Page 19 of 23 FirstFirst ... 9151617181920212223 LastLast
Results 361 to 380 of 454
  1. #361
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    977

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chai View Post
    But if they do so at the expense of no longer producing the chocolate their current clients enjoy, the result will be a net loss. The market doesnt need another WOW, erm...I mean Hersheys.
    The result is not a net loss if they make more profit by producing chocolate for a larger market segment than they could have by serving a smaller market segment.

    To wit, if DDO can make more profit by producing more products aimed at 75% of the player base and fewer products aimed at 25% of the player base, then that is a rational strategic direction to take. And now we're back full circle to debating how they should decide whether to do just that, and my premise that the aggregate sales data they have from all of their paying customers is much more valuable in choosing a direction than forum posts. But you disagree with that.

  2. #362
    Community Member bsquishwizzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    2,822

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hit_fido View Post
    Doesn't address the contradiction. In fact the statement that "you can have a low headcount, and still be outrageously profitable" reinforces the contradiction against the statement that "Social games tolerate most of their populace being small time spenders because the game needs to be full."
    Maybe I need to elaborate my last statement:

    Your "contradiction" assumes that you can only do business one way. Anybody who knows ANYTHING about business knows you can be profitable in any number of ways, with any number of conditions.

    Ford sells to the mass market, Ferrari does not. Each makes money according to their business model.

    Duh.

  3. #363
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    977

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bsquishwizzy View Post
    I mentioned that there were two types of chocolate: the most popular, and the “best.”
    Ok, chocolate expert.

  4. #364
    The Hatchery Paleus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Stormreach Sewers
    Posts
    1,627

    Default

    So, if any of the producers actually does get to this thread, they'll see that we're arguing over chocolate, who contradicted themselves in what post, and how to be the best at trolling. The inevitable conclusion is that we're easily distracted and these forums may be a portal to Xoriat. The inevitable question, where is the cube when you need it?
    Kobold never forgive....kobold remember waterworks.

    Quote Originally Posted by KookieKobold View Post
    i'll be putting a bug into our system.

  5. #365
    Community Member bsquishwizzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    2,822

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hit_fido View Post
    The result is not a net loss if they make more profit by producing chocolate for a larger market segment than they could have by serving a smaller market segment.

    To wit, if DDO can make more profit by producing more products aimed at 75% of the player base and fewer products aimed at 25% of the player base, then that is a rational strategic direction to take. And now we're back full circle to debating how they should decide whether to do just that, and my premise that the aggregate sales data they have from all of their paying customers is much more valuable in choosing a direction than forum posts. But you disagree with that.
    This assumption – and that is what it is: an assumption – makes a MASSIVE leap of faith that a producer can indeed carve a niche out of a market basically controlled by entrenched producers.

    Tell me, when was the last time you saw a OS for the PC that wasn’t either Windows or Linux (Unix, etc.)? There have been a few over the years, however, those two are entrenched, and the likelihood that someone will come along with something brand-spankin’ new and care a place out of an existing customer base is beyond remote.

    Oh, and the ones that have come along? Crushed, marginalized, bought-out, and gone.

    Again, all of this is some theoretical business school schlock that you think you know something about. Trust me, you don’t.

  6. #366
    Community Member Shorlong's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    996

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bsquishwizzy View Post
    This assumption – and that is what it is: an assumption – makes a MASSIVE leap of faith that a producer can indeed carve a niche out of a market basically controlled by entrenched producers.

    Tell me, when was the last time you saw a OS for the PC that wasn’t either Windows or Linux (Unix, etc.)? There have been a few over the years, however, those two are entrenched, and the likelihood that someone will come along with something brand-spankin’ new and care a place out of an existing customer base is beyond remote.

    Oh, and the ones that have come along? Crushed, marginalized, bought-out, and gone.

    Again, all of this is some theoretical business school schlock that you think you know something about. Trust me, you don’t.
    The fact that I can go into most retail outlets and buy a Chromebook disagrees with you.
    Shorlong - Pale Master, Cevon - Druid Archer, Gorgnak - Barbarian, Addanc - Bear Tank, Juristash - Shadar Kai Assassin, Treiah - Morninglord Tempest Ranger, Baylfyre - CC Bard, Deimanus - Bladeforged Melee Arti, Daerian - Healing Cleric Morninglord, Krazig - Pally Tank, Veriste - Shadar Kai Death Knight, Xanapheia - TWF FVS, Helainia - Shadar Kai Henshin-Theif

    Leader of The Dark Creed

  7. #367
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    977

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bsquishwizzy View Post
    Your "contradiction" assumes that you can only do business one way.
    The contradiction is that you can't both assert on one hand that "The social gaming model for monetizing MMOs does NOT hinge on total headcount" and that "the monetization model used also does not require attendance during most of the games availability cycle" and that "[The social gaming model] merely requires that players who attrite when they are bored come back when new power creep is introduced, buy into it heavily, then they can do what they want" and then later tell us all that no, actually, "Social games tolerate most of their populace being small time spenders because the game needs to be full."

    A: It doesn't hinge on total headcount, does not require attendence during most of the games availability cycle and the players just need to come back every now and then to spend some more, and can do something else in between.

    B: The game needs to be full.

    Does not hinge on total headcount - but - game needs to be full. Contradiction.

    Does not require attendence during most of the games availability cycle - but - game needs to be full. Contradiction.

    Players can attrite and only come back when new power creep is introduced - but - game needs to be full. Contradiction.

  8. #368
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,694

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hit_fido View Post
    To wit, if DDO can make more profit by producing more products aimed at 75% of the player base and fewer products aimed at 25% of the player base, then that is a rational strategic direction to take.
    You may be right, this actually seems to be what they already do. This has to be true in certain situations and I think DDO might be one of those. The comparison that people are trying to make here isn't accurate. Also... no such thing as luxury chocolates... come on there's luxury everything in 2013. Even comparing DDO's way of making profit to another MMO would barely make sense? Why?

    - Paying for content
    - Paying for new content
    - TRing
    - Leveling up process after TRing
    - Ways to overcome all those how so sick irritations that drive people away from the game. If they really do
    - Significant boost you might want to not feel underpowered. (Possibly tomes / Book of fate)
    - Many ways to save time / catch up with others in general

    Content, TRing and time savers being what appeals to the biggest crowd i'd say. I know, most of this can be obtained via playing but let's be real, I doubt most people do it even so it's very faisable.

    That's on top of what is available in most games : fluff, various short term boost, inventory spaces, various services, subs... etc. Most of MMOs settle to subscription + fluff or f2p (+subs) and fluff. Most won't sell content "a la carte" and have no such powerful tool as TRing.

    The statement about 2-4% of playerbase being big spenders is true in general. I've both read about it before and it seemed to reflect reality as well. But that's in general. I doubt it's true in DDO's case since the way it's being monetized is not the exactly the same. Also because of the "competition" (or the pressure that some feels and pass down so it affects more people), every means to gain power and speed up the process becomes much more tempting to the masses.

    That being said, I doubt that the ways how other MMOs establish priorities in order to generate revenues are the same as DDO's which has the power to recycle ideas around old content (TRing) over and over again while making money doing so.

    There could be other variables such as simply the age and wealth of the average player. So much data we just don't have in hand in order to make facts instead of pure assumptions since we think we know exactly the tendencies. But tendencies are just that and they change when confronted to different situations.
    Kal Vas Flam... Corp Por... Corp Por

    ...And then there was silence

  9. #369
    Community Member Chai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Wisconsin, birthplace of D&D
    Posts
    20,954

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hit_fido View Post
    The result is not a net loss if they make more profit by producing chocolate for a larger market segment than they could have by serving a smaller market segment.
    It would be a net loss, because picking up market share is much harder than dumping market share. They would effectively be dumping most of their market share of previous users, to attempt to gain interest of users who already have a product that meets their desires (needs?). While switching the formula WILL get rid of the old users, it doesnt necessrily pick up people in the hersheys market at anywhere near the same rate, who already are satisfied with hersheys and arent looking for a replacement.

    New coke is a perfect example of this. Look how fast they backpedaled on that error.

    Quote Originally Posted by hit_fido View Post
    To wit, if DDO can make more profit by producing more products aimed at 75% of the player base and fewer products aimed at 25% of the player base, then that is a rational strategic direction to take. And now we're back full circle to debating how they should decide whether to do just that, and my premise that the aggregate sales data they have from all of their paying customers is much more valuable in choosing a direction than forum posts. But you disagree with that.
    And why would they cater to one crowd at the expense of the other when they can have both, which they have shown throughout the years? They are also working on a raid as we speak.
    Advocating repeated nerfs in the name of "balancing the game" then complaining about how DDO is moving away from D&D, is a direct contradiction in logic - D&D 3.5 (what DDO is based on) is not a balanced game. We can either have a balanced clone MMO with homogenized classes, or we can have a D&D game. We cant have both.

  10. #370
    Community Member enochiancub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Copenhagen, Denmark
    Posts
    1,116

    Default

    I was told that this is where we queue for the chocolate?

    Sorry sorry, couldn't help myself. I saw the term "luxury chocolate" and as a pâtissier I couldn't help but wonder what that even meant. I do love how completely off the rails some of these discussions become.

    Main: 18 Artificer, Thelanis

  11. #371
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    977

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chai View Post
    So the game needs to be full when those who get bored come back, they see a full game, spend more money etc etc....
    Pointing out that you said "the server ... would be a ghost town" does not release you from the contradiction - you very clearly state that the social gaming model does not hinge on total headcount - and - the game needs to be full, contradicting yourself. You very clearly state that the model does not require attendance during most of the games availability cycle - and - the game needs to be full, contradicting yourself. Not being "a ghost town" does not imply that the "game needs to be full" and this doesn't help your case. You contradicted yourself and now you're pleading out that what you wrote isn't really what you meant. If you can't defend what you wrote, then I guess you need to rewrite it and get your story straight.

    And I'm gong to continue to beat you about the head and shoulders until this thread is closed or you admit that the model can't both require a full game and not depend on headcount and that you can't demonstrate that DDO's actual revenue base conforms to any of your social gaming model numbers.

  12. #372
    Community Member Ungood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    7,154

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chai View Post
    My correct observation of the situation.
    So this is just your personal feelings on the matter, and that makes it nothing more then an Opinion, beyond that, it's future prediction based entirely on your opinion of the situation. Which means, it can't be refuted or proven till it comes to pass.

    They return when a new update comes out, play it until they attain what they want, and then leave again. There is historical evidence in the log on information that indicates this around most updates.
    Well I am not sure where you get your data, but the real data we have variable shows diminishing returns in this venture, as more people "returned" for MotuD then for Shadowfell, that means this is not a resurgance as you put it, but a steady slow decline in both the people continuing to play, and the people who return for the updates.

    That alone would prove your hypothesis incorrect that the next raid will be a big money maker, as all the numbers show a reduction in returns, and this 'expansion' showed even less retaining then MotuD.

    Youll see how wrong you are on this when the new raid comes out, has attractive loot, and people are paying for bypass timers again in order to obtain that loot as quickly as possible.
    We shall see... we shall see.

    The only possible way I can even be wrong on this is if the loot sucked in the new raid - that would be a poor business decision.
    WIN! .. because that is exactly what they did with FoT, they made the loot of a BRAND NEW raid..into Suck.

    And the one thing that seems to be constant here, is that was a bad business decision.

    Anyway. I wonder, did you raid much? I mean, not including Shroud or Tempest Spine, but the raids with the sought after named loot, just curious, as you claimed that opening boxes was fun for you again, and I used to raid quite a bit, and opening that raid box had always been met with anticipation. There was a thrill in it.

    I mean, not sure your play style either, but for me every box was something to go after, as they could hold a goodie from time to time, like pulling a Metaline of Pure Good, I even saw a loot-gen, Holy Silver of Evil Outsider Bane, that baby was more precious then most raid gear in the game at the time, then later we could craft them.. and boy did 'loot-gen' see a new life, even if only for raw materials, it was sought after, it was bought off the AH, bought off the Pawn, loot-gen was the shizzle, because we could make the combos we wanted, and that had the potential to be some good stuff at the time.

    Then this loot-gen revamp started and stuff went pear shaped. Say what you will, but this looks like a crippling blow to the future of the games raid scene.

    Time will tell, which of us is right. if it makes you feel any better, I kinda hope you are somewhat correct, that raids come back to life somehow, but, I'll be honest, I'm not optimistic, I saw what happened with the Shroud when they shafted it over for a while... and this was.. much.. much.. worse.

  13. #373
    Community Member Chai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Wisconsin, birthplace of D&D
    Posts
    20,954

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hit_fido View Post
    The contradiction is that you can't both assert on one hand that "The social gaming model for monetizing MMOs does NOT hinge on total headcount" and that "the monetization model used also does not require attendance during most of the games availability cycle" and that "[The social gaming model] merely requires that players who attrite when they are bored come back when new power creep is introduced, buy into it heavily, then they can do what they want" and then later tell us all that no, actually, "Social games tolerate most of their populace being small time spenders because the game needs to be full."

    A: It doesn't hinge on total headcount, does not require attendence during most of the games availability cycle and the players just need to come back every now and then to spend some more, and can do something else in between.

    B: The game needs to be full.

    Does not hinge on total headcount - but - game needs to be full. Contradiction.

    Does not require attendence during most of the games availability cycle - but - game needs to be full. Contradiction.

    Players can attrite and only come back when new power creep is introduced - but - game needs to be full. Contradiction.
    Again, reading the entire post, none of this is a contradiction. Its only a contradiction when you split it off and use a small portion of the post as the entire statement, and then use that smal section of the entire post in an argument of ABSOLUTE, when analyzing an argument of DEGREE in the first place.

    Absolutism in interpreting data for decisionmaking purposes has resulted in some of the poorest decisions made in history. Your strawman got fireballed when I outlined the reality of both posts youre attempting to pick apart yet again. Anyone who can read, and analyze objectively sees what I am saying.
    Advocating repeated nerfs in the name of "balancing the game" then complaining about how DDO is moving away from D&D, is a direct contradiction in logic - D&D 3.5 (what DDO is based on) is not a balanced game. We can either have a balanced clone MMO with homogenized classes, or we can have a D&D game. We cant have both.

  14. #374
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    977

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chai View Post
    It would be a net loss, because picking up market share is much harder than dumping market share. They would effectively be dumping most of their market share of previous users, to attempt to gain interest of users who already have a product that meets their desires (needs?)
    No. They would be choosing to focus on one segment of their existing player base where they see higher profits to be had than if they focus on a different segment of their player base. Given $1M to invest, they'd be acting on data that shows they'll have a higher return by investing $750K in products for segment A and $250K in products for segment B than if they invest in reverse.

    It's not about "dumping" segment B; it's about prioritizing segment A over segment B because segment A is where they feel they are best able to increase profits.

    Again, the premise - the actual aggregate sales data they have from all of their paying customers is more important in determining how they should prioritize development than forum threads. That is the premise you evidently disagree with.

  15. #375
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    977

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Azarddoze View Post
    The statement about 2-4% of playerbase being big spenders is true in general. I've both read about it before and it seemed to reflect reality as well. But that's in general. I doubt it's true in DDO's case since the way it's being monetized is not the exactly the same. Also because of the "competition" (or the pressure that some feels and pass down so it affects more people), every means to gain power and speed up the process becomes much more tempting to the masses.

    That being said, I doubt that the ways how other MMOs establish priorities in order to generate revenues are the same as DDO's which has the power to recycle ideas around old content (TRing) over and over again while making money doing so.

    There could be other variables such as simply the age and wealth of the average player. So much data we just don't have in hand in order to make facts instead of pure assumptions since we think we know exactly the tendencies. But tendencies are just that and they change when confronted to different situations.
    For a while I considered the idea that there is this small hyperactive contingent of whales akin to mega millionaires flying in to Vegas for the weekend to drop stacks of bills. But once I started paying attention to posters in other sections of the forum and saw folks dropping $50 on random pet baskets and then other players chiming in about similar spending, or read posts about how someone bought this or that supreme tome or extra accounts for their kid(s) and how they play as a family activity, I've started to draw another picture in my head, and that is basically a break down of DDO players into more than a single monolithic group from which some 4% spend the most and follow a pattern of intense play only when they want to gorge on new loot.

    I speculate that DDO's revenue base is far more diverse than that, and while there is a segment of players who spend very little, the spending by the remaining player base is not actually concentrated into 4% but rather spread out quite a bit more than we realize, with more casual players spending money on these fluff items (and I don't mean that in a derogatory way, the proof is in the spending and they saw enough value in pet baskets to make a purchase), and other less challenging products than power gamers realize.

    But that's just speculation and I have no more (or less) insight into Turbine's sales data than Chai.

  16. #376
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,889

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shorlong View Post
    The fact that I can go into most retail outlets and buy a Chromebook disagrees with you.
    Actually, Chrome OS is a Linux-variant (as are iOS and the other Apple OS's). So, the point still stands that there are two major operating systems.

    EDIT: And I recognize that Linux is derived from Unix.
    Sarlona: Acaat || Ahchuykak || Anaiadeia || Atlacoya || Camalos || Coyopa || Gwylelwiel || Imahidden || Kisin || Pukuh || Temporarily

  17. #377
    Community Member Teh_Troll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    5,874

    Default

    Okay folks . .. Rowan just posted that we're getting a new raid early next year and nothing regarding housing. So I'm going to interpret this as meaning the devs understand the game needs more raids for end-game to be awesome.

    Once again . . . teh_troll stands victorious.

    I'd like to thank my minions for trolling this thread for me, it's allowed me to have a pretty productive week at work. See you all in game.

  18. #378
    Community Member Chai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Wisconsin, birthplace of D&D
    Posts
    20,954

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ungood View Post
    So this is just your personal feelings on the matter, and that makes it nothing more then an Opinion, beyond that, it's future prediction based entirely on your opinion of the situation. Which means, it can't be refuted or proven till it comes to pass.

    Well I am not sure where you get your data, but the real data we have variable shows diminishing returns in this venture, as more people "returned" for MotuD then for Shadowfell, that means this is not a resurgance as you put it, but a steady slow decline in both the people continuing to play, and the people who return for the updates.

    That alone would prove your hypothesis incorrect that the next raid will be a big money maker, as all the numbers show a reduction in returns, and this 'expansion' showed even less retaining then MotuD.
    That alone proves what I have been saying for 3 years now to be correct. People are returning for new releases, but staying for less time afterward - due to the very fact that it does make money through raid timer bypass - which makes the game boring faster for people whose only goal is to attain the best in slot new loot. They attrite again, until the next significant content release with better loot.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ungood View Post
    WIN! .. because that is exactly what they did with FoT, they made the loot of a BRAND NEW raid..into Suck.

    And the one thing that seems to be constant here, is that was a bad business decision.
    Yeap, like I stated, once "the people who pay for loot" demographic gets saturated with that loot, they stop paying for it. Turbine has to then make loot that trumps the old loot so people will continue paying for it on the ASAH, and they are working on a raid currently as well, so the timer bypass will likely sell again afterwards.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ungood View Post
    Anyway. I wonder, did you raid much? I mean, not including Shroud or Tempest Spine, but the raids with the sought after named loot, just curious, as you claimed that opening boxes was fun for you again, and I used to raid quite a bit, and opening that raid box had always been met with anticipation. There was a thrill in it.
    I play both ends of the spectrum. I play permadeath in regular guild runs as well as multiple static groups. Every single chest we have been opening has had significant loot upgrades, which made opening ALL chests exciting again. I also raid and play endgame EE quests in another non-PD guild, and have seen that scene in particular is most irritated that single pieces of loot that used to trade straight up for ottos boxes, is now obsolete, or at the very least, not top tier.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ungood View Post
    I mean, not sure your play style either, but for me every box was something to go after, as they could hold a goodie from time to time, like pulling a Metaline of Pure Good, I even saw a loot-gen, Holy Silver of Evil Outsider Bane, that baby was more precious then most raid gear in the game at the time, then later we could craft them.. and boy did 'loot-gen' see a new life, even if only for raw materials, it was sought after, it was bought off the AH, bought off the Pawn, loot-gen was the shizzle, because we could make the combos we wanted, and that had the potential to be some good stuff at the time.

    Then this loot-gen revamp started and stuff went pear shaped. Say what you will, but this looks like a crippling blow to the future of the games raid scene.

    Time will tell, which of us is right. if it makes you feel any better, I kinda hope you are somewhat correct, that raids come back to life somehow, but, I'll be honest, I'm not optimistic, I saw what happened with the Shroud when they shafted it over for a while... and this was.. much.. much.. worse.
    I dont think Turbine is currently building a new raid only to have the gear it drops be worse than loot gen. The only problem there is it will be ONE RAID. Will the entire endgame raiding scene be this one raid, since gear from the others is trumped by random gen loot? A raid as good as the shroud might be able to carry DDOs endgame for a while. But a raid where people can attain the loot in a weekend of marathon grinding will become boring long before the next one is released.
    Advocating repeated nerfs in the name of "balancing the game" then complaining about how DDO is moving away from D&D, is a direct contradiction in logic - D&D 3.5 (what DDO is based on) is not a balanced game. We can either have a balanced clone MMO with homogenized classes, or we can have a D&D game. We cant have both.

  19. #379
    Community Member Chai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Wisconsin, birthplace of D&D
    Posts
    20,954

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teh_Troll View Post
    Okay folks . .. Rowan just posted that we're getting a new raid early next year and nothing regarding housing. So I'm going to interpret this as meaning the devs understand the game needs more raids for end-game to be awesome.

    Once again . . . teh_troll stands victorious.

    I'd like to thank my minions for trolling this thread for me, it's allowed me to have a pretty productive week at work. See you all in game.
    Just make sure the check is in the mail.
    Advocating repeated nerfs in the name of "balancing the game" then complaining about how DDO is moving away from D&D, is a direct contradiction in logic - D&D 3.5 (what DDO is based on) is not a balanced game. We can either have a balanced clone MMO with homogenized classes, or we can have a D&D game. We cant have both.

  20. #380
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    977

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teh_Troll View Post
    Okay folks . .. Rowan just posted that we're getting a new raid early next year and nothing regarding housing. So I'm going to interpret this as meaning the devs understand the game needs more raids for end-game to be awesome.
    Thumbs up to the raid loving segment! Isn't that what he had already stated before?

Page 19 of 23 FirstFirst ... 9151617181920212223 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload