Forums » Suggestions
I'd pay it. Not sure I'd go with multiple accounts though. But now that we have lost the apl, multiple accounts is less necessary.
Blah. You're killing me Fluffy. The reason I can keep my sub active even when I'm not active is the low price.
heh. This post was in jest as a response to the $5.99 thread. I'd still be willing to pay it, but I think the game needs further development before it could honestly justify that price.
As a subject of curiosity though, I would seriously be interested in seeing what impact raising the price $5 or $10 would have on the game. I mean seriously, how long has the cost been $9.99 and not adjusted for inflation?
As a subject of curiosity though, I would seriously be interested in seeing what impact raising the price $5 or $10 would have on the game. I mean seriously, how long has the cost been $9.99 and not adjusted for inflation?
Considering Eve is $14.99, and they have a current promotion on for $9.99 for the first month, I'm assuming the impact would likely be significantly negative. Whether or not you like Eve's gameplay or not, I don't think VO could really compare in terms of value if the price was raised.
A quick calculation shows that for the UK an index linked cost of about 13 usd /month would be reasonable.
Yes, I would pay it.
Yes, I would pay it.
I'd tie an increase to the time one had been a paying subscriber: after a year, kick the account cost up to $12.99/mo, with the same bulk % discounts. Kick it again to $14.99 after 24 subscribed months.
We're willing to pay it. Those with less invested in the game will either leave before the rate increases kick in anyway, or start over with a new account and characters.
We're willing to pay it. Those with less invested in the game will either leave before the rate increases kick in anyway, or start over with a new account and characters.
Considering Eve is $14.99, and they have a current promotion on for $9.99 for the first month, I'm assuming the impact would likely be significantly negative. Whether or not you like Eve's gameplay or not, I don't think VO could really compare in terms of value if the price was raised.
Actually, if you look at the deal being offered, it's still $14.99 -- you pay $9.99 to create the account, and then a $5.00 "activation fee."
No actual sale there, just marketing spin. :)
Actually, if you look at the deal being offered, it's still $14.99 -- you pay $9.99 to create the account, and then a $5.00 "activation fee."
No actual sale there, just marketing spin. :)
I'd tie an increase to the time one had been a paying subscriber: after a year, kick the account cost up to $12.99/mo, with the same bulk % discounts. Kick it again to $14.99 after 24 subscribed months.
Financially punishing loyal customers. Now why hasn't the rest of the entire world caught on to such a brilliant idea? You missed your calling, you should have been in marketing.
Seriously though, if people want to pay more, put your money where your mouths are. Setting up a "donations" box would be simple enough. Would be better for all. Guild gets extra money, and they don't have to try and sell prospective customers on a scheme that goes against pretty much every other business model out there.
Financially punishing loyal customers. Now why hasn't the rest of the entire world caught on to such a brilliant idea? You missed your calling, you should have been in marketing.
Seriously though, if people want to pay more, put your money where your mouths are. Setting up a "donations" box would be simple enough. Would be better for all. Guild gets extra money, and they don't have to try and sell prospective customers on a scheme that goes against pretty much every other business model out there.
haha lecter be trollin
You ever tried renewing a lease, Gav?
Your investment in VO is not portable, and after a certain point in time is probably worth more to you than it was early on. Charging more is eminently reasonable.
Your investment in VO is not portable, and after a certain point in time is probably worth more to you than it was early on. Charging more is eminently reasonable.
and that way you weed out the life-timers, who, instead of playing the game, can then use all their time in the more important forums:)
Charging more is eminently reasonable
While reasonable, it does not make good advertising. Guild is in the entertainment business.
While reasonable, it does not make good advertising. Guild is in the entertainment business.
Charging anything is, as we've seen, also not "good advertising."
Next time, please rub your two lonely little neurons together for a bit longer before gracing the thread with your presence.
Next time, please rub your two lonely little neurons together for a bit longer before gracing the thread with your presence.
Like I said Lecter, you missed your calling. You could usher in a new era of brutal honesty in marketing. Don't let the nay sayers keep you down man! You may starve to death, and all the companies who do hire you will probably fail miserably, but hey, innovation's never kind to those first out of the gate.
Honestly though, the more I think about the donation thing, the more it seems like a "why the hell not" idea. I wonder if it would cause more of a headache for Guild's accounting than it would be worth?
Honestly though, the more I think about the donation thing, the more it seems like a "why the hell not" idea. I wonder if it would cause more of a headache for Guild's accounting than it would be worth?
Trolling fail Lecter. Did you not get enough sleep last night?
Why doesn't VO offer first month for 4.99 or something. Either way it would bring in more people.
We do key-based promos every few months, where we give away half a month or more for free.
I know this thread is intended mostly as a joke, but the issue isn't really price (as I see it). More one of exposure. And gaining exposure, without spending money, is challenging. We're pursuing about 10 different things to try and raise our profile this year, but it isn't easy.
I know this thread is intended mostly as a joke, but the issue isn't really price (as I see it). More one of exposure. And gaining exposure, without spending money, is challenging. We're pursuing about 10 different things to try and raise our profile this year, but it isn't easy.
yea a price hike might force me to drop a subscription, though that wouldn't really hurt much.
Does anyone seriously believe that Ecka wouldn't shell out $14.99 US/month - or more - for his now-invested little existence?
You want to fully price to each individual customer's cost/benefit inflection point. The only real question is how do you do that without triggering the human animal's irrational 'it's unfair so I won't play' response. Or you can go for accuracy by volume as Inc. suggests above. When that works, it's fine, since the model doesn't have to be as efficiently priced. That's not VO, which could benefit from more efficient pricing.
You want to fully price to each individual customer's cost/benefit inflection point. The only real question is how do you do that without triggering the human animal's irrational 'it's unfair so I won't play' response. Or you can go for accuracy by volume as Inc. suggests above. When that works, it's fine, since the model doesn't have to be as efficiently priced. That's not VO, which could benefit from more efficient pricing.
Does anyone seriously believe that Ecka wouldn't shell out $14.99 US/month - or more - for his now-invested little existence?
No one is saying that. What we're saying is LNH and others WOULD drop their subs. Moreover, it would also not make new subs happy, as they know that soon the game will cost more. The marketing is horrid. While it might be a good lending practice, it is a seriously foul game marketing practice. And probably more than anything, this game needs marketing/exposure/etc... so suggestion fail.
No one is saying that. What we're saying is LNH and others WOULD drop their subs. Moreover, it would also not make new subs happy, as they know that soon the game will cost more. The marketing is horrid. While it might be a good lending practice, it is a seriously foul game marketing practice. And probably more than anything, this game needs marketing/exposure/etc... so suggestion fail.