|
Well, remember; the thing that distinguishes my conceptual model from most PFP applications is its binary nature.
Either you pay monthly and have access to all of the extended content, or you don't. It isn't a matter of paying and receiving an X increase in power, where each player can pay and receive these increases as many times as desired.
So, in a sense, it lowers the monetary barrier to effective competition, since in this model you only need to pay the monthly fee, whereas in the more liberalized PFP model you need to pay as much as other players (some with a great deal more disposable income than others, I imagine) are paying in order to effectively compete with them.
It's a given that paying members will in some ways have advantages that non-paying members don't; the moment you allow non-paying members to play in however limited a scope, this will happen, unless, as you said, you make your fee-required content not worth paying for.
The primary difference between the two models to my mind lies in the difficulty of surmounting the barrier of effective competition between paying customers noted above.
|