Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

"Whales Do Not Swim in the Desert"

2456

Comments

  • CecropiaCecropia Member RarePosts: 3,985
    Kiyoris said:
    Cecropia said:
    What happened to your avatar? 
    He got a partial ban probably.

    The jailed avatar is for people who are partially banned. You can still reply to threads but you can no longer make your own. When some time has expired the ban is lifted.

    (an no you can't change your avatar to lift the ban, the jail appears over all of them lol)
    Interesting. Thanks for the heads up.

    "Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb

  • ClaiesClaies Member UncommonPosts: 76
    JohnP0100 said:
    The logic of judging someone by labelling them through their spending habits was always strange to me. And I don't think it happens in real life.
    I recently bought a golf club for $1200. Will that club make me into a pro golfer? Probably not. Does anyone judge me at the club house for having it? Probably not.
    Apply the above for anything; house, kids school, clothes, cars etc.

    Other than labelling someone 'rich/well-off' that is.

    It might be telling that the other industry which refers to people as "Whales" is the Casino industry.   Casinos are more than happy to throw drinks, meals, hotel rooms, and more at the people who gamble the most.   It's no coincidence that a lot of cash shop items for sale are random loot boxes, and that Whales in MMOs are just another form of gambler.
  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer Member EpicPosts: 8,857
    edited January 2016
    [mod edit]

    Leave the Desert

     

    With current estimates indicating 500,000 new mobile products reaching consumers yearly, the desert is really becoming an apocalypse where your product is most likely to die unnoticed by the general public, unless you spend massively on marketing. Often, several times what you spent on development. Conventional marketing not cutting it? Break out Mariah Carey (as Machine Zone did recently).

    Post edited by Vaross on
  • SplattrSplattr Member RarePosts: 577
    edited January 2016

    [mod edit]

    Leave the Desert

     

    With current estimates indicating 500,000 new mobile products reaching consumers yearly, the desert is really becoming an apocalypse where your product is most likely to die unnoticed by the general public, unless you spend massively on marketing. Often, several times what you spent on development. Conventional marketing not cutting it? Break out Mariah Carey (as Machine Zone did recently).

    No, the "desert" refers to games with monetization models that push potential fish away from the game before they make purchases. He even mentions working on WoT:Blitz which if I am not mistaken is a mobile game.

    The desert/oasis analogy is really quite good. The desert is a very inhospitable place for humans, with most people not willing to enter or dying off quickly if not prepared. In contrast, the oasis is a very hospitable environment, one someone would be willing to stay in for a long time. And in comparison, the desert is a very large area, while the oasis is extremely small. In the article, most f2p games would fall into the desert part of the analogy, while the few games he mentioned are the oasis.
    Post edited by Vaross on
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 25,499
    edited January 2016
    splattr said:

    [mod edit]

    Leave the Desert

     

    With current estimates indicating 500,000 new mobile products reaching consumers yearly, the desert is really becoming an apocalypse where your product is most likely to die unnoticed by the general public, unless you spend massively on marketing. Often, several times what you spent on development. Conventional marketing not cutting it? Break out Mariah Carey (as Machine Zone did recently).

    No, the "desert" refers to games with monetization models that push potential fish away from the game before they make purchases. He even mentions working on WoT:Blitz which if I am not mistaken is a mobile game.

    The desert/oasis analogy is really quite good. The desert is a very inhospitable place for humans, with most people not willing to enter or dying off quickly if not prepared. In contrast, the oasis is a very hospitable environment, one someone would be willing to stay in for a long time. And in comparison, the desert is a very large area, while the oasis is extremely small. In the article, most f2p games would fall into the desert part of the analogy, while the few games he mentioned are the oasis.
    An oasis is only a nice place to live as compared to a desert and not in any absolute sense.  Whales tend to live in neither.
    Post edited by Vaross on
  • SplattrSplattr Member RarePosts: 577
    Robokapp said:
    so AAA F2P should have 1500 hours of content.

    It's a good goal, I think. It also rules out 99% of F2P MMOs.
    Sets the bar a bit too high, doesn't it, to demand fully-formed veteran title fresh from the box on day one?

    ...
    Just keep in mind who the author of the article is.

    He designs monetization strategies for WoT and WoWS. In those games the "content" consists of a range of vehicles/ships that you unlock by grinding-out XP.

    So they make 150 vehicle models, you grind 10 hours to unlock each one and...
    Voila !
    1500 hours of "content" !
    Now add in what he was really trying to get across in the article: "...maximizing life time value (LTV) by focusing on creating and charging for products that will keep the interest of consumers for at least a month and preferably a year or more..." Just throwing 150 models that all require 10 hours to grind will not keep the attention of most players. You have to find something to keep the player grinding all the way through the 150 models without them feeling like the game is just a big cash grab.

    In my experience with WoX games, I would never plow through all the trees for all nations. I pick one nation, pick the class that I think would be most enjoyable, and then start my progression there. So how does WoX get me to try different classes/nations? They simply give me more than one starting vehicle. It allows me to play multiple nations and classes without ever having to pay a dime to buy into them.

    This part also helps qualify for me to play the game for free for the requried time it takes for me to be "all in." If the first vehicle I picked ended up not being fun, I would be hesitant to buy another vehicle. By giving me multiple options for free, I will likely find something I like. It also increases the time it takes for me to burn through the first few levels of play. Add in the need to gain enough xp to hit elite crew status for any vehicle I plan on playing further than just to get to the next level. So I now have a class I like to play, spent enough time in game to build an attachment, and I have only burned through a few levels. Job well done. 

    At this point, I would continue to grind through the levels of my chosen class. So how do they get my money while doing this? They offer the great grinding vehicles with elite crews for sale, among other things. These mid level vehicles allow me to jump a level or two if I want to, and at the same time allow me to try out even more classes that I may not have tried earlier, or just don't want to grind the full tree. By this time I have seen the other classes in-game, and I see the allure of said classes that I may not have seen in the early hours of gameplay. I see the grind ahead to complete multiple nations/trees, so now buying in to premium status doesn't sound like such a bad thing. Job complete. They now have me in game, spending money, and happy to do it.

    There are other things that WoX games do well to keep someone playing, and eventually spending money, without them feeling violated. Even more, you don't hear as much fuss about p2w as you do in other f2p games (notice I said AS MUCH). 



  • thinktank001thinktank001 Member UncommonPosts: 2,144
    splattr said:

    There are other things that WoX games do well to keep someone playing, and eventually spending money, without them feeling violated. Even more, you don't hear as much fuss about p2w as you do in other f2p games (notice I said AS MUCH). 


    His payment models aren't perfect, but I would guess that is probably a compromise with his employers.  I will give him my respect, since he is the only one in the industry telling them their microtransaction models suck, and are exploitive. 
  • SplattrSplattr Member RarePosts: 577
    edited January 2016
    Quizzical said:
    splattr said:

    [mod edit]
    No, the "desert" refers to games with monetization models that push potential fish away from the game before they make purchases. He even mentions working on WoT:Blitz which if I am not mistaken is a mobile game.

    The desert/oasis analogy is really quite good. The desert is a very inhospitable place for humans, with most people not willing to enter or dying off quickly if not prepared. In contrast, the oasis is a very hospitable environment, one someone would be willing to stay in for a long time. And in comparison, the desert is a very large area, while the oasis is extremely small. In the article, most f2p games would fall into the desert part of the analogy, while the few games he mentioned are the oasis.
    An oasis is only a nice place to live as compared to a desert and not in any absolute sense.  Whales tend to live in neither.
    Wasn't quite sure why you brought that up, but then I found this in a prior post by you: "If you read the article, the metaphor of this thread title is absurd because whales do not swim in oases, either."

    You are obviously trying to take a statement made by someone else, interject yourself into the conversation without anything pertinent to said conversation (for the 2nd time I might add), and by doing so try to show your intellectual prowess, while at the same time stroking your enormous epeen.

    First, let me start off with the definition of metaphor: "a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable." So you have based your comment on the literal meaning of the words, when my post was merely a breakdown of how the metaphor used was applicable to the topic of the original post. So nice try, but fail. 

    Second, if you want to go literal here, we can. In the context of the article, whales indeed could swim in an oasis. The whales referenced in this article are actually people. They are specifically gamers with the ability to spend large amounts of real life money purchasing items for use in the virtual worlds of the games they play. They are not the large mammal that lives in the ocean. These gamers, metaphorically called whales, could indeed live in both a literal desert or oasis if they so chose. Given that these gamers also could have learned how to swim during their lives, they indeed could swim in an oasis. Fail number two.

    Third, my post focused on the desert/oasis analogy. This is the topic of the post I had referenced. See how I took something @GeezerGamer had said (please don't tell me about how he didn't actually say anything, as I understand that he typed it) and then constructively tried to show how his statement was incorrect? Maybe you could actually try that sometime. Again, fail.


    Post edited by Vaross on
  • SplattrSplattr Member RarePosts: 577
    splattr said:

    There are other things that WoX games do well to keep someone playing, and eventually spending money, without them feeling violated. Even more, you don't hear as much fuss about p2w as you do in other f2p games (notice I said AS MUCH). 


    His payment models aren't perfect, but I would guess that is probably a compromise with his employers.  I will give him my respect, since he is the only one in the industry telling them their microtransaction models suck, and are exploitive. 
    I would agree the final models aren't perfect. It does seem that he is working towards models that would be a win-win for gaming. Oh wait, we already had that with subscriptions (sorry, I am an old school gamer who preferred the sub model).
  • thinktank001thinktank001 Member UncommonPosts: 2,144
    splattr said:
    I would agree the final models aren't perfect. It does seem that he is working towards models that would be a win-win for gaming. Oh wait, we already had that with subscriptions (sorry, I am an old school gamer who preferred the sub model).

    I have a similar opinion as you do when it comes to payment models.  However,  you should have realized from the article that the gaming industry completely disagrees.   They never have and never will care what consumers think of their microtransaction model.   This guy has been railing against the standard implementation, since 2000 and there is no else with the balls to do so.

    It would be nice to see microtransaction games that can compete with the quality of P2P games, but we will never see that if developers continue down their current path.
  • Solar_ProphetSolar_Prophet Member EpicPosts: 1,960
    LOL !

    Summary:
    "I work at Wargaming.net and our company is the greatest thing on earth. Our games have no P2W (gold ammo is a lie) and we give players the best value in the entire industry.

    I can't tell you what our numbers are, but they are MUCH better than everyone else's. I will now write a long article based on what I read about our competitors.

    I have tried to get a job at many other companies, but they don't like it when I tell them everything they're doing is wrong. Hopefully, some employer out there will read this article and realise how clever I am."
    I am now going to have to clean snorted out Faygo soda off my monitor and keyboard. I blame you for this! Expect a cleaning bill in the mail!

    Kiyoris said:
    Quoting Gamasutra makes anything you say irrelevant. They are the cesspool of gaming journalism, it is troll central of the gaming press.

    The site that employed feminist writers to call gamers lonely basement dwellers,  angry socially inept men and a petri dish of jobless people. No serious developer still engages with them.

    it is that site that fueled gamergate and gamer outrage at the media, rightfully so

    Gamasutra can go throw themselves off a cliff.

    Gamasutra:





    So they're the gaming equivalent of TMZ? 



    AN' DERE AIN'T NO SUCH FING AS ENUFF DAKKA, YA GROT! Enuff'z more than ya got an' less than too much an' there ain't no such fing as too much dakka. Say dere is, and me Squiggoff'z eatin' tonight!

    We are born of the blood. Made men by the blood. Undone by the blood. Our eyes are yet to open. FEAR THE OLD BLOOD. 

    #IStandWithVic

  • Painbringer7Painbringer7 Member UncommonPosts: 121
    edited January 2016
    Well this is anecdotal evidence, but my dad spent atleast $120 on  WoT the first 3 months it was out (Xbox 360 edition). I would guess the total amount as of now would probably be around $500 (In his defense, it really is the only game he ever plays).  As for myself, I invested $30 at the start ( an amount I deemed worthy of the game) and have not spent a penny since.  I am a cheapskate, I know ( a badge I wear with honor).
     
    Post edited by Painbringer7 on

    The code of the pessimistic loner: "We unpopular loners are realists, who follow the three non- popular principles: Not having any (Hope), Not making any (Gaps in your heart); And not giving into (Sweet talk)".


  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,775
    splattr said:
    splattr said:

    There are other things that WoX games do well to keep someone playing, and eventually spending money, without them feeling violated. Even more, you don't hear as much fuss about p2w as you do in other f2p games (notice I said AS MUCH). 


    His payment models aren't perfect, but I would guess that is probably a compromise with his employers.  I will give him my respect, since he is the only one in the industry telling them their microtransaction models suck, and are exploitive. 
    I would agree the final models aren't perfect. It does seem that he is working towards models that would be a win-win for gaming. Oh wait, we already had that with subscriptions (sorry, I am an old school gamer who preferred the sub model).
    Clearly sub is not a win-win. May be a win for you. Certainly not for them. Just look at how much money f2p brings in compared to sub-only, and with the competition of free content, sub-only is clearly a huge loss for devs.

    And free 18 days of content (that is how long he said free players need to be entertained before they are turning into whales, if ever) is a better win to players than playing a sub. 
  • Flyte27Flyte27 Member RarePosts: 4,574
    splattr said:
    splattr said:

    There are other things that WoX games do well to keep someone playing, and eventually spending money, without them feeling violated. Even more, you don't hear as much fuss about p2w as you do in other f2p games (notice I said AS MUCH). 


    His payment models aren't perfect, but I would guess that is probably a compromise with his employers.  I will give him my respect, since he is the only one in the industry telling them their microtransaction models suck, and are exploitive. 
    I would agree the final models aren't perfect. It does seem that he is working towards models that would be a win-win for gaming. Oh wait, we already had that with subscriptions (sorry, I am an old school gamer who preferred the sub model).
    Clearly sub is not a win-win. May be a win for you. Certainly not for them. Just look at how much money f2p brings in compared to sub-only, and with the competition of free content, sub-only is clearly a huge loss for devs.

    And free 18 days of content (that is how long he said free players need to be entertained before they are turning into whales, if ever) is a better win to players than playing a sub. 
    It's probably because it's like a drug.  You get a free taste, but then are encouraged to pay for things in game.

    I'll never understand why people would play something for escapism only to be hassled by the developers with real money transactions all the time in game.
  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer Member EpicPosts: 8,857
    edited January 2016
    splattr said:
    splattr said:

    There are other things that WoX games do well to keep someone playing, and eventually spending money, without them feeling violated. Even more, you don't hear as much fuss about p2w as you do in other f2p games (notice I said AS MUCH). 


    His payment models aren't perfect, but I would guess that is probably a compromise with his employers.  I will give him my respect, since he is the only one in the industry telling them their microtransaction models suck, and are exploitive. 
    I would agree the final models aren't perfect. It does seem that he is working towards models that would be a win-win for gaming. Oh wait, we already had that with subscriptions (sorry, I am an old school gamer who preferred the sub model).
    Clearly sub is not a win-win. May be a win for you. Certainly not for them. Just look at how much money f2p brings in compared to sub-only, and with the competition of free content, sub-only is clearly a huge loss for devs.

    And free 18 days of content (that is how long he said free players need to be entertained before they are turning into whales, if ever) is a better win to players than playing a sub. 
    I will say this again.
    The sub model is absolutely a Win for everyone. It's not the business model that failed. It was game development that failed. Many of the games sucked. They couldn't retain players. Not because players weren't willing to sub, but they didn't feel the games were worth it.

    There are still enough successful games that generate healthy revenues from subscriptions. Actually, all you need is one to show the model can work.

    Your whole personal agenda for years has been to try to prove that games fail because of bad business models. But the truth is the opposite. Business models fail because of bad games.
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,775
    Flyte27 said:

    It's probably because it's like a drug.  You get a free taste, but then are encouraged to pay for things in game.


    Yes, and most don't pay, and even for those who pay, a majority only pay once.

    So most players get free content (for 18 or whatever number of days), and many more get almost free content (pay a small amount once).
  • DrDread74DrDread74 Member UncommonPosts: 308
    dalewj said:
    Robokapp said:
    so AAA F2P should have 1500 hours of content.

    It's a good goal, I think. It also rules out 99% of F2P MMOs.
    Sets the bar a bit too high, doesn't it, to demand fully-formed veteran title fresh from the box on day one?

    ...
    Just keep in mind who the author of the article is.

    He designs monetization strategies for WoT and WoWS. In those games the "content" consists of a range of vehicles/ships that you unlock by grinding-out XP.

    So they make 150 vehicle models, you grind 10 hours to unlock each one and...
    Voila !
    1500 hours of "content" !

    you never played WoT did ya... 15,000+ hours
    You can play World of Tanks in 15 minutes .... for about $15,000

    http://baronsofthegalaxy.com/
     An MMO game I created, solo. It's live now and absolutely free to play!
  • DrDread74DrDread74 Member UncommonPosts: 308
    This Ramin Shokrizade is quite a guy !

    According to his LinkedIn profile, he:

    • used to coach/train the US Olympic team
    • works 80 to 100 hours a week on learning the gaming space (aside from his normal job)
    • when actively playing, he is "the top-ranked Western cyberathlete in games with player-based economies"
    • was one of the first 100 players in the world to L60 in World of Warcraft
    • was undefeated in chess from age 5 to 15
    • has assisted over 100 game development teams

    That's just a small sample of his laundry-list of remarkable achievements and industry experience. I am humbled when I read about people like this who seem to pack 2 or 3 ordinary lifetimes into their single existence.


    I remember when it was a joke to list something like:

    "Have scored over 100,000 point in Pitfall"

    in your resume. Oh how the times have changed =)


    .... Pitfall, it was a game on the Atari 2600

    .... Atari 2600... it's a game console

    ... ya know, like 35 years ago?

    Jesus you bunch of KIDS, heres a link!  =)



    http://baronsofthegalaxy.com/
     An MMO game I created, solo. It's live now and absolutely free to play!
  • ThexReporterThexReporter Member UncommonPosts: 124
    "Whales" -  A term used by poor people to make themselves feel better about being poor.
  • Flyte27Flyte27 Member RarePosts: 4,574
    Flyte27 said:

    It's probably because it's like a drug.  You get a free taste, but then are encouraged to pay for things in game.


    Yes, and most don't pay, and even for those who pay, a majority only pay once.

    So most players get free content (for 18 or whatever number of days), and many more get almost free content (pay a small amount once).
    You can look at it that way, but most of these games I wouldn't play for free.  Either way it doesn't stop the game from breaking immersion by introducing real life money while you are playing the game.  You can choose not to pay, but just having real money transactions visible in game stops the suspension of disbelief.  It's like you have to be on your guard.  You can't just relax and play the game.
  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    DrDread74 said:
    This Ramin Shokrizade is quite a guy !

    According to his LinkedIn profile, he:

    • used to coach/train the US Olympic team
    • works 80 to 100 hours a week on learning the gaming space (aside from his normal job)
    • when actively playing, he is "the top-ranked Western cyberathlete in games with player-based economies"
    • was one of the first 100 players in the world to L60 in World of Warcraft
    • was undefeated in chess from age 5 to 15
    • has assisted over 100 game development teams

    That's just a small sample of his laundry-list of remarkable achievements and industry experience. I am humbled when I read about people like this who seem to pack 2 or 3 ordinary lifetimes into their single existence.


    I remember when it was a joke to list something like:

    "Have scored over 100,000 point in Pitfall"

    in your resume. Oh how the times have changed =)


    .... Pitfall, it was a game on the Atari 2600

    .... Atari 2600... it's a game console

    ... ya know, like 35 years ago?

    Jesus you bunch of KIDS, heres a link!  =)


    Oh yeah, I see. So it's like Donkey Kong....... :)

    Crazkanuk

    ----------------
    Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
    Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
    Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
    Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
    Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
    ----------------

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,775
    Flyte27 said:



    Yes, and most don't pay, and even for those who pay, a majority only pay once.

    So most players get free content (for 18 or whatever number of days), and many more get almost free content (pay a small amount once).
    You can look at it that way, but most of these games I wouldn't play for free.  Either way it doesn't stop the game from breaking immersion by introducing real life money while you are playing the game.  You can choose not to pay, but just having real money transactions visible in game stops the suspension of disbelief.  It's like you have to be on your guard.  You can't just relax and play the game.
    Yes, i can and I do.

    I am quite relaxed ignoring the cash shop but certainly if you cannot, feel free of not playing free games. It is not a must. We are talking about entertainment here.

    But do not tell me whether i can or cannot relax. I know that better than you do.

    The idea that you have real world stuff in a game will break immersion is just irrelevant to me. I play lobby games .. and lobbies clearly take the player out of the game world. If i don't mind a lobby, or a menu, why would i mind a cash shop which I am totally going to ignore?

    At the end of the day, you don't have to enjoy free games. But you have to admit, lots of others do.
  • NewfrNewfr Member UncommonPosts: 133
    and i quote:

    "For the last two years I have lived in the gaming oasis that is Wargaming.net ..."

    That enough information for me to know that this guy don't know a thing about online games. Even in Russia where WoT is most popular this guys manage to f*ck up so hard that you can't imagine.
  • CecropiaCecropia Member RarePosts: 3,985
    edited January 2016
    This Ramin Shokrizade is quite a guy !

    According to his LinkedIn profile, he:

    • used to coach/train the US Olympic team
    • works 80 to 100 hours a week on learning the gaming space (aside from his normal job)
    • when actively playing, he is "the top-ranked Western cyberathlete in games with player-based economies"
    • was one of the first 100 players in the world to L60 in World of Warcraft
    • was undefeated in chess from age 5 to 15
    • has assisted over 100 game development teams

    That's just a small sample of his laundry-list of remarkable achievements and industry experience. I am humbled when I read about people like this who seem to pack 2 or 3 ordinary lifetimes into their single existence.

    "Cyberathlete". 



    LMFAO!

    Just when you thought "esports" was the pinnacle of gaming hilarity. 

    Sorry gamers; you guys are never going to be athletes by competitively or professionally playing video games no matter how hard you wish it to be true (unless you count really getting into it on the Wii, or holding your pee/bowl movement in for long durations of time).

    Fucking adorable. This type of idiocy is why people mock and laugh at gamers. 


    Post edited by Cecropia on

    "Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb

  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer Member EpicPosts: 8,857
    edited January 2016
    Cecropia said:

    "Cyberathlete". 


    "Cyberathelete"

Sign In or Register to comment.