Umm, I do think we should keep comparisons 1:1 though. Both NWN and Guild Wars are both instance-type games, not really full blown MMOs. Guild Wars has an MMO type "meeting ground", but the gameplay is all instanced.. NWN isn't even in the same ballpark. They don't have the server resources or architectural requirements of a truly persistent MMO, nor is it possible to have the same scale of gameplay. For better or for worse, we are making a truly persistent MMO, in every respect.

Additionally:

NWN2: no mac port, no linux port.

Guild Wars: no mac port, no linux port.

WoW: no official linux port that I have heard of.

BioSfear: no mac port, no linux port.

Vendetta Online: Windows, Mac and Linux support.

Owning a mac implies that I've got money to spare anyways. What's really neat about VO is that it's free. Somehow it adds to the roleplaying aspect in that any time I can just sign up for my pilot's license ($9.99/month) and brave the cosmos. There's no fee to exist. =D

I got a mac... no money to spare though ;)

i know that they don't have a mac port, but in all honesty these mac ports and linux ports are there to attract extra clientele (an extra selling + marketing point of view) not to drive up the price or am i wrong in this? Nor do i use the max or linux port so to me if it was part of the price it wouldn't be worth that extra buck.

persistent worlds:
http://nwn.bioware.com/players/profile_persistent_worlds_introduction.html
http://nwn.bioware.com/players/profile_wheel_of_time_p2.html

tops out at 50 - 55 players on weekends and it is free.

My point remains, stating that this is not comparable is bs seeing as if i'm playing GW, or biosfear or nwn2 i'm not playing vendetta and that in some way will determine your pricesetting. It is also the reason why i haven't been on for ages... or maybe i just outgrew mmos due to real life reasons i don't know.

I'd pay extra if they asked me to, or if I thought that it would help make the game better.

Incarnate said: If we were to change to $4.99, and didn't double our userbase in one month, we would go under.

Erm, cutting it kinda close, aren't ya, Inc? That statement's... depressing.

We've been cutting it close since we started. The fact that we're here is nothing short of a goddamn miracle. So, we do what we can, walking the fine line of "must fix game and make better!" along with "don't want to advertise too much while game is not yet better" along with "must not go out of business". It's exciting.

Anyway, I don't mean to depress anyone or imply that we may vanish tomorrow. If anything, we've been more stable since we've launched, because a lot of you are really solid about supporting us. But, I did mean to explain that I'm not in a position to experiment with the business model right now. We're alive, we're here, and we're working towards what I think is a realistic and relatively short-term goal fixing our game to what it should be, and then hopefully getting some more users. That is our focus (regardless of recent commentary on our development priorities).

Anyway, this thread is about pricing, and "value" is really in the eye of the beholder.. comparisons become kind of vague and irrelevant anyway, since it's up to the individual. If people think our game has that value, then that's cool. If not, well, that's ok too. Hopefully we'll continue to find enough people who do think so, and continue being able to add value to the game until it's no longer a question in anyone's mind. I think that's a worthy goal.

Yeah, hopefully the priorities are like this:
1. Must Not Go Out Of Business
2. Must Fix Game And Make Better
3. Don't Advertise Too Much While Game Is Not Better
4. Cater to Complaining A-Holes