State of the game - should I return?

[Rathothis]

For some of us it's more like Buy to trial for free to play, considering many of us also bought the game originally.

When you bought the game, it was obvious that it required a subscription. So this is a non-issue. There are good arguments for expanding the F2P model, but the "I feel cheated" argument is not among them.

[Asharoth]

When you bought the game, it was obvious that it required a subscription. So this is a non-issue. There are good arguments for expanding the F2P model, but the "I feel cheated" argument is not among them.

I never said a thing about feeling cheated.

I'm just pointing out that some of us bought the game and still need to pay the subscriptions, whereas some of us only pay a subscription an get the same, there's a disparity between us right there.

A to the whole free to play issue, this is a terrible free to play model, it's inconsistent and nowhere in line with any other f2p game available.

The whole buy the expansion and still have to subscribe thing is just wrong, granted prior to free to play we had to pay subs anyway, but that makes no odds you weren't paying to access the expansion, you were subscribing to play the base game, the expansion was bought and paid for separately.

Now it is free to play the base game, why are we expected to subscribe to play the expansion? we bought and paid for it separately.

What they should have done is so simple:

For free to play they could have offered:

• Access to all base game open areas
• Expansion areas can be purchased as permanent unlocks
• Limited access to alternate advancement (maybe a cap on points etc)
• Access to 4 character slots plus purchased slots
• 10g cap
• 50% bag slots
• Limited access to dungeons/raids

Then had an optional subscription that offers:

• Access to all base game open areas
• Access to expansion areas without purchase (only while subscribed)
• Full access to alternate advancement
• Access to 8 character slots plus purchased slots
• 100g cap
• 100% bag slots
• Access to all dungeons/raids

Additionally for subscribers:

• Monthly stipend of FC points.
• X% discount from the FC store
• X% increased EXP, Loot and Gold.

With character slots, gold cap increase, expansions, bag slots and so forth in the store.

This makes far more sense, would potentially make them more money, give the players more access to the whole game and still give in incentive to subscribe.

I know I would certainly come back and potentially pay a subscription if this was the model, but at the moment i'm just lurking on the forum because I was thinking about it but certainly won't pay a subscription with the current model on principle.

[Rathothis]

some of us bought the game and still need to pay the subscriptions, whereas some of us only pay a subscription an get the same, there's a disparity between us right there.

Again, it is wrong to argue this in terms of "fairness". Some of us (you and I included) paid the full box price for the game and for RotGS. But that doesn't mean that we are morally entitled to any future price reductions. Or do you expect CD Project to reimburse you for paying the full box price of The Witcher 3 in a couple of years time, when the game will sell for less than 10 Euros? Or, to be less polemic about it:

• The fact that a new player doesn't pay the full box price doesn't impose a cost on us - so we have no cause for complaint;
• Rather, due to the network effects which are inherent to MMOS, we benefit from every new player. So if FC charge new players less than they charged me, and thereby succeed in gaining new players, I'm actually more than happy.

For free to play they could have offered:

• Access to all base game open areas
• Expansion areas can be purchased as permanent unlocks
  ...

Then had an optional subscription that offers:

• Access to all base game open areas
• Access to expansion areas without purchase (only while subscribed)
  ...

...
With character slots, gold cap increase, expansions, bag slots and so forth in the store.

What you are essentially proposing is a B2P model, since in your example there is no content which is limited to subscribers (everything can be permanently unlocked in the store). I'm not saying that your suggestion is good or bad, or that it would have worked or would not have worked - but it clearly goes beyond mere changes to the current F2P model.

That said, you are right that the current system is inconsistent (we have Turan to thank for that), and that F2P access is too restrictive. The best way to make F2Pers subscribe is to have them mingle with subscribers, so they start to feel that they are missing out on something. That (and not fairness) is the real reason why FC should open lower tier (all T2, probably also T3) raids and at least some Khitai content (open areas, a few dungeons) to F2Pers.

[Dieselconq]

Don`t think ******* will open anything more for f2t((( but if they open global chat for all users, this can help ppl to see that game is not dead, not a pile of carcases) if you want know what i mean, just swich off global for some time.

[ErikT]

I never said a thing about feeling cheated.

I'm just pointing out that some of us bought the game and still need to pay the subscriptions, whereas some of us only pay a subscription an get the same, there's a disparity between us right there.

Of course there is. You who bought the game back when that was required to play it were actually able to play it back then. Those of us who didn't buy the game back then couldn't play it at all. In other words you have been able to play the game for much longer than us newcomers.
You are right - that is indeed a disparity.