85 replies to this topic

[OlF]

At the moment 0$.

If the game in my perception is worth spending money, it would be 15$ a month I guess. Jugding by the amount I spend on other similar f2p products.

My 2 main points are CW and regional servers (both announced early 2012).

[One Medic Army]

I'll probably buy a $100 MC pack every 6months or so once the game's in release status.
I'm finally reaching the end of my Founder's MC, so I may g for a $100 pack sometime soon if there's a sale or another hero mech I really want.

Edited by One Medic Army, 04 April 2013 - 12:47 AM.

[Kissamies]

Occasionally maybe. I expect it'll be much like my relationship with Tribes: Ascend. At some point I play alot and then decide that the devs deserve some money from me and spend maybe $30. Then I eventually drift off to some other game. Come back later and possibly put some extra money in it if I need some mech bays or something.

[Exoth3rmic]

I've spent enough for the moment which has equated over the time I've played to $20 a month.

You make a comment about "f2p" players + there's a lot of people voting to spend $0. That's fine, if you're enjoying the game and unable/unwilling to pay I thank you for being here and providing a critical mass of players to give me my monies worth in targets.

I trust, though, that if you fall in to the category of people that would never pay that you are busy, when on the forums, supporting the opinions of those of us who do pay in order to keep your own gaming experience here alive.

Afterall, there's no point in you asking PGI to create you more content off my money when issues I have aren't resolved first - I might stop paying and you'd have to stop playing.

[The Amazing Atomic Spaniel]

So far the game is great fun and I'm impressed with the quality of work done by PGI. They keep producing content and I'll keep buying it. Sounds like a fair deal.

[Monkeystador]

A whole lot of notin

[Kyynele]

Scromboid, on 03 April 2013 - 12:03 PM, said:

I really think if PGI redefines their price point a bit, they can capture more consumer, netting them higher and longer term profit potential.

I'm pretty sure that wouldn't work.

I work in games business and have had to hear some stuff about monetization even though that I have very little interest in it.

Target audience defines the monetization model in freemium games. MWO is no Angry Birds, MWO will never hit one billion downloads. MWO is pretty much a schoolbook example of a game that has very targeted demographic, and that model works because there are very dedicated players who will spend lots of money in the game. This is in contrast to casual games in which the model works because the pool of users is so vast that very small transactions accumulate to significant amounts.

So there's a limited amount of players, and even though trying to get in some CoD audience in game, the player count will never get to those kind of numbers because of the niche hardcore mech simulation genre. Out of that limited customer base, there's a large percentage that will not pay anything in any case because 'it's a free game'. Out of the percentile that are willing to pay - unfortunately for the people who aren't willing to spend much - it's better business to keep prices high and get the money from the big spenders.

Getting some of the 0$ spenders to spend 7$ in a month would likely mean that the big spenders would go down from 200$ to 50$ a month (this isn't even a extreme example really, there are people who spend a lot more than that) since things are just so much cheaper and they don't need to invest as much to get the nice things. Also, the people who put in large sums of money are much more likely to waste lots of it in impulse buys (since they have lots of MC lying around), while small spenders will likely make only very thought-through purchases, making the big spenders even more lucrative.

TLDR;

If you're currently spending 0$ and think IGP/PGI would make more money if things were cheaper so that you and others like you would spend a little, you likely underestimate how much money the big spenders actually put in the game.

[JuiceKeeper]

atm am not spending anything, theres just no interesting content, desert map is amazing but game is stuck since january some visual addons dont change much for me and bug fixing too becouse bug will be allways. And personaly i cant justify for my self buying hero mech for those prices and bashing each other like we did in december allready. Its just boring. I might spend in future after its out from beta depends how much they will try to monetize CW. Anyway what i expect what i can spend its like 30-50 a year on this game. But in current state i will just buy whole game for 30 then single mech.

[The Amazing Atomic Spaniel]

Kyynele, on 04 April 2013 - 01:31 AM, said:

Target audience defines the monetization model in freemium games. MWO is no Angry Birds, MWO will never hit one billion downloads. MWO is pretty much a schoolbook example of a game that has very targeted demographic, and that model works because there are very dedicated players who will spend lots of money in the game. This is in contrast to casual games in which the model works because the pool of users is so vast that very small transactions accumulate to significant amounts.

This!

MWO has more parallels with an F2P flight sim like Rise of Flight (excellent, btw) than it has with mass-market shooters. Many MWO players have been attached to the IP for decades and have played MW2, 3 & 4. They are older and better paid than most gamers and are prepared to spend more - evidenced by all the Heavy Metal Highlanders jumping around over the last few days.

I'm probably quite typical. I actually don't care that the game is currently quite limited because I know it will grow over time and I'm old enough to be patient. I don't mind dropping £20-30 a month on it because it's still much cheaper than my other interests (gliding and road cycling). I also don't mind dropping money on MWO because I don't play many other PC games (Rise of Flight is the only other with any longevity on my PC, although I have the new Bioshock to install some time).

[buttmonkey]

i will spend nothing except for mech bays as it simply isnt worth it. if i ever want to buy myself a mech why on earth would i pay up 30 ******* dollars when i can go on ebay and buy 6 real life metal miniatures for that cost. i mean come on ffs how greedy can you get !? and the paint is cheaper in real life too!

Edited by buttmonkey, 04 April 2013 - 02:00 AM.

[Ghogiel]

I am waiting for CW before spending any more $.

and even then I might only spend $30-50.

[The ZeroCool]

I only buy stuff if it is on sale or if I really want it. But, for me I will probably put in 10 bucks a month into my MC. I haven't yet, been wasting up my Founder MC that have about 1800 left of that. I see it as any other 15.00 a month game with subscription. But, if you don't feel like paying you don't have too!

[BA Dillard]

I'll spend, no problem. Love this game, don't mind spending money on it.

[HurlockHolmes]

Short Answer: I will not spend any more, because it is quickly becoming blatantly obvious that it isn't worth it, to me. That isn't saying that I haven't spent on it already however.
(The forums are much better source of entertainment anyway, where are my forum paint patterns and colours PGI?)

Long Answer:

Spoiler

I almost spent the money to get founders a while back, then I decided against it because I couldn't trust PGI to deliver a worth while product.

I ended up getting into cbt anyway and let them have the "It's a beta" excuse, but I played it enough to justify throwing a little bit into it.

Then they made a bunch of terrible design choices and it looked like a uncontrollable spin, they somehow pulled out with a really great patch and I threw more into it.

And then they started to repeatedly started kicking me in the *nether regions* with a bunch of terrible design choices.

Then this last patch is pretty nice, and they seem to have finally caved and listened to "certain" groups who actually know the meta game and how to actually balance it, instead of sticking their fingers in their ears and singing lalalalala, all the while saying they are "competitive" gamers and want this to be a competitive game. And of course they go WAY overboard as usual, throwing a certain feline into the sky and drop kicking it midair to go for the overkill.
(And I say that as somebody who hates piloting anything that doesn't have fully functional arm actuators.)

But the fact that it took THIS long to make basic changes that, to be perfectly honest, should have been there from the start and would have fixed a whole slew of problems months and months ago has drained me of any confidence of their ability to produce a quality product.

[Roadbeer]

repete, on 03 April 2013 - 04:04 PM, said:

Hang on. Really? CoD and BF have massively successful multi-player ecosystems going (Admittedly not in a F2P model) who are "fighting over nothing". Is it not enough to just enjoy blowing up enemy mechs, for now at least?

No, you know why?

[Scromboid]

repete, on 03 April 2013 - 04:04 PM, said:

Yup. I think this boils down to "Do you do the sell one million units at $1, or one unit at $1,000,000"? I would have no idea how you would make this decision, though I'd have thought it was slanted towards the former as you also have 1 million 'more committed users'.

But you also run the risks of only selling 500K at $1 and not making enough money, or zero at $1,000,000. I suspect they have priced their items at the max they think they can get on the bell curve.

Let me say this. Every match I've managed to get in (Thanks black screen bug) has had at least one HMH.



Hang on. Really? CoD and BF have massively successful multi-player ecosystems going (Admittedly not in a F2P model) who are "fighting over nothing". Is it not enough to just enjoy blowing up enemy mechs, for now at least?



Yup. I'm still bummed about the missile nerf. Quite a few mechs just rusting away in the garage and when I do take them out, they get owned by lasers.

Yeah, but real economics don't work like that. You are arguing extremes, and it always falls somewhere in the middle. You make that pink robot $10 and I think you'll have a ridiculous adoption rate to the point where you'll see 8 in every match... for a while.

That said, it came out two days ago. Of course you will see a lot. The question is this: In 3 months will it still sell as well at $35 a pop?

You will always get your initial buy in from folks who will buy something ~anyways~ no matter the price. Those folks are the initial 'gotta get it first and get it now'. What actually drives consistent revenue, though, are the folks who research, wait patiently and buy later. That is the vast majority, and you will end up making more money in the long term if you focus on catering to the vast majority vs. the early adopters.

Think of the TV industry. Remember when LED first came out? $20k for a 65"? Now what is it? I can get a 65" LED for less than a grand. You think the TV manufacturers are going broke because they are selling for so low? No. They are cleaning up now, because they got the initial burst from the early adopters, the 1%ers, if you will, and are now making a continual revenue stream from the VAST MAJORITY of folks (the 70%ers).

You have to make the game for long term or it will die.

I don't want this game to die. I like it quite a bit. PGI needs to refocus their strategies a bit for long term or we'll all be talking about how 'Cool MWO was back in the day' soon enough.

[Elandyll]

I answered "$0 becasue I don't think it's worth it", but imo that option should have the added wording "For Now".

Nothing is set in stone, and (hopefully) games like MWO get better over time and with more content / features.

CW and voip/ lobbies alone could change the worth (in my eyes) of MWO by a mile. Oh, and Balance too, but that is an ongoing challenge.

[Hawks]

0

Don't think it's worth it, the only reason I'm even still playing this game is because I don't want my Premium time to go to waste. Once that's expired I will probably stop playing, possibly for good.

[jay35]

Kyynele, on 04 April 2013 - 01:31 AM, said:

Target audience defines the monetization model in freemium games. MWO is no Angry Birds, MWO will never hit one billion downloads. MWO is pretty much a schoolbook example of a game that has very targeted demographic, and that model works because there are very dedicated players who will spend lots of money in the game.

Yet on the other hand, that sounds like a very good argument for getting as much of that audience to pay as much as possible. So it'd seem wise to consider a price point where the majority of the audience is paying as much as they're capable of paying.

As another poster noted above, "...real economics don't work like that. You are arguing extremes, and it always falls somewhere in the middle."

I'm not sure they've found that middle yet. But I am sure they are experimenting to find it. =)

Edited by jay35, 04 April 2013 - 07:46 AM.

[Nuds]

people seem to forget that simply playing the game consistently is a form of supporting the game. The game fails if it does not have a strong community of players out there playing and keeping it alive. Not everyone has to pay in the free to play model for it to be successful that is the point. so I picked spend occasionally because that is how this model of monetization works.