Roper Explains Hellgate: London Subscription Model

29
In a letter addressed to fans of Flagship Studios, CEO Bill Roper confirms reports of an optional subscription model for the studio's upcoming Hellgate: London and also outlines the reasons behind that decision.

"Hellgate: London is completely free to play online, out of the box," the letter states. "Anyone who buys the game can not only play through the fully randomized, storyline-driven gameplay offline, but they can also go online and share that experience with millions of players from around the world...Both free players and subscribers will be playing together in groups and guilds on huge realms supporting tens of thousands of players simultaneously."

"Gamers also want choices, and we have so many great ideas for Hellgate: London, and the concept is so extendable, that we know we can keep adding to this game for a long time," Roper adds. "We want to continue moving Hellgate: London forward in some really exciting directions, and to support ongoing development we've created a subscription service to give players access to new content as we go along. This commitment to our gamers was also a part of our plans for Hellgate: London from the very beginning."

The optional subscription fee for Hellgate: London is currently set at $9.99 a month.

"In short, what subscribers are getting is new content--not simply 'better' things," he writes. "Another way of thinking of this would be that we're delivering smaller expansions over time rather than having players wait a year or more before they finally get something new."

Chris Faylor was previously a games journalist creating content at Shacknews.

Filed Under
From The Chatty
  • reply
    May 9, 2007 6:42 PM

    I feel bad for them right now, kind of. The way they're laying the subscription out actually seems okay to me, and I probably won't spring for one for a few months (and don't mind missing out for that time), if I ever do.

    Sounds like they're getting roasted over it on the internets by a lot of people making inferences and assumptions, though.

    • reply
      May 9, 2007 6:48 PM

      I think the problem people have is the way the game was marketed. Lets face it, this game is the spiritual successor to Diablo II. They say it, people know it, thats the kindve game people were expecting.

      It now seems like they are trying to make some mmo hybrid. Also, Guild Wars has proven that the expansion model works. Quite frankly, i would have a hard time justifying paying 10 bucks a month for some crippled half mmo when i can play great ones now and new ones coming on the horizon.

      • reply
        May 9, 2007 7:09 PM

        They've been talking about the multiplayer being a pseudo-MMO practically as long as they've been talking about multiplayer.

        • reply
          May 9, 2007 7:32 PM

          That's just marketing speak. If Diablo 2 was released today, they'd try to call it an MMO and want to charge monthly for it too.

          • reply
            May 9, 2007 8:31 PM

            Doubtful. Diablo 2 didn't offer on-going content or the wide range of features that subscription-based games these days do. I certainly don't see Titan Quest charging a subscription fee. Do you?

          • reply
            May 9, 2007 8:53 PM

            Diablo 2 didn't have any globally shared environments whatsoever, or things like raid content.

        • reply
          May 9, 2007 8:30 PM

          Some people conveniently ignore this fact because it invalidates their complaints.

      • reply
        May 9, 2007 8:24 PM

        The thing about the GW expansion model is that in that PC Gamer interview about GW2, the ArenaNet guy said that they aren't entirely happy with the model and are looking to change it with GW2 (still no up-front subscription fees though).

        It works for us, but not for the developer/publisher perhaps.

    • reply
      May 10, 2007 12:26 AM

      I don't think they've handled this the best way. Their model is entirely reasonable but I don't think they've explained it clearly enough. People are skimming the details and coming to erraneous conclusions.

Hello, Meet Lola