Sins purchasers are commonly found playing multiplayer on the web. That's a very important statistic for any future business model design to take into account.

As for enticing other publishers, that's great! And bringing them over to StarDock's way of thinking for DRM and copy protection is even greaterer.. uh... er. But before a marketing approach is devised, they really have to sign on with strong expressions of interest. That's the kind of behind-closed-door stuff that we won't see in these forums simply because it's necessary for the business that those discussions remain low-key until a decision is made.

So I'm not counting on them happening just yet and would rather shell out a bit larger bursts of money for content that I know about and that I know I want for games that I've already bought.

-- Retro

Successfully updated karma reason!

Frogboy,

I think the challenge is making the content meaningful. The more expansions or micro-expansions you have the greater the risk that the product becomes stale. Not to mention that I think that you as developers may lose some degree of innovation when constantly working on the same product for such a long period of time.

Successfully updated karma reason!

kwm1800

Join Date 03/2008

+26

A subscription system will not work. The others have already explained well so I will not go further.

Mini-expansion system would be good. Available in digital download (so the cost for distribution can be minimized) and acceptable contents; people will buy it.

But again, nothing is effective as mod tools. A powerful mod tools with nice SDK will make the game last much longer than you thought.

-wnmnkh-

Successfully updated karma reason!

Any good game will come to an end eventually. I'm going to take EQ here as an example. The first few expansions were great fun, adding meaningful new content to the game. But after so long, the engine is dated and you've already done everything you can do with it. Expansions now consist of more health to player armor and add more raid bosses that are more of the same.

This clearly is not worth the subscription and was dropped immediately. It's inevitable, a good game has to be put down eventually. That's about as close as it gets to adding new content on a regular basis and providing continued support for a game. Do they still make money? Of course. But I won't be fooled into thinking the game is any better than it was when it launched just by adding more of the same rather than improving.

In short, subscriptions can work until you realize what you're subscribing for isn't enhancing the game at all. And I can't say I wouldn't subscribe to any given game. I did after all subscribe to EQ for 5 1/2 years before deciding it was time to call it quits. Any game eventually wears out its welcome and I find myself looking for the next big thing.

As people have mentioned though, if all games adopted a subscription system I would probably have to call gaming quits. I don't like the idea of continually paying for every new game that looks remotely interesting. Just looking at the current generations games for both console and PC I'd be spending well over $300 a month in subscription costs, games that actually see regular play.

It's easy to argue that I could just pick which games I'd subscribe to. But I won't buy a game unless I know I'm getting all the content in the first place. 360 games are some of the worst when it comes to this. Games like Armored Core 4 require Gold membership to play online which I find is just stupid, as much as I loved the series I had to pass on that one.

Successfully updated karma reason!

A subscription system will not work. The others have already explained well so I will not go further.

You and the others are wrong. Many popular pc games have flourished with the subscription method. Some have failed because they didn't do it right.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Outside of the MMO realm, which games would those be? I know I've certainly never paid for one.

Successfully updated karma reason!

If Ironclad/Stardock wants to adopt this model and lose my business,

It is my theory that you and others like you are liars. There is a price for everything. If you would pay 1 penny per month then you would pay 2 pennies. There is a price which you would pay. There is a price that EVERYONE would pay for a subscription.

To say you would not pay anything is a flat-out lie. Unless, ofcourse, you are a game pirate.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Repeat that all you want. It still won't be any closer to the truth and since there's really no way to test it here, it's just inane babble at this point.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Repeat that all you want. It still won't be any closer to the truth and since there's really no way to test it here, it's just inane babble at this point.

What you just said was pure babble. My statement had substance.

I can see why game pirates would be against the idea of a monthly subscription.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I only bought Sins yesterday and I don't know how long I'm going to want to play it (it's v. promising so far!) so I'm answering based on my experiences of other vaguely comparable games like Warcraft III, Dawn of War, Civ 4.

If I really enjoy playing a game I tend to buy the expansions. Sometimes they are good value, sometimes they aren't. Often the expansion will inspire me to start playing a game that I've put down for a few months again.

I'm not a hardcore gamer, I wouldn't pay for a subscription because I wouldn't feel I played enough to get value for money out of it. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think only a tiny proportion of hardcore players would subscribe. If I wasn't subscribing I'd also resent feeling like the poor cousin of the people who could afford it.

Mini-expansions I'd definitely consider getting, but it depends what was in them.

With the normal update cycle for RTS/TBS you seem to get 2 decent sized expansion packs with a years gap in between, if instead of that it was 4-6 smaller expansion packs which had less content but were cheaper, and were possibly more frequent I'd certainly consider getting them. On the other hand I'm also looking forward to quite a few of the mods.

Anyway, nice to see that this kind of thing is being discussed. Makes a change from most official game forums.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Nevermind.

I just realized that most individuals will pay more money with the one-time purchase.

Example, if someone subscribes to play the game for 2 months at $8 per month then he only paid $16 to the company. It's much better to force gamers to pay $40 to $50 with the one-time purchase. (of course, I do not know how much profit the company actually makes off a $40 or $50 sale. That's something to take into consideration when comparing this).

This especially applies to the casual player. The one-time purchase is a much easier way to force them to pay more.

Most people only play a game for a few months before moving on to a new release game.

Successfully updated karma reason!