14 replies to this topic

[RobarGK]

I've posted about this in a couple other threads, but I'm curious what the communities reception to this would be.

Currently all the base mech packs cost the same, at $20 dollars each, with some lights for $15. However, the perceived value if these packs has not stayed up with this as the packs get older. Older players who have been buying over the years already purchased the packs they wanted. Other then a few favorites, most newer players aren't going to have as much interest in paying the same for an old pack as they would for a new one, especially when the new one is being advertised and the old one can be bought in game, often for cheap enough there is no real grind (looking at you urbanmech).

I propose the pricing on some older and/or under purchased mech packs be reduced. Reinforcements too, while perhaps keeping the hero add ons the same except where comparable purchases are much cheaper.

For example, let's use the assassin. A decent mech but not a huge favourite. Many varients are cheap enough that they are easy to aquire. I imagine the spending on the pack mostly disappeared once it was out for cbills. If the price was reduced to $15, or better yet $10 (although maybe after it was at $15 for a bit) it could be a solid investment for a new player to get a few mechs and mech bays. Additionally, some older players who never got into it might consider it worth a purchase at that price point if they didn't before.

With it being cheaper it could start bringing in more income, through more purchases. This would have to be balanced against the Mc and premium time prices still, (which I think could be a bit cheaper too) but could really help the game.

Plus if a new player plays the game and does buy anything they become invested and more likely to stick around and possibly make more purchases.

I've had these thoughts for a while but since the announcement that pgi isn't making money off mech packs and the potential coming of maintenance mode, a change should happen and little ones like this could keep it alive longer. If I know the end is coming I'm not going to spend $20 dollars on a bushwacker, but ten I might.

[Black Ivan]

Make the Mechs in a Mech Pack selectable so we can purchase the variants we really want would have helped a lot.

[Bombast]

Too late. Once you openly say "This game is unsustainable," the jig is up. No price reduction can compensate for the knowledge that your purchase can and is going to be disappearing in a puff of smoke any time now.

[Karl Streiger]

Bombast, on 03 June 2019 - 05:06 AM, said:

Too late. Once you openly say "This game is unsustainable," the jig is up. No price reduction can compensate for the knowledge that your purchase can and is going to be disappearing in a puff of smoke any time now.

This so much this

Can i quote it again:

Bombast, on 03 June 2019 - 05:06 AM, said:

Once you openly say "This game is unsustainable," the jig is up.

Its scary that this elementary error was made.... this was beyond stupid

[Mawai]

Also, it is important to note that reduced prices do not typically increase revenues. If you drop the price by 50% you need to sell twice as much to break even. If you drop it by 90%, you need to sell 10x as much.

MWO is too much of a niche market for permanent price drops to have any lasting impact and it has always been this way.

Other strategies like bulk discounts, sales, packages at reduced rates will all work as long as they aren't too frequent.

Finally, as mentioned, introducing doubt regarding the future operations of the game is probably among the worst things that can be done since it makes it very difficult for someone to actually decide to spend money on the game if they don't know how long that content would be usable.

I long ago received all the value I expected from purchasing a Founders pack and other bundles. I also recently pre-ordered MW5 though none of the MWO freebies were an incentive since I had not played he game for at least 2 years at that point. (I did play on the past weekend and enjoyed it ... the basic game play is the same as closed beta [and still just as much fun] but the game in general looks and feels quite a bit better than a few years ago).

However, the recent dev comments appear to show very little direction from PGI in terms of where they will take MWO next, if anywhere, which doesn't seem to me to be a very well thought out approach.

On the other hand, they may be having licensing issues again which comes around every few years.

Edited by Mawai, 03 June 2019 - 10:47 AM.

[Koniving]

Whether or not they renew the license,said well before that Dev Update, was "dependent upon Mechwarrior 5's success."

If you want to keep the lights on, getting those sales numbers up would do a lot more than buying mech packs...and unlike the mech packs, MW5 isn't gonna disappear when servers get shut down.

This said..
Perhaps the fact that free to play games that don't evolve will stagnate and die will teach PGI that perhaps it would be better to not go the free to play route without pumping money into innovation in it to keep it from stagnating. Or perhaps they'll go the smarter route of producing real games.

They don't have to be triple A. In fact I find that triple A games are, usually, **** unless made by the best...and even then, well look at Resident Evil 2 Remake. Good as that game was, so many things were done to cheapen the experience.

Single A, or even high B games would be nice. To be honest most of the Mechwarrior series was never triple A.
And lets be even more honest, Mechwarrior doesn't feel right when there's nothing coherent about it and lacking literally anything else. Its impossible to believe that machines that are easily 100,000,000 USD each and die in 17 seconds of combat or less would be the be-all and end-all of combat, and in the BT universe they really weren't. But in general, few things lasted less than 20 seconds as well. Even 5 ton hovercraft tended to survive multiple hits, even if the first might've crippled it.

We don't need millions spent on graphics. We need content and substance, and hundreds of nearly identical contraptions is not content when design decisions have robbed all life from what made them unique. So many times we offered ideas, and PGI has shut them down. Map generation for example. Now that PGI has map generation, hopefully they put it to use on their next title.

[M R T]

Bombast, on 03 June 2019 - 05:06 AM, said:

Once you openly say "This game is unsustainable," the jig is up.

Can you link me where this was actually said, for in my understanding what was said was: "MWO by itself is not by itself enough to sustain a company of PGI's size", which is a completely different thing.

[VitriolicViolet]

thats really not any different, MWO is ongoing revenue, MW5 is a single player game and as such is not going to bring in any where near what MWO does over time. upfront purchases of MW5 will be decent possibly but after the initial release period single player games tend to very quickly stop making money unless they micro-transaction the crap out of it or go the overpriced DLC once every 6 month route.

[M R T]

VitriolicViolet, on 03 June 2019 - 02:10 PM, said:

thats really not any different

Yeah it really is. PGI has hired a lot more hands to develop MW5, so the company has grown in size as a result. When the same thing happened to our company, we downsized instead of killing our source of income. I'm pretty sure the circumstances are similar, and keeping a game running does not require a huge workforce that needs to be paid.

Anyway, if you want to forgo the misinformation and fearmongering, listen to this guy instead:

[LordNothing]

dont think it will work. the supply seems to be high and the demand at an all time low. how do you get people with 300+ mechs to be interested in another mech? you dont. you are just giving a drowning man a glass of water. failure to set up monetization for other content, hell failure to make other content at all, is what will kill the game. you give me 20 flavors of ac20 for a thousand mc a pop and maybe we will talk. or maybe start selling gsp.

Edited by LordNothing, 04 June 2019 - 06:46 AM.

[Rosh87]

Morte Nilsum, on 03 June 2019 - 11:21 AM, said:

Can you link me where this was actually said, for in my understanding what was said was: "MWO by itself is not by itself enough to sustain a company of PGI's size", which is a completely different thing.

This is Exactly my point the last few days, as people are starting to say (rarely but it's happening) in Quick Play games All Chat things like "too bad this game is being ended" or "game's on its last legs - they said so in the Dev Update !" - which I think is a GROSS mischaracterization of what was actually said by PGI.

Saying this game - by itself - is not enough was somehow translated by certain players as "MWO is doomed" - which I didn't get at all from their actual comments (in totality). If anything, they were being honest about a part of the Financial Equation...but people are being overly negative about the connotations. It's as if - he had said instead "MWO is great and fully self-sustainable so just keep doing exactly what all of you have been doing - no issues !" - then they would all be happy and positive, even if this was a Lie / Inaccurate.

Instead, by being (arguably) sort of honest, people are taking that as "ah, see, they have admitted the game is about to end !" - which...again, I think is a Huge stretch. The most / worst you could take from the stream (I think) is "If MW-5 fails colossally, then yeah - We - PGI as a whole and MWO by extension - would be in serious trouble and at risk of actually ending everything for financial reasons".

THAT...however, is a huge step from "MWO itself is dying / ending soon / will not be supported going forwards" - etc, which is how some people have interpreted things.


(just my - admittedly new-player-as of Feb-2019 impressions)

[shaytalis]

One positive sign is that they have 4 job openings posted. 2 months ago they only had 1 job opening posted, and not one of the four currently posted. If their hiring has escalated that's good news. And one of the jobs relates specifically to Unreal 4.

[RePlayBoy101]

shaytalis, on 04 June 2019 - 11:12 AM, said:

One positive sign is that they have 4 job openings posted. 2 months ago they only had 1 job opening posted, and not one of the four currently posted. If their hiring has escalated that's good news. And one of the jobs relates specifically to Unreal 4.

no people started to quit

[JediPanther]

How many years has it been people have said reduce the dam price of the cosmetic fluff? Why buy a paint when the price of it could get you a new mech instead?

[shaytalis]

RePlayBoy101, on 04 June 2019 - 11:48 AM, said:

no people started to quit

MW5 launches in September. Hiring a developer means at least a month or two where the new hire is getting their bearings and learning the system. Whoever they are hiring is coming in to work on something new. Same with the other 3 people and the one they recently hired just before these. They wouldn't be hiring all these people if they were about to close their doors.