Suggested Changes To Pay-To-Play Model :: Forum :: Virtonomics

Search Rating log

List of forums -> Archive -> Suggested Changes To Pay-To-Play Model

Topic:

«...»

Topic closed

Topic created : 1 October 2009, 12:12

Ian68

Magpie Industries

While I understand that the developers wish to receive an income to reward their work in producing this game, I feel there are two very fundamental flaws in the model for pay-to-play that has been put in place.

1. Price

It is simply too high. I have played numerous online games and the prices being introduced for Virtonomics are more than double the highest I have previously paid, and four times the price of some online games. If you are looking to have a large user base then the price needs to be reduced.

2. Demo-mode

The 14 day demo will not be enough to convince most people that the game is worth paying for. After 14 days my business was still losing money, and only surviving because of the bonuses for completing quests. Had I been asked to pay at that point then I would have quit without hesitation. A much better solution would be to have a demo-mode unlimited by time, but with a restriction on the maximum number of subdivisions that can be owned (I would suggest between 5 and 10). This would allow people as much time as they need to decide to become a paying player whilst still putting a substantial restriction on what they are able to do for free.

Page:

Message list:

1 October 2009, 12:48

Mike1

Moderator

Mico Inc

i've asked Diska some questions directly and if he is willing to improve this game:
http://virtonomics.com/mary/forum/forum_new/11/topic/27744/view ...

Since my post he had time to read delete other messages he didn't like, but i didn't get an answer.

Well i "only" have paid 50 USD in the past 3 month and i see no point in maintaining monologues.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
no money - no honey - mary is a bitch :-/
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

1 October 2009, 13:20

hafeezi

Thanks for bringing this thread up Ian68. I used to be a developer myself for a few years and I too can really understand how much work they have put into this game. I can also understand that their company needs to have a good and stable source of revenue just to keep the payrolls moving.

While I agree with you on the 2 points of the plan that you have laid out, I wanted to see things in another different point of view. Because at the moment, I think they're having trouble when it comes to monetizing the game in order to gain revenue. So lets see if I can come up with a few ideas to help this a little bit.

1. Incentives for buying game points.

I think before we go to the pricing part, the first problem that we have to think about is on creating demand for game points. Right now, with the current model, I think this is their biggest problem. Coming up with products/services/features that players will want and are willing to buy game points and spend game points for these extras if they can afford it.

As of right now, I think the demand for game points is limited as there aren't enough variety for people to choose or the varieties available just doesn't seem to attract their attention. I know some of the features doesn't attract mine, but there is one feature I would love to have and that is the Store Assistant feature that you get when we played the game for the first few days. I'm not sure if that was the name of it. It is the feature that does the analysis on your store and give suggestions on either increasing your orders on products, the employee's salary, marketing, store size and so on.

If there is a feature like this available, I'm sure that it will sell like hot cakes. Also lets take for example, innovations. This is a great feature that anyone would want to buy game points for. Only issue here is that I think the time period given should be made shorter. This way, it increases demand for game points and players can choose to buy them again and again. Means we try to increase the frequency of purchasing innovations.

One more feature that I can suggest, is the introduction of something like licenses. We have a lot of industries in the game but there are a few industries that very few venture into like high priced goods, such as computers, motorcars, jewelry and so on. One way would be to introduce something like licenses that players will pay by game points in order to own so that they can venture into these high priced industries and every now end then, they renew these licenses also by game points.

So like things like these, I would recommend looking into first. Creating demand for game points.

2. Comparison between Free-To-Play plan with Pay-To-Play plan and a suggestion to have both.

Currently, there isn't much difference between the two except for the new plan later, players have access to things that at first we can't get if playing for free. This is kinda like the basic and premium account plans that is available in many places on the Net.

The Basic and Premium scheme until now, is still a good model because it encourages users who are using the service for free to upgrade themselves so that they can access better features and all. If the Virtonomics team wishes to change to this sort of plan, having a basic and premium plan, I think it would be a lot better. Because you guys will be offering options to customers like us to pay for, and at the same time, giving value for the features/service that you provide as we, the customers, will think that it is in our best interest to subscribe to a premium account because of the perks available.

Right now, you guys are planning to impose on customers, in which I will have to say is bad way of doing business. Also the whole idea of having an entertainment based product like Virtonomics is to enhance player experience. Every time you enhance our game play, introducing new features that will make us play better, even if some of them requires buying game points, we would gladly pay for it.

These are just some of the ideas that I can come up with, and I hope it is helps to give the team some ideas here.

Thanks for reading.

1 October 2009, 13:39

Rains

well, everything's been said and let's just hope for a fruitful response or just be here until the fat lady sings.

1 October 2009, 17:50

yuga_ninjie

Moderator

Yuga Ninjie Group of Company

Does this mean that everything would start in the beginning??? Oh my gudness...

6 October 2009, 14:46

JuleBCN

Administrator

hafeezi

Thank you for your suggestions.

Shop assistants may later appear as a paid service which will help optimizing the process of making adjustments to your store.

As for the restrictions concerning your company's field, we don't make them intentionally in order to allow you to do wahtever you like in every sphere you like. Besides, the high priced companies are rather complicated themselves which is kind of a natural ristriction.

12 October 2009, 16:46

Jakeroberts_123

*Fat lady sings*

25 October 2009, 10:18

sawasawa

I'm late to add to the monologue however just to throw my 2 cents in.....

I see a principle problem with the current model which is not a "pay to play", but rather a "pay to gain" model.

In order to advance more rapidly you need to invest, encouraging you to pay more to buy game points.

We now see a significant reduction of suppliers on the market reducing the stable supply of goods at competitive prices. It seems that to be successful you need to manage the complete supply chain, and the real competition has shifted to competing in the liberalised retail market. This is the part of the market which is currently following normal market trends.

OK -I understand there is a need to make this game pay.

I guess the Google delivered adverts generate some cash, but they will generate more if there are more players. Of course the adverts are influenced by the page content, so I've seen some really interesting adverts related to the industries I'm playing. They are interesting but normally not worth clicking. Maybe if we all clicked an advert each day this would help.... But another suggestion would be to adapt the page content to ensure more applicable adverts are shown for gamers instead of industrialists and purchasers. Also more players would increase the click rate.

I'm quite happy paying a reasonable amount each month to play. I'd be much happier if it was a fair playing ground for everybody so your success is not dependent on the amount you pay.

Some suggestions

Size based charge
You could charge based on the size of the corporations owned.
So a 100,000 square foot store should be more expensive than a 10,000 square foot store

Region based charges
Allow basic player to establish himself only in a single region.
To expand to other regions you must pay an amount per region.

There are actually lots of ways to establish a payment model but keep it simple. It's also important to ensure hat people can play for free but with limited access to facilities....

Free play
Starters get a package of five enterprises which they can expand with say a maximum step of one expansion step per week. For example they can increase the size of one subdivision by one step or they can build a new subdivision, but not both. This would allow new players to play for free and create more demand/supply in the market. But they would need to pay the package to be allowed to play more fully.

Simple affordable payment packages
Also it's important to introduce easily understood packages which people can buy.
The current concept is too complex and too costly..... and hence not used

For example if you want to introduce a quality system innovation, it costs in excess of a dollar a subdivision for larger subdivisions. If there was a low barrier package, like pay 10$ and introduce as many innovations as you want, I'm sure more people would opt for it.

It is a great game and very instructive, but will only survive if players continue to play Eyes in a heap

Hoping for the best
SAWASAWA
Great bread, great pasta, great pastries

25 October 2009, 18:11

Mike1

Moderator

Mico Inc

"Success dependent on the amount you pay" .. The only way to solve that are different worlds with different monthly MAX of spending, all players would have the same conditions but a bit like a poker game where you select a table according to your spending budget. Uncle gifts would get larger over time to maximize between-player challenge,
Game advantages could only be purchased with in-game money... play free for 90 days and able to win, buy for virtual money, trade or receive as a gift update credits from other players.

The lack of interest to widening the audience by serving small people/budgets may be due to hard- and software restrictions, and the main target is to sell the game itself, so its under development until the right price is offered.

>> Not enough people register at main advertiser's site (Earn $27 for every membership registration you refer to FXClub) ! Can we get game points for registering there? To wink

26 October 2009, 16:21

JuleBCN

Administrator

>> Not enough people register at main advertiser's site (Earn $27 for every membership registration you refer to FXClub) ! Can we get game points for registering there?
No, u can't, Mike1.

26 October 2009, 16:21

Fractal

Moderator

Company 2.0

Revolution Corp.

Sawasawa: I'm glad to see constructive comments regarding the change of business model, and you raise some excellent points.

The pay to gain model is only applicable to Mary realm. Anna realm is a true pay to play version, but at a higher cost than Mary so there are fewer players there.
I'm not sure how others feel about it, but I actually prefer the payment concept used for Mary realm. I say concept because I think there needs to be some adjustment to the point pricing on most buildings to really encourage purchase.
Limiting banked days to 90 also renders anything above 15 points virtually useless, who would buy a mine for up to $1000 when one for $15 will give the same access?

"It seems that to be successful you need to manage the complete supply chain"

This is what I see to be the biggest problem with the game, especially now many companies are disappearing. Expanding on your Free play suggestion, I'd like to see a free option available to players. Instead of limiting new buildings or expansions, I believe a restriction on certain industries would be beneficial to players and developers.

If free players were allowed to build basic buildings (animal farms, mills, semi-product factories, etc), there would be a wider range of suppliers for necessary materials and the competition this creates among the suppliers would be a large incentive to upgrade to paid status.

List of forums -> Archive-> Suggested Changes To Pay-To-Play Model

Page: