I think game design has much more to do with a game's prosperity than the pricing model. If FF was a game that offered any sandpark/sandbox type freedom I would be there in a second. However it is the same game we have all been playing since 2004. I wouldn't waste my time with it if it was free.
I will say the days of charge $60 and a sub should be coming to an end though. There is no game (currently released...not saying much though as they all pretty much suck) that I'm willing to sink $60 and a sub on. I would do $40 and a sub but that is pushing it.
It just seems really odd that people will argue that they won't play a free to play game because they perceive free to mean lower quality, and then argue that more people would pay a half price game, when by one's own admission that would indicate less would play it as it would be perceived as being a lower quality game.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
It isn't. We're talking about an ongoing investment in a game you like or dislike. MMO's are unique in this regard in the gaming industry. Other games are a one-time investment that you decide based on the merits of the game and becoming invested. You look at the ads, the videos, the twitch, the demo and then decide to pull the trigger.
Yes, that is exactly what I am saying. The people that like WoW are paying the fee. the ones that don't like it aren't paying it, and the vast majority of the ones that have lost interest will not have their interest re-ignited by a $7 change.
This has already happened in the MMO industry. It used to be a practice to lower subscription fees when a title started losing subscriptions. The result was a small change in the downward trend of subs (not an increase) which quickly disappeared and the downward spiral resumed its previous rate. The only thing that happened was the publisher lost even more money faster.
It's convenient that you used WoW for your example, because even if you don't recognize this effect, Blizzard does. They know that lowering the subs will not add more than a small amount of temporary subs but over time the change of $15 to $7 for all those folks that ARE still interested will cost them a boatload of cash.
You are applying a textbook theory about economics to a situation without any practical experience to back it up, and you can't recognize that there are other factors in play that render your theory not just insignificant, but actually detrimental.
No, we're not talking about "an ongoing investment in a game you like or dislike." We're talking about whether price matters, and my example is a clear-cut case of price mattering. It would be in an entirely different industry altogether and it would still be completely appropriate.
Really it just ends the conversation for you to admit you think the exact same number of players would subscribe to WOW at $7 as $15. That's nonsense and everyone knows it.
What it is a clear case of is changing the topic from MMORPG pricing to general goods pricing in an attempt to make your failing point more valid. This isn't a forum for discussing the price of corn. If you hadn't noticed, this is a topic about MMORPG pricing on an MMORPG website.
'Sandbox MMO' is a PTSD trigger word for anyone who has the experience to know that anonymous players invariably use a 'sandbox' in the same manner a housecat does.
When your head is stuck in the sand, your ass becomes the only recognizable part of you.
No game is more fun than the one you can't play, and no game is more boring than one which you've become familiar.
How to become a millionaire: Start with a billion dollars and make an MMO.
What it is a clear case of is changing the topic from MMORPG pricing to general goods pricing in an attempt to make your failing point more valid. This isn't a forum for discussing the price of corn. If you hadn't noticed, this is a topic about MMORPG pricing on an MMORPG website.
At a higher price, goods sell less.
At a lower price, they sell more.
It really doesn't matter what scale the economy is, these are simple facts.
They're even more true of luxury goods (like entertainment, where if the price is too high you don't buy) than necessity goods (like food, where you would be willing to spend an extremely high price for the good.)
I'm a bit confused why you're arguing over this. This is high school economics stuff.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Depends on how you like to pay for your game and if the game is good or not. I prefer to pay per month because I look at the game as an entertainment service much like cable TV. I do not really do the whole buy what I want to watch as I go because I might miss something that I might not purchase that ends up really being entertaining.
Can't really say much for the F2P games as I do not even waste the worlds bandwidth to download them. I see them as designed for one thing and one thing only, to get me into the cash shop and buy something so they can pay people to research more of what other people will buy in cash shops.
I only played one B2P game, GW2 and really didn't think the game was worth the box price, should have just went F2P.
Edit:
Just re-read OP's post and would add you also pay more when something is new, like a car but as soon as you drive it off the lot it loses value. What you are asking though seems like you already don't buy new games and wait for them to drop in price 6 months later, I'm sure a lot of other people do the same thing but you miss out on the launch when everyone is pretty much new still and all have to learn at the same time. When you finally get around to playing the game there are already thousands of walk through and perfect build sites up that kind of take away from the fresh feeling of the game.
Originally posted by Axehilt At a higher price, goods sell less.At a lower price, they sell more.It really doesn't matter what scale the economy is, these are simple facts.They're even more true of luxury goods (like entertainment, where if the price is too high you don't buy) than necessity goods (like food, where you would be willing to spend an extremely high price for the good.)
Life isn't black and white no matter how much you stamp your foot and bury your head in the sand.
There are variations to everything. Economics especially. What you can't seem to fathom is that they aren't hard and fast rules that can be applied blindly.
Originally posted by Axehilt I'm a bit confused...
That much is clear.
'Sandbox MMO' is a PTSD trigger word for anyone who has the experience to know that anonymous players invariably use a 'sandbox' in the same manner a housecat does.
When your head is stuck in the sand, your ass becomes the only recognizable part of you.
No game is more fun than the one you can't play, and no game is more boring than one which you've become familiar.
How to become a millionaire: Start with a billion dollars and make an MMO.
Life isn't black and white no matter how much you stamp your foot and bury your head in the sand.
There are variations to everything. Economics especially. What you can't seem to fathom is that they aren't hard and fast rules that can be applied blindly.
That much is clear.
What about a $100/month subscription? Are you so convinced of your position that you believe that even if it cost $100, there would be the exact same number of subscribers?
I'm interested in exploring just how absurd a position you're willing to take on this.
How about a $10,000/month subscription?
...and then when you admit that at a certain point players will stop subscribing, we can begin walking back towards the obvious truth that even $15/month is too much for some players, and more players would subscribe at $7/mo than $15/mo.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I think what actualy hurts MMORPG's most is TOO much emphasis on pricing model as compared to the actual product they are selling. Pricing model matters a little bit. Actual price matters more but ultimately what matters most is producing a product that's good enough that people will want to spend money on it instead of the other products out there.
You can put lipstick on a pig and hang a "Kisses for Sale" sign over it....but whatever price or payment model you choose, ultimately you are still trying to get someone to pay you to kiss a pig.
Life isn't black and white no matter how much you stamp your foot and bury your head in the sand.
There are variations to everything. Economics especially. What you can't seem to fathom is that they aren't hard and fast rules that can be applied blindly.
That much is clear.
What about a $100/month subscription? Are you so convinced of your position that you believe that even if it cost $100, there would be the exact same number of subscribers?
I'm interested in exploring just how absurd a position you're willing to take on this.
How about a $10,000/month subscription?
...and then when you admit that at a certain point players will stop subscribing, we can begin walking back towards the obvious truth that even $15/month is too much for some players, and more players would subscribe at $7/mo than $15/mo.
If you have to stretch your post into the realm of pointless hyperbole, then you have no point.
The topic of this thread is $15 down to $7 and that level of change for the vested MMO player, will not matter.
Your last posts have been trying to alter the topic so it will make your point right, and that is an admission that you are wrong.
'Sandbox MMO' is a PTSD trigger word for anyone who has the experience to know that anonymous players invariably use a 'sandbox' in the same manner a housecat does.
When your head is stuck in the sand, your ass becomes the only recognizable part of you.
No game is more fun than the one you can't play, and no game is more boring than one which you've become familiar.
How to become a millionaire: Start with a billion dollars and make an MMO.
If you have to stretch your post into the realm of pointless hyperbole, then you have no point.
The topic of this thread is $15 down to $7 and that level of change for the vested MMO player, will not matter.
Your last posts have been trying to alter the topic so it will make your point right, and that is an admission that you are wrong.
We're not talking about the vested player.
We're talking about all players. We're asking whether dropping the price would create enough new subscribers to be worth the drop in price.
And while we don't have enough information to say either way (although my hunch is "no it's not worth it"), we can certainly concede the reality that if the price drops, more players will subscribe to a game. Because that's how capitalism works, especially with luxury goods like game subscriptions.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Originally posted by Axehilt We're not talking about the vested player. We're talking about all players. We're asking whether dropping the price would create enough new subscribers to be worth the drop in price.
I've already addressed this, previous page, first post... please keep up and read the posts to which you are 'replying'.
Originally posted by Axehilt And while we don't have enough information to say either way (although my hunch is "no it's not worth it"), we can certainly concede the reality that if the price drops, more players will subscribe to a game. Because that's how capitalism works, especially with luxury goods like game subscriptions.
Part of the defining aspect of a luxury good is that they are associated with affluence.
There is nothing affluent about an MMO subscription.
Someone who actually fits this description...
Originally posted by Axehilt Not only do I have economics experience, but games-related economic experience. For the last few years on the games I've worked on part of my job was to set prices for the things in the games, analyze the results, and use that analysis to generate better-priced items in the future.
Would know that... unless their only true economics experience is in-game economies and has deluded himself into thinking that real life economies aren't orders of magnitude more complex.
'Sandbox MMO' is a PTSD trigger word for anyone who has the experience to know that anonymous players invariably use a 'sandbox' in the same manner a housecat does.
When your head is stuck in the sand, your ass becomes the only recognizable part of you.
No game is more fun than the one you can't play, and no game is more boring than one which you've become familiar.
How to become a millionaire: Start with a billion dollars and make an MMO.
If I spent $30-$50 a month on one title sub, it would still be the cheapest form of entertainment I can think of. I'm ok with whatever they throw out there as long as it doesn't cost more than dinner and a movie for a night.
Death is nothing to us, since when we are, Death has not come, and when death has come, we are not.
I am of mixed feeling in that I think the publishers are demanding we pay too much for downright shit MMORPGs. Frankly most of them in recent times simply haven’t been worth the bill for the entertainment provided and I hate writing that. However, I will pay a premium for a quality game without complaint every time. HALO 3, GTA IV, Half Life 2, Skyrim... I bought them at release for full price and never had one regret. Still play them sometimes. But I can’t think of one MMORPG that was worth it over the past few years much less with a sub on top. Sure GW2 was fun for a little while but once I was done with it I never looked back.
Price has never been an issue for me personally, if i like the game enough (after the 30day free), i'll sub no matter the cost (never has exceeded 13-15€ / mo.)
ps.
15.00 EUR
=
19.7542 USD
15.00 USD
=
11.3901 EUR
Always makes me smile when US folks cry about 15$ / mo.
It'd be 3rd world-war on every MMO-forum known to man if any company asked 19.7$ / mo.
Honestly, for a good MMO I'd pay $20 bucks without a blink of an eye. I don't understand how $15.00 is a problem for some. If it is, get a job. If you have a job and $15.00 for an entire month's worth of entertainment (assuming its a decent MMO) is an issue, then you need a new job or to get your priorities together lol.
I've already addressed this, previous page, first post... please keep up and read the posts to which you are 'replying'.
Part of the defining aspect of a luxury good is that they are associated with affluence.
There is nothing affluent about an MMO subscription.
Someone who actually fits this description...
Would know that... unless their only true economics experience is in-game economies and has deluded himself into thinking that real life economies aren't orders of magnitude more complex.
For me the previous page is the first page.
It doesn't matter though. The question is whether the pricing model is hurting MMORPGs, which implies we're talking about all potential subscribers of MMORPGs (which includes players who would additionally buy them if they knew the subscription was lower.)
Being associated with affluence doesn't mean that's the definition of a luxury good is affluence. The definition of a luxury good is it's not essential.
Games are not essential. You could live without them. As prices increase (or buying power drops), luxury items like game subscription are some of the first things people cut back on, because they're luxury items and not essential. So price matters more with luxury goods than necessity goods.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I see like 3 MMORPG's being released soon, all asking the same. Box price + same monthly fee...but the real question remains....Why is China considered the behemoth of exports and sales?
If for example FFXIV:ARR came free with $7 monthly sub, 100% I would've took that deal. What is better to sell something to 3 people for $7 or to sell the same thing to 1 person for $15?
So, the poll follows. Are MMORPG's making mistake for asking more than what you think you would pay? Would a $7 monthly sub without box fee "sold you" and try the game right away? I would definitely pay that and try every single upcoming MMORPG from FFXIV to Wild Star, ESO and ArcheAge, but because they asking box fee + $15 a month there is a 100% chance I might only try one and after months of reviews.
I know for fact I would not bought DCUO on release without -$15 promo that costed me $35 a to buy the game + 30 days free and that was 2 years and 8 months ago. Also after that they had this promotion where you could perma sub for $10 a month.
I know for a fact I would own Guild Wars 2 now if it cost $20-25, but because it cost $60 I never bought it...
I have a paper route I am unconcerned with the price of a game. It is miniscule compared to the price of my bike, the cost of my lawnmower (I cut lawns too) and the cost of gasoline.
I think all real online MMORPGs should be $70 ~ $500 a year.
If somehow you are worried about $15 bucks off a game, or a promo.. then chances are you need to ask for a bigger allowance, or do more house chores.
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
This has nothing to do with how much subs cost compared to this and that or that I should probably get a better job if I have hard time to afford it.
Warren Buffett, one of the richest men in the world still lives in his regular house from 40+ years ago. It's about being responsible person and making wise decisions, something I did far less when I was a child. It's true many are carelessly spending $ on whatever comes and it is the reason why we've seen more MMO's now than ever, but the quality on most has drasticly reduced from what I've played before.
WOW 5.4 will come in 3 days and it's no doubt the most expensive MMORPG on the market and I will play it, but because other MMORPG's are asking the same (or close) paying $30-45 a month for multiple MMORPG's surely gets expensive and I won't have the time to fully enjoy them so there is surely no reason to support multiple MMORPG's for the time being.
So yes, I'm certain because of the pricing model many MMORPG's have missed opportunities to take $ from me and will continue to do so apparently.
It doesn't matter though. The question is whether the pricing model is hurting MMORPGs, which implies we're talking about all potential subscribers of MMORPGs (which includes players who would additionally buy them if they knew the subscription was lower.)
Being associated with affluence doesn't mean that's the definition of a luxury good is affluence. The definition of a luxury good is it's not essential.
Games are not essential. You could live without them. As prices increase (or buying power drops), luxury items like game subscription are some of the first things people cut back on, because they're luxury items and not essential. So price matters more with luxury goods than necessity goods.
If cost is always the primary factor in sales...
I am sure Microsoft will skyrocket sales of the XBOX 360 by lowering its price to $199.99
If you had some perfectly preserved beef from the time of mad cow disease, you would make a bundle selling it for $1.99 a pound instead of $6.99 a pound even if it is both fresh and healthy.
Why is the Galaxy S4 still the best selling smartphone when Samsung slashed the price of the S3 to 20% of retail?
Do some research and look up Salton Sea resort prices from the late 1950s.
Price drops do not universally increase sales. You are completely wrong in this. In the MMO industry game quality trumps price. You cannot sell a terrible game for $5 faster than a great game will sell for $50 plus $15 a month.
Luxury Good:
Investopedia: "An item that is not necessary for living, but is deemed as highly-desired within a culture or society. The ability to purchase or finance a luxury item is directly proportionate to ones' income or assets. In other words, as people move into higher income brackets they are more able and more likely to purchase more expensive luxury goods.
Luxury items are also known as "positional goods" because they signal that the owner has achieved a certain position or status within society to be able to afford them."
Wikipedia: "Luxury goods are products and services that are not considered essential and are associated with affluence."
BusinessDictionary.com: "Products which are not necessary but which tend to make life more pleasant for the consumer. In contrast with necessity goods, luxury goods are typically more costly and are often bought by individuals that have a higher disposable income or greater accumulated wealth than the average."
All of them include the fact that they are typically reserved for those with greater income than average. There is nothing affluent about MMO prices, which means they are optional expenses but not luxury goods (services). You are wrong on this as well.
You keep trying to prove what has already been established and incorrect, and instead of helping your argument, you add more things you are incorrect about.
'Sandbox MMO' is a PTSD trigger word for anyone who has the experience to know that anonymous players invariably use a 'sandbox' in the same manner a housecat does.
When your head is stuck in the sand, your ass becomes the only recognizable part of you.
No game is more fun than the one you can't play, and no game is more boring than one which you've become familiar.
How to become a millionaire: Start with a billion dollars and make an MMO.
P2P model depends more on quality then F2P where prestige of big spenders having better or more exclusive things then you seems to matter most.
There are instances where raising the price of goods has increased sales. I think it was a vodka or vodka in general that raised its price and people thought it was better quality thus bought it. Many designer clothes are sold this way.
I am sure Microsoft will skyrocket sales of the XBOX 360 by lowering its price to $199.99
If you had some perfectly preserved beef from the time of mad cow disease, you would make a bundle selling it for $1.99 a pound instead of $6.99 a pound even if it is both fresh and healthy.
Why is the Galaxy S4 still the best selling smartphone when Samsung slashed the price of the S3 to 20% of retail?
Do some research and look up Salton Sea resort prices from the late 1950s.
Price drops do not universally increase sales. You are completely wrong in this. In the MMO industry game quality trumps price. You cannot sell a terrible game for $5 faster than a great game will sell for $50 plus $15 a month.
Luxury Good:
Investopedia: "An item that is not necessary for living, but is deemed as highly-desired within a culture or society. The ability to purchase or finance a luxury item is directly proportionate to ones' income or assets. In other words, as people move into higher income brackets they are more able and more likely to purchase more expensive luxury goods.
Luxury items are also known as "positional goods" because they signal that the owner has achieved a certain position or status within society to be able to afford them."
Wikipedia: "Luxury goods are products and services that are not considered essential and are associated with affluence."
BusinessDictionary.com: "Products which are not necessary but which tend to make life more pleasant for the consumer. In contrast with necessity goods, luxury goods are typically more costly and are often bought by individuals that have a higher disposable income or greater accumulated wealth than the average."
All of them include the fact that they are typically reserved for those with greater income than average. There is nothing affluent about MMO prices, which means they are optional expenses but not luxury goods (services). You are wrong on this as well.
You keep trying to prove what has already been established and incorrect, and instead of helping your argument, you add more things you are incorrect about.
A lot of what you're saying indicates you haven't been paying attention at all. Please read what's being said.
For example, I don't know where you got this "primary factor" nonsense. It's a factor, period. Sometimes it's the primary factor, sometimes not. But it's always a factor. It always matters to some degree, because nobody has infinite money to be able to afford the good at every price.
Another example, you somehow thought someone in this thread was saying a lower price is always the best price. Price always changes the number of people willing or able to make purchases, but lowering a price isn't universally the right choice. Nobody claimed that. Quite the opposite, I clearly stated my hunch is $7 wouldn't be worth it! (But that we don't have enough information to know for sure either way.)
Lastly, are you trying to imply that for the millions of people in the world living on or near the bread line MMORPG subscriptions are something they can easily afford? For many, possibly even most, it's a luxury good. It's something where the price prevents the product from getting into the hands of people who -- were they able to play -- would be interested in playing.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Comments
I think game design has much more to do with a game's prosperity than the pricing model. If FF was a game that offered any sandpark/sandbox type freedom I would be there in a second. However it is the same game we have all been playing since 2004. I wouldn't waste my time with it if it was free.
I will say the days of charge $60 and a sub should be coming to an end though. There is no game (currently released...not saying much though as they all pretty much suck) that I'm willing to sink $60 and a sub on. I would do $40 and a sub but that is pushing it.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
What it is a clear case of is changing the topic from MMORPG pricing to general goods pricing in an attempt to make your failing point more valid. This isn't a forum for discussing the price of corn. If you hadn't noticed, this is a topic about MMORPG pricing on an MMORPG website.
'Sandbox MMO' is a PTSD trigger word for anyone who has the experience to know that anonymous players invariably use a 'sandbox' in the same manner a housecat does.
When your head is stuck in the sand, your ass becomes the only recognizable part of you.
No game is more fun than the one you can't play, and no game is more boring than one which you've become familiar.
How to become a millionaire:
Start with a billion dollars and make an MMO.
At a higher price, goods sell less.
At a lower price, they sell more.
It really doesn't matter what scale the economy is, these are simple facts.
They're even more true of luxury goods (like entertainment, where if the price is too high you don't buy) than necessity goods (like food, where you would be willing to spend an extremely high price for the good.)
I'm a bit confused why you're arguing over this. This is high school economics stuff.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Depends on how you like to pay for your game and if the game is good or not. I prefer to pay per month because I look at the game as an entertainment service much like cable TV. I do not really do the whole buy what I want to watch as I go because I might miss something that I might not purchase that ends up really being entertaining.
Can't really say much for the F2P games as I do not even waste the worlds bandwidth to download them. I see them as designed for one thing and one thing only, to get me into the cash shop and buy something so they can pay people to research more of what other people will buy in cash shops.
I only played one B2P game, GW2 and really didn't think the game was worth the box price, should have just went F2P.
Edit:
Just re-read OP's post and would add you also pay more when something is new, like a car but as soon as you drive it off the lot it loses value. What you are asking though seems like you already don't buy new games and wait for them to drop in price 6 months later, I'm sure a lot of other people do the same thing but you miss out on the launch when everyone is pretty much new still and all have to learn at the same time. When you finally get around to playing the game there are already thousands of walk through and perfect build sites up that kind of take away from the fresh feeling of the game.
Life isn't black and white no matter how much you stamp your foot and bury your head in the sand.
There are variations to everything. Economics especially. What you can't seem to fathom is that they aren't hard and fast rules that can be applied blindly.
That much is clear.
'Sandbox MMO' is a PTSD trigger word for anyone who has the experience to know that anonymous players invariably use a 'sandbox' in the same manner a housecat does.
When your head is stuck in the sand, your ass becomes the only recognizable part of you.
No game is more fun than the one you can't play, and no game is more boring than one which you've become familiar.
How to become a millionaire:
Start with a billion dollars and make an MMO.
What about a $100/month subscription? Are you so convinced of your position that you believe that even if it cost $100, there would be the exact same number of subscribers?
I'm interested in exploring just how absurd a position you're willing to take on this.
How about a $10,000/month subscription?
...and then when you admit that at a certain point players will stop subscribing, we can begin walking back towards the obvious truth that even $15/month is too much for some players, and more players would subscribe at $7/mo than $15/mo.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I think what actualy hurts MMORPG's most is TOO much emphasis on pricing model as compared to the actual product they are selling. Pricing model matters a little bit. Actual price matters more but ultimately what matters most is producing a product that's good enough that people will want to spend money on it instead of the other products out there.
You can put lipstick on a pig and hang a "Kisses for Sale" sign over it....but whatever price or payment model you choose, ultimately you are still trying to get someone to pay you to kiss a pig.
If you have to stretch your post into the realm of pointless hyperbole, then you have no point.
The topic of this thread is $15 down to $7 and that level of change for the vested MMO player, will not matter.
Your last posts have been trying to alter the topic so it will make your point right, and that is an admission that you are wrong.
'Sandbox MMO' is a PTSD trigger word for anyone who has the experience to know that anonymous players invariably use a 'sandbox' in the same manner a housecat does.
When your head is stuck in the sand, your ass becomes the only recognizable part of you.
No game is more fun than the one you can't play, and no game is more boring than one which you've become familiar.
How to become a millionaire:
Start with a billion dollars and make an MMO.
So, having spent almost an hour reading this thread from page 1 to here, I have only 1 question. Where can I buy my $7 Maserati?
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
We're not talking about the vested player.
We're talking about all players. We're asking whether dropping the price would create enough new subscribers to be worth the drop in price.
And while we don't have enough information to say either way (although my hunch is "no it's not worth it"), we can certainly concede the reality that if the price drops, more players will subscribe to a game. Because that's how capitalism works, especially with luxury goods like game subscriptions.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I've already addressed this, previous page, first post... please keep up and read the posts to which you are 'replying'.
Part of the defining aspect of a luxury good is that they are associated with affluence.
There is nothing affluent about an MMO subscription.
Someone who actually fits this description...
Would know that... unless their only true economics experience is in-game economies and has deluded himself into thinking that real life economies aren't orders of magnitude more complex.
'Sandbox MMO' is a PTSD trigger word for anyone who has the experience to know that anonymous players invariably use a 'sandbox' in the same manner a housecat does.
When your head is stuck in the sand, your ass becomes the only recognizable part of you.
No game is more fun than the one you can't play, and no game is more boring than one which you've become familiar.
How to become a millionaire:
Start with a billion dollars and make an MMO.
Death is nothing to us, since when we are, Death has not come, and when death has come, we are not.
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
I am of mixed feeling in that I think the publishers are demanding we pay too much for downright shit MMORPGs. Frankly most of them in recent times simply haven’t been worth the bill for the entertainment provided and I hate writing that. However, I will pay a premium for a quality game without complaint every time. HALO 3, GTA IV, Half Life 2, Skyrim... I bought them at release for full price and never had one regret. Still play them sometimes. But I can’t think of one MMORPG that was worth it over the past few years much less with a sub on top. Sure GW2 was fun for a little while but once I was done with it I never looked back.
Honestly, for a good MMO I'd pay $20 bucks without a blink of an eye. I don't understand how $15.00 is a problem for some. If it is, get a job. If you have a job and $15.00 for an entire month's worth of entertainment (assuming its a decent MMO) is an issue, then you need a new job or to get your priorities together lol.
For me the previous page is the first page.
It doesn't matter though. The question is whether the pricing model is hurting MMORPGs, which implies we're talking about all potential subscribers of MMORPGs (which includes players who would additionally buy them if they knew the subscription was lower.)
Being associated with affluence doesn't mean that's the definition of a luxury good is affluence. The definition of a luxury good is it's not essential.
Games are not essential. You could live without them. As prices increase (or buying power drops), luxury items like game subscription are some of the first things people cut back on, because they're luxury items and not essential. So price matters more with luxury goods than necessity goods.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I have a paper route I am unconcerned with the price of a game. It is miniscule compared to the price of my bike, the cost of my lawnmower (I cut lawns too) and the cost of gasoline.
I think all real online MMORPGs should be $70 ~ $500 a year.
If somehow you are worried about $15 bucks off a game, or a promo.. then chances are you need to ask for a bigger allowance, or do more house chores.
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
-Nariusseldon
No.. then more people CAN afford it.
If a nice moist turd cost $600 bucks... would you buy it? OK, what if that was reduced to $6 bucks..?
Only children and adolescent youth spend habitually on $7 turds... (convincing themselves it isn't a turd)
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
-Nariusseldon
This has nothing to do with how much subs cost compared to this and that or that I should probably get a better job if I have hard time to afford it.
Warren Buffett, one of the richest men in the world still lives in his regular house from 40+ years ago. It's about being responsible person and making wise decisions, something I did far less when I was a child. It's true many are carelessly spending $ on whatever comes and it is the reason why we've seen more MMO's now than ever, but the quality on most has drasticly reduced from what I've played before.
WOW 5.4 will come in 3 days and it's no doubt the most expensive MMORPG on the market and I will play it, but because other MMORPG's are asking the same (or close) paying $30-45 a month for multiple MMORPG's surely gets expensive and I won't have the time to fully enjoy them so there is surely no reason to support multiple MMORPG's for the time being.
So yes, I'm certain because of the pricing model many MMORPG's have missed opportunities to take $ from me and will continue to do so apparently.
If cost is always the primary factor in sales...
I am sure Microsoft will skyrocket sales of the XBOX 360 by lowering its price to $199.99
If you had some perfectly preserved beef from the time of mad cow disease, you would make a bundle selling it for $1.99 a pound instead of $6.99 a pound even if it is both fresh and healthy.
Why is the Galaxy S4 still the best selling smartphone when Samsung slashed the price of the S3 to 20% of retail?
Do some research and look up Salton Sea resort prices from the late 1950s.
Price drops do not universally increase sales. You are completely wrong in this. In the MMO industry game quality trumps price. You cannot sell a terrible game for $5 faster than a great game will sell for $50 plus $15 a month.
Luxury Good:
Investopedia: "An item that is not necessary for living, but is deemed as highly-desired within a culture or society. The ability to purchase or finance a luxury item is directly proportionate to ones' income or assets. In other words, as people move into higher income brackets they are more able and more likely to purchase more expensive luxury goods.
Luxury items are also known as "positional goods" because they signal that the owner has achieved a certain position or status within society to be able to afford them."
Wikipedia: "Luxury goods are products and services that are not considered essential and are associated with affluence."
BusinessDictionary.com: "Products which are not necessary but which tend to make life more pleasant for the consumer. In contrast with necessity goods, luxury goods are typically more costly and are often bought by individuals that have a higher disposable income or greater accumulated wealth than the average."
All of them include the fact that they are typically reserved for those with greater income than average. There is nothing affluent about MMO prices, which means they are optional expenses but not luxury goods (services). You are wrong on this as well.
You keep trying to prove what has already been established and incorrect, and instead of helping your argument, you add more things you are incorrect about.
'Sandbox MMO' is a PTSD trigger word for anyone who has the experience to know that anonymous players invariably use a 'sandbox' in the same manner a housecat does.
When your head is stuck in the sand, your ass becomes the only recognizable part of you.
No game is more fun than the one you can't play, and no game is more boring than one which you've become familiar.
How to become a millionaire:
Start with a billion dollars and make an MMO.
This is a pretty illogical ad hominem attack but lets see how far down the rabbit hole we can go.
If a Ferrari cost $6, would people buy more Ferrari's? Yes? So... logic?
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
There are instances where raising the price of goods has increased sales. I think it was a vodka or vodka in general that raised its price and people thought it was better quality thus bought it. Many designer clothes are sold this way.
A lot of what you're saying indicates you haven't been paying attention at all. Please read what's being said.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
-Nariusseldon