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

Login with username, password and session length

 
Advanced search

1056983 Posts in 42933 Topics- by 34882 Members - Latest Member: Sirowl

October 24, 2014, 01:21:08 PM
TIGSource ForumsDeveloperBusinessNon-Evil Multiplayer Monetization?
Pages: 1 [2]
Print
Author Topic: Non-Evil Multiplayer Monetization?  (Read 1174 times)
anselm_eickhoff
Level 0
***



View Profile Email
« Reply #20 on: January 08, 2013, 06:15:50 AM »

I strongly dislike the 'insert coin to play' model. I'd delete any game which looks like it's trying to charge me once I get hooked; it makes me feel cheated. I probably would've paid the $3 for Triple Town, but once I saw the model, I expected it to act like some Zynga game and rip me off later after paying.

Premium features works, especially if you build a community (if you're not building a community, why make it multiplayer at all?).

But idk, every form of monetization has people who hate it. Pay to win gaming is a multi-billion dollar market. While a lot of people absolutely hate it, it's brought joy to millions of people.

WoW's been a hit despite the aged subscription model. Guild Wars has thrived on charging for purchases and expansions.

You are raising valid objections and you're making me doubt the model again. I definetly don't want it to be pay to win and I don't want the players to feel cheated or being abused after getting hooked.

For just a small web game I simply can't imagine a subscription working. I feel that I can either have a community or have a monthly fee and no ones plays it. On the other hand I can't really come up with premium features that are worth paying for. They always seem added as an afterthought, when actually the core gameplay mechanic and the fact that you play with other humans is the thing that has the most value. But how do I charge for that?  Undecided
Logged
bateleur
Level 10
*****



View Profile
« Reply #21 on: January 08, 2013, 06:41:15 AM »

I think the thing to emphasise is that many repeat payment games are just doing it as a strategic thing. You have genuine ongoing costs related to the maintenance of the game, so you need some way to pass on those costs to players. If you explain this fact I think they'll accept it.

Server-side support for something like this really shouldn't cost much, so it ought to be possible to price very reasonably.

One option which might be worth considering is long duration subscriptions which come with a "free" subscription for a friend. This will help to alleviate worries about people having nobody to play with, whilst also giving you a bit of free publicity as people post to social media "Hey, anyone want to play this with me?".
Logged

RudyTheDev
Level 1
*



View Profile WWW
« Reply #22 on: January 08, 2013, 06:47:15 AM »

I know this is about the system, and not the game itself, but I have to ask -- Sudoku? It takes less than a second to solve any solvable Sudoku puzzle. So once money and competitions get involved, how do you stop cheating in your system, besides not offering any rewards for doing better than others? (Not that lack of tangible reward stops cheaters.)
Logged

anselm_eickhoff
Level 0
***



View Profile Email
« Reply #23 on: January 08, 2013, 06:57:08 AM »

@bateleur: that sounds like a nice and honest option. But how do I convince the first players (that are not my friends or my mom) to actually pay for it and start playing it? Gameplay videos?

@RudyTheDev: Cheating might definetly become a problem, but there are already two things in place: first, like you said, I don't really reward individual players too much, the focus is more on the collaborative success. Secondly, I already have a system that checks if a player could have guessed a number by methods that humans actually use (it's strict enough without getting in the way of hardcore sudoku players). This would be the easiest way to detect naive bots.
Logged
RudyTheDev
Level 1
*



View Profile WWW
« Reply #24 on: January 08, 2013, 07:36:29 AM »

Secondly, I already have a system that checks if a player could have guessed a number by methods that humans actually use (it's strict enough without getting in the way of hardcore sudoku players). This would be the easiest way to detect naive bots.

Well, now it just sounds like a challenge.  Evil
Logged

anselm_eickhoff
Level 0
***



View Profile Email
« Reply #25 on: January 08, 2013, 08:15:41 AM »

Would your bots also be able to strike up interesting conversations in the in-game chat?

To get back to the topic:

Does anyone know of smaller games where a plain old monthly subscription works?
Because that would be the most honest option in my view.
Logged
Nathan Cash
Level 1
*



View Profile Email
« Reply #26 on: January 08, 2013, 11:42:10 AM »

At first I assumed this was an IOS game. That is why I suggested a flat fee. If it isn't a subscription might work. Just don't make it too high and give like a few days for free.
Logged
anselm_eickhoff
Level 0
***



View Profile Email
« Reply #27 on: January 08, 2013, 01:42:20 PM »

Well a one time fee might also work, since every player will cost me only very little in bandwidth and storage costs.

So the price is practically all margin.
Now the question is:
what is the most honest, convincing (not manipulative!) and effective way to ask for money,
while still trying to get as many players as possible?
Logged
Nathan Cash
Level 1
*



View Profile Email
« Reply #28 on: January 08, 2013, 02:13:12 PM »

For me it would be a flat fee. There may be more people who wouldn't mind subscribing.
Logged
Muz
Level 10
*****



View Profile Email
« Reply #29 on: January 09, 2013, 04:44:11 PM »

One time fee works, but you'd have to charge in accordance to depth and how rare it is on the market. Let's be frank here, sudoku isn't rare; people will just move on to another game if you ask them to do something.

I'd say about $0.50-$0.99 for a month, and $1.99-$4.99 for unlimited use. It seems low, but note that it's been the ideal rate for casual games placed on an app market.

If you settle on a price of $0.99/month and $1.99 for unlimited use, I'd suggest just dropping the monthly fee system because you'd confuse the buyer with too many irrelevant options.

Find an ideal number of attempts before they give up.. you'd have to do some player profiling here, see how many games before your testers stop playing.

Try to give free games up to the point where they've gathered too much momentum to stop, but not before it gets boring. Adjust the price based on how close the boredom point is to where the demo point is. For example, if your game is addictive at 3 plays and boring at 5 plays, you'd probably want a price of about $0.20 or so, it becomes evil to charge a high price for it. If it's boring after 500 plays, then you can probably safely charge $25 or more. I know simple multiplayer games that are fun for 3 years or more, and the top players will happily spend $200 on donations a month.

Just follow your instincts and keep on the side of giving your players a good deal. I think buyers love to find honest sellers, which is why the Humble Bundle system sells so well.

Also note that everyone's concept of prices might not be the same; people in some countries earn $1 a week, whereas in some others, it might just be 10 minutes of work. So you might consider a pay-what-you-want system, with a minimum of $0.50 (again subject to your payment system, because I think you actually don't earn anything at that rate with Paypal).
Logged
anselm_eickhoff
Level 0
***



View Profile Email
« Reply #30 on: January 09, 2013, 05:22:08 PM »

Thanks for the input, Muz.
Pay what you want got me thinking, because the two things that got me to spend money the easiest are Humble Indie Bundle and Sublime Editor (unlimited demo with nag screens)

Do you think the following would work:
  • Unlimited Demo with nag screen after every X games that encourages you to pay what you want
  • If you pay, no more nag screens and visible change to player "avatar" depending on how much was paid
  • Unobtrusive option to pay more (maybe to reach next avatar bonus stuff)
Logged
Muz
Level 10
*****



View Profile Email
« Reply #31 on: January 09, 2013, 06:14:25 PM »

Yeah, IMO, sounds about right.
Logged
Archibald
Level 4
****


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #32 on: January 11, 2013, 12:57:52 PM »

I have no clue why you call ads evil. It's the most player friendly method (ask them)...

As for monthly subscription... Smiley Come on, it's XXI century now, no one uses monthly subscription anymore (or to be more precise there are only 2 games that use it: WoW and Eve online). This model has been dead for years and everyone know it (try to find a MMO that is at least 3 years old and haven't either switched to F2P or went bankrupt).
Logged

Europe1300 - Realistic Historical Medieval Sim
Nathan Cash
Level 1
*



View Profile Email
« Reply #33 on: January 14, 2013, 01:46:04 PM »

Not many. The model of nag screen and such sounds great. Maybe just have a "help out the devs" button on the main menu. I happily payed above the average for the most recent humble bundle because I like supporting small devs and they were not forcing you to pay or nagging you. I love that model and while some abuse it, I find that is works rather well.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]
Print
Jump to:  

Theme orange-lt created by panic