sydspain

WWII Online: Current state and future

248 posts in this topic

What the game needs is people playing. Incentivize that. Have a base sub price of whatever .... earn reduced pricing based on in game metrics. Some formula of TOM, with caps, deaths/kills (they have equal weight) to keep people honest, etc. So i pay $17.99, the more i play the less i pay. To a certain floor of course.

Edited by choad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, kazee said:

No, I am saying reduce monthly price to $4.99 for everyone, everyone that has a sub for those 3-4 months during the price reduction trail to try and gain and grow the playerbase

If we dont see the growth and CRS needs to go back to old pricing model then fine, but at least try it for 3-4 months and see what happens.

Also note, I don't know whats on their books and know monthly income vs expenses so its easy for me to suggest it, however at this stage why not try it for several months if its possible

 

good idea for a test.  if say a $5 buck '3 month intro' sub could be done for new subscribers only PLUS a FTP month or even longer. anything to get more players into the game experiencing it. 

think many full/hero/builder/whatever subscribers wouldn't mind continuing to pay full price of current subs during this kind of test - we're the same ones paying now anyways plus trying to help with all the crowdfunding or fundraising campaigns over the last few years. 

also believe at this point the state of the game as outlined by Syd's most excellent post is way more about the business model, money, sub model, getting new players a taste as opposed to any gameplay aspects or mechanics - until/unless CRS has evidence that gameplay and not cost is the main reason for new players not sticking. hard decision for them. 

Edited by sorella

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about a low price account that sticks you on the low pop side 

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, pfmosquito said:

However, there are moments in this game which are indescribably amazing.

This is why to play. It's not very frequent, but when you have the right constellation of factors line up, it is really immersive.

Most of my suggestions are implicitly (sometimes explicitly) designed to do what I think will maximize those immersive moments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, tatonka said:

How about a low price account that sticks you on the low pop side 

Interesting.

"Underdog Account"

$5/mo, you get Premium stuff,  but you only spawn into whatever side is underpop by more than X% (you don't want it super sensitive).

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Further to my earlier post....I want the game I started playing almost 20 years ago. True combined arms, where BOTH  sides had a good chance of winning one MASSIVE battle, then could shake the proverbial dirt out of their kits and could log off knowing they got great value for money, helped their mates (win or lose), or stay on for "just one more fight".

For the last month for myself personally it has been a rare moment to get more than ten guys in the same attack. It has been the same guys doing all the work, and yes when the game becomes work......

I hope that @XOOM can turn it around. It was with a very heavy heart, that I pushed that unsubscribe button - this is not just a game but a community of like minded souls.

 

Edited by dropbear
Autocorrect sux
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tater said:

This is why to play. It's not very frequent, but when you have the right constellation of factors line up, it is really immersive.

Most of my suggestions are implicitly (sometimes explicitly) designed to do what I think will maximize those immersive moments.

Yup just had one or two of those immersive moments.

Flying on a bombing mission. Never did that before. Got help from fellow flyers. Made the bomb drop on their factory. All in the box. My support fellow (Kard) got a kill on the "evil" p38 chasing me...across many squares. He battled with them and rtb'd. 

Was fun. It was tactical, with necessary comm's, as we were on different missions. 

Great stuff. Lots of fun, with a sense of purpose in the game.

There's a lot of different experiences in the game to be had.

Having said that....more players is crucial. Not sure how to accomplish that. Sure if it was free or low sub cost....more numbers, maybe. 

The challenge is to jump the gap between old tech/code/  etc... to current tech/code etc...  That is a BIG challenge.  Perhaps only WWII online version 2 can do that.

Where the funding comes from I am not sure. How feasible it is I am not sure. 

I'll continue to pay and play...as there seem to be incremental advancements, enough. 

But I can empathize with those who no longer feel that way.

S!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect that Xoom and his team of volunteers struggle every day with trying to keep this game alive. There are numerous paths to take but all boil down to money. I wish someone would hand them a million dollars.

Meanwhile, thanks to everyone at CRS for hanging in there.

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, noparty said:

I suspect that Xoom and his team of volunteers struggle every day with trying to keep this game alive. There are numerous paths to take but all boil down to money. I wish someone would hand them a million dollars.

Meanwhile, thanks to everyone at CRS for hanging in there.

Yes. Agree.

S!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps a clearer time frame on upcoming changes could help. I'm looking forward to the new buildings in towns, new towns, new tiles. That could boost the game tremendously, more so than a new weapon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want more people to shoot at and more tourists to yell at.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, matamor said:

I want more people to shoot at and more tourists to yell at.

Yes!!!! LGR

Edited by Jsilec

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, matamor said:

I want more people to shoot at and more tourists to yell at.

stop smg in HCFMS and who will complain here is matamor..

(only knows how to play smg) lol lol 

lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, kareca said:

stop smg in HCFMS and who will complain here is matamor..

(only knows how to play smg) lol lol 

lol

Nope. Not me. Many others but not me. Give us a rifle and I'll clean your stats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we should all band together and start a militia........ take over the world....... and force people to play WWIIOL as part of their reeducation!

Edited by kgarner
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, kazee said:

No, I am saying reduce monthly price to $4.99 for everyone, everyone that has a sub for those 3-4 months during the price reduction trail to try and gain and grow the playerbase

If we dont see the growth and CRS needs to go back to old pricing model then fine, but at least try it for 3-4 months and see what happens.

Also note, I don't know whats on their books and know monthly income vs expenses so its easy for me to suggest it, however at this stage why not try it for several months if its possible

edit: I am going to bow out of this topic now because I know its a touchy subject and I dont want to say the wrong thing, however all the answers are here in this topic...what people want, what they are willing to pay and what they see is worth it and not worth it. more players makes things less stale and people are willing to pay for action with a larger playerbase

I'm not going to pretend to know what the monthly operating expense are to keep this game afloat, so it is really hard to comment on posts like this. Hell, I don't even know if the game is turning a profit for Xoom, or just barely treading water. It's easy to say things like this when you have no skin in the game. And while this might makes sense on the surface, it could also backfire in a big way. Lower the prescription price for several months, it doesn't work, who is going to cover the operating expenses? What happens when it is determined that the game needs to go back to our current pricing model? My guess is a lot of players would then exit in mass, and we would be worse off than we are now. 

Are you willing to pony up some real cash to give this a go? 

Edited by nc0gnet0
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no idea how much the server hosting costs are, but they are a pittance compared to paying full time employees.  Just one full time programmer would take over 250 premium subscriptions to cover (and they would be a poorly paid programmer).  

 

Does this game even have 250 subscribers?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Capco said:

I have no idea how much the server hosting costs are, but they are a pittance compared to paying full time employees.  Just one full time programmer would take over 250 premium subscriptions to cover (and they would be a poorly paid programmer).  

 

Does this game even have 250 subscribers?  

I'm guessing several thousand, but with the billing change, if they don't reup it will be less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Kilemall said:

I'm guessing several thousand, but with the billing change, if they don't reup it will be less.

That's why my version (above) was that people already here pay what we pay (we would anyway, so why not), then they use the lower price to get new players---then if that works, prices drop for the existing subs. It's hardly different than offering F2P, or WBS. People are happy to see old tags playing free on WBS in the hopes some stay, after all (I was treated nicely when I did that).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tater said:

That's why my version (above) was that people already here pay what we pay (we would anyway, so why not), then they use the lower price to get new players---then if that works, prices drop for the existing subs. It's hardly different than offering F2P, or WBS. People are happy to see old tags playing free on WBS in the hopes some stay, after all (I was treated nicely when I did that).

+10/ 

or +$5/ 

right idea to test

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For poops and giggles I went onto steam and read some of the reviews, and I think the most common one was the no Cap as a free player. 

I get it one want people to subscribe,  but with no players this game is dull for both sides.

Now here is my idea bring back the F2P , let them cap  give them Rifles and the 2nd smg option for free.  It will fill the game arena , and already subscribed player or players that just quit due to no action will come back.

Yes will some of them choose the free option , I'm sure of it.

All other INF Avatar  throw them a bone and give 1 free each month , so in total they get 3 but the * so called premium anything but basic smg and rifle * be limited. 

I would even pony up 20 a month , I play mainly Armor anyways and INF and Air when my heart desires or the need as the battle unfolds .

Also the game needs a new Advertising Video , the other one is old. 

Make Armor and AIR subscription based ( just alone due to the fact these are limited) 

I think CRS can easily tweek the SMG and Rifle numbers upwards.

Then make like others have said the price 5 bucks and see what happens . Even maybe have a 10 dollar subscription with more stuff available. 

And maybe keep the premium stuff for the ones that pony up the full amount . It's not like the premium stuff is unkillable so even the 5 and 10 ones will have their fun.

Something needs to be tried. And we need players.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, nc0gnet0 said:

It's easy to say things like this when you have no skin in the game

Well I have some skin in the game, I have been paying for a long time (off and on since 2001) and want the game to be successful and grow. 

 

5 hours ago, nc0gnet0 said:

Lower the prescription price for several months, it doesn't work, who is going to cover the operating expenses?

Well my suggestion that if we gain 3x the amount of players it would gain us the same income per month as we see today. Lower price to a third of what it is today, grow the subs by 3x. Then we have 3x the playerbase which we all know more people in game make the game much more exciting

 

5 hours ago, nc0gnet0 said:

What happens when it is determined that the game needs to go back to our current pricing model?

CRS states that in their email saying that this is an experiment to try and grow the game and that CRS has the right to go back to old pricing model at anytime as they see fit. They are being upfront and honest and are showing us they are doing everything to grow the playerbase. Personally I would be fine to try it and would also be fine to go back to old pricing if it does not work, i just see it as nothing to lose

 

5 hours ago, Capco said:

Just one full time programmer would take over 250 premium subscriptions to cover (and they would be a poorly paid programmer).  

We don't need a programmer, what we need is a gaming & tech consultant to offer ideas and suggestions to grow. I do know someone that worked at world of tanks for several years plus someone at EA and could also probably find some other guys where I live that would be willing to possibly do some work outside of their full time jobs in tech. 

I would be more than willing to reach out to them and see what it brings us. Plus if CRS would be willing to let us (the playerbase) start a fund drive to pay these guys for consulting then the funds would not come from CRS but from us. 

6 hours ago, nc0gnet0 said:

Are you willing to pony up some real cash to give this a go? 

Yea I would be. What I and maybe a few others would do would be to pay the difference in monthly income loses if we lowered the sub rate to $4.99 for 3-4 months to try a grow. But i would have to know those numbers prior to any agreement, but i dont see it being more than two or three grand per month. But also if we did grow by say 4-5 times i would want my capital back that I paid for those 3-4 months.

Do we have long-term debt? How is our company capital rating? Can we get capital from a lender to grow? Just pile on some debt and try to grow. I would think we could get 25k-50k easy from a venture cap firm, sure they would want a piece but what's the risk, its the VCs money so its their risk. 

imho this is all that matters, this is the only topic we should be discussing...all the gameplay discussions or equip vs equip stuff means nothing if we cant figure out how to grow the pb 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In an effort to help encourage the discussion in a direction that helps provide some more supplemental insights for my active thought processes and ideas... I'd like to request your feedback on this:

The game needs more players. We are a massively multiplayer online game. We have the capability of holding up to 5,000 concurrent users.

What can we do to get more players to join WWII Online, and then stay / keep on playing?

How can we achieve that and balance the expectation(s) of avoiding perpetual free play with no monetary contribution, but still making it reasonable enough for people to opt-in to a plan should they choose?

Price does matter, but it's not the only singular thing, and there's no way without serious volume we could seriously consider going to $4.99/mo. It's far too risky. But again I do understand the "paywall" being a non-starter for players who are not yet interested (that also includes things like graphics, some performance expectations not being met, etc).

Everything else aside in terms of development and production (though both are very valuable - and we will continue, of course), if the only thing that occurred was more players joining, playing and staying, the entire state and health of the game would improve. And it doesn't take another Steam release necessarily to achieve that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I am gonna go back in-game and camp someone's spawn :P

well until i get sapped that is ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.