Considering i knew nothing about this game til yesterday and purchased a 20 dollar pack today after doing my homework.safe to say,the OP clearly knows even less than i do about the game just based on their post lol
I forgot this is mmorpg.com,it's cool to critcize things than do research later :P
Considering i knew nothing about this game til yesterday and purchased a 20 dollar pack today after doing my homework.safe to say,the OP clearly knows even less than i do about the game just based on their post lol
I forgot this is mmorpg.com,it's cool to critcize things than do research later :P
The purpose of a Monetization strategy is to get money. Hopefully lots of money. Hopefully with happy customers. It seems that they have succeed on both of these, and as such I cant see how anyone would believe that it has backfired.
Is this kinda like asking if Apple coming out with the ipod has backfired?
Backing can also be an investment for a person who pre-purchases products in hopes that he could re-sell them. It doesn't grant any official investor status, but there seem to be some people here who genuinely believe that buying those limited ships could be an investment that pays off. Personally I think that throwing money into a well would be better investment, but even the most stupid investments are investments.
I consider my pledge a donation, not a pre-purchase. Like with all Kickstarter projects. Whenever i chose to support one of these projects, i expect to never see my money again. And I give an amount of money i can afford to never see again. And i am pleasantly surprised if the project works out.
However, some people DO buy ship packages as investment ... you are completely correct in that. There certainly IS a grey market for SC related items:
Originally posted by maybebaked You sir are wrong yet again. The came is scheduled to come out in 2016. They are continuing to collect money, like a lot of other games do. You can buy a castle in Shroud of the Avatar for $5000. How is this any different? How does hype matter this far out from the full game actually being released?
And how is any of this different than people choosing to spend money in cash shops?
People get to do whatever the hell they want with their money.
A successfully monetized game makes a lot of money - people seem to have a problem with this for some reason.
To some folks dropping $100,000 on a video game is pocket change, to others spending $5 per year on video games is absurd.
Disposable income varies *greatly* because wealth varies greatly.
I don't think I understand your point. It sounds like you are trying to compare this to other arguments we have had over Archeage. The main difference is that this game is using the money to fund it's development, while the other game is using the money to fund it's owner's bank account. The game isn't out yet, and we really don't know what the difference in ships will make.
Right now this is a fundraising campaign. If people want to buy fancy pixels for thousands of dollars, great, all the power to them. I think it's good that people are willing to spend their money to fund a game.
On the other hand, spending thousands of dollars to acquire a definite advantage over other players in a live game is very, very different and is something for another thread.
If I was a millionaire I would spend money funding indie games, but I would not spend money to have the best gear in 1 game, just to make my epeen grow.
Is this kinda like asking if Apple coming out with the ipod has backfired?
Actually it's more about asking if apple coming out with Iphone 6 that bend in your pocket had backfired? Yes it made them money, but might consumer trust have been damage? That could in the long run cost you a lot more money. I think that is what the OP is talking about. There Monetizing strategy clearly worked on short tern, but will it harm them (backfire) in the long term?
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
Not sure if I understand OP, I don't see $63m+ from crowd funding as -not- successful or less successful. Just shows great interest in this project to support the people who have delivered prior to Star Citzen.
If you think collecting ships is "the game" you're sorely mistaken and encourage you to research what is happening, what is planned, and how ships in SC are handled in the universe which is on their website.
I hope they deliver. Right now all they have is tens of millions of dollars, and all some people have are the bank account drain and claim of a fictional ship.
It would be really, REALLY shitty if they suddenly just up and left with the cash.
Is this kinda like asking if Apple coming out with the ipod has backfired?
Actually it's more about asking if apple coming out with Iphone 6 that bend in your pocket had backfired? Yes it made them money, but might consumer trust have been damage? That could in the long run cost you a lot more money. I think that is what the OP is talking about. There Monetizing strategy clearly worked on short tern, but will it harm them (backfire) in the long term?
Fair enough. Apple has made a newer, larger iphone in order to meet the customer demand for such a product. However, one of the downsides of a larger device is that it has a larger surface area, and can be bent by applying pressure across it. I do agree that preselling products might have a backlash when they are delivered... However, that is hardly a backlash... more like an inevitable outcome. It is also the reason that the products got made in the first place. There really isnt any downside for them on this.. and it can only have a positive upside (for this product.. you can speculate that it might affect a future product negatively).
Originally posted by Rhoklaw I find it a huge red flag when they don't discuss the importance of ships in the game. They don't say whether a $2000 ship will crush a hundred $50 ships without so much as breaking a sweat. There's a reason behind this and once it's finally explained how ships will work, you will see a lot of people pissed off.
They will have to balance game play. I wonder if this will be like Eve where some players never take out their expensive ships.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
Is this kinda like asking if Apple coming out with the ipod has backfired?
Actually it's more about asking if apple coming out with Iphone 6 that bend in your pocket had backfired? Yes it made them money, but might consumer trust have been damage? That could in the long run cost you a lot more money. I think that is what the OP is talking about. There Monetizing strategy clearly worked on short tern, but will it harm them (backfire) in the long term?
Fair enough. Apple has made a newer, larger iphone in order to meet the customer demand for such a product. However, one of the downsides of a larger device is that it has a larger surface area, and can be bent by applying pressure across it. I do agree that preselling products might have a backlash when they are delivered... However, that is hardly a backlash... more like an inevitable outcome. It is also the reason that the products got made in the first place. There really isnt any downside for them on this.. and it can only have a positive upside (for this product.. you can speculate that it might affect a future product negatively).
Maybe it's asking if the iPhone 7plus will backfire if they started taking orders today.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
Is this kinda like asking if Apple coming out with the ipod has backfired?
Actually it's more about asking if apple coming out with Iphone 6 that bend in your pocket had backfired? Yes it made them money, but might consumer trust have been damage? That could in the long run cost you a lot more money. I think that is what the OP is talking about. There Monetizing strategy clearly worked on short tern, but will it harm them (backfire) in the long term?
Fair enough. Apple has made a newer, larger iphone in order to meet the customer demand for such a product. However, one of the downsides of a larger device is that it has a larger surface area, and can be bent by applying pressure across it. I do agree that preselling products might have a backlash when they are delivered... However, that is hardly a backlash... more like an inevitable outcome. It is also the reason that the products got made in the first place. There really isnt any downside for them on this.. and it can only have a positive upside (for this product.. you can speculate that it might affect a future product negatively).
Maybe it's asking if the iPhone 7plus will backfire if they started taking orders today.
Or how about asking:
Would the iphone have backfired, if they had taken preorders to fund its development.
Originally posted by maybebaked You sir are wrong yet again. The came is scheduled to come out in 2016. They are continuing to collect money, like a lot of other games do. You can buy a castle in Shroud of the Avatar for $5000. How is this any different? How does hype matter this far out from the full game actually being released?
And how is any of this different than people choosing to spend money in cash shops?
People get to do whatever the hell they want with their money.
A successfully monetized game makes a lot of money - people seem to have a problem with this for some reason.
To some folks dropping $100,000 on a video game is pocket change, to others spending $5 per year on video games is absurd.
Disposable income varies *greatly* because wealth varies greatly.
Unless you are part of the 1% (referencing USA) dropping even $1000 on concept art is unfathomable to most because that's a LOT of money. Unless you are the minority 1%
I mean, I've seen all these ships on sale for $, at the end what's the real point of playing the game, collecting cool ships if this is how it chooses to monetize? Obviously a big part of the game revolves around riding amazing/cool ships, but since the even cooler and more amazing thing for this company is our $ over delivering an amazing game, one has to question why us the gamers should participate in it?
So, poll follows...Would've the game been far more successful if it had a different monetizing system like a monthly sub or B2P for box/expansion? Anything that simply did not involve a big shipyard sale that we can shop with our "in real life wallet/currency". Shipmart at it's finest. I mean, I would've gladly pay a premium price for a premium game experience. It doesn't have to involve sacrificing gameplay features...I think this is one of the big reasons why the hype of this game has quickly vaporized.
how could it be even more succesful? They are raising a million $ every second week, it can hardly get any more succesful.
besides you don't play the game to grind out ships, it's about playing the game and having fun.
I played Privateer back in the day for the story and the immersion, and taking up roles, not get all ships then quit.
In SC I want to do a lot with the Aurora and Freelancer, max them out with finest equipment from all over the universe until it's a total gunboat.
Ship Hulls are just ship hulls, it depends what you put in.
If you like the hull you will focus on tweaking and upgrading. The journey doesn't end with a basic hull.
Unless you are part of the 1% (referencing USA) dropping even $1000 on concept art is unfathomable to most because that's a LOT of money. Unless you are the minority 1%
Ironic when you consider this was meant to be a grassroots method of getting games made while staying away from the greed culture of AAA.
Unless you are part of the 1% (referencing USA) dropping even $1000 on concept art is unfathomable to most because that's a LOT of money. Unless you are the minority 1%
Ironic when you consider this was meant to be a grassroots method of getting games made while staying away from the greed culture of AAA.
What game developper be it AAA or indy isn't after profit ? Why do people seem to find the notion of trying to grab money so repulsive ? It's always, if not the first at least the second goal of any company out there.
Unless you are part of the 1% (referencing USA) dropping even $1000 on concept art is unfathomable to most because that's a LOT of money. Unless you are the minority 1%
Ironic when you consider this was meant to be a grassroots method of getting games made while staying away from the greed culture of AAA.
What game developper be it AAA or indy isn't after profit ? Why do people seem to find the notion of trying to grab money so repulsive ? It's always, if not the first at least the second goal of any company out there.
I guess people expect some kind of ethics from those that go round with their beggar cap whining about the big bad publisher. The real goal of a company is to make money without pissing it's customers off. SC was pitched and sold as something totally different to the mass ship selling CoD in space game that it's morphed into.
The real goal of a company is to make money without pissing it's customers off. SC was pitched and sold as something totally different to the mass ship selling CoD in space game that it's morphed into.
They might have pissed YOU off and some others. But the growing number of backers - some 35.000 new backers per month at the moment - says something different. Do not equal your opinion with that of the majority of customers that are backing Star Citizen.
Does plus 35000 new backers per month sounds like a strategy thats backfiring ?
Comments
Considering i knew nothing about this game til yesterday and purchased a 20 dollar pack today after doing my homework.safe to say,the OP clearly knows even less than i do about the game just based on their post lol
I forgot this is mmorpg.com,it's cool to critcize things than do research later :P
research is overrated.
The purpose of a Monetization strategy is to get money. Hopefully lots of money. Hopefully with happy customers. It seems that they have succeed on both of these, and as such I cant see how anyone would believe that it has backfired.
Is this kinda like asking if Apple coming out with the ipod has backfired?
;-) Nice one ...
Have fun
I consider my pledge a donation, not a pre-purchase. Like with all Kickstarter projects. Whenever i chose to support one of these projects, i expect to never see my money again. And I give an amount of money i can afford to never see again. And i am pleasantly surprised if the project works out.
However, some people DO buy ship packages as investment ... you are completely correct in that. There certainly IS a grey market for SC related items:
http://www.themittani.com/features/star-citizens-grey-market
Have fun
I don't think I understand your point. It sounds like you are trying to compare this to other arguments we have had over Archeage. The main difference is that this game is using the money to fund it's development, while the other game is using the money to fund it's owner's bank account. The game isn't out yet, and we really don't know what the difference in ships will make.
Right now this is a fundraising campaign. If people want to buy fancy pixels for thousands of dollars, great, all the power to them. I think it's good that people are willing to spend their money to fund a game.
On the other hand, spending thousands of dollars to acquire a definite advantage over other players in a live game is very, very different and is something for another thread.
If I was a millionaire I would spend money funding indie games, but I would not spend money to have the best gear in 1 game, just to make my epeen grow.
You're using your time machine for some really mundane and useless activities. Give it to me, I'll make better use of it.
*waves hand palm facing outward*
"The Hype is strong in this one."
Actually it's more about asking if apple coming out with Iphone 6 that bend in your pocket had backfired? Yes it made them money, but might consumer trust have been damage? That could in the long run cost you a lot more money. I think that is what the OP is talking about. There Monetizing strategy clearly worked on short tern, but will it harm them (backfire) in the long term?
They just write code to do it. Nothing else prevents it. Kind of an odd statement.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
Not sure if I understand OP, I don't see $63m+ from crowd funding as -not- successful or less successful. Just shows great interest in this project to support the people who have delivered prior to Star Citzen.
If you think collecting ships is "the game" you're sorely mistaken and encourage you to research what is happening, what is planned, and how ships in SC are handled in the universe which is on their website.
I hope they deliver. Right now all they have is tens of millions of dollars, and all some people have are the bank account drain and claim of a fictional ship.
It would be really, REALLY shitty if they suddenly just up and left with the cash.
Fair enough. Apple has made a newer, larger iphone in order to meet the customer demand for such a product. However, one of the downsides of a larger device is that it has a larger surface area, and can be bent by applying pressure across it. I do agree that preselling products might have a backlash when they are delivered... However, that is hardly a backlash... more like an inevitable outcome. It is also the reason that the products got made in the first place. There really isnt any downside for them on this.. and it can only have a positive upside (for this product.. you can speculate that it might affect a future product negatively).
They will have to balance game play. I wonder if this will be like Eve where some players never take out their expensive ships.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
Maybe it's asking if the iPhone 7plus will backfire if they started taking orders today.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
Or how about asking:
Would the iphone have backfired, if they had taken preorders to fund its development.
That's uncertain at this time. Game hasn't even launched.
Only when we see what the game is and has to offer can we ascertain if anything 'backfired' concerning money given for ships.
And how is any of this different than people choosing to spend money in cash shops?
People get to do whatever the hell they want with their money.
A successfully monetized game makes a lot of money - people seem to have a problem with this for some reason.
To some folks dropping $100,000 on a video game is pocket change, to others spending $5 per year on video games is absurd.
Disposable income varies *greatly* because wealth varies greatly.
Unless you are part of the 1% (referencing USA) dropping even $1000 on concept art is unfathomable to most because that's a LOT of money. Unless you are the minority 1%
how could it be even more succesful? They are raising a million $ every second week, it can hardly get any more succesful.
besides you don't play the game to grind out ships, it's about playing the game and having fun.
I played Privateer back in the day for the story and the immersion, and taking up roles, not get all ships then quit.
In SC I want to do a lot with the Aurora and Freelancer, max them out with finest equipment from all over the universe until it's a total gunboat.
Ship Hulls are just ship hulls, it depends what you put in.
If you like the hull you will focus on tweaking and upgrading. The journey doesn't end with a basic hull.
Ironic when you consider this was meant to be a grassroots method of getting games made while staying away from the greed culture of AAA.
What game developper be it AAA or indy isn't after profit ? Why do people seem to find the notion of trying to grab money so repulsive ? It's always, if not the first at least the second goal of any company out there.
I guess people expect some kind of ethics from those that go round with their beggar cap whining about the big bad publisher. The real goal of a company is to make money without pissing it's customers off. SC was pitched and sold as something totally different to the mass ship selling CoD in space game that it's morphed into.
They might have pissed YOU off and some others. But the growing number of backers - some 35.000 new backers per month at the moment - says something different. Do not equal your opinion with that of the majority of customers that are backing Star Citizen.
Does plus 35000 new backers per month sounds like a strategy thats backfiring ?
Have fun
Not sure. They do have gotten in plenty of money on this already but I for one will be playing Elite instead due to this.