Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

 
Advanced search

1059192 Posts in 43055 Topics- by 35002 Members - Latest Member: plauk

October 30, 2014, 11:00:12 PM
TIGSource ForumsCommunityCompetitionsVersus (Moderator: Melly)Guardian Soul
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]
Print
Author Topic: Guardian Soul  (Read 17774 times)
battlerager
Level 10
*****


I resent that statement.


View Profile
« Reply #100 on: March 09, 2011, 06:02:59 PM »

Oh, also, "Guardian Spirit" sounds just fine to me Smiley
Logged
Mega
Level 1
*



View Profile Email
« Reply #101 on: March 09, 2011, 06:33:33 PM »

Quote
...IMO, pay-to-play wouldn't work unless people got a good dose of the core gameplay and want more...
I agree.
Logged
Melly
Moderator
Level 10
******


This is how being from "da hood" is like, right?


View Profile
« Reply #102 on: March 10, 2011, 10:11:40 AM »

On another note, you should think about player psychology if you want to pay your bills. To me, pay $1 to extend gameplay is not good, I feel like I am being fleeced before I even start playing. But pay for a new character is A-OK. Perceived value is important.

Mmm, could you elaborate?
Logged

Feel free to disregard the above.
Games: Minus / Action Escape Kitty
Tuba
Level 10
*****



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #103 on: March 10, 2011, 11:10:30 AM »

I think the business model depends a lot on the platform you're working with. People that play games on Facebook, for instance, are used to paying for stuff inside games and would accept that, can't tell the same about flash portals like Kongregate and Newgrounds.
Logged

Triplefox
Level 9
****



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #104 on: March 10, 2011, 11:22:27 AM »

The main point of going away from a conventional one-price scheme is to price discriminate.

This is a big part of why carving gameplay up into unlocks and resource grinding, with "accelerator" items for sale, has been successful for a lot of F2P games: if you don't really want it you can grind for it instead. Facebook games extend this strategy by forcing a viral loop into play(invite x friends to get...) and that acts as a second kind of price discriminating behavior; players can spend "social capital" instead of "monetary capital" to continue advancement.

When doing this it has to be put in an appropriate context - are the features you selling the "real value" of the game? i.e. is it something that is expected to be basic functionality(save games) or is it a thing that makes the experience substantially different(multiplayer)? The more people percieve value, the more likely it will be successful at monetizing.

I think selling characters is right at the borderline, to be honest. The main reason why this is likely to offend people, is that because the game is multiplayer, new characters will be perceived as advantageous. So the game becomes "pay to win," and many players want "grind to win" instead because they have time and little money(13-year-olds...) or they are interested in a pure-skill competition(most core gamers...) Balancing both types of player is really tough, and so a common alternative is to focus on monetizing outside of the "pure competition" aspects - visual customizations, socialization features, etc.

So, in my opinion, it isn't actually a matter of whether monetizing in this way can work - it's a matter of which population of players you are primarily aiming to capture. That's going to depend on the context of the game and who is most likely to see it.
Logged

Chris Pavia
Level 10
*****


teknobabel42 aquamanscg
View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #105 on: March 10, 2011, 11:45:06 AM »

Will the final product have online/network play, or will it be hotseat only?
Logged

Droqen
Level 10
*****

aka nick fury


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #106 on: March 10, 2011, 12:11:30 PM »

Will feature online and offline multiplayer.
Logged

Chris Pavia
Level 10
*****


teknobabel42 aquamanscg
View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #107 on: March 10, 2011, 12:59:45 PM »

Yeah I saw that, but since it's been so long since the first post, I was curious if that was still the plan.
Logged

Melly
Moderator
Level 10
******


This is how being from "da hood" is like, right?


View Profile
« Reply #108 on: March 10, 2011, 01:32:01 PM »

Online is still the plan, though it's still up in the air a bit how exactly it'll be accomplished.

Thanks for the insight guys. I'll put plenty of thought into this. It's not exactly certain I'll go with this scheme, or just go more traditional, or pull something unique out of my ass (I thought of Farbs' registration thing, and how interesting it is, though I'd probably do it differently than he does, or did. Been a while since I checked it out).
Logged

Feel free to disregard the above.
Games: Minus / Action Escape Kitty
shojin
Level 1
*


m0unt4inj3w
View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #109 on: March 14, 2011, 09:18:45 AM »

I hate DLC. HATE. You should just offer the full game for a price. Much better tactic IMO.
Logged

X3N
Level 6
*


View Profile Email
« Reply #110 on: March 14, 2011, 09:38:20 AM »

I hate DLC. HATE. You should just offer the full game for a price. Much better tactic IMO.
But then they can try before they buy..
Logged

destiny is truth pre-op
Mega
Level 1
*



View Profile Email
« Reply #111 on: March 14, 2011, 11:52:26 AM »

Quote
I hate DLC. HATE. You should just offer the full game for a price. Much better tactic IMO.

It depends on the game. I personaly prefer buying once, though it would be interesting to see this implemented. I'm thinking people would need to love the gameplay to want to upgrade or buy new features.
It's going to depend on the quality and playability of the game. whereas there'd be more lee way for non DLC games interms of quality IMO.
Also you'd have to monitor hacks and all that BS.

If you've got a plan figured then go with it, but I think non DLC is more solid, complete and less Hassle!

If the game is liked then you could have optional DLC characters for pro's but I think most of your players will be noobs/average and wont care about upgrades (especially if they have to), until they get tired of the game.. and thats when you release Gaurdian Spirit 2 Smiley  (Just like MK & the rest)

I know you're Pichachu and want to make it like Pokemon but you'll need a TV show, Trading cards and so on, you dont have any of that right now.

IMHO
Thats my 20cents
« Last Edit: March 14, 2011, 12:25:42 PM by Glinka » Logged
Hangedman
Level 10
*****


Two milkmen go comedy


View Profile WWW
« Reply #112 on: March 14, 2011, 11:55:27 AM »

If you're willing to pay $20 for a game -
Then paying 15$ now and 5$ later for extra content that doesn't exist yet isn't such a bad deal.

It's when they charge you 60$ and then 20$ for content that was a) already paid for because it was already there and b) not worth 20$ (especially if the total game content isn't worth $80) that it's a bad deal.
Logged

AUST
ITIAMOSIWE (Play it on NG!) - Vision
There but for the grace of unfathomably complex math go I
Mega
Level 1
*



View Profile Email
« Reply #113 on: March 14, 2011, 12:19:21 PM »

Quote
If you're willing to pay $20 for a game -
Then paying 15$ now and 5$ later for extra content that doesn't exist yet isn't such a bad deal.

Maybe, but some (most) people, including myself, wont look at dollar value and calculate when buying a game. Instead they'll say "I just bought this game ... WTH? It wants more money??!" or "MOM ... the game wants more money .. can I borrow your card again" lol

The only alternative I see is where the DLC costs more than the client or base program. and (&&) where the client or base program is rediculously cheap or free.
But it's only conjecture, I've never actually seen this kind of thing done first hand.

So Melly if you got a plan dont listen to us nobody's! XD
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]
Print
Jump to:  

Theme orange-lt created by panic