Cost of the game

This is all pointless if the game is fun and brings something new that gamers want is ultimately the only factor of consequence.

 

I remember seeing in 2013 an interview where there would be a free trial version. I wonder if this is still the plan.
http://www.gamespot.com/articles/ultima-creator-reveals-shroud-of-the-avatar/1100-6405007/
"What we are doing is somewhere in the middle," he added. "We're doing a game where we will make the trial version you can play for free. But then as soon as you really want to participate in a meaningful way, there's a game cost; so we don't have an exact price for that. "

This part isn't directed toward you Moiseyev Just added it in addition to my post hehe

I'm one of those that wish there was at least a subscription that offers sort of V.I.P. items/coin/whatever (which is what subscriptions are these days) Subscriptions haven't died, they just re-labled them for F2P and B2P games for added bonuses and things to shy away from the name subscription, though that's exactly what they are. An Opt in to pay a subscription supporting the game Not that am snobbish to think I'm better than anyone else, I just feel it would help support the game in the long run. $15 is cheap entertainment, imo and helps fund games in the long run without nickle and diming everyone monthly with cash shops, which by the way I always spend way more in than any subscription game I've ever played, hehe.

 

Thanks for linking that. I only recently joined up so early stuff I am very ignorant on.

 

Aye, I know, I remember adding you when I saw your posts the first time, and you're welcome I'm not really sure they will keep to that, I'm still wondering myself. Since I haven't heard them bring it up again. I wonder.....

 

who knows? one day, they might break off an employee to go through and read these |AND REPLY to stop the rumour mill? i mean, how much time would that be in manhours? 10 hours answereing the playerbase more effectively? seems like an easy position to fill and a neccessary one.

and i mean, pop in when a thread has 5 of so pages... not everytime.

The Hendoman

 

Sneaking in after I liked the post! Heartless.

Yeah I tend to dump more money into the cash store than most people would pay for subscriptions too. DDO does a good job with the VIP sub and I wouldn't have an issue with something similar as long as it wasn't game play affecting (i.e. if you dont pay your gear is worse or you get shafted someway). I am all for anything that increases revenue as long as it isn't detrimental to those who have invested (whether by the current model or p2p or whatever) and then choose to stop or cap their investment.

 

Hah, you can unlike it, I won't be offended It's all good. I agree as long as it didn't effect gameplay and wasn't something you couldn't already get in game.

 

That's a brilliant idea. Wonder how much i could convince them to pay me to do this... Get to work with them and just surf the forums all day (don't have any relevant coding skills so that's about all I could offer at this stage).

 

Yeah I tend not to unlike stuff when I still agree with something or find it interesting (even sneaky things). 8^)

Besides the number of times I edit something after the fact would instantly make me an uber hypocrite (and not just because this is an edited post).

 

Aww I wasn't being sneaky Just thought of something to add so I didn't have to put it in another post hehe

 

Not used to people taking me at face value... Must consult Budner... Or insert more smiley faces... But I'm lazy so that will probably never happen.

 

Oh no I didn't, I'm just joshin with ya

 

I know, but any opportunity to randomly reference Budner is too good to ignore.

It should become one of the forum rules. If he can be irreverently referenced, it must be done.

 

Made me laugh

 

Um? No.
People are not paying subscriptions in any shape or form.
People are paying for perks.
One such perk is to play all 1-5 episodes, permanently, DRM free.
To give me a price on that you'd have to divide the fee with the amount of years people might want to play this. I could make a table out of that too, but it would be just as assumptious as the other one.

The market for pay2play is completely different than the market for buy2play.

And that forest and trees thing, that is how I feel every time I make a 500+ word post and you ignore all of the arguments in it only to cut out a single sentence and try to continue the argument.
*sigh*
In the old topic you made some sort of argument that SotA's business model gives too much of an advantage to players with money, yet again and again you advocate for a business model which is worse. This is what you said then:
"Just because someone has more money does not mean they should have more say. No matter how you cut it, it's what's going on in many countries all over the world. And you can see the reaction - protests, fighting, wars, economies failing, and all the rest.

It's an old and outdated model that people are finding simply doesn't work. But more than that, the majority of people are not happy with that model and won't support it."
What a subscription fee creates is a gated community for those who can afford it, fortress europe and all of that jazz. A subscription fee shuts out all the poor players. It means that all the poor players have nothing to say.
I really can't understand your argumentation here, and I've been trying hard.

 

But yet again I fail to see what you are trying to achieve in this thread other than having yet another bash at the housing market as you have made it perfectly clear that you would like to see the majority with housing. This thread has been done before.

 

This makes me laugh
how many times have people argued that kickstarter is neither purchases nor investment but some kind of donation. If we say they are right then this is EXACTLY "a socialist/Communist way of thinking", not a captialistic one

 

You call it paying for perks. I call it a lump sum subscription with perks. I see no difference between that and paying $5/month in Runescape to have more bank space, which is a perk. You can say "no," but that's your opinion, and I have my opinion. Neither is wrong, but we come from a different viewpoint on the matter. That's all.

I tend to post only the part I wish to comment on, because who wants to see a wall of text? It doesn't mean I disagree with a whole post. Are you saying you comment on every sentence someone makes? I don't see you doing that with me.

Worse to you.

I simply disagree that a subscription creates a gated community. And maybe it should, just like charging $500 and up gets a person a house long before anyone else that joins later, at game launch.

I can see both arguments, for and against subscriptions and I can't say I'm strong one way or the other in that opinion. I think money can be raised in either way. I don't think it's anything close to cut and dry. It might be in your mind, but surely not in mine.

But it is a fact that this model is going to cost more than a monthly subscription for most people - if they want perks. Most people come and go, not stay in a game beyond 3 months. If they stick around for all 5 episodes, I'm not so sure they won't have spent a crud-ton of money in that timeframe.

To nitpick the dollar figures I presented seems mean spirited. If someone stays a full year, it's indisputable that's what it breaks down to, same as 5 years. I surely didn't think I needed to break it down for every day of the year, just to satisfy someone who wants to pick apart that I didn't spend weeks on doing just that.

Of course there will be variance, depending on how long someone plays. I didn't think the obvious needed stating.

 

Here's the cost of this game--to make that is:

"As it stands it remains unknown but for such a game to cost $200 million to develop is not completely out of the question. After all games such as Star Wars: The Old Republic did cost around that much as well, and had a larger production staff, meaning that The Elder Scrolls Online could cost around that as well."

 

Was that just development cost, or including marketing? That seems pretty low to include marketing.