Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Parab00n
The monthly subscription for owning an entire team would be huge IMO, people would probably be more willing to spend $25-30 a month instead of dropping $250 at once for Flex.

Absolutely agree with this, I hope they put thought into implementing a subscription base. They can also keep a paid flex system with it for those that want more players than what the subscription offers.

I also agree that a subscription option would help grow the game.

First of all, the pay as you go flex system could remain an option for those who preferred it, so there's absolutely no loss of people who prefer the current system.

Then, people sign up and see "Wow, I can have X players and all boosts taken care of for $19.95/month! That sounds great!" It's a system more like what people are used to in premium games. The $19.95/month would be the low-tier subscription. There could be a higher tier for people who want more players, or maybe a few tiers. Those who get into the game may well buy a higher tier.

It's more likely to get that first payment from people-- and once the person has paid, he's extremely likely to stick around to, as has been spoken of, actually watch his players play.

I don't know what one would get for what subscription price, but it should be a little bit better value per dollar than the flex system, but it doesn't have to be that much better. It also would give the agent a fixed number of players at each tier, maybe proportionate to the number of positions at each tier. That would help ease the glut of QB's and HB's.

Given that there's no one lost, because people can still use the old flex system, I don't see a down side. And I definitely think that there are people reluctant to buy flex who would be much more willing to pay a subscription fee, as it's a more common method in net games one pays for.

last time this was discussed and got a comment from corndog, I think his comment was "subscription based games died out several years ago - they don't work anymore."


Probably just because I'm old -- but I'd still play them if the game was fun.

Originally posted by TxSteve
last time this was discussed and got a comment from corndog, I think his comment was "subscription based games died out several years ago - they don't work anymore."


Probably just because I'm old -- but I'd still play them if the game was fun.

Maybe I'm just old too, but while I never got into the World Of Warcraft type of subscription MMO, I'm pretty sure the genre is still going strong-- maybe not as strong as at its peak, but still has a good amount of players.

Originally posted by TxSteve
last time this was discussed and got a comment from corndog, I think his comment was "subscription based games died out several years ago - they don't work anymore."


Probably just because I'm old -- but I'd still play them if the game was fun.

To be honest, I'm guessing from a short-term revenue perspective, the current model far outshines your alternative model... just too many people (like myself, Rob, b00n, all the 1 agent teams, etc.) who are spending a crapload of money on the game - far more than your recommended amount. Some of us own 2 teams too... which makes it even more costly.

From a long-term user growth perspective I would imagine your model is likely more profitable.

Originally posted by TxSteve
last time this was discussed and got a comment from corndog, I think his comment was "subscription based games died out several years ago - they don't work anymore."


Probably just because I'm old -- but I'd still play them if the game was fun.

Lmao.....what games is Corndog playing?? yes MMO's are going to more of a Free to play, purchase power items on the cash shop type. But World of warcraft is still going strong as a subscription base. And many of those free to play are still extremely limited on what you can do, such as the leveling, the gear you get etc etc. And many of those free to play do offer a monthly subscription base so you get all the goodies. So no, they aren't completely dead yet and I doubt will die out for still a little while. I see more people complain about the free to play option because they are so limited, and many wishing that some of those games that they do love will offer a subscription base. Mathematically it's way cheaper for monthly subscription than free to play, 14.99/month for most subscription based games is cheap imo. Free to play being so limited on many games, you get forced to purchasing stuff on the cash shop if you want anything good out of it for your character, in which most items or packages costing between $5-$99. Yeah I'll take the $15/month and get it all any day over free to play.

Originally posted by Nyria
Maybe I'm just old too, but while I never got into the World Of Warcraft type of subscription MMO, I'm pretty sure the genre is still going strong-- maybe not as strong as at its peak, but still has a good amount of players.

Yeah it's still going strong all considering how long it has been out, last I remember they are still over 7 million subscribers. not quite what they were when they were going gang busters, but still that's quite a bit.

or theres the lol model of free game which everything can be unlocked by playing but you can unlock cool looks for the game with money. thats really smart not sure how it would work here

Originally posted by SithLord
Yeah it's still going strong all considering how long it has been out, last I remember they are still over 7 million subscribers. not quite what they were when they were going gang busters, but still that's quite a bit.

It's actually down to just over 5 mil right now. A lot of unsubs with their last expansion.

It's high peak was just over 10 mil.

If chemistry is real then allow for an expanded scrimmage system that allows for chemistry to build. Scrimmages cost flex points which cost money. Have a 100 point scrimmage that adds to chemistry. Users get scouting material and chemistry add on. If a team is playing a scrimmage, they would be getting more cohesive. This would encourage more scrimmages, people would spend more money, and gives owners the option to build chemistry in another manner.

Originally posted by td577
If chemistry is real then allow for an expanded scrimmage system that allows for chemistry to build. Scrimmages cost flex points which cost money. Have a 100 point scrimmage that adds to chemistry. Users get scouting material and chemistry add on. If a team is playing a scrimmage, they would be getting more cohesive. This would encourage more scrimmages, people would spend more money, and gives owners the option to build chemistry in another manner.

I don't think I'd be opposed to this...win/win for the customers and WG right?