$2.99 for an increased game limit?

[Yipperpants]

(09-07-2012 10:14 AM)worldfamous Wrote:  I understand that servers don't run themselves but I'm not most consumers. Most consumers don't give rip what the cost of doing business is. Consumers seek value. All they need to do to stay in business for the long haul is introduce a new team every couple months. They could even charge for new maps. People pay $10-$15 every quarter for new COD maps. You just can't tell your customers to cough up $3 to run the servers. We need content and value.

It works really for major companies who can basically "buy servers in bulk". For example, Zynga owns roomful of servers, have market analysts that guaranteed them that their hundreds of millions of users will each average $2 a month, and have plenty of pocket change to spare if any gamble fails. On the other hand, unsupported startups (that is, those that aren't working on commissioned jobs on the side) have very little pocket change (these two guys are in their early-mid twenties with student loans to consider) and often indebted further due to taking out loans to start, can't bank on a steady revenue, but can bank on their rented server billing for tens of thousands of dollars to house half a million free users (which like Necrocat219 mentioned, might have been a bittersweet surprise).

(09-07-2012 10:14 AM)worldfamous Wrote:  I don't know why they didn't just put ads in for the free users.

As I understand, there may be a few less obvious reasons. First, ad money isn't significant unless you're popular enough to be respected by big ad companies. Second, it comes at the risk of sending your players mixed signals to play other peoples' games, which most ads currently are. Third, the game is perceived to be lesser quality product. Both two and three may be especially undesirable since Adam&Alex are trying to build a up brand name. And finally, consumers are less willing to invest (in terms of money and in trust) in a developer if they know that the developer already has a source of income that they're making off the players anyways.

The announcements have been pretty honest: "As long as Outwitters is paying the bills, we can keep working on it!" Much like for servers at American restaurants, a simple thanks to indie developers doesn't keep the lights on. I think many people can understand that; if US gamers* can learn to tip waiters, we can learn to support developers. I mean hey, these talented guys have likely turned down really nice offers from Zynga just so they can make awesome games for us. I applaud developers who are willing to be honest with me and give me the option to vote with my money instead of selling my data and time without my consent to ad corporations.

*International gamers are more awesome.