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

[Rentahamster]

It's not beta >_>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaTO8_KNcuo

[Starlord]

The Forums are such a wonderful place to be! Drinks on me!

[AamesxDavid]

You seemed reasonable yourself until you spent the majority of your prose on ad hominems against one such as I. I guess everyone is equally disappointed.

Until you went once again with the shoehorned debate jargon, now I'm even more disappointed - unless you have an example of these alleged ad hominems.

My claims towards 2.0 are not mere speculation. It's grounded in the reasons provided by Yoshida himself.

They're based on his hopes for the game, not what the game absolutely is or will be. You can't just state things like "Version 2.0 will make the PS3 version a success with critical acclaim" as if it is fact. They're working on fixing currently-known issues. It's not a guarantee that suddenly everyone will love it.

And it's definitely not speculation to think most people will leave FFXI once full fees for 1.0 resume.

Because one site had a poll in which, mind you, no one said they absolutely would not pay? It said they were "against" the payment. Again, at the very least, you should be requesting an official poll to really show SE what price would yield the most revenue for them instead of just saying they should drop their price because one poll said it would make people happy.

And once again, if you think that SE should base their fee on what would yield the most revenue, why do you think it's so reasonable to charge full price once 2.0 comes out? What if continuing to have a lower price would keep that many more people after 2.0 is released? At least be consistent if that's your real reasoning.

[AmyRae]

Until you went once again with the shoehorned debate jargon, now I'm even more disappointed - unless you have an example of these alleged ad hominems.



They're based on his hopes for the game, not what the game absolutely is or will be. You can't just state things like "Version 2.0 will make the PS3 version a success with critical acclaim" as if it is fact. They're working on fixing currently-known issues. It's not a guarantee that suddenly everyone will love it.



Because one site had a poll in which, mind you, no one said they absolutely would not pay? It said they were "against" the payment. Again, at the very least, you should be requesting an official poll to really show SE what price would yield the most revenue for them instead of just saying they should drop their price because one poll said it would make people happy.

And once again, if you think that SE should base their fee on what would yield the most revenue, why do you think it's so reasonable to charge full price once 2.0 comes out? What if continuing to have a lower price would keep that many more people after 2.0 is released? At least be consistent if that's your real reasoning.

You're just nitpicking the semantics now. I'm not going to rewrite my case to satisfy what you wish to read between the lines. I don't care to play that game.

Do you have a case to make for paying full price or not?

[irongripz]

SE you owe your fans more than you are giving them. you know you are remaking the game because it was no what people expected. and you know the finished product is not till 2.0 do the right thing wait for 2.0 and the finished product everyone expected at release, do not charge for beta test.

[AamesxDavid]

I'm not going to rewrite my case to satisfy what you wish to read between the lines.

Your case is that a lower fee will increase revenue due to the higher number of subscribers. There, no reading between the lines necessary. The only problem with your case is the flimsy evidence for it. A poll on a fan site which indicated that maybe people would quit and "most were not against paying half". I fear for any company you ever run if that's enough for you to rework your business model.

Do you have a case to make for paying full price or not?

Hmm, great question.. I suppose things like "you should have been paying for the past year" and "you knew the price going in and purchased the game anyway" and "there's no real evidence that it would benefit SE to do otherwise" wouldn't really work here. But, since you are so concerned with SE's bottom line, and you find polls to be so paramount to assessing how it would be affected, here you go:

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...ng-in-November

Now, we should have an interview with Yoshi P, and say "A recent poll on the official forums showed that over three times more players will stay once the fee is introduced than will leave" or, to put it another way, "less than 25% of players said they would quit".

That poll has real, verifiable numbers on the absolute question at hand, and it's on the official site. Apparently, Lodestone forum goers are way more hardcore than your infamous BG players.

[AmyRae]

Your case is that a lower fee will increase revenue due to the higher number of subscribers. There, no reading between the lines necessary. The only problem with your case is the flimsy evidence for it. A poll on a fan site which indicated that maybe people would quit and "most were not against paying half". I fear for any company you ever run if that's enough for you to rework your business model.



Hmm, great question.. I suppose things like "you should have been paying for the past year" and "you knew the price going in and purchased the game anyway" and "there's no real evidence that it would benefit SE to do otherwise" wouldn't really work here. But, since you are so concerned with SE's bottom line, and you find polls to be so paramount to assessing how it would be affected, here you go:

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...ng-in-November

Now, we should have an interview with Yoshi P, and say "A recent poll on the official forums showed that over three times more players will stay once the fee is introduced than will leave" or, to put it another way, "less than 25% of players said they would quit".

That poll has real, verifiable numbers on the absolute question at hand, and it's on the official site. Apparently, Lodestone forum goers are way more hardcore than your infamous BG players.

Having a poll about who's going to stay in this forum is like running a poll at Wrigley Field on game day and asking people if they support the Cubs. I imagine those numbers might look different if you asked all of Chicago in general, or all of the U.S. for that matter.

And that's part of the point I'm making. Not every FFXIV player is a regular forum-goer. I'd hazard a guess that many, if not most, don't even bother with it. Or am I to assume that FFXIV has less than a thousand players total judging from the number of the poll's respondents (the game has some serious problems if that's true).

If this game is meant to appeal to wide swath of players who aren't constantly F5ing the forums, then why not keep them with a price they can live with paying? The principles of Price Elasticity suggest there ought to be level that would actually improve the income SE gets from subscriptions as well as improve the amount of players that stick it out. This isn't just something we made up. There are some real potential benefits from this for all sides.

Just to say, "Pay the full price, and damn the consequences, there couldn't possibly be a better way to do this," is short-sighted.

[Zanfire]

Hmm, great question.. I suppose things like "you should have been paying for the past year" and "you knew the price going in and purchased the game anyway"

If that was the case, this game would have been dead and gone last year lol. I still don't get why you or anyone else is so desperate to pay full price. We know that if they dropped the price, more people would stay and play. We also know that SE will work on the game to 2.0 no matter how many people play. So why all the fighting to have the price stay at full? Wouldnt you like more players AND playing less.

Some people are just crazy...

[Alerith]

Just to say, "Pay the full price, and damn the consequences, there couldn't possibly be a better way to do this," is short-sighted.

Your alternative suffers from the exact same thing. You can't guarantee the subscriptions needed to make a lower price more profitable just like nobody can guarantee that paying full price is better over a discount.

As a business, SE is going to go with the option that THEY think will pull in more money between those two options.

[Azurus]

Having a poll about who's going to stay in this forum is like running a poll at Wrigley Field on game day and asking people if they support the Cubs. I imagine those numbers might look different if you asked all of Chicago in general, or all of the U.S. for that matter.

And that's part of the point I'm making. Not every FFXIV player is a regular forum-goer. I'd hazard a guess that many, if not most, don't even bother with it. Or am I to assume that FFXIV has less than a thousand players total judging from the number of the poll's respondents (the game has some serious problems if that's true).

If this game is meant to appeal to wide swath of players who aren't constantly F5ing the forums, then why not keep them with a price they can live with paying? The principles of Price Elasticity suggest there ought to be level that would actually improve the income SE gets from subscriptions as well as improve the amount of players that stick it out. This isn't just something we made up. There are some real potential benefits from this for all sides.

Just to say, "Pay the full price, and damn the consequences, there couldn't possibly be a better way to do this," is short-sighted.

^^^ this. and the post you used for the poll isnt even the biggest one, the one with the most votes had the numbers work out more to 33% would leave being that the numbers were roughly 2/3 to 1/3, but that is w/e. I'm sick of people trying to pull any unbiased numbers out of these forums. If i were to use these forums in a statistics project for my senior seminar i'd be failed for choosing such a poor sample.

Like Starlord said, sot only do 95% of the playerbase not use the forums, the %5 that do are polarized so far in on direction or the other it is absurd to use anything they say as fact. 3% are rabbid fanbois and 2% are debbie downers...theres like a +/- 1% of people that even bother looking at things objectively and from both angles. These forums may have been one of the worst additions to this game the more and more i read them.