Tuesday, October 19, 2010

How do you like to pay for your games?(if you even pay for them at all..)

In chapter 5 Castronova talks about the business side of creating virtual worlds for people to play and interact in. He speaks about the development of synthetic worlds and how they are developed like video games with many stages of planning and preproduction. First having a "Alpha" version of the game to test it out but then focusing more on the "Beta test" of the game. Many virtual worlds and online multiplayer games use Beta-testing as a way not only to test there game and see how players react to it so they can make changes and fix problems but as a way to build up buzz and establish a community before the games official launch. Castronova says that "the idea is to get a community of insiders hooked to the game, so that when it goes gold and starts to charge a fee, newcomers will find an active and vibrant community within the world."(ch 5.pg 128) In my opinion I think this has become a fairly common practice of MMO's and FPS online shooters. Game developers have seen this become a great way to get people excited and into their games before they launch, drawing blockbuster sales when the game launches. There is a draw back to doing this though if your game is terrible in Beta-testing the opposite effect can happen and it can cause lack of sales and can make people think the game is crap before it even releases. 


Castronova also talks about the different pricing strategies that occur. Even though this article is old in terms of current technological standards its probably still true that the top pricing strategy is that of a two part pricing system of users buying the software along with paying a monthly subscription fee. Many MMOs like WOW use this model and so does Microsoft with their Xbox Live service. The other type of service of service that i think has seen big leaps in use sense this article was written is Micro-transations, or allowing free use(minus the software fee) but then charging for in game items or property. We are seeing this become huge with social network games like Farmville and Mafia wars. Some MMOs have also changed to this pricing strategy as well like Lord of the Rings Online which has changed from a subscription to free to play with the ability for users to pay for more premium content .

We can also see more in-game advertisements in games today as a source of income for game developers. This really only works best in games that are based off something that already has lot of advertisements in it. Like major sports franchises like the NFL, MLB, NHL, ect.. one in game advertisement that drew quite a bit of attention was a campaign add for President Obama that was featured in a background bilboard for EA's Burnout Paradice.




My question to you is: What type of pricing strategy do you like best and why? Why does one work better than the other? Are you opposed to advertisements in your games?

2 comments:

  1. What an interesting and well-written ost. Let's talk about some of these questions tomorrow. You've answered Tom's question about pricing as a barrier to participation for MMO's--it seems like they started to figure this out and offer at three types of options for players to pay (or not).

    ReplyDelete
  2. I tend to like subscription based games better than games where you pay for goods and services, mainly because with subscription games, everyone pays the same amount and the entire experience is reliant on skill and amount of time spent. With games where you pay for certain goods/services, people with more money can purchase all the best stuff and be really good at a game because of how much they paid.

    I'm not opposed to advertisements in game, as long as they're not distracting. In certain games I actually like them because they can make the games seem more realistic. But in others, it wouldn't work at all. For example, a McDonalds ad in World of Warcraft would seem entirely out of place and take away from the game.

    ReplyDelete