no, that is a terrible idea
6 Likes
It would be ideal but they can’t support the game if it’s b2p granted they have the cash shop but still that would not be enough…
But it’s a different story if “Tos” had a huge player base like GW2…
F2P will make IMC more money. They already basically did the B2P model by using the early access.
Too little too late, they’ve already established their system and we’re less than a week from launch. You can step ‘down’ to F2P, but once you’re at the bottom of the barrel it’s all but impossible to climb back up without either destroying the playerbase or severely upsetting it.
It’s not as if third party traders don’t have money to throw around to purchase the game to do that thing they do so well; not that they aren’t already utterly destroying the systems in place to stop them.
Please, not this all over again…
1 Like
dont worry no one is asking for ur opinion
I don’t think B2P is a good model for ToS. It hasn’t got enough content to warrant a B2P.
Remember the $50 fiasco? People were raging how they won’t even pay this game if it was B2P at $50. And that was just for early access…
The fact that the $50 pack sold more than the others tells me that the money wasn’t the problem…
3 Likes
Oh really? That’s cool, for IMC. 
IDK… $50 is already B2P price for some games. It’d be nice to pay once and just forget about P2W, crappy cash shops etc.
But MMOs tend to require a constant stream of money to support maintenance / content patches. So subscription is usually the preferred monetizing method.
Tokens are essentially subscriptions.
Most mmos that still have subscriptions land between $5-15 I believe per month. What is the currently proposed cost for tokens again?
I’m going to move this to the suggestions category, I believe we’ve seen plenty of this opinion shared on general discussions.
1 Like
I think ToS won’t make enough revenue as a B2P game.
That and changing something like monetization plans at this point of the game is too much too late. It’s not really an easy thing to change, it’d take time, and people have bought EA packs.
It would just be terrible for the games reputation.
As for most MMO’s that have subs being $5-15, unlike most sub MMO’s, you can purchase them off players in this game. It’s more freemium if anything.
B2P would be risky, something IMC probably can’t afford right now. I would be up for a subscription model, however. But it’s late for it and we have a similar thing in hands.
No this would kill the game completely do you know restrictions are what make cash shop items desirable removing the desirability from the game and you end up with a cash shop that does not sell because if you have what you want why would you need something optional…
if this was to remove the limitations the game would need to become a subscription based game I personally wouldn’t mind that because I believe in supporting the things I love.
As much as I’d like to see it, 99.9% of B2P games go F2P after a few months to a year. Might as well just embrace it now (although they should adjust some of the paid stuff, as many topics around the forum are suggesting)!
This is wrong… you can even have F2P with only costumes and pets that don’t confer any stat benefits. The company that does that still even makes a profit and was able to expand the number of employees. See:
1 Like
Make it like Black Desert Online or Guild Wars or… * rambles on incoherently*
Agree with the OP though, I much rather pay and get access to much more content compared to going F2P and then getting locked behind a paywall.
Maybe op meant “Bot 2 Play” lolz
1 Like
Its funny how people are giving suggestions to a company on how they should earn there money they have already chosen there method leave it be stop expecting change because your doing it for yourself and normally when people do it for themselves they don’t care if it affect anything negatively just so they can get what they want.
If you think “your way” is better provide evidence to back it up in a compariable meens with statistics no just a optional…
Because removing all restrictions/limitations means removing a number of desirable items off the cash shop that is intended to make income for the company.
You think buy to play is a good idea your going to be sadly mistaken it shares the issues of subscription and the bad parts of free to play.
To keep running a server you must have staff and money to pay for the staff and servers this is constant a one payment entry fee might pay for the first number of months but what about after that? this means they need to relying on a cash shop but wait they cant because they removed the restriction thus people have no point to buy from it as it does not give them anything meaningful for there money worth… this would result in the company laying off staff lowing server quality until it reaches a point of un-playability.
The reason I said subscriptions is because to some “cheapskates” paying to play a online game is unfair and there are plenty of other games that are free.
The reason I said the bad part of cash shops is because in all cash shop relies on desirable items that are optional to buy the problem here is THERE OPTIONAL means they are relying on a gamble to make ends meet.
This is why your opinion does not work.