Since I posted on this thread once, I felt like I should make a follow up post, as, finally, I've found a machine I own that can play this game reasonably. I don't know if this is just a difference in configurations (I only run windows machines... mostly), or due to patches/improvements on the server or a combination of the two, anyway...
So tongue and cheek commentary aside, as a software developer myself, trying to charge money before testing on various platforms is bad. This should not be a surprise, I think, even to a "lay" person. Launch issues are not uncommon, however, and many major studios have had bad launches. Note this also tended to kill their game, but... The internets are not forgiving
.
Anyway, server uptimes *seem* to have improved dramatically (I've not made a study of them, per se, just my informal perception) and the game is reasonably playable on my Surface (for some reason). Assuming such play experience could be provided ubiquitously on supported platforms, than I would say some p2p model would seem reasonable, however...
I tend to agree with most people that the scale is too high. From what I can tell there has been some significant UI improvements in the game and the flora and fauna have been increased in diversity. How deep these expansions run is unclear. Certain features are clearly missing (healing??), so overall the game is clearly still in pre-release. Personally I do not feel a developer has the right to charge a subscription fee for a pre-release beta product (full stop). I think attempting to do so is attempting to move the needle from industry standards, and that is the most neutral description I can put on it. It is, however, exceedingly common these days to charge a one-time fee for "early access" to a game you are developing. If it had been me, I would have done a one-time fee of $5 per character.
I think one of the troubles you are suffering from is the store descriptions. There are several pretty irrelevant options. Like the verified account. Also trying to "defend" a free account is pointless. I played Archeage (don't bother, btw), which uses many of the same subscription options, and it seems premature to me to try to mimic them.
So, maybe you just need to money to keep the game running, I don't know. Or you are trying to do an in-house kickstarter-like fund raising effort to try to push development to another level. Maybe you hope to become self-sufficient like the Dwarf Fortress (guy, btw, primarily, afaik--he has contributors, but Two dogs(?memory fails me) is basically one stay at home dad, iir). In any of those events, at the least, I'd recommend just being up front about your goals and motivations. People will feel a lot better about it, and more likely to actually give you money. By the by, a kickstarter might not be a bad idea. Just saying.
My final comment, (and all these comments I largely make for myself as I never feel like giant threads like these get read by many people), would be to point out that it's not about what $10/mo is "worth". You are not competing or pricing against the cost of a meal at a restaurant or a movie or whatever. You are pricing against the standards set by other titles in the industry. The subscription model in general is very hard to maintain, even for triple-A titles as it stands. Most only manage it for their honeymoon period when they are the new hotness--usually 1-2 years after release. Many don't even last that long, and these are major titles with major funding, art budgets, marketing, etc. An indie game, unfinished, with a poor track record for maintenance and updates, being released unfinished should not even attempt to charge a subscription fee. But even in so attempting, trying to make comparisons against other subscription games for pricing is really pretty silly. I guess, since I said this was my "final" comment I'll tack on the point that many have already eluded. HnH, like any online multi-player game, can only survive with a minimum quorem of players. If you drive too many players out of the game, the game becomes an empty wasteland making it no fun for your paying players either, who then grow bored and quit. This is a proven intersection of game theory and game marketing, you can look it up; it is the basis for many games going free to play or freemium or whatever. Personally, I hate freemium games, but, devs have to eat too.
In the end you all will do what you do and the market will bare what it will bare and the chips will fall where they may. YMMV and good luck!
by Cranny » Tue Sep 01, 2015 12:24 am 
I'd say a good amount are americans and westerners (such as myself) too. Many of them write english very well.