EvilDead said: Pay-to-win is a bit of stretch although certainly VIP is cheaper than the current purchase options and better overall rewards for your dollar. I would give 10-15/month for a stable good game. Would feel a lot more comfortable with $9.99/month personally and would likely pay it myself.The $30 mark is way to high for a mobile game. Even PC based subscription games haven't hit that mark and there is not enough content in this game to justify that high of a monthly fee. There are those who will pay it and more power to them.VIP can help new players which is a good concept, but those who have been here for a few years with a wealth of gems won't be needing VIP. So they're likely looking for revenue from new/newer players.
jtwood said: At the risk of flaming, this seems like a silly perspective:I am against this and will be seriously ramping down my playing because of itWhy would you play less because someone else is offering to pay for a game?If you want to play less, do it because they remove features, functionality, or enjoyment.But just putting in a subscription system alone doesn't seem like a reason to change your gaming habit.
Mburn7 said: I just see "craftable masterpieces" and I think pay-to-win. I've played other mobile games where the "SS Tier" cards or whatever they are called are only available to paying players. I absolutely despise those games. Now with the "exclusive bundles", "craftable masterpieces", and "early access to new content" I see this game making a hard turn toward that kind of game. Hence, the pay-to-win tag. Am I really so off base with that assessment?
Magic123 said: for FREE Rising tensions gives you this much a month:400 gold400 pinks20 packs10,000 orbsPAYING $30 for VIP you this much a month:400 gold150 pinks8 packs4 non-dupe rares1 non-dupe mythicthe top one looks better, and its also FREE, why would you downgrade to PAYING $30 a month, for lower rewards...
madwren said: I don't mind the existence of a subscription model. It largely won't affect me.What I do mind is the removal of RT. Subscription models should augment an already equitable reward pool. They shouldn't replace it. The combination of the two creates very poor optics and is yet another marketing failure.