Gold Pricing & Event Requirements

[RealTeflonDon]

So, right now most Job LTQs require a vault or so to complete. Everything else is roughly the same.

That's something like $500-600 for an individual to complete every event in a month. Add in what it costs to be competitive in Wars & complete SLTQs.. Now we're nearing the $1,000+ range. It's simply not affordable, or, justifiable for the overwhelming majority of players.

GREE can continue targeting that small group of addicted & rich players. In turn, their new players will be discouraged by the heinous costs of "playing" the game and more people in general will cease spending, potentially outright quitting.

Or

GREE could target a larger group of players by reducing the prices of gold and/or the gold required to complete events. This would help hook new players, encourage spending from many free players & former gold spenders, and would indubitably increase the population of active players (because now almost everyone can actually play the game in its entirety- instead of being let down numerous times a month).

I know, what a crazy thought, but look at it like this. There's maybe a few thousand players hitting that first tier of the gold bonus program. 6,000*500 = $3mil (of course there are the heavy spenders to add into that & obviously I don't know the exact number of players hitting each tier of the bonus program. Important to note, they're definitely bringing in more than $3mil/mo).

So we have that rough estimate. Now, what if the game were more affordable. What if you had, 100,000*20? Okay, that's only $2mil, but that's ONE event. Multiply that by 5 or 6 & we're talking $10+mil. Now factor in SLTQ events and GREE's probably looking at $20+mil.

I know, crazy!! So why are things the way they are? Is it to help keep players stratified? That could easily be corrected by including more leaderboard events, as well as drastically improving war prizes for the Top 250 teams.

The only downside for players, would be having to readjust IP & player stat requirements. Oh, and the game would be vastly more fun. Wait, that's not a downside.

Anyways, I'm sure there's going to be a lot of TL;DRs & the "shut up or pay ups". I can see why you would want to protect your investments, but, if done properly, the players would still be stratified as they are now, for the most part. Increased emphasis on leaderboard events & War would help to keep all of that in tact.

Food for thought, GREE

[Love and War]

Well said...the majority of us do not have a disposable income to spend over a thousand pounds every month on a mobile game!!! I don't even bother with ltqs for the simple fact that I know I'll never finish them without 2 vaults of gold! The way this game is so expensive now loads of members are retiring now. Come on now gree fix up!

[Jclew]

I have to agree with all this as well. I would be interested to see real numbers of gold buying for the last 6 months. Not even total gold bought, but just percentages.. Id be willing to bet they have dropped. Along with active players.

[lordsagacity]

I have to agree with all this as well. I would be interested to see real numbers of gold buying for the last 6 months. Not even total gold bought, but just percentages.. Id be willing to bet they have dropped. Along with active players.

For me, it used to be $20/month before syndicate started. It rose to $200/month for the first several wars and dropped to zero 6 months ago. Being in a top syndicate requires unaffordable money and time. I cannot justify devoting $200/month, continuous attention in weekdays and hours of tedious tapping in weekends to a mobile game.

[OmgMileyCyrus]

Even if a top 10 syn requires 250k ip that can be done with just a couple vaults. Some top 50 teams have free players. It's not wars that are the problem, despite everyone blaming SAS, TAW, SC, PnL, and cathouse. It's the other events which are completely grees fault. This hasn't been a free game for a really long time now.

[RealTeflonDon]

Even if a top 10 syn requires 250k ip that can be done with just a couple vaults. Some top 50 teams have free players. It's not wars that are the problem, despite everyone blaming SAS, TAW, SC, PnL, and cathouse. It's the other events which are completely grees fault. This hasn't been a free game for a really long time now.

I agree that wars aren't the problem, but it's all cumulative. The fact that 100% of events now require gold use is discouraging new players from sticking around. It's discouraging free players & former spenders from paying again. It's even causing players to outright quit. (Granted, the cost of the game isn't the only contributing factor for those that do quit).

The entire point of my thread was to show that an inclusive pricing scheme would better suit the game, rather than milking a relatively small percentage of players. Not only for GREE 's profits but, their long-term viability as well.

[Jclew]

Even if a top 10 syn requires 250k ip that can be done with just a couple vaults. Some top 50 teams have free players. It's not wars that are the problem, despite everyone blaming SAS, TAW, SC, PnL, and cathouse. It's the other events which are completely grees fault. This hasn't been a free game for a really long time now.

Just a couple vaults is 200$ full price. With two wars a month, $400 into a mobile game and the amount of time involved is ridiculous. That's continually too. With no other event involved, and if you don't do all the other stuff your stats aren't gonna stay competitive to all the other sinkholes sooo yeah, totally ridiculous.

400$ a month will pay my cable, internet, phone and insurance with gas money left over...

[OmgMileyCyrus]

I agree that wars aren't the problem, but it's all cumulative. The fact that 100% of events now require gold use is discouraging new players from sticking around. It's discouraging free players & former spenders from paying again. It's even causing players to outright quit. (Granted, the cost of the game isn't the only contributing factor for those that do quit).

The entire point of my thread was to show that an inclusive pricing scheme would better suit the game, rather than milking a relatively small percentage of players. Not only for GREE 's profits but, their long-term viability as well.

yes but they are programmers and developers.....never taking an economics course wouldn't surprise me in the least. They will have to learn the hard way like democrats, socialists and communists. When you don't understand the free market you're doomed to economic failure.

[OmgMileyCyrus]

Just a couple vaults is 200$ full price. With two wars a month, $400 into a mobile game and the amount of time involved is ridiculous. That's continually too. With no other event involved, and if you don't do all the other stuff your stats aren't gonna stay competitive to all the other sinkholes sooo yeah, totally ridiculous.

400$ a month will pay my cable, internet, phone and insurance with gas money left over...

if the game is out of your price range then you would be irresponsible to spend money on it....

[GucciMane]

who said you have to participate in every event. I just nixed Case Events off the list muself when I realized that they were discriminating on drop rates.





not all of us care to have the highest stats in our level, especially now that the rivals list has been expanded to include minis with more efficiently allocated experience regardless.

[RealTeflonDon]

Cyrus, Gucci, you two are missing the point of the thread- That, an inclusive pricing scheme would be more profitable for GREE, while making the game more enjoyable for the majority.

[OmgMileyCyrus]

Cyrus, Gucci, you two are missing the point of the thread- That, an inclusive pricing scheme would be more profitable for GREE, while making the game more enjoyable for the majority.

no, I understand that completely

[GucciMane]

Cyrus, Gucci, you two are missing the point of the thread- That, an inclusive pricing scheme would be more profitable for GREE, while making the game more enjoyable for the majority.

no, I understand that completely.




Paying customers shouldn't have to develop their game's business model. That's not how business works.

[RealTeflonDon]

:-) excellent.

Paying customers shouldn't have to develop their game's business model. That's not how business works.

Totally agree on this point. Granted, businesses do have to adapt/evolve on occasion in order to stay profitable.

[TooFlyRobbie]

Cyrus, Gucci, you two are missing the point of the thread- That, an inclusive pricing scheme would be more profitable for GREE, while making the game more enjoyable for the majority.

That's a second step. The first step is always making players' expenses justifiable. If there's no incentive to be strong, the cost of the game wouldn't be justifiable, not even if a vault costs $1.00,GREE are "lucky"? that enough players "can't let go" when it's evident that the game is "dead" or very close to that. By taking away the very thing players (GOLD players of course) want, they completely killed it.

Meaning that, lowering the prices, would be a desperate move that would not save the game, nor will it produce what it produced a few months back/"when it was fun" IF the basics stay as they are now, because as the game get easier (less expensive) for the majority they'll start losing interest and realizing there no point if everyone has the same strength. it's a wrap.