34 replies to this topic

[TimTheEnchantor]

I hope to make a plea to IGP on this front. This is a broader topic than posting it in the Hot Topic Heatsink thread, as it affects more than just the CW portion. Mods, I hope this enables discussions on that broader topic of C-Bills versus MC and the like.

With the newly updated thread for the Community Warfare (http://mwomercs.com/...clarity-p2pf2p/) - we should help IGP to understand the ramifications of these issues.

Here's my feedback thus far:

• The MC-to-Dollar Ratio.
  
  • The main issue right now is that we have several features (colors, camo, mechs and more) that are incredibly high cost for what you get. We have the Pretty Baby and the newly-released Heavy Metal that are upwards of $30 for one variant. This is for just a single mech variant in a sea of mechs. On top of spending the money on these, you need to spend more MC or C-Bills to get the full use of that mech if you only own that mech chassis (you need three variants before maxing out the mech trees).
    
  • If we leave the current ratio as-is, and according to our clarification by Bryan earlier today, then we would essentially be looking at PGI considering the following scenario:
    
    • Player buys MC to participate in CW matches (or private matches) by using founder's premium. This can range from a few dollars to several.
      
    • Player and his group are using active MC to do this, since Premium Time counts down.
      
    • Player and his team must now choose whether this is gambling with their money or is providing them an active benefit. This is a slippery slope and may cause intense issues in the player base. Mainly the fact that some units will be incredibly 'elite' because if they lose - they may be losing money. Try to avoid this, please!
• The lack of emphasis placed on using C-Bills as an alternative currency.
  
  • In each of these threads lately, where Community Warfare is involved or consumables are involved, we see a distinct lack of foresight into handling P2W.
    
  • We have seen multiple cases where PGI has to defend it's position on how MC items are being implemented and how it affects game balance. Now, I believe PGI needs to really look into the mirror here.
    
  • There have been multiple instances where they have to say, "No, No we meant to have a C-Bill option!" If that truly was the case, then please put more emphasis on it. By not providing your position clearly or by being amiguous in your position - it essentially leaves the player to try and comprehend it themselves; and that never is good for anyone.
• PGI wants new players to try and get hooked on MWO
  
  • Community Warfare and the associated 'costs' of such a feature must have a reasonable barrier of entry. It should allow new players to access most (at best, all) competitive content without paying a dime. This is the business scenario that PGI accepted by making MWO a freemium game.
    
  • The costs of creating 12-man companies should have a high C-Bill cost in addition to MC. MC, as I consider it, is a way to bypass the time-requirement for long grinding sessions. It seems lately PGI has instead been changing that definition ever so slightly. Please try and come back to the original vision! Because...
    
  • ...by requiring such cool and exciting features to be 'gated' where making gamers pull out their wallet; that will actually be a harder sell to newer and existing gamers than if those features were just 'gated' by time alone (using C-Bills and bringing out the wallet being optional).
• Be clear about your message and don't muddle it
  
  • In the post made by Bryan, he tries to use a red herring argument for private matches:
    
    
    

    Quote

    If we decided to launch Private Matches, they will likely require a Premium Account to cover costs of hosting a match on our hardware.
    
    
  • This is not the right way to handle it. We have Hero mechs, premium time, camo and paint... there are many ways that PGI can make money. Using private matches as a way to generate money when it is a miniscule cost for server infrastructure; it just goes to confuse your message.

In closing, thanks for making a fun game thus far. Let's continue the progress.

Edited by TimTheEnchantor, 08 April 2013 - 12:13 PM.

[Vasces Diablo]

I have zero problem with MC for private matches (assuming we are not talking about the Merc v Merc CW matches).

They are a game type that specifically seeks to exclude the majority of the player base. That's fine. If two groups want to throw down in an exclusive way than go at it, but why would there not be a cost associated with that.

I've been under the impression that this request has been coming from the various leagues that exist (names escape me...NBT?). Which again, is totally fine, but if they want to do something exclusive from the community, than there should be compensation for the infrastructure provided.

[Wizard Steve]

Premium content for premium players.

[SirLANsalot]

http://mwomercs.com/...28#entry2181828

read and understand that this is not a P2W game, nor will it ever be. Pay for Convenience is what this game is being made around. Consumables ARE NOT exclusively MC, the cbill ones ARE THE SAME.

Idiots.

[TimTheEnchantor]

Sirlansalot, I am making that distinction - actually. Unless you are responding to the others...

[BlackWidow]

TimTheEnchantor, on 08 April 2013 - 12:11 PM, said:

• 
  
  • et. We have the Pretty Baby and the newly-released Heavy Metal that are upwards of $30 for one variant.

Here is the deal-io on this. PGI works with a company that SPECIALIZES in web and micro transactions. They have numbers that we are not privy to and would probably just pi$$ you off if you saw them. But, I'm fairly certain there are graphs with lots of data to back them up showing price breaks, who pays, who doesn't and when.

So, lets say (completely made up) 5 % of players purchase Pretty Baby. Or any Hero Mech for that matter. At the current price. There are a certain number of players, say 2%, that would still buy one even if they were MORE expensive. 1. Because they look cool. 2. Because they are unique. 3. Because said players have enough disposable income they price isn't the roadblock. And, lets say that 2% more players would purchase HERO mech if it was say, what? 1/2 that price? 15 bucks is still steep for a single mech, but now PGI has cut their revenue in half for each unit. And there are those in the majority that play this game will not spend a dime on HERO mechs no matter what the cost.

So, make believe math:

100,000 users. 5% buy PB at $30. 2% buy at 40 dollars. 7% buy at $15 bucks.

100000 x .05 x $30 = $150,000 ( I assume the player base is larger than that but the 5% is pretty close to on the money)
100000 x .02 x $40 = $80,000
100000 x .07 x $15 = $105,000

As you can see, they make less money charging more. They also make less money charging less. In a F2P environment you have forces that drive people to spend money. Some players will spend X amount of dollars each month no matter what. (another thread in here had some people stating they have already spent over $1000 in-game. Yikes!) And you have some people that will NEVER spend money no matter what the incentive. Those two groups basically vary little over the course of a game. The key is to CONVERT as many of the never-paid-before players in to one-time or more-than-one-time players.

It's not easy to do considering the allure of playing for FREE is so strong. They have to counter that with items, sinks, bonuses, what have you, that are desirable enough to get a user to change his/her habits.

They have been posted many times before but I believe these two videos are REQUIRED viewing for anyone either playing a micro-transaction game ( or as they are commonly mislabed, F2P) or trying to have a discussion about them.

http://www.slideshar...s/paying-to-win

http://www.penny-arc...crotransactions

Everyone...please take 10 minutes of your life and watch these. They are informative, entertaining and will allow you to come back to the game and these forums better armed with new understanding. Now, it may still make your blood boil, but at least you will know why.

SirLANsalot, on 08 April 2013 - 12:30 PM, said:

Idiots.

Now, now. Not everyone can take the time to read all previous threads on this or other issues.

/cheers.

[BlackWidow]

No more discussion on the topic? Is everyone busy watching the videos?

[Noobzorz]

SirLANsalot, on 08 April 2013 - 12:30 PM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...28#entry2181828

read and understand that this is not a P2W game, nor will it ever be. Pay for Convenience is what this game is being made around. Consumables ARE NOT exclusively MC, the cbill ones ARE THE SAME.

Idiots.

It's amazing. It's like you didn't read the topic at all.

Further, your point of reasoning is that it is not P2W because the developer said so. Do you understand how tenuous this "proof" is?

I agree that MWO is not P2W, nor does it show signs of going in a P2W direction (though, admittedly, hero mechs are something I wish they hadn't included). But there was no need for you to come romping in here with this irrelevant silliness. It's like you had two windows open and posted in the wrong topic by accident.

So let me be quite unequivocal:

Your post was stupid. You should be ashamed of it.

Edited by Noobzorz, 08 April 2013 - 02:29 PM.

[BlackWidow]

This topic needs a bump!

[Lefty Lucy]

I would definitely have purchased a hero mech and some premium time if MC were a better value. However, I also realize that my experiences do not reflect the experiences of all other players.

[NinetyProof]

BlackWidow, on 08 April 2013 - 12:58 PM, said:

As you can see, they make less money charging more. They also make less money charging less.

That statement is only true if your percentage numbers are correct.

As for a rebuttal ... I got one word: Steam.

Steam has already proven that deep discounts can rake in Huge numbers for developers. In some cases, software is a lot like Mech chassis. When they are new and pretty, the command a higher price ... and the older they get, the less their value is.

Hero mechs is a great example. Out of all of them, only 1 or 2 of them are even viable for serious game play. Frankly, even with the cbill boost, some of them are sooo bad, you can make more cbills in a different chassis with an optimal build. So some of those chassis will never be bought until they go on deep deep discount.

So, those same "scary" metrics you have mentioned will point to this (when deep discounts will generate more revenue) ... but, this is beta, and even those metric don't really count at this point and won't kick in till after launch.

The reality is that PGI is still in Beta Business Model and the metrics are different then post-launch metrics. Post launch, a lot of things change.

[Vasces Diablo]

The deep discounts of Steam only work because you have a massive audience and they offer a wide variety of products (game types/titles). There are enough people who would never buy some of those titles unless they were on sale that it works.

Mech chassis have a much smaller customer set, so the equilibrium price is going to be higher. I'm not saying that equilibrium may not be lower than what they're charging today, but losing money while selling more is a very real possibility with a smaller customer set.

Despite what the Republican Party tells you, supply side economics doesn't work. Just making things cheap doesn't automatically increase demand in equal (or greater) proportion.

That could just be the Keynesian in me talking though.

[Purplefluffybunny]

Any type of recurring fee via MC to access a gaming space means you are essentially paying a sub to play this game. This may constitute false advertising, particularly if you take previous interviews as a form of 'advertising'. Likewise, if you require a one off MC fee, you run into similar issues; you have to 'buy in to' the game (lets just drop the Orwellian speech and just say 'you have to buy the game'), to access the gaming spaces.


EDIT: You can't have all of your cake to eat PGI!

Edited by Purplefluffybunny, 09 April 2013 - 12:36 PM.

[BlackWidow]

NinetyProof, on 09 April 2013 - 12:16 PM, said:

That statement is only true if your percentage numbers are correct.

As for a rebuttal ... I got one word: Steam.

Steam has already proven that deep discounts can rake in Huge numbers for developers. In some cases, software is a lot like Mech chassis. When they are new and pretty, the command a higher price ... and the older they get, the less their value is.

Hero mechs is a great example. Out of all of them, only 1 or 2 of them are even viable for serious game play. Frankly, even with the cbill boost, some of them are sooo bad, you can make more cbills in a different chassis with an optimal build. So some of those chassis will never be bought until they go on deep deep discount.

So, those same "scary" metrics you have mentioned will point to this (when deep discounts will generate more revenue) ... but, this is beta, and even those metric don't really count at this point and won't kick in till after launch.

The reality is that PGI is still in Beta Business Model and the metrics are different then post-launch metrics. Post launch, a lot of things change.

You are correct on many points. But, as with my made up numbers, unless were privy to actual data, it's speculation at best. Consider this though:

1. Many of the "bargins" on Steam are from small, indie devs. Much lower cost to produce their game
2. A large portion of games on Steam are just digital versions of RETAIL packages. This means bigger budgets and usually the game has a period of retail box sales before it's released on Steam. So they have already made the brunt of their sales. Steam sales are kinda picking up the scraps, so to speak. So, those DEEP DISCOUNTS are for games that may have already sold enough to cover development costs.
3. I would say most of these games are one-and-done. They are not persistent games with the need to maintain servers and staff. Yes, there may be some, but not the majority.

MWO is considering Steam as a distribution channel. I think this would be great but time will tell.

[Chavette]

http://mwomercs.com/...36#entry2174036

From here.

Improve the value of hero mechs by:

Free mech bays.
Get the hero mechs colors unlocked for free.

[Purplefluffybunny]

Chavette, on 09 April 2013 - 12:38 PM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...36#entry2174036

From here.

Improve the value of hero mechs by:

Free mech bays.
Get the hero mechs colors unlocked for free.

That is a good idea.

[NinetyProof]

Vasces Diablo, on 09 April 2013 - 12:29 PM, said:

The deep discounts of Steam only work because you have a massive audience and they offer a wide variety of products (game types/titles). There are enough people who would never buy some of those titles unless they were on sale that it works.

Wide variety doesn't matter per-se

Vasces Diablo, on 09 April 2013 - 12:29 PM, said:

Mech chassis have a much smaller customer set, so the equilibrium price is going to be higher. I'm not saying that equilibrium may not be lower than what they're charging today, but losing money while selling more is a very real possibility with a smaller customer set.

Some of their sales are strickly due to "low-information-buyers" though ... but yes, there are metrics that wold probably show that deep discounts *right now* would bring in loads of cash ... my point though is those metrics are probably being ignored because this is beta.

Vasces Diablo, on 09 April 2013 - 12:29 PM, said:

Despite what the Republican Party tells you, supply side economics doesn't work. Just making things cheap doesn't automatically increase demand in equal (or greater) proportion.

You might want to actually "know" what your talking about first ... supply side is not about companies making less profit. hint: google: wiki supply side ... read first paragraph to refresh your memory.

Vasces Diablo, on 09 April 2013 - 12:29 PM, said:

That could just be the Keynesian in me talking though.

Or could be the "I forgot what supply side economics is" side of you talking?

The original point I was replying to was the obviously obtuse observation that the reason why PGI has not lowered the prices is because of arbitrary percentage numbers poster pulled out of the air.

Yes, there are forecasting intelligence ... but the percentages quoted are purely fictional use to bolster a point.

My response was two fold:

1) Those are fictitious numbers
2) Being in Beta drastically alters the formula to such a point that it's almost not worth discussing.

ie: If this game were post-launch, a whole different set of algorithms would be use.

Yes, the original post did attempt to educate people that pricing is not willy nilly ... granted ... but drawing a negative conclusion with hypothetical numbers fabricated to bolster a position? puh-lease.

Edited by NinetyProof, 09 April 2013 - 12:57 PM.

[Vasces Diablo]

Again, we are making a lot of assumptions here, as we have very little data:

1)My point with steam. They have a large and very diverse customer base. The discounts work because they capture people who come to steam for a different product set. I like RPGs, I have no interest in Call of battlefield honor 7. I would not seek that game out. But steam exposes me to it, eventually at a very low price point, so maybe I'll buy. MWO is incapable of doing that, so the simply lowing prices will not equal more cash flow.

2)If they do have the data that shows they would increase revenue by lowering the price, why wouldn't they do it? I assure you, they pay very close attention to what happens when they put things on sale, being Beta or full production shouldn't be a factor.

3)No, what I said before is not the all encompassing definition of what Supply Side economics is, but it is an aspect of it. The theory that providing large quantities of supply at a low price will drive demand, as opposed to demand driving price and level of supply. Ultimately, it's not exclusively one or the other, but a mixture of both along with a variety of other things (like quality and substitution options).

[BlackWidow]

Chavette, on 09 April 2013 - 12:38 PM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...36#entry2174036

From here.

Improve the value of hero mechs by:

Free mech bays.
Get the hero mechs colors unlocked for free.

Love that idea.

[Rashhaverak]

Economics is not that complicated. PGI will charge the amount that most will pay. I've seen an awful lot of pink mechs out there, so saying that the hero's are overpriced just may be a non-starter argument.