Compromise: Just Charge $5 For Now. Once 2.0 is Out, Then Charge $12

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AmyRae

Everyone makes mistakes.

You were there for the launch of FFXIV, weren't you? Do you really want to call SE a smart company for doing that?

I think rigidly sticking to the $12 is a mistake. I don't buy the "if it's worth $5 it's worth $12" argument. Because even more people would drop off if they said, "if it's worth $12, it's worth $50." Everyone draws the line somewhere.

You could buy an iPhone game for a dollar. Is FFXIV worth $12/month or would you have more fun buying 12 iPhone games a month, especially when you consider 1.0 is getting thrown in the trash heap as soon as 2.0 is done? Even if you're still convinced it's still worth it, many people don't.

Even if you want full price, you stand nothing to lose if they lower it. You'll pay less, there will be more people online to play with, and if the price point is just right, SE will make more money to feed their starving engineers. What's not to like about this plan?

---

the basic danger is that if the revenues arent where they think they are, usually there is less development and resources for the project. In this case they have commited to 2.0 and certain things on the road map, if the interest isnt there, and the money isnt there, they will treat 2.0 more as a development thing and less as an evolution.
IE put more features into 2.0 rather than implement them now, as well as less implementation and resources devoted to features which wont translate over to 2.0 like UI, story events, etc. For 2.0 marketability and recoup of development costs on it, it is better for it to have more content, the way to do that is not to put content in the current package.



Its really very simple, the main thing you pay for in a MMO is development costs.

depending on what their money model is, it shapes the development costs, and the release of those developments

Expansion heavy model (guild wars) moderate cash shops and virtually no new content until the expansion hits; this way most of the development is packaged into new products.

F2p Cash shop models
money revolves around what sells in the shop, so most development is focused on things people would like to buy.

Another technique, limit player progression and available world, create content you have to play to access

subscription model, an overall pass to the game unlimited time, and full access to everything in the game. Content is developed with the assumption that eveyone can get anything given enough time.


If you want them to go free, you need a different model, and the development will come to you based on that model, if you want this game f2p till 2.0, expect little to no actual updates to the game till 2.0 (why give out the thing your trying to sell for free, which is content)

If you can generate more money with a lower sub, that is a viable means, that doesnt effect development, but i really dont know if its 5 dollar price point, in fact id say it most likely is not. 2.6 times the people wont play to play. i could see 8, or 9 being a good price point, but 5 just requires too many more successful sales. The fact is a lot of people who dont want to pay wont pay at 5 either, they just dont really want to pay.

The real reason the game went f2p, is because they stopped development for 6 months, an they knew in good conscience they could not charge people while not providing the service of content, now that they have a plan that involves them creating new content at a steady clip, they want some type of renumeration for it, they also want to get an idea how many people are willing to pay now, and adjust their business plan around real data, as well transition the image of the game to a p2p idealogy.

just remember its way easier for them to decrease the price, than it is for them to increase it, if they settle at a number like 5, they probably wont be able to move the price up no matter what, people will mentally associate the games worth as what is the norm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AmyRae

I don't buy the "if it's worth $5 it's worth $12" argument.

---

How is it that you manage to quote my post and then right below it act like I'm saying something completely different? Do you just read two words, then hit "Reply With Quote" and make up your own context for those two words?

I'm sorry, but it's just getting ridiculous at this point. So I'm going to do everything I can to make this as clear as possible. Here is the most relevant part of the post you quoted, as it relates to your response:

I'm very interested to know how the game isn't worth a $12 fee, but is somehow worth a 55-page debate. Not to mention all the time you've spent playing the game.

Saying a game is worth less than half the subscription fee that you knew they were going to charge from day one after a year of playing for free means that you're enjoying the game less than half as much as you expected. If that's the case, why are you still playing after all this time? Why do you care enough to argue on the forums over the price?

How many other ways do I need to put it before you actually respond like you understand what I'm saying?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AmyRae

Even if you want full price, you stand nothing to lose if they lower it.

---

I don't want full price. I just think that everyone's reasoning for saying the game is only worth half price is nonsense. For the last time.. pay attention.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AmyRae

and if the price point is just right, SE will make more money to feed their starving engineers. What's not to like about this plan?

---

The part where SE lowers their fee temporarily because some people claim that $6 or $7 a month will make or break their subscription. How about we just wait and see what happens? Of course SE wants to make as much money as possible, so if their numbers are so abysmal after fees are introduced, they will consider lowering it. What do you stand to lose by sending a real message to SE, and actually not subscribing when fees are introduced, and when all of these people you seem to think are going to do the same thing, wait for the price to drop? After all, the game isn't worth the full subscription fee to you; taking a little break shouldn't be such a terrible proposition.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AamesxDavid

How is it that you manage to quote my post and then right below it act like I'm saying something completely different? Do you just read two words, then hit "Reply With Quote" and make up your own context for those two words?

I'm sorry, but it's just getting ridiculous at this point. So I'm going to do everything I can to make this as clear as possible. Here is the most relevant part of the post you quoted, as it relates to your response:

I'm very interested to know how the game isn't worth a $12 fee, but is somehow worth a 55-page debate. Not to mention all the time you've spent playing the game.

Saying a game is worth less than half the subscription fee that you knew they were going to charge from day one after a year of playing for free means that you're enjoying the game less than half as much as you expected. If that's the case, why are you still playing after all this time? Why do you care enough to argue on the forums over the price?

How many other ways do I need to put it before you actually respond like you understand what I'm saying?



I don't want full price. I just think that everyone's reasoning for saying the game is only worth full price is nonsense. For the last time.. pay attention.



The part where SE lowers their fee temporarily because some people claim that $6 or $7 a month will make or break their subscription. How about we just wait and see what happens? Of course SE wants to make as much money as possible, so if their numbers are so abysmal after fees are introduced, they will consider lowering it. What do you stand to lose by sending a real message to SE, and actually not subscribing when fees are introduced, and when all of these people you seem to think are going to do the same thing, wait for the price to drop? After all, the game isn't worth the full subscription fee to you; taking a little break shouldn't be such a terrible proposition.

---

Sorry if I got some of the subtler points of what you were trying to say wrong. I know you weren't specifically saying if it's worth $5 it's worth $12, but many people have, and since you seemed more inclined to support that position than mine, I just presented that case. I certainly wasn't trying to take you out-of-context and I apologize if it seemed that way (and trust me, many of my opponents would not afford the same consideration).

I've said this before, but there's a distinction between 1.0 and 2.0. I support the full price for 2.0, and even the thread title reflects that. After all, if you think going from free to full price for 1.0 is no problem, going from a discounted 1.0 to a full price 2.0 should be even easier to accept. When you look at it that way, it's actually supports the case to offer a discount rather than not.

And if you insist on making this personal (and there's no reason you should... the truth is in the logic of the request; how much I play has nothing to do with it) you can look this character up on the lodestone and see my highest rank is 30. I probably played more in the last week of Sept. 2010 than any time since. The fact they've offered the game free has kept me around, and I've dabbled in their new offerings along the way. I really don't play enough that $12/month is worth it to me, but I honestly would give a discounted rate serious consideration. That's why I've taken up this argument.

I'm not saying they shouldn't charge, and if they decide to stick with the $12.99/month rate that's fine with me. But I think there's a better way that would work in everyone's interest. It's as simple as that.

Quote:

---

many people have

---

On the Forums maybe, Try the game itself

Forums don't have enough people to Constitute any poll on this forum to be Acc. Correct

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starlord

On the Forums maybe, Try the game itself

Forums don't have enough people to Constitute any poll on this forum to be Acc. Correct

---

I feel I represent the interests of a silent majority who don't show up on the forums or play FFXIV that much out of their current level of enjoyment of the game. I'm only here as much as I am because I'm used to participating in the FFXI community at large, even though FFXIV is probably a going to remain a casual game for me.

FFXIV is meant to appeal to a large majority of casual players, the broad base of the subscriber pyramid as Yoshida put it. Charging too high a price now will cut into the customer base the game needs most to support it in the long term and send people off for a whole year to find other forms of entertainment. This is a delicate time that should strike a proper balance between keeping a greater player base interested and engaged with the game along with keeping revenues as high as possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AmyRae

Sorry if I got some of the subtler points of what you were trying to say wrong. I know you weren't specifically saying if it's worth $5 it's worth $12, but many people have, and since you seemed more inclined to support that position than mine, I just presented that case. I certainly wasn't trying to take you out-of-context and I apologize if it seemed that way (and trust me, many of my opponents would not afford the same consideration).

I've said this before, but there's a distinction between 1.0 and 2.0. I support the full price for 2.0, and even the thread title reflects that. After all, if you think going from free to full price for 1.0 is no problem, going from a discounted 1.0 to a full price 2.0 should be even easier to accept. When you look at it that way, it's actually supports the case to offer a discount rather than not.

And if you insist on making this personal (and there's no reason you should... the truth is in the logic of the request; how much I play has nothing to do with it) you can look this character up on the lodestone and see my highest rank is 30. I probably played more in the last week of Sept. 2010 than any time since. The fact they've offered the game free has kept me around, and I've dabbled in their new offerings along the way. I really don't play enough that $12/month is worth it to me, but I honestly would give a discounted rate serious consideration. That's why I've taken up this argument.

I'm not saying they shouldn't charge, and if they decide to stick with the $12.99/month rate that's fine with me. But I think there's a better way that would work in everyone's interest. It's as simple as that.

---

interesting case, but is there enough people like you to make it work? thats the real question, i suppose the best way to answer that is to see how many people log in peridodically to check the game, but then again, these people will probably come back in 2.0, and they apparently dont enjoy the current game that much, so would they really pay even half? you might but 2.6 times as many people? seems unlikely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AmyRae

I feel I represent the interests of a silent majority who don't show up on the forums or play FFXIV that much out of their current level of enjoyment of the game. I'm only here as much as I am because I'm used to participating in the FFXI community at large, even though FFXIV is probably a going to remain a casual game for me.

FFXIV is meant to appeal to a large majority of casual players, the broad base of the subscriber pyramid as Yoshida put it. Charging too high a price now will cut into the customer base the game needs most to support it in the long term and send people off for a whole year to find other forms of entertainment. This is a delicate time that should strike a proper balance between keeping a greater player base interested and engaged with the game along with keeping revenues as high as possible.

---

12.99 is not high priced sorry

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AmyRae

Everyone makes mistakes.

You were there for the launch of FFXIV, weren't you? Do you really want to call SE a smart company for doing that?

I think rigidly sticking to the $12 is a mistake. I don't buy the "if it's worth $5 it's worth $12" argument. Because even more people would drop off if they said, "if it's worth $12, it's worth $50." Everyone draws the line somewhere.

You could buy an iPhone game for a dollar. Is FFXIV worth $12/month or would you have more fun buying 12 iPhone games a month, especially when you consider 1.0 is getting thrown in the trash heap as soon as 2.0 is done? Even if you're still convinced it's still worth it, many people don't.

Even if you want full price, you stand nothing to lose if they lower it. You'll pay less, there will be more people online to play with, and if the price point is just right, SE will make more money to feed their starving engineers. What's not to like about this plan?

---

Quoted for truth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starlord

12.99 is not high priced sorry

---

Isn't that $2-$3 under the industry standard anyways? Factoring in that you get access to all the classes on one character and you have retainers that eliminate the need for "mules", I think even at full price you're getting a deal compared to what other MMO's charge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starlord

12.99 is not high priced sorry

---

It's less about the price itself and more about the price for what you're getting. It's true 12.99 is cheaper than most MMORPGs, but also consider you're getting less than half the product. I like FFXIV, and I wish the best for its future, but as a casual player I'd rather pay for something that offers more. You don't have to look far to get a better value for a MMORPG. If I reactivate WoW right now for a year I pay about $6.35 per month since I plan on buying D3 (which is free with a year of WoW) and it comes with a free mount, which runs $20 on the cash shop.