Dedication Through Light
Member
No one ever presents alternatives for how to monetize those hours of online play, lol. Or at least I havent seen any
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Pach-Attack!
- Thread starter OverHeat
- Start date
Neuromancer
Member
I don't like it but he's probably right. It's the next logical step. But will Microsoft let Activision charge for online services on top of Live?
Dedication Through Light said:
I think what publishers don't want to talk about is the fact that a healthy online base for a game encourages future sales. No one wants to buy a game 6 months after release if the online community is dead. If there is not a huge amount of people playing your game online then you also won't have anyone to sell map packs or trinkets to.
SatelliteOfLove
Member
Dedication Through Light said:
Something that isn't spawned from conversations similar in vein to this:
There's something seriously wrong and unsustainable with the industry when even stones gushing blood are squeezed this intently and wishfully for even more blood.
VillageNinja
Banned
Dedication Through Light said:
lol
-WindYoshi-
Banned
Dedication Through Light said:
right!? :lol
yurinka
Member
There are some sucessful monetization examples in free MMOs(mainly in Asia) and Facebook (worldwide). But Patcher doesn't know how this market works.Dedication Through Light said:
They (or well, we) make a shit ton of money, and even without paying $60+ to start playing the game.
The main idea is to release the full game free, designed to play at least quick plays of some minutes frequently during a long period of time. And then to put a shit ton of cheap DLC to skip all these time of level up / gold farming to be able to purchase certain game items using the game currency.
And also to sell some paid only items that gives you some exclusive features in the game. In addition to that, reward people for inviting their friends to play the game.
Only a small portion of people pay to play, so it make sense as monetization system when you handle it sucessfully to get a shit ton of players. And a tiny portion of gamers will spend a shit ton of money in the game.
The Activision approach will fail if they are going to make you pay $70+ for the game + suscription + extra $ for DLC. Console install base is so limited when comparing to Facebook and non-high end PCs, the $70+ and suscription is a huge barrier for most people, and don't have a proper method to know if a user invited to play the game to another.
michaelpachter
He speaks, and we freak
I suppose I'm really talking about converting the games into a service model. You buy the single player game, and maybe get some multiplayer as part of the price, but accessing value added services will cost you. For example, ladders, achievements, tournaments and virtual goods will cost money. The car analogy, as lame as it is, can even be defeated by pointing out that you must pay a license fee and must pay for fuel. The more you drive, the more gasoline costs, and some states (California, for example) require proof of insurance. So you can't drive your car as much as you want "for free".
I think that the better analogy is the cell phone, PC or TV. All are far more useful with "subscriptions" (to cell phone service, Internet access or cable). If you want premium content on the TV, you pay more for HBO, for example. Activision will sell you the equivalent of broadcast TV, but will charge you for the extra services.
I am not advocating that Activision or anyone else charge for multiplayer, nor do I think that shareholder pressure will increase because I mentioned it. I am merely basing my opinion on an educated guess as to what Activision will do, based upon recent statements by their CEO and COO, and based upon past behavior. It is really foolish to think that they haven't thought of this before, and equally foolish to think that they would adopt a subscription model because I predicted it. Just as foolish as believing that Iwata will authorize a Wii HD because I predicted it (over two years ago) ;-)
The open questions are when and how much. My guess is that they will try an a la carte payment plan, with a subscription giving you access to everything, but of course, I could be wrong.
I think that the better analogy is the cell phone, PC or TV. All are far more useful with "subscriptions" (to cell phone service, Internet access or cable). If you want premium content on the TV, you pay more for HBO, for example. Activision will sell you the equivalent of broadcast TV, but will charge you for the extra services.
I am not advocating that Activision or anyone else charge for multiplayer, nor do I think that shareholder pressure will increase because I mentioned it. I am merely basing my opinion on an educated guess as to what Activision will do, based upon recent statements by their CEO and COO, and based upon past behavior. It is really foolish to think that they haven't thought of this before, and equally foolish to think that they would adopt a subscription model because I predicted it. Just as foolish as believing that Iwata will authorize a Wii HD because I predicted it (over two years ago) ;-)
The open questions are when and how much. My guess is that they will try an a la carte payment plan, with a subscription giving you access to everything, but of course, I could be wrong.
I definitely see Activision doing something like that. It doesn't make sense not to.
I kinda think the next generation of consoles will have subscription plans built in a bit better...so that you have your EA pass, your Activision pass and so on built right into the OS. But who knows.
I kinda think the next generation of consoles will have subscription plans built in a bit better...so that you have your EA pass, your Activision pass and so on built right into the OS. But who knows.
Technosteve
Banned
i was expecting him to open his fridge and have crystal disappointed
Neuromancer
Member
Well that was a waste of time, did people ask for this? :lol
Fularu said:Once you buy your car, the manufacturer has no more costs related to it. When you buy "Online game xxx with servers provided by publisher YYY" your game still costs money to maintain for the publisher.
Your analogy really doesn't work. Also car manufacturers sell maintainance packages when you buy a car(that covers more than the base insurance obviously)
Except that's only for MMO's or when they provide dedicated servers. Games that are just matchmaking with peer 2 peer don't fit that. Companies like activision with MW that want to monetize multiplayer and people who don't know any better would fall for it.
In spite of what I said, I did go back and watch a few seconds of it. That cannot be a Gamestop from 2007, I just don't believe it. I saw a Halo 3 poster, and maybe a GTA4 poster too, but there's a wall of Xbox games. Not Xbox 360, Xbox. They had rows of SNES cartridges. It must be a mish mash of old stock footage and some new stuff. Why don't you get to the bottom of this?p01ar said:
Neuromancer
Member
Wow OK :lolp01ar said:
clip said:
It is fun to watch. I don't rely on him or anybody else for reliable analysis so I can buy stock or manage a fund, but that doesn't make his opinions less interesting. Should I only be allowed to enjoy it if I agree with him, or if I think he is always right? Who cares? Not I.
I watch it because it is fun.
Neuromancer
Member
I like him too but I expected to see him talk about video games, I didn't need to see his house. It's weird that some people were clamoring for that.
MattyGrovesOrMe
Member
New Episode (130): http://www.gametrailers.com/video/episode-130-pach-attack/703903
Pach Attack said:
Pachter: "Expect a home game console from Apple in 2014..."
Certainly, if any company has a chance of entering the crowded game market, it's going to be Apple. I used to think that it might have been Dell a few years ago, but with the success of gaming on the iPhone, I think that Apple is going to look at using at doing a video game console as their next major consumer product, and give it a "magic box" focus. Internet capabilities, media playback, integrated Apple TV, etc.
Now Pachter's right that Apple doesn't really have any internal game studios atm, but that's nothing a couple acquisitions can't fix. I mean, what did Microsoft really have before they acquired Rare? Age of Empires and Flight Simulator?
Don't agree with Pachter that they're going to try the iPhone model for their first console though. Apple's smarter then that.
Now Pachter's right that Apple doesn't really have any internal game studios atm, but that's nothing a couple acquisitions can't fix. I mean, what did Microsoft really have before they acquired Rare? Age of Empires and Flight Simulator?
Don't agree with Pachter that they're going to try the iPhone model for their first console though. Apple's smarter then that.
Wag
Member
I enjoy seeing someone closer to my own age who's a gamer sharing his opinions, and I'm sure a lot of people share that view. I think people tend to forget that gamers tend to skew a wide range of ages (I'm in my 40s and grew up with games). The >40 gamer is far under represented.faridmon said:
Draft said:
have you seen Apple's new AirPlay? soon new iPhones and iPod touches will be nearly as powerful as PS3/360, you can game on the go, come home and hit AirPlay button and have the game running from your iPhone streamed to your tv etc, i think thats the way Apple gets into the gaming industry.
qwerty2k said:
well no.
nowhere near that yet.
the resolution and overall fidelity of home consoles is not within reach yet...
iPhone is currently at 960x640 I believe so that is still quite a way from the 1280x720 or 1920x1080
An Apple console would cater to the casual games like Zuma or something
Give me a break. What kind of company only lets people who are on Macs watch their live stream? What kind of company tells people how to hold their phone? What kind of company then attempts to drag other companies into a problem of thier own creation by highlighting them at their conference?
Apple are the worst kind of company.
offshore said:
If you don't have a mac/ipod/ipad/iphone, why do you care about the conference showing more of the same product?
They said they were sorry and gave everyone a free bumper to fix the issue.
EVERY COMPANY.
Sounds like you have a problem with a company you don't even care about.