Zandil said:
Kilsin said:
Zandil said:
If Pantheon charged $20-$25 a month would you need to charge for Xpacs or would the Sub cover that cost ?
For arguments sake, let's just say $20/mo just covered the subscription and expacs were extra since they are very time consuming and a lot of work and effort goes into them plus they are not regular, they are expansions of the original game.
I would be happy to pay $20 for a sub and $XX amount for Xpacs as long as the game is worth the money. I guess my question is how much would people pay per month in a sub if the sub included all future content and patches ? could a sub, lets say $50 bucks or under sustain such a game and all future xpacs in a sub of this amount ?
Would players be prepared to pay sub up around the $50 if it was all inclusive of future updates ?
That's a good question, I know a lot of companies make a ton of revenue from "Season Passes" or "All Access passes" which are purchased prior to the game or with the purchase of the game and cover usually 1 year of content (Consoles do this a lot too) and it saves you having to buy any expacs, you just download and go once they are released, doing it this way gives you like a 10-15% discount over purchasing the expacs individually.
I can see how it would work for MMORPGs too but it would be interesting to see how people reacted to it. It is basically like a 1 year sub but was more expensive and includes content updates/Expansion packs. I am not sure what that prive would be for it to work but it is an interesting idea mate.
Aradune said:
It's definitely an interesting topic. I always hesitate to reply because I don't want to look like a money-grabber or something, but what if we did charge $20 or $25 a month AND we also used that income to give you guys a better experience and a deeper world and *more* content? We could do monthly updates that would have a lot more to them -- same with full Expansions every 9-12 months. Would Pantheon's target audience want this?
-----
Yes, but $25/mo would most likely be my max per month. Though I would like to see a portion of an increased sub fee going towards something such as an active GM team to host events, deal with in-game issues, and maybe just run around and RP or jump in and have some fun with the player base
edited for format
Theres also a reason why most people don't blow money on Starbucks coffee. While its popular, I'm going to go out on a limb and guess less than 1% of people who drink coffee every day drink Starbucks.
I work in an Airport and in the food court there are two coffee stands that are literally 10 steps from each other. One is a Starbucks and the other is something else. The Starbucks line is almost always 5 times longer. Its funny to see one line with 2 people in it why the other has like 15 in it. In fact if I stand in just the right spot I can see two Starbucks.
To the point of including expansion pack within the sub price is something Eve has been doing for a decade. They are generally smaller then a full fledge expansion pack but they seem to come along more often.
It is also a huge misnomer that giving a (any) company more money means they will re invest the extra profits directly back into their own product
Kilsin said:
Niien said:
Zandil said:
If Pantheon charged $20-$25 a month would you need to charge for Xpacs or would the Sub cover that cost ?
That's a good question. Usually the sub is only to keep the current game going. I think Brad and team would need to tell us what we could expect from the extra cash coming in. Though I originally started this thread due to doubts that our small community could give enough money to keep the game going. So I was thinking if we paid more... less people had to play to keep it going.
Does there need to be more to justify a small increase?
We cannot tell you what it involves because this is just discussion that you started and we want to get your opinion, we have not planned to raise the price we are just using hypertheticals to continue the discussion in your thread.
Do you feel that you need to see more for say a $20 sub fee?
Personally I would be fine paying $20 without seeing anything new, as long as the game was supported properly and had VG-like GMs to help with any tickets and in game problems plus regular bug fixing and updates as required I would be fine with a $5/mo increase, especially knowing it helps a small team, I may have a problem if it was someone like EA or Blizzard asking unless it was to eliminate Free to Play or a Cash Shop, then I would throw money at any company no matter their size.
This is where it usually gets tricky. From experience(i'd say at least 4 or 5 mmos worth) I've thought the same thing, If this is good enough I wouldn't mind spending up to say 20 bucks. But the issue is with the "No new content". For users to be ok with not recieving new content. There has to be enough content for them to enjoy for months between expansions. I can't tell you the games where all the focus was put strictly into lore, or voice acting. And once people ding'd max level, there was absolutely nothing to do besides level another character. This IMO is not worth even $15 bucks. There is a point the game needs to cross to distinguish itself from a Singleplayer/Online RPG to a MMORPG.
Kilsin said:
That is my point though and you used my example of a multi million dollar company vs a small indie developer. Starbucks mass produces and go for quantity to make their profit, where as a small business owner who ran one coffee shop would not produce anywhere near the quantity but could provide that extra quality and service if they charged a small amount more and you know the money would be going directly to them and their business which would help them improve.
We are tasked with this decision everyday in life, either support the big guy or support the little guy who usually struggles among the big guy's to make a living, I personally choose the little guy 90% of the time because I know my money is going directly to that person and their store, even if I have to pay a little more, I usually get better/friendlier service and can speak to the person serving me who is usually the owner too.
We also need to remove the $50 option as that would be extremely unlikely but was used as an exaggerated example. I am not made of money by any means but I personally think $30 would be absolutely fine in this day and age for a whole month of 24/7 entertainment knowing that my money was supporting a small but dedicated, talented and passionate team, rather than a faceless multi million dollar corporation who only cares about the bottom dollar.
I understand where you and Xonth are both coming from and I don't think it's a matter of choosing sides or that anyone is right or wrong, I just think you are both looking at it from the wrong perspective, you get what you pay for but in small business it goes to the people you usually deal with and in this case (VRI), the more the team gets, the more we can do. We already have a niche product that many will want to play and as long as we can produce a quality game we will keep those people, since we are basing our revenue model on subscriptions though (also requested by our target audience), that is where we will be looking to when we need money to support, upgrade, produce expansions, pay the bills/wages etc. the more there, the better the quality and the more of it, if it's not there, then it's not there, simple as that.
Kilsin - I've been busy here.. so sorry for the delay in responding. And I'm not trying to argue for arguments sake either :).
It's true I did use Starbucks, but I could have just as easily used any local Ma and Pa Breakfast/Coffee shop and could easily find coffees for 3 dollars or less. I get your point and oftentimes, there are gigantic superstores like Wal-Mart that reduce prices by buying mass quantities of product in bulk, but, big chains don't always equate to cheaper prices. I can get a cup of coffee at many places (Local owned) nearby me of similar/better quality to a Starbucks for equal price or cheaper. I do get your point though that typically a local business has to charge more to compete with the major players. Another counterpoint to this though is that even companies like Starbucks started small, with cheaper products, and obviously continually raised prices once people were hooked/addicted and the brand was well-known, liked, and advertised (the strategy that I would hope Pantheon would copy).
And, you're little guy argument I agree with 100% - I would much prefer to support the local business/indie/niche market than a chain/superstore; however, comparing a local business to Pantheon is a bit different. Currently, the team is a 100% grassroots, indie development team with 100% creative freedom (basically a 100% local business), but funding could come in from a significant investor that could change that development structure and it has been said multiple times that funding is being sought after with crowd funding still appreciated, accepted and needed - but it is not the sole source being sought after. So, while today it is 100% grassroots, it comes with a disclaimer that the 100% grassroots effort could be subject to change (not saying this is a bad thing, it's just the truth). This would make me think Starbucks basically buying the local coffee shop or at least being a 75/25 or a 50/50 partner. Even if the investor were to come in and say you could have 100% creative freedom to produce a niche game (which I hope happens), I would still say that's much different at that point.
And, your point on the $30 dollars not being a lot of money is true, and many (if not most) could easily afford it and I have discussed/agreed with this before as well - but it is a lot of money comparatively to any other subscription MMO available - and it's the principle of paying $30/month for a game. Much more will be expected at a $30 dollar price point than at a $15 dollar. And regardless if Pantheon is marketed as Niche and Grassroots, etc. the market still determines price points, and even with surveys collected, there's no proof truly that a group of gamers would be willing to pay $30/month until you were to just try it out. Surveys don't equate to subscriptions and the demand may be there, but it would be a risk. And, I'm not saying Pantheon couldn't be a trend setter and it be 100% successful at $30/month - I just think it would be easier to start at an accepted $15, and once the promises are delivered on and people are addicted - raise it at that point (see Starbucks above). It would be better to exceed expectations by under-promising and over-delivering than over-promising and under-delivering.
I'll leave it at a hypothetical example that I see playing out at $30/month, and obviously, this is just my opinion.
Scenario A: $15/month. Release has some bugs, crafting is so-so at launch, and there's a lot of crashing - but the potential can be seen. Player A states, "Man this crashing and bugs suck." Player B, "Yeah, they do, but Pantheon has so much potential and this game was made with an indie development team - so a little slack needs to occur." Player A says, "Yeah - that's true, hopefully they can be fixed quick."
Scenario B: $30/month. Release has some bugs, crafting is so-so at launch, and there's a lot of crashing - but the potential can be seen. Player A states, "Man this crashing and bugs suck." Player B says, "Yeah, they do, but Pantheon has so much potential and this game was made with an indie development team - so some slack needs to be cut." Player B says, "Forget the slack, I'm paying more for this monthly subscription than 2 MMOs - for this price the game should be running perfect."
Then.. Scenario B goes to forum boards and discusses issues, forums state at $30/month forget that crap, I'll play XYZ instead until it runs perfect/content is added, etc. etc. and who knows if that player base will return
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Disclaimer: I want the game/team to be successful and if $30/month is what needs to be tried in order for it to make that happen and pay the bills, then by all means, go for it. Until I'm told to shut up and accept it - t's going to be $30/month - I'm just voicing opinions :).
Raidan said:
Kilsin said:
That is my point though and you used my example of a multi million dollar company vs a small indie developer. Starbucks mass produces and go for quantity to make their profit, where as a small business owner who ran one coffee shop would not produce anywhere near the quantity but could provide that extra quality and service if they charged a small amount more and you know the money would be going directly to them and their business which would help them improve.
We are tasked with this decision everyday in life, either support the big guy or support the little guy who usually struggles among the big guy's to make a living, I personally choose the little guy 90% of the time because I know my money is going directly to that person and their store, even if I have to pay a little more, I usually get better/friendlier service and can speak to the person serving me who is usually the owner too.
We also need to remove the $50 option as that would be extremely unlikely but was used as an exaggerated example. I am not made of money by any means but I personally think $30 would be absolutely fine in this day and age for a whole month of 24/7 entertainment knowing that my money was supporting a small but dedicated, talented and passionate team, rather than a faceless multi million dollar corporation who only cares about the bottom dollar.
I understand where you and Xonth are both coming from and I don't think it's a matter of choosing sides or that anyone is right or wrong, I just think you are both looking at it from the wrong perspective, you get what you pay for but in small business it goes to the people you usually deal with and in this case (VRI), the more the team gets, the more we can do. We already have a niche product that many will want to play and as long as we can produce a quality game we will keep those people, since we are basing our revenue model on subscriptions though (also requested by our target audience), that is where we will be looking to when we need money to support, upgrade, produce expansions, pay the bills/wages etc. the more there, the better the quality and the more of it, if it's not there, then it's not there, simple as that.
Kilsin - I've been busy here.. so sorry for the delay in responding. And I'm not trying to argue for arguments sake either :).
It's true I did use Starbucks, but I could have just as easily used any local Ma and Pa Breakfast/Coffee shop and could easily find coffees for 3 dollars or less. I get your point and oftentimes, there are gigantic superstores like Wal-Mart that reduce prices by buying mass quantities of product in bulk, but, big chains don't always equate to cheaper prices. I can get a cup of coffee at many places (Local owned) nearby me of similar/better quality to a Starbucks for equal price or cheaper. I do get your point though that typically a local business has to charge more to compete with the major players. Another counterpoint to this though is that even companies like Starbucks started small, with cheaper products, and obviously continually raised prices once people were hooked/addicted and the brand was well-known, liked, and advertised (the strategy that I would hope Pantheon would copy).
And, you're little guy argument I agree with 100% - I would much prefer to support the local business/indie/niche market than a chain/superstore; however, comparing a local business to Pantheon is a bit different. Currently, the team is a 100% grassroots, indie development team with 100% creative freedom (basically a 100% local business), but funding could come in from a significant investor that could change that development structure and it has been said multiple times that funding is being sought after with crowd funding still appreciated, accepted and needed - but it is not the sole source being sought after. So, while today it is 100% grassroots, it comes with a disclaimer that the 100% grassroots effort could be subject to change (not saying this is a bad thing, it's just the truth). This would make me think Starbucks basically buying the local coffee shop or at least being a 75/25 or a 50/50 partner. Even if the investor were to come in and say you could have 100% creative freedom to produce a niche game (which I hope happens), I would still say that's much different at that point.
And, your point on the $30 dollars not being a lot of money is true, and many (if not most) could easily afford it and I have discussed/agreed with this before as well - but it is a lot of money comparatively to any other subscription MMO available - and it's the principle of paying $30/month for a game. Much more will be expected at a $30 dollar price point than at a $15 dollar. And regardless if Pantheon is marketed as Niche and Grassroots, etc. the market still determines price points, and even with surveys collected, there's no proof truly that a group of gamers would be willing to pay $30/month until you were to just try it out. Surveys don't equate to subscriptions and the demand may be there, but it would be a risk. And, I'm not saying Pantheon couldn't be a trend setter and it be 100% successful at $30/month - I just think it would be easier to start at an accepted $15, and once the promises are delivered on and people are addicted - raise it at that point (see Starbucks above). It would be better to exceed expectations by under-promising and over-delivering than over-promising and under-delivering.
I'll leave it at a hypothetical example that I see playing out at $30/month, and obviously, this is just my opinion.
Scenario A: $15/month. Release has some bugs, crafting is so-so at launch, and there's a lot of crashing - but the potential can be seen. Player A states, "Man this crashing and bugs suck." Player B, "Yeah, they do, but Pantheon has so much potential and this game was made with an indie development team - so a little slack needs to occur." Player A says, "Yeah - that's true, hopefully they can be fixed quick."
Scenario B: $30/month. Release has some bugs, crafting is so-so at launch, and there's a lot of crashing - but the potential can be seen. Player A states, "Man this crashing and bugs suck." Player B says, "Yeah, they do, but Pantheon has so much potential and this game was made with an indie development team - so some slack needs to be cut." Player B says, "Forget the slack, I'm paying more for this monthly subscription than 2 MMOs - for this price the game should be running perfect."
Then.. Scenario B goes to forum boards and discusses issues, forums state at $30/month forget that crap, I'll play XYZ instead until it runs perfect/content is added, etc. etc. and who knows if that player base will return
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Disclaimer: I want the game/team to be successful and if $30/month is what needs to be tried in order for it to make that happen and pay the bills, then by all means, go for it. Until I'm told to shut up and accept it - t's going to be $30/month - I'm just voicing opinions :).
No problem at all man, I do not think I have the answer by any means, I am just trying to get you both (and everyone else) to think from a different point of view for conversations sake as Pantheon is in a different situation than most gaming companies ;)
We are seeking investors and if that happens, it will help us initially with staffing, software, game development etc. but the game still needs to live on for many years to come and we need to show that we can support the game and return on their investment, which is why I am looking more to the future when we release the game and need to live off the subscription model, this is where companies say no cash shop and try to do the right thing then realise the subscription just isn't enough and they scramble to implement some other source of revenue, we have all seen it before and I am trying to think ahead and avoid that with Pantheon if possible.
Thanks for the reply and your thoughts mate.
Kilsin said:
Niien said:
Zandil said:
If Pantheon charged $20-$25 a month would you need to charge for Xpacs or would the Sub cover that cost ?
That's a good question. Usually the sub is only to keep the current game going. I think Brad and team would need to tell us what we could expect from the extra cash coming in. Though I originally started this thread due to doubts that our small community could give enough money to keep the game going. So I was thinking if we paid more... less people had to play to keep it going.
Does there need to be more to justify a small increase?
We cannot tell you what it involves because this is just discussion that you started and we want to get your opinion, we have not planned to raise the price we are just using hypertheticals to continue the discussion in your thread.
Do you feel that you need to see more for say a $20 sub fee?
Personally I would be fine paying $20 without seeing anything new, as long as the game was supported properly and had VG-like GMs to help with any tickets and in game problems plus regular bug fixing and updates as required I would be fine with a $5/mo increase, especially knowing it helps a small team, I may have a problem if it was someone like EA or Blizzard asking unless it was to eliminate Free to Play or a Cash Shop, then I would throw money at any company no matter their size.
No, I would definitely pay more just to have a game very similar to EQ, so I'm not looking for a ton of extras, though I believe I said it on mmorpg and I will say it here. As soon as I see the money going to line the pockets of the upper management and not being distributed between the creators and improving the game itself... I will stop paying.
I would however like to see the customer service side of the house come back if possible. Meaning GMs like you stated, someone I can actually call if needed for account issues etc.
Has anyone considered the number of subs lost(never gained) by raising the sub over the current MMO sub norms? I don't even know if it's possible to determine how many under 18 would be told by their parents, "I'm not paying more, especially 120 dollars a year more, for a game which is the same as the one your are currently playing (and buying expacs also).
Because of the above, I would be reluctant to raise the sub fee. It's a gamble. There is no real way of knowing whether the raised sub fee would cover the loss of subs never gained, or lost, prior to actually doing it. Also, the increase actually needs to substantially cover the loss of subs, because otherwise why in the world would you want less people playing and more people (parents) telling their friends (children) "It's too expensive".
I think current EQ players are a prime target for Pantheon subs. At a sub rate equal to or above the all-access rate ($15 a month) and paying for only one game, it's possible the percentage of players moving to Pantheon could be much smaller. There just isn't a way to tell for certain.
This (somewhat older) thread popped up on my front page so I'll add my two cents on the subject(I read all the responses, well skimmed them all at least!);
The critical part of marketing yourself as a niche product is to differentiate yourself from the competition in a way that it is uneconomical for the bigger guys to copy. If I were a local coffee shop trying to differentiate myself, the last thing I'd want to do is provide the same product and atmosphere as Starbucks. I'd differentiate. I'd have live entertainment, singing baristas, classic arcade games, allow pets, a tablet computer on every table, or some hook that would set me apart enough to make my target crowd come to me, but too niche for Starbucks to copy. The point is you make it so you can't compare Pantheon to Wow, or to current EQ, on a price basis because the aren't the same thing. If Pantheon is successful in differentiating itself from the competition then you can't compare them and the question becomes: what price can I charge for my one-of-a-kind product.
The whole point of being niche is that people can't go somewhere else to get your product, so you have a captive audience and you can charge a premium for your service. If playing Pantheon is a different enough experience then I think at least some subset of the market will deem a $30 subscription worth it. The point is to make it difficult to compare current subscription norms because your product is outside the current norms.
As for the subscription being a barrier to trying it out, I think the original plan of making it free to play the first few levels is plenty enough encouragement to get people to try it out. However, in those levels you have to show your target audience that Pantheon is something different from other tiles out there.
I usually play with my best friend and his wife. they both always play together as well.
that mean 60$ for their account, as they are "poor" they won't be able to play Pantheon with me.
remember this will be the case for all couple who want to play together -> 60$ (if it is 30$ for each account)
I would be comfortable paying more, but I would hope any consideration for this would be at a later date, after release, and after the game gets it's base established. More importantly, after initial interest is solidified, turning potential players away for the sake of starting with a higher monthly price (on a game genre that requires numbers usually to survive, and more-so on a niche version of the genre that requires grouping) seems kind of foolish in my opinion.
I personally believe with 15/mo, the game will find the niche market, and then potentially explode past that - all depending on what the current market has for other options of mmo's. Basically promising a great experience/adventure to anyone who is willing to give it a try - times 10 if they bring some friends with them to go for the journey.
For what it's worth, I'd caution having an expectation/amount needed to function as a company, and then a time frame set to see if you meet those requirements. If you see steady increases in the player population on release, coverage, word of mouth, etc, then consider not upping the price. But if you don't see the numbers you need, then revisit the subject. I'd wager the ones wanting the niche will still be around, and the majority would be willing to pay for keeping what they have gotten a taste of.
i think that $20 - $25 per month and $40+ per expansion is something that would not scare away players wanting to try a new game, a different type of game.
even if the expansions cost more it would be fine especially if once you got 3 expansions out then the first expansion would come free with purchase of the game.
Kazingathi said:
More is fine, just have to watch how much more. Even though I am purple and have life time sub, I will still probably give more money to support this game and cause. 20-25 doesn't sound to bad.
What pledge levels get life time sub? I checked the levels and I saw no life time sub listed.
Aich said:
Kazingathi said:
More is fine, just have to watch how much more. Even though I am purple and have life time sub, I will still probably give more money to support this game and cause. 20-25 doesn't sound to bad.
What pledge levels get life time sub? I checked the levels and I saw no life time sub listed.
Lifetime subscriptions were killed a month or two back. Game is becoming too well known, they need to have somebody paying in the future...
Chimerical said:
Aich said:
Kazingathi said:
More is fine, just have to watch how much more. Even though I am purple and have life time sub, I will still probably give more money to support this game and cause. 20-25 doesn't sound to bad.
What pledge levels get life time sub? I checked the levels and I saw no life time sub listed.
Lifetime subscriptions were killed a month or two back. Game is becoming too well known, they need to have somebody paying in the future...
Yes what Chimerical said
Kilsin said:
It kills it for me too, I wasn't referring to over the top hot pink bikini's and giant rainbow pets, just simple lore friendly things like cloaks, rings, Merch like T-Shirts, mouse pads, lore books, Concept Art etc. nothing immersion breaking or anything to give an advantage.
Over the top hot pink bikini's with concept art on them, and giant stuffed rainbow pets, in the Merch shop maybe? But that might give an advantage to some people in different situations. ;-)
i like the thought of OOG merchandise on the pantheon store....
i am envisioning a line of shirts with MMO jokes on em, things like:
a picture of a football goalpost with a gnome soaring thru it and WIN in giant letters below.
a ranger appearing at the soulbinder
a cleric and a warrior standing next to a dead ranger commenting about how realistic his FD is, while the ranger's ghost says, "Yeah laugh it up funnyman"
I need alts for real life!
G.I.R.L.
u n e i
y a f
l e
I just wanted to add something really quick:
The plan is the normal $15 a month. I did post earlier wanting feedback as to what people thought about charging more, but also of course, delivering more, and wondering what that 'more' would be, e.g. what would you guys want in return?
But then I saw in some other threads on other sites that Pantheon was for sure going to charge more than the accustomed amount. Ack! Please be careful guys. I want to be able to throw ideas by you and not have everything I post morph into 'Brad said this is the way it's going to be.' When that happens, I become more timid and afraid to offer opinions and ask you guys for opinions. I want to be able to have a dialog with you guys without worrying that anything I type will be considered set in stone. Maybe I am naive and this isn't possible, I don't know.
Aradune said:...snip... I want to be able to throw ideas by you and not have everything I post morph into 'Brad said this is the way it's going to be.' When that happens, I become more timid and afraid to offer opinions and ask you guys for opinions. I want to be able to have a dialog with you guys without worrying that anything I type will be considered set in stone. Maybe I am naive and this isn't possible, I don't know.
I have been a pre-game/development forum participant for years. In your position anything you do say publicly will be quoted in forum conversations as "proof". That is the way that it is. Some sites dedicate themselves solely to recording quotes as a database.
It is good that you posted that you don't want "Brad said...."threads. This community will listen to that.
There are ways to avoid "quoting" though and still interact with your community in a meaningful way. You have a subset of forums that are not public. You have a group of pledges that will be NDA'd. For public conversations -there is always the very important tagline of "it is not set in stone but we are planning on...." :D I personally thank you for chatting with us and listening to feedback.
If I were you Aradune, I would just change my signature to "Knowing nothin' in life but to be legit, don't quote me boy cause I ain't said sh**. " lol
A bit more on topic, I wouldn't be opposed to paying 25$ a month because as we all know this game is going to be aimed at a small target audience, if we expect quality comparable to or better than current big-budget MMOs and for Visionary to still have it focused toward such a small audience, it's completely reasonable for us to shell out an extra few bucks a month.
But with this you run into the problem of some people not being able to afford something like that, and can only budget their usual 15 a month. I think the solution to this would be to not have a forced 25$ a month subscription, but offer both a 15 and 25 dollar or maybe 15-20-25 dollar subscription options. You could give the players who pay more a month some way of being recognized in the community whether it's something with their forum profile or a title in game, and maybe give the 25-a-month'ers some **SMALL** benefits like a 10-15% increase in exp or maybe an increase on coin looted. Nothing like an item that is unattainable through regular play or anything very imbalancing like that. Just something that wouldn't change the gameplay drastically but would be enough to make the people feel like they're not just giving up 10$ a month for no reason.
Even though I'm sure most of us understand why this game would need more money, the casual player may not and even if the game isn't being designed for the "casual" playstyle per say, I still think Visionary should try to appeal to the largest audience possible while keeping mind to not forsake their core values for the game, after all the main playerbase in any MMORPG of sizeable population is made up of casual players.