A: I think the ideal model is where you have to buy the expansions (for the prices they were at before the Beta or possibly lower than that) and also have to pay a nominal yearly fee once you reach a certain games played threshold. This keeps the active players funding the site.
You have to pay for the game, pay for the expansions and pay an ongoing subscription.
Man, I feel like I'm flogging a dead horse here, but you're describing the payment model of WoW.
A payment model that WoW itself is increasingly shifting away from as more players reject it.
You seriously think this payment model would work for an online card game?
I am seriously struggling to find words to describe just how effective this model would be at driving away potential players.
B: I imagine Blizzard already has servers devoted to their MMOs and can just use that infrastructure for StarCraft, so there's less cost associated with running servers for SC because they already have to run them for other stuff. StarCraft is like Dominion in that it's a game that has taken on a very competitive life of its own, and to take that away for a cash grab would be sort of silly. The thing is that Blizzard makes other games that they can promote this way through StarCraft. I don't think MakingFun does.
Okay, I need to stop using megolithic companies like Blizzard as a comparison.
Seriously, look through this list of multiplayer games on Steam.There's a huge number of multiplayer games from developers big, small and tiny.
How many of them require a monthly or yearly subscription to play multiplayer?
Aside from maybe a handful in the MMO category, the answer is basically
none of them.
This is the space in which Dominion is competing.
You have to put aside your own love of Dominion.
Obviously most people on this forum would be willing to pay a monthly fee to play a game they all love.
But we're a captive audience.
If MF actually want to make money, I say again, the way to do it is to fix the game, slash the price and sell a million copies on Steam.