Make Arma series under subscription ?

[EricM 0]

This may sound a bit provocative, but don't you believe that BIS should somewhat change their business model and make the Arma series somewhat "under subscription" à la World of Warcraft or EVE Online instead of trying to sell standard retail DVD every X years ?

I know there are psychological barriers and technical issues, but let's examine a couple of points :

First BIS is developping the same game since 2001, always refining, adding new features, improving it, patching, debugging etc... We will probably never have a totally different game, just a steady evolution/perfection of the ultimate military sandbox game in a perpetual "work in progress" state.

The series can count on a great community of fans that keep buying multiple copies of the game, playing, modding, supporting the game since 2001. So basically we fanboys already are on subscription, just not knowing it.

With each new generation of the game, the improved quality and complexity of the game makes it harder for modders to offer addons that can rival standard BIS model (islands, vehicles, characters, animations...). Only pros or very dedicated and talented modders with lots of time on their hand (semi-pros) will be able to keep up in the future.

From a business perspective (and for development planning) it's better to have a steady cash flow income instead of irregular sales that can be jeopardized at every new version of the game. With a subscription, BIS would have the resources and incentive to add little by little almost anything. Plus, BIS would control the distribution directly and get a bigger chunk of it.

From a marketing point of view, you don't have to market a totally new game every time and bother with new publishing contracts and PR. Just like WOW or EVE Online, you aknowledge that you are building on the same winning formula and regularly exanding the universe and possibilities, upgrading the graphics etc...

With its online coop campaign concept (quests ?), its huge and complex world (chernarus with its history), and its FPS/RTS/RPG/Persistent world features, Arma looks more and more like a modern military MMORPG.

So, next time (Arma 2 expansion/Arma3 ?) why not aknowledge all this and ask this community for a lower but steady fee (how much is to be discussed) for as long as they want, instead of a lump fee of from time to time ?

Those who eventually get bored won't waste much money, those who keep liking will support the game as long as it needs and as long as they want. In the end, if the game is good BIS would get much more money (see Blizzard revenues) and the users a better game.

The Question is : what if you stop "paying" ? I guess you should still be able to play offline and online with your friends, but you would be denied the access to BIS servers for updates and thus stuck at your current version number and hence only be able to play with people with the same version as your version "grow old".

What's your opinion on this ?

[arma2disapointed 10]

I´m republican hawknose.

[Mojo 0]

Interesting, but would BIS then need to house servers to keep the official servers up to date, like WoW?

Would they provided a subscription download, so that members who's dues were paid up, could download the patches, updates and even the full version of the game pre-patched?

Would there be a supported server list, hardware list, OS list?

Would the dedicated server crowd need to purchase rights for their version on the server?

While I find the concept pretty interesting, I think the logistics of it are too much to consider as realistic. BIS would need to create or significantly upgrade their network infrastructure to support the new system.

What do you do about those that would rather steal the subscriptions than pay, ala WoW?

Regardless of the results of a pol, I think that if BIS were to countenance this sort of business vertical, they'd have to increase so much of the overhead that they'd be operating in the red for at least the first few quarters. They'd need a war chest on hand to be able to retool.

Is BIS really focused upon the civilian market? It seem to me that there is a great deal more money to be made in government contracts, more stable an income, more stable a customer base.

I'll remain undecided for now, but I do think the idea is interesting.

[Guest Ti0n3r]

No thanks. I would never subscribe to a game in the state Arma2 currently is in.

[wooly-back-jack 10]

I'd never subscribe to a game.

[hoak 0]

Generally, no. What I think BI could do, that would net them more income is manage Mods content. The Mod support BI offers with its games is unprecidented, and not only makes difficult for them to create and sell compelling expansions for their games, it puts a bewildering volume of mods on servers, that can be off-putting to new players, or the player just looking for something familiar.

There are several ways that Mod content could be mananged -- some even could compensate the mod Developers, and done right would be a win/win/win scenario for BI, Mod Developers, and Fans... I for example would be willing to pay for professionally organized and deployed Mod content. A good content management plan, and deployment model could raise the quality of all mods and increase the collaboration between Mod Developers...

:)

[HOPEnSPIRIT 10]

Not read all your post yet :p but from what I know of WOW this could work...

• Would generate income for them to work on patching, I wouldn't pay over £5 a month though.
  
• They would need a proper support area so bugs can be recorded efficiently (vBulletin Project Tools).
  
• Patching would have to be regular, WOW patch something every week or two, if you notice everytime we got a patch in ArmA it patched hundreds of things so it should be possible for a weekly update.
  
• Downloads of Updates would just replace the old version, so when a major release comes out say ArmA III looking that far ahead.
  
• Hosting always seems to be a problem, yes they could run some massive player servers like WOW do but I think it would be benefitial for them to rent us servers we can setup as we wish too.
  

Think all the stress of the past few months of Bugs alot of people including myself and BI Moderator have said some silly things, having proper support and weekly / bi-weekly patching even if it just patched one thing would be a step in the right direction and would calm the community.

[Llauma 0]

Well, that's assuming that BIS actually wants to continue this series. I guess they will put all their effort in carrier command. What will come after that I don't know. We can only hope they'll grow to a size where they can develope two games simultaniously. If not that I think we'll see a non military RPG after CC.

About the MMORPG idea. I'm not sure about it. I like the way it is now. If I want a good coop night I'll join a passworded server where I know I'll get it. I'd rather face AI's then thousands of noobs with no interest in the general mission. Keep on developing independant games and if I like them I'll buy them. The modding part of the game would also be doomed if it was became a MMORPG.

No thanks...

[Maddmatt 1]

No.

Perhaps they could make money selling several expansions. Considering that the game sold very well, I can see that happening. I'd pay for good content.

But I wouldn't pay a subscription for a game where much of my time with it will be spent modding it and playing offline, that's just nuts. Offline content is just as important for the game as online, would be ridiculous to have a subscription for that.

We don't need BIS to provide us with MP servers anyway.

[bangtail 0]

NO!

I am happy to support BIS with the initial 40 euros but there is NO way I would pay monthly. This series of games are a blank canvas and are made great by the community. BIS gets the money for providing the canvas, no doubt about that, but the true potential of the game will be realised (as always) by the community.

Eth

[Cpt.Goose 10]

I think Arma 2 needs tracking, a few main servers from BIS overlook the user account and stats, but the servers you join can use that information to base whether you can fly, what weapons you can get, can you be a squad leader...

I would just like to see more support on the ARMA 2 Multiplayer front from the devs. I want to be able to jump on a server and because I passed so many single player flight training missions or accumulated so many "flight points" I can fly a aircraft right away, leaving the ones that don't know how to or spend the time to learn unable to jump in and kill the whole crew.

Also with the stats going to servers first maybe we could do mass blocks from servers for team killings. If someone TK's a certain amount in a row and is voted it was on purpose there automatically kicked from the server and made aware to other servers. Kind of like a "minimum ping" requirement, you couldn't have to many TK - points

But no, it's no MMO and shouldn't be considered that way. It just needs more support on the multiplayer line like the Call of Duty 4,5 have shown but to the next step.

Edited July 18, 2009 by Cpt.Goose

[.kju 3239]

Well several major faults in your opening post unfortunately.

Never ever take other games as example. Reason is no matter how different the suggested

concept is, people will always think of the game(s) you listed.

In the end to see it realistic BI provides the engine and base content.

SP/MP missions, more content is always where a community can provide way more

and better content.

So in the end, it is more about do you want to pay em every 2-3 years with 40-50€/$.

Or pay them monthly for the engine updates and more base content.

One problem is that BI provided already free content and updates via patches.

So most people have the idea that they will get it already for free, so why pay.

For a company the smaller cycles can have many major benefits. At the same time

its very crucial if the company and its people want to work this or the other way.

[nkenny 1051]

No thanks. I would never subscribe to a game in the state Arma2 currently is in.

Monthly payments demand a functional product.

-K

[bangtail 0]

Monthly payments demand a functional product.

-K

Yah because AoC was functional per promises on release or Vanguard or pick another MMO /sarcasm off.

Not that I would pay for A2 on a monthly basis but your argument is a moot point.

Eth

Edited July 18, 2009 by BangTail

[nkenny 1051]

Interestingly enough all these games attract a core of ridgidly immobile and rather naive group of players who are willing to praise these games. Even in the face of all evidence.

-K

[bangtail 0]

Interestingly enough all these games attract a core of ridgidly immobile and rather naive group of players who are willing to praise these games. Even in the face of all evidence.

-K

I've been playing OFP since it was released and I am far from naive. This type of undertaking has teething problems, much the same as most MMOs do. You deal with it or you go play BF2.

Your choice of course.

The real idiots are the ones who buy it, despite the fact that they CLAIM they knew what they were in for.

I think it's a great game but it has some problems. TBH, the only real problems I have experienced are sporadic instances of AI stupidity, which are annoying, but hardly "show stopping" and most assuredly not limited to A2.

Eth

Edited July 18, 2009 by BangTail

[=SEALZ=Gen.***1cem@n*** 0]

i would be all for it if BIS provided us some kickbutt servers and provided more pvp gamemodes avalible for the pvp'rs .. come out with their own c&h and AAS modes .. mabey even make more campaigns for us (good ones)...also provide us with new content (weapons,vehicles,maps etc..) as often as possible .. but..seeing as BIS lets the community make the gamemodes and most all content, i wouldnt pay them to play arma2..

i truly believe this game could reach a large amount of player numbers rivaling cod5 if BIS would contribute some servers and new downloadble content every so often..you would see the player base come alive..

and for NKENNY...your apparently one of the only naive persons this game has attracted TBH!! go play COD or BF .. those suit your young dumb wants and needs in a fps... ive gotten passed the "rambo" games about ..O..idk..lets say about 10years ago.. this is the only FPS/sim that differs from any other...alls you needa do is go play the old dukenukem or quakes and you've played them all..there all the same..all the way up to now even... so what if this years "hot" fps uses a more complex shader model than last years...the gameplay remains over 2 decades old..

regards,

***1cem@n***

Edited July 18, 2009 by =SEALZ=Gen.***1cem@n***

[Inkompetent 0]

I'd be willing to pay a subscription of say... up to €5 a month. I don't feel motivated to pay as much as I do for WoW, which both has and gets much more content, balancing and fixing (no shit, comparing company size), but I definitely wouldn't mind doing so for ArmA2 either.

However as a demand for that I think there should be lots more work on vehicle simulation, which is the biggest and worst lackluster in the whole game and has been since 2001.

[SWT_Janowich 10]

NO!

? I guess you should still be able to play offline and online with your friends, but you would be denied the access to BIS servers for updates and thus stuck at your current version number and hence only be able to play with people with the same version as your version "grow old".

I cannot play with my friends, when they still subscribe or ended it earlier!

[jw custom 56]

NO!

I am happy to support BIS with the initial 40 euros but there is NO way I would pay monthly. This series of games are a blank canvas and are made great by the community. BIS gets the money for providing the canvas, no doubt about that, but the true potential of the game will be realised (as always) by the community.

Eth

I agree 100% ;)

[EricM 0]

I see it's rather negative response which was to be expected, given the psyhcological change it implies. I'm not even sure I'd prefer it, but I believe it makes more sense now than before.

Would you have the same answer if if was only 5 euros per month, and they give you weekly hotfixes and monthly updates (missions, islands, units, functions etc???) for instance ? It's a question of what you get for what you pay, not "same content for more money".

Do you prefer to pay 60 euros upfront for an "unfinished" game (says someone) or 5 euros per month for one year of subscription and constant updates ? BIS could host some "official" servers for patches and updates, but it wouldn't mean they are the only ones.

Anyway, if they provide multiple expansions or DLC, it will more or less account to the same thing, but there will be people WITH the expansion and people WITHOUT, thus fragmenting the community (see Queens Gambit). Same goes with community-made addons. Outside of private servers and clans, most of them are barely used, while official addons can be used in any missions and campaign SP or MP.

And I have yet to see more than a couple of fully functional community addons that can rival Chernarus or BIS' Hinds and Venoms...

Thanks for your input anyway.

[nocturna 10]

lol..... NO.

[Duck4coveR 10]

I dont think this type of game could ever be converted into a MMORPG with paid subscriptions. There's just not enough roles, content and room for character building. There's no persistant world, and the worst part of all MMO's is the dam boring griding for hours and hours just to get your character that little bit better.

Then as with all MMO's you soon have those people who seem to have no life away from there pc running around with there uber characters seemingly untouchable killing everyone, blowing the simulation of the game right out the water.

I know before any other consideration, you guys have to turn a proffit otherwise whats the point in being here. Personally i have no problem paying for DLC content whatsoever. And i think this is your only option with the type of game you have. New maps, new missions and new weapons we all would like to see as often as possible. But as for being worried about it fracturing the comunity into the have's and have nots you just need to look at X-box live and the PSN, practicaly every game gets additional content now and things seem to be busy regardless.

**PS**

As its the comunity that makes so much of the additional content, why not setup a process that the modders upload there content to BIS where it gets checked and added to DLC packs making them offical content for server compatability. And some of the proffit could go back to the modder that created the content??

You just have to provide good extra content and and there will always be people there wanting to buy it !!

Edited July 18, 2009 by Duck4coveR

[Inkompetent 0]

@ Duck4coverR

Why even talking about a MMORPG, persistant worlds, character classes and crap like that at all? It hasn't even been suggested, and as you say it indeed wouldn't work. All we are talking about is making the payment a subscription rather than a one-time sum. Nothing like BF2 ranking system (that does nothing but attract the worst in people) and stuff like that. Just a payment method.

[Jimmy the Saint 10]

I do not like to play with cashcows. On the one hand people are complaining that the game is incomplete and hope for fixes and patches within days which is impossible to handle and on the other hand people are asking the community offically if they want to pay for "content" (whatever this might be)? Leave it be, you will not make a game better by buying mostly useless "stuff". A good game has to grow (read: develop) itself independently by getting frequent support in the sense of patches from the devs, free mod tools, hobby modders, mission creators etc. If you are asking me, this game is made for some longevity and a strong community and not for the fast money. That is also the reason why not everybody knows or likes the game anyway. So, my vote is strictly NO!

I have to say that I am sorry, but essentially this thread makes no sense to me at all and I hope it is going to be locked soon.