Yea 24$ a year is pretty reasonable assuming the game is as good as I hope it will be. I am not a huge fan of the freemium model so this should make everyone pretty equal.
Yea 24$ a year is pretty reasonable assuming the game is as good as I hope it will be. I am not a huge fan of the freemium model so this should make everyone pretty equal.
We aren't huge fans either. We spent a lot of time analyzing our costs and tried to determine what was the lowest we could go, while being able to pay for hardware, bandwidth, overhead etc.. We came up with the $2/mth. Compared to how easy it is to spend a ton of money on a freemium game, only to end up being bested by someone what was willing to spend more money, which forces you to spend more.. etc.. quickly becomes a vicious cycle.Originally Posted by Trom
The other thing is it seems like so many freemium games have no real end point.. Once you end up with several guys on top because they spent a huge sum of money it's impossible to beat them. For most of us here it was a frustrating model for a game. We wanted to play a game that was based on skill, not who was willing to spend more. I guess it's one of those fundamental philosophies..
Sure you can lose in the game, just like you can in Civ, Moo, StarCraft, WarCraft etc... hopefully people want to play again to get better at the game, and then perhaps have a shot at winning themselves.. At least you know if you lose, you can figure out what you did wrong, and improve on your game play for the next game. Rather than know you lost a ton of stuff because some guy spent $50.
That's what beta is all about.. See what the players think of the game, and if there is anything they think might make the game better so we can improve the play mechanics and the experience for them.
Just some thoughts..
Reply With Quote
