169 replies to this topic

[Inertiaman]

Cerlin, on 12 December 2012 - 10:20 AM, said:

But the forums really only represents a small percent of players that choose to post. I know many players who dropped money on Mc/founders who NEVER post here and PGI does have that information.

Way to destroy that pesky anecdotal evidence with hard facts.

Posthocergopropterhoc_facepalm.jpg

[TheSturgeon]

PGI can charge whatever they're charging and still be successful (I see wangs and IMs everywhere). However, I feel like there are a lot of people like myself, who are totally willing to spend money if the value is there. Right now it's just not.

I would really like to pick up a YLW, but I wouldn't pay more than $14 for it.

[8RoundsRapid]

Its too expensive. Only people who don't know the value of their dollar will buy at these prices. I've been playing this game for months now and I haven't once thought to myself 'this game would be much better if I spent a few bucks.' There's simply nothing worth the prices.

On the other hand, planetside2 has already convinced me to drop 15$ even after I told the wife I wouldn't spend any money on it.

Contrast those 2 stories and you'll understand why this current price model is a failure, PGI. In one, I play a f2p game for a few months and am not convinced to spend. In the other, I play a f2p game for 2+ weeks and after swearing not to spend, I spent.

There has to be value. PGI will always get money from some of the diehards. But I just don't understand how they can grow their game and improve it by pricing 80% of the playerbase out of the product right out of the gate.

[Lanessar]

Cerlin, on 12 December 2012 - 10:20 AM, said:

But the forums really only represents a small percent of players that choose to post. I know many players who dropped money on Mc/founders who NEVER post here and PGI does have that information. They dont just track the forums, they track transactions, which mechs we drive, who spends mc, how much, how many people dont spend any, etc. I am sure they have a long term plan and ANY company wants a successful multiplayer game. IT can make money for YEARs opposed to regular games that are only one time or short term gains. It is in their best interest that this game can make the most money possible. ALong with that they are mechwarrior fans, that gives them two strong motivations to make this work.

The problem with anecdotal evidence (I know a guy...) is that it isn't necessarily true.

I could postulate that for every person posting the prices are insane, there are 100 players in-game that feel the same way.

Or, like the six friends I had join me in the game, that 1 in 7 people won't continue past the fifth match because of the terrible new user experience.

The problem with "leaving it up to PGI" is that, based on lack of feedback, we really don't know what they are looking at. Someone in the finance department could say "we've made $3,000 on camo spec! Success!" and they could be blindsiding the fact that many of us would start purchasing if the pricing model were better. Turning that figure into, say, $100,000. We can't know. Because we're not getting any data in return despite loads of feedback on the subject.

And honestly, I know enough short-sighted and know-best consultants or project managers who really wouldn't see the forest for the trees. I don't expect exact financials, or even hints. But a posted response would be a decent idea.

Since, y'know, as so many people are fond of pointing this out... "it's a beta".

Edited by Lanessar, 12 December 2012 - 10:49 AM.

[Stoicblitzer]

aspect, on 12 December 2012 - 04:39 AM, said:

Everybody keeps saying things like this without actually having access to the sales numbers. What exactly makes all of you so sure that it ISN'T a success?

One of the devs said that the YLW was a huge success, and I'm inclined to agree given how many of them were seen in game. I played a match a few days ago where out of the 16 mechs present, THREE of them were muromets.

I know it's fun to pretend that nobody is buying MC or hero mechs, but based on what I actually see in-game that's simply not the case. Arguing that PGI doesn't understand economics and should adjust their pricing downward when you have literally ZERO sales data is absurd...maybe they should be adjusting the price UPWARDS in order to bring in more revenue? Have you conducted a pricing trial to find out? No?

I feel like there's a lot of people on these forums who are starting to figure out basic economics and are desperate to share their new-found realizations with the world...why else would any rational person assume that nobody at PGI has heard of a demand function or a revenue curve? Everyone I know with a computer science or engineering degree has taken at least one economics class, and that sort of thing is covered in like the first week.

As one of those engineers who took an engineering economics class, let me say that I don't feel like people are trying to show-off their knowledge or lack thereof. True, we have no sales data besides a comment by a dev that they made $5 million on the founder's program. However, it is also true that if they lowered their prices even a little they would more than likely sell more items. I really do think the demand is there even with the current state of the game. In any case, I don't think we should ignore many of these anecdotes. Personally, I do feel that the prices are too high on everything. Maybe a 20% reduction on mech bays and premium time. Then half the MC prices on all mechs. We are also neglecting the resale value of mechs which is far too low. I can't really see a reason for this besides making it extremely expensive to convert MC to C-bills. Either they should reduce the c-bill prices and keep the current resale values or they should just increase the amount you get back on resale. Currently, it's just not enough. I have not activated my premium time but do buy 1-3 day increments if I know I will be playing a lot in the near future.

[Kraven Kor]

The prices are so high on mechs and cosmetic stuff that even while drunk I think to myself "that's not a good value."

I will eat at White Castle while drunk, but I won't pay $7.00 for virtual christmas lights.

I did break down and buy the Ilya, as I needed a Cataphract and don't play enough to have gotten one with CBills any time soon. And I hate myself for it

But we don't have access to their data to know how sales are going.

If they are making money at current prices, then, well, @#$% me. I'm wrong. And probably a bit of an @$$hole to boot.

If not, hopefully they will see reason and lower prices.

I sincerely believe they are adopting the wrong pricing scheme - rely on people with more disposable income than sense to buy things at higher prices, instead of pricing things to where even those not able to drop $20, $50 at a time can still piddle away their life savings on virtual things

[ollo]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 11 December 2012 - 05:35 PM, said:

since PGI lives by the money, I assume they know what they are doing, and that everyone is buying stuff like crazy, because if that isn't the case, well, it'd be crazy to keep these high prices so high.

Banks also live by the money, and we all know how that went...

[Domenoth]

I have looked through several pages of discussion and found one other topic about MC but it was about paint schemes. I found this post by searching for "cost of hero mechs" so I feel it is more applicable to my situation.

My Experience:

I considered making my very first purchase with my Founder's MC tonight. I looked at the prices for Ilya, and all the cockpit items. Just on a whim, I clicked the "Purchase MC" button. I lined up the MC price lines with the minimum amount of MC for each item I was considering purchasing.

I clicked cancel in the Mechlab and then closed the game.

In my opinion, everything is priced way too high. At these current price points, I am unwilling even to spend money I've already spent. I am satisfied to play my founders mechs and any other mechs I can scrounge enough cbills to purchase, but I have no desire to use MC to buy more mechs or customize anything.

P.S.
I've seen the posts in this thread saying another thread like this is useless because there is no data available and the forums are only populated by a vocal minority. Those points may or may not be valid, You should be able to tell I am not a frequent poster. But after performing the $-to-items calculation, As soon as I closed my game I came straight to the forums to post.

[Urza Mechwalker]

Maybe the fact that WoT that is the game they DO base their revenue model after, charges even more for the premium tanks (equivalent to Ilya) keeps them firm in th e belief they are right. WoT is making money like nuts.

THe secrect fo this model is made an adictive game then you can charge very expesively.

[Naqel]

Because of the steep pricing, I made one 15$ purchase, and treated that as a "Buy to Play" option for getting my first mech.

Unless they drop the prices by 40-50%, and allow us to buy a chassis without paying MC for it's equipment(I refuse to pay MC for small lases), this will be the only MC I ever get.

We don't even get the now-industry-standard "daily deals", for crying out loud...

Edited by Naqel, 16 December 2012 - 03:56 AM.

[TerminatorUK]

I really like this game but I have to agree I'm really put off by the extreme prices.

IMHO, they really need to slice them in two.

£12 for a hero mech...no thanks but I'd pay £6 (or £3 for a regular mech)

To be honest, they'd probably make more money not only from casual players actually buying something but for the more hardcore types most likely spending the same ammount of cash because they are happy that they are getting lots of mechs / value for money.

Comparing it with Planetside 2, I was able to get 7500 Station Cash for about £18 in a recent triple-station cash deal which is enough to get tons of weapons and vehicle upgrades etc...

I'm a bit tight with my money but even I can see that was great value for money!

Devs - I really want to get a Fang or Flame but I'd expect to pay 2000MC for them; don't make me not give you my money!

[SpiralRazor]

They are for me, in my case....If MC was cheaper, id have bought the mech camo...and possibly the Muromets..

But with current pricing and the lack of developer speed and general laziness, nope...not going to invest in MC until things change.

[ArmyOfWon]

The only reason why I've spent some of my MC is because, well, I have it. I was in closed beta before the founders program, but decided to support PGI by also buying into the Founder's program. My money's already gone, and I spent it willingly and I'm happy with that purchase.

That said, when I run out of MC (at current prices) there's almost no way in hell that I would purchase more MC. I've got 5k left, after purchasing a few mechs, mechbays, and a sweet paint job for my 9M (I didn't want to pay money, but that Phranken is just too sweet!), and I have more than enough to sustain for quite a while with the Mechs I currently own.

If MC prices were lower (and as a result Mech prices) I wouldn't mind losing out on the savings one bit, and in fact I would actually buy MC to get more mechs faster.

But 20 bucks for an Atlas? 30 bucks for a Hero? No thanks, I'll just use what I have and keep it at that.

[F lan Ker]

S!

Another game, or a simulator, called Rise Of Flight has this scheme of purchasing extra planes and other stuff to fund game developing. But their prices are nowhere near prices of MWO. Even a totally new map is less than a Hero Mech, and it sure takes more time to create a big map for a flight sim than a Mech with a different paintjob and some alterations on it's hardpoints. Pricing could come down a bit so buyers would feel not being charged a bit too much. Add to this RoF has sales going on quite frequently to get people buy stuff and it works.

Sure I did buy the Fang, but had to really ponder if I want to shell out over 20€ to get one. Temptation won and I bought enough MC to get it and convert XP to GXP. Still, adjusting the prices to a more affordable level would increase sales as there would be more capable buyers out there, not all have disposable money to shell out.

[ArmyOfWon]

F lan Ker, on 22 December 2012 - 04:00 PM, said:

Temptation won and I bought enough MC...

Unfortunately economics are sometimes a binary issues. "Buy MC" and "Not Buy MC" is one of these. As long as people still pay, nothing changes (therefore I do not pay, but feel kinda left out in my own little box of pretentiousness. Oh well, I suppose they don't want my money, as long as they get someone else's)

[Naeron66]

ExplodedZombie, on 11 December 2012 - 04:55 PM, said:

They went the unfortunate path of trying to appeal to whales. Whales are those guys that will spend hundreds or even thousands of dollars a month to get what they want.

No, the pricing model appeals to a large portion of the player base who will spend maybe $5-10 a month on average.

ExplodedZombie, on 11 December 2012 - 04:55 PM, said:

However, that only works in pay-to-win games. A ~$25 mech is completely out there. I am REALLY interested in buying mechs for MC but NEVER will I spend more than $10-15 on a single mech. JK I probably will but only because they won't lower prices.

The sad fact is that it's likely they won't see much more than 10% of players monetize, at all (Open Beta going forward). This can cripple their revenue if they price low. It's not fair to those who don't have huge wallets, but it's business

The only sad fact is that you are completely wrong. The game whose monetary model MWO is emulating sells items at roughly the same prices (or higher) and they have sold hundreds of thousands of such items (just checked and its well over a million of such items all at $40+) and they are most definitely not P2W items, just pay to grind less.

Raidyr, on 12 December 2012 - 09:56 AM, said:

I get the feeling that MWO is not seeing near the success WoT met when it went open beta and cash purchases were final, especially considering that even at primetime I constantly see the same people in match after match. Lack of a tutorial and horrendous grind must be killing their player retention stats.

Their Open Beta lasted quite a long time and you could not spend cash, in fact you got "MC" every day for free. Of course WoT had a hardwipe when it launched.

Edited by Naeron66, 22 December 2012 - 04:52 PM.

[Fastidious]

Gorstagg, on 12 December 2012 - 02:54 AM, said:

I'm assuming at some point PGI will learn about the Steam effect. That reducing the prices by a significant margin, results in upwards of 40x the revenue anticipated.

I see comments about the Steam effect a lot... The problem is first off, MWO isn't on Steam and secondly it's a F2P title still in development which requires recurring revenue. Most games on Steam have a fixed cost and are finished. It makes sense to milk them for as much as you can by reducing the prices. If PGI were to run a buy one get ten sale for MC, sure they'd sell a truckload but in the future almost no one would buy again at normal prices and would wait for another great deal. There frankly isn't enough buyable content via MC to support drastic deals either. If PGI gets desperate I'm sure they'll do drastically better and better deals but that'll also probably mean development is stopping as well.

Currently I think MWO is priced decently. Mechbays and premium time are good value. Cosmetic pricing is all over the place and mechs are expensive. You need MC sinks somewhere (cosmetics) and you need to allow people who want to spend a lot to do so. You can play for free and access all gameplay with no disadvantage (it'll just take longer to get there). It's a fine line to balance.

[bonapartist1]

Everything is overpriced in MWO. To put my gaming budget into perspective, which I imagine is like a growing number of consumers, is that I buy games online when they are on sale through digital distribution sites like Steam, GoG.com, or even (gasp) Origin.

I only buy them on sale, and I buy alot of games that I would never buy at full or near-full retail, because they look interesting enough to merit 1.25, 4.95, 9.99, or whatever it may be. A good example would be BF3, which I bought at 9.99 because at that price it was almost certainly worth it, even though I hate EA and how they've watered down the Battlefield series since its intial offering.

Now MWO is a good game, but they want that same kind of money for a handfull of mechbays. Those mechbays are a necessity to me and anyone else I imagine. They can't be purchased with in-game money...

So basically to get the mechbays I want, I have to match my entire yearly gaming budget, just for MWO...

Now I'm not even going to start talking about 40 dollar "hero" mechs because those are obviously really inflated cost-wise and aren't that interesting load-out wise.

And where are the sales? Other F2P games have massive bonanaza sales which double or triple the points for your dollar relative to the norm. That at least would bring the absurd MWO pricing down to a level the common man can rationally spend on one ******* videogame.

Everything seems to cost too much money, relative to how inexpensive gaming has become in recent years, and how digital distrubution has encouraged that feeling in consumers.

Edited by bonapartist1, 25 December 2012 - 07:31 PM.

[PANZERBUNNY]

I think the terrible idea of rarity due to price is what is being used so "everyone" doesn't have one. WHICH is stupid.

More units sold better over less units at a higher price.

[Muffinator]

Almeras, on 11 December 2012 - 04:40 PM, said:

Bottom line no one likes to feel short changed or over charged. This isn't an attack lots of businesses fall into the same pricing trap, it does take allot of guts to drop your prices and go the volume route.

I couldn't agree more. I point blank refuse to spend another cent on MC at the current prices. If MC cost 25-50% what it does now I'd happily spend $100 over a few months without feeling ripped off at all. My 2 friends who play agree with me on this. Would they rather have $0 or $300 from happy customers? It seems so obvious.