("He was a good man. What a rotten way to die.")
Nope. I'm a subscriber, but I abhor the idea of a paywall and wouldn't support it.
A paywall is extremely unlikely to ever be a possibility. I am working on making subs worthwhile, however.
Yay. Because while I am currently cool with paying the sub-fee and see no reason to stop, I mostly view it as "A charity that doesn't really help needy people but that I am cool with" rather than an actual subscription, if that makes any sense.
I said yes since I love reading RPS. But I never would have started reading if it was behind a paywall, so that's actually a no.
Also Jim since you are reading this. I would much prefer an annual sub as opposed to monthly. Give us more ways to give you money!
I pay the subs, but to help make the site better. Paying for a paywall will reduce the income from ads, so I would need to pay more to counter that, or the site will end with less money to operate. I personally don't like sites behind a paywall. No reasons, other that I have born free and I will die free.
No, honestly no.
While i love RPS, setting any kind of paywall will just leave out.
No. Gaming is a hobby. As a result, convenience and lack of obligation (both time and monetary) are key.
An RPS paywall might be a boon for workplace productivity on my weaker days, though. :\
Nope; I'd be far likelier to donate cash if they did a PA-style "sellout" Kickstarter (I find that less distasteful).
RPS is good, but it's not unique anymore. I don't know their numbers but I highly doubt they'd have enough conversions to replace their current ad model, and the instantaneous hit they'd take to relevance (from droves that'd start refusing to link to them) would kill 'em off right quick.
I sub and have adblock on. Thats paywall to me already, so yes of course! :D
I like the content I get for free, but they would have to really step it up, and use the money for investigative journalism, for me to agree to a subscription. The series on EA and SimCity this year is the closest I've seen to that. Maybe even send me something in print every month. I subbed to NSFWCorp because of the quality and depth of their writing staff's previous work. And good journalism costs money, and the writers of good journalism should be paid fairly (even handsomely). You could even share ten stories a month for 48 hours each as part of your subscription, so you could still send links to friends and family for particular interesting pieces.
However, on the other side of that same coin, I cancelled my sub to NSFWCorp because their editor is a real bell-end and they posted a pathetic "you leftists should shut up because only the Irish have a reason to hate Thatcher" eulogy with absolutely no irony. So there's always the risk that you'll drop the ball on something or lose subscribers just for being true to what you believe in. Like, I seriously never would have canceled my subscription, even given that shoddy eulogy, if I hadn't made the mistake of listening to Paul Carr be a complete and total nob-head over and over again on the podcast.
I would really like to see the RPS editorial hand at work with a subscription-based journalism model focusing on long form stories and investigative journalism, but it's not likely to be feasible. Many gamers are young and can't afford, for whatever reason, a subscription to a games journalism website. And they're also not the demographic that is interested in long form/investigative journalism.
It's an interesting idea, though. I would really like to see something like this for games journalism beyond the PC Gamer model, which still relies on a metric fuck-ton of ads in their print edition and are therefore beholden to those advertisers. As in, a truly independent source of thoughtful, well-researched pieces on PC games and gaming. No ads, totally subscription funded, to avoid advertiser conflicts and so forth, giving the journalists and editorial staff a free hand to write whatever is true, regardless of what powerful people it might offend.
No, I'd never pay for game information, even though I have been reading RPS for a while and it is generally in-line with my gaming interests
Well, I've thought a bit more on this and I find myself agreeing with drvoke; I'd pay for more directed content. And this is mainly because I'm always trying to trim back my RSS feeds...
I don't want investigative journalism per se, although it'd be nice. In general I just want more long-form stuff: more John Walker issue-tackling, more WITs, more multi-party musing sessions, perhaps some twitch-streamed and/or recorded games accompanied by later written analysis, culture-pondering, interviews, etc. And less of the press release type posts, or at least a reliable way to separate them out from the longer-form stuff.
I don't hate "look at this trailer and have a pun about it" snippets – I've been introduced to interesting stuff here – but tbh I'm more interested in why RPS writers find things interesting than in what they're interested in. And I don't really get that from announcement posts which I can find at Blues/Shack/a jillion other venues. iow, I'd pay for a regular blast of meaty content in which the RPS crew play up their sexy mindbits a bit more.
Or maybe I just need to read less altogether. That could be my problem.