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

[stoned]

Translation: my argument isn't working so I'll use personal attacks instead because that will make me seem more right.

baaaaaahhh baaahhhh.

translation for every1 else. you have no argument your just a bad troll. you argu over somthing that would not effect you in 1 way what so ever besides givving you more peeps to play the game with. you hurt yourself being so blind and ignorant. people like you need to stay off the forums or deserve to get trolled.

[Kallera]

you do realize they wont review it until the ps3 version (or 2.0) so them charging less now would actually sound like some good press tbh.

On the contrary, they seem to be "reviewing" every update. If only to justify their condemnations to their fans.

[stoned]

You haven't proved that what you said would happen. You fail to point out those those that would go to a new game. Your assumptions about the rest of the player base, to say nothing about the finances of the company, have no merit.

Also, making it priced at 5$ would cause another PR disaster. If I can come with ways to insult the idea, how do you the internet reviewer, who partially relies on entertaining shows, will do it?


So you, and your select group of sycophants (see, I can do it too) claim that this is about hurt feelings and the "mass exodus" of "the one true group of fans" who like the game...at sufficient monetary value so their opinions should matter more than others.

All that has been said of this topic has been said, the rest is you puffing your cheeks to look bigger than you are.

Feel free to check back though, as you drop lots more money to coast through years old content and half a screen's worth of competitive UI calculations for fear of a teenager's declarations that "You suck, gtfo!" till 3 in the morning.

I have my own things to enjoy.

the point was proven when the game floped. but u ignore the fact that your lil fanboy group is only 1s still playing and most of the realistic players are gone. they have spoken. the game reviews speek louder than anything a troll like you and wyne can say.

as for SE finnases they are doing just fine they did fine for 5 years making it. and they screwed up not us. they need to fix it b4 they try to feed us unfinished crap again. 1/4th of the loser who was GD, would pay 5 times the amount they will get for charging subs this early. this is gona hurt the game, comunitee, get more bad reviews, and also make you lose some peeps on your already low pop server.

[AmyRae]

You haven't proved that what you said would happen. You fail to point out those those that would go to a new game. Your assumptions about the rest of the player base, to say nothing about the finances of the company, have no merit.

Also, making it priced at 5$ would cause another PR disaster. If I can come with ways to insult the idea, how do you the internet reviewer, who partially relies on entertaining shows, will do it?

So you, and your select group of sycophants (see, I can do it too) claim that this is about hurt feelings and the "mass exodus" of "the one true group of fans" who like the game...at sufficient monetary value so their opinions should matter more than others.

All that has been said of this topic has been said, the rest is you puffing your cheeks to look bigger than you are.

If it's all been said, why are you still here? Hoping to be surprised?

This is based on a poll performed by BlueGartr that showed SE could possibly generate more revenue by lowering the price than if they charged full price. It doesn't absolutely prove that it would work out that way, but it's encouraging enough that it ought to be looked at more seriously.

BlueGartr aren't just another ragtag group. These guys are the hardcore of the hardcore FFXI players. Many of those free mods and parsers you so enjoyed back then were made by these guys. If they're not the "true fans" of the series, then who the hell are you?

As for bad PR for offering a lower price, isn't bad PR to charge full price for a game that isn't good enough to sell as the PS3 version, and must be completely replaced? VGChartz is declaring FFXIV dead over the idea.

[Kallera]

the point was proven when the game floped. but u ignore the fact that your lil fanboy group is only 1s still playing and most of the realistic players are gone. they have spoken. the game reviews speek louder than anything a troll like you and wyne can say.

as for SE finnases they are doing just fine they did fine for 5 years making it. and they screwed up not us. they need to fix it b4 they try to feed us unfinished crap again. 1/4th of the loser who was GD, would pay 5 times the amount they will get for charging subs this early. this is gona hurt the game, comunitee, get more bad reviews, and also make you lose some peeps on your already low pop server.

If its not about the finances, (already not profiting,company not in peril, planned for 2.0)
And not about the PR (already bad, and planned for 2.0)
And not about the user base (already not high enough for profitability, when it is free)

Then why lower the price?

[JackDaniels]

I really have to assume that this animosity towards a discount is due to a select group taking the request personally.

It's as though, because they are willing to pay full price, they take requests for a discounts as an attack against their self-esteem. It's as though we were questioning their intended purchase as being a bad deal. And as a result, they lash out against the perceived threat with insults and derision.

So, it doesn't matter how much we've sanitized the argument down to being about the benefits and how it could be more profitable. We're not even dealing with people who are interested in the argument at all. We're up against those who perceive an insult against their beloved brand, and they're taking it way too personally.

Yep, thanks for this.

[ninesunz]

This just in, business are trying to make a profit, more at 11.

[whoopeeragon]

I wonder just how many people are sitting here laughing so hard at the pure absurdity of certain branches of coversation going on in this thread. And I see JackDaniels to be exposing his 'more words no action' motto over this thread as well.

Ignoring the economic side of things, it really is a matter of personal mentality. Some are of the opinion that version 2.0 is 50% complete, whereas the current version is near to acceptable launch level, as I also believe. We believe that, short of a few things which hinder our enjoyment which won't be fixed until 2.0, that the current game is playable for the full cost, as we mentally envision this game to not have any correlation with the next version in playable immersion. We enjoy what is being offered as a wholely game in itself, without thinking of the effect with the next version. Put into exaggeration, we believe the version 2.0 to be a completely new game to start off with, while the current game is whole to itself.

We then have the other group, which believe that we should pay only half or a compromised price for a game they feel is unfinished or not to the standard they expect. Different opinions are everywhere; what may seem better may be unpolished in another's eyes. (I believe Belial and Sierra made a point about this.) They also believe that with the advancement of the next version, what we do now is -kind of- obsolete and thus should not deserve the full price. In exaggeration, they believe the current game and the new vesion to be the same, with the latter being the true beginning of the game.

These are just the extremes; there exist many of you who will sit in the gray area between the two. I'm partially like that, though as I said, I swing more to the former group.

So which group is correct? Both of them, and none of them. It depends on how well you justify your mentality. Renta's done a pretty good job; some others also have. Others, however, have yet form their own cohesive ideal; others have chosen to express pure negativity or positivity, others yet again join in bandwagons without proof of why and how they came to that particular aspect. I would advice those of you to do so and just think and justify why you came to your conclusion. Inappropriate responses will be, for example, nearly all of JackDaniels' posts for the past twenty pages, as well as stoned's purely negative, insulting, harsh and cutting mutterings which provide no substantial feedback and information whatsoever. Think on what it is you try to say, envision your mentality, justify it, accept that others will have differing opinions, and learn to compromise.

From a thought process perspective, that's my opinion in a nutshell.

For the economic side of things, I leave it to you adults who have more experience regarding businesses and finance than a teenager like me.

[Bartel]

Personally, I'm glad that some people are willing to pay full price now because it means the game isn't completely going to die in the short term. What I don't understand is the hostility towards players who aren't ready to pay full price for a game that's half finished. I also don't understand how people are trying to justify full price by saying that the game is "the current version is near to acceptable launch level" when it is ABUNDANTLY clear that this is not true. Take a look at the list of things I posted. That's not even close to a full list of the issues currently surrounding the game. If you can honestly tell me this game is at a point where they could successfully re-launch it now then you are friggin nuttier than my grandma's pecan pie.

Why do you think they ARE rebuilding much of the game for 2.0? Because it's not up to MMO standards. They are on the right path, but they've got a long ways to go.

I do like the idea that one of the posters said though about paying for 1 month after a patch and then just cancelling. If they don't go half price this is a possibility... unfortunately at that point I will have probably subb'd to Star Wars and not want to be playing 2 P2P's simultaneously, but you never know.

[AmyRae]

Ignoring the economic side of things, it really is a matter of personal mentality. Some are of the opinion that version 2.0 is 50% complete, whereas the current version is near to acceptable launch level, as I also believe. We believe that, short of a few things which hinder our enjoyment which won't be fixed until 2.0, that the current game is playable for the full cost, as we mentally envision this game to not have any correlation with the next version in playable immersion. We enjoy what is being offered as a wholely game in itself, without thinking of the effect with the next version. Put into exaggeration, we believe the version 2.0 to be a completely new game to start off with, while the current game is whole to itself.

We then have the other group, which believe that we should pay only half or a compromised price for a game they feel is unfinished or not to the standard they expect. Different opinions are everywhere; what may seem better may be unpolished in another's eyes. (I believe Belial and Sierra made a point about this.) They also believe that with the advancement of the next version, what we do now is -kind of- obsolete and thus should not deserve the full price. In exaggeration, they believe the current game and the new vesion to be the same, with the latter being the true beginning of the game.

What I'm trying to get through here, is that the first group is well-served no matter the price of the game. It's not as though they would choose not to play if they had to pay less for the service.

The second group may represent a substantial number of players who won't pay full price, but who would pay a lower price. The reasons for this may vary greatly, but they generally revolve around the current state of the game, and the feeling it's not ready for prime time. If a lower price can generate more income by retaining a lot more people than what you would get by charging full price, the first group suffers no ill effects. On the contrary, they will benefit in the savings and participate in more active servers as a result.

It therefore seems illogical that the first group would want to fight the notion of the second group since they are not harmed in any way, no matter the results of the inquiry.