I would really like to point this out. At current prices on 4 subs month to month it comes to $60 a month. At new prices 3 subs equal $60. So the can afford to lose 1 sub for every 3 kept dor same money. Now here is the big issue, they are losing more subs than that. People such as myself who have several accounts, i have 10 have unsubbed more than one per every 3 kept. This is a net loss across the board. Example at current price i pay $150 a month for 10 accounts. I unsubbed 9 of them so i went from 150 to 20 a month at new prices. Even if i went back up to 3 accounts that is only 60 vs 150. Still a huge next loss from one person. Many people are currently doing or looking at similar things.
You should also look at areas where multiple benefit you such as say indy or mining. Less accounts mean less indy stuff being made or at the least at slower rates. Less mining leads to higher ore prices etc etc.
I really appreciate your candor. Just recently returned to the game and Iâve been vacillating on whether or not I want to take the plunge back into EVE with my 6 accounts. This increase in price is making me reconsider my decision. CCP will have to pull an impressively large rabbit out of the hat at fanfest at this point.
No. But Blizzard isnât the only MMO company out there, are they? One of my examples, after all, was The Lord of the Rings Online. Standing Stone Games is far closer to CCP than they are to Blizzard. Though of course, SSG doesnât have a parent company that can assist with capitalization.
Regardless, itâs perfectly valid to look at how others are managing their finances in these situations and asking âso why does CCP claim they need to do it this way?â Especially since there are a number of alternatives that have been consistently outlined for years.
Lets make some Applejuice out of it, so you could swallow it at least and not put overpriced half rotten apples on the desk and want more for it than when it was fresh fruits.
Really? CCP didnât have backing⌠when? Because the salient time frame is the one in which the pricing changes have occurred. CCPâs pricing changes happened⌠now, while they are owned by a larger company providing considerable potential support.
SSGâs pricing changes, by comparison, happened after they bought their independence, at a time when they did not have any financial support from a larger company. So, again, thereâs no validity whatsoever to say that the choices made by the smaller company that have resulted in a larger number of happy customers were somehow not available to CCP. They pretty clearly were, and they have been for a long time.
Further, the financial history of the two companies, and how they differ, is whatâs not at all salient. It doesnât matter how they came to the point of deciding that they needed to change their pricing structure to increase revenue, only whether they had the same options available to them. Could SSG have increased their prices? Could CCP have attempted to reduce the initial buy-in point and monetize by providing a larger selection of purely cosmetic items their customer base has definitely indicated an eagerness to purchase?
The answer is âyesâ in both cases. As a result, it is entirely appropriate to compare the two companiesâ decisions, and the immediate reaction to them.
We keep bringing it up because CCP is over valuing their stagnating game.
And CCP Effectively Ignoring and going against their player base(We The People) you could see they are acting very arrogant. And if they want this game to last years more, this is def not the way to go about it.
They havenât added any good content for a while they ruined Industry for most people, and it took them a good 2 years or so to fix what they broke, you can see why people donât want to pay luxury prices for something that is disguised garbage, and an empty husk of its former glory.
Itâs like if an Indie dev made a crap game with graphics from the PS2 era, wanted AAA title cost to buy their game.
SP farming is good and all but the pressure to make isk is meh. I SP farm 21 and Iâve mostly used them for ganking. Wouldnât be so bad if we had 2012-2014 levels of player count.
I just stops being fun and stops being a game and turns into chores. Which is unfortunate because thereâs not much fun to be had in eve that doesnât require multiboxing or friends, and unfortunately we have a dwindling PCU and CCP have already pushed most of my friends out of the game years ago.
This is not at all true. CCP were not self-owned prior to the Pearl Abyss acquisition. Instead, CCP had considerable financial backing available to them, as they were owned by a venture capitalist group that includes one of the wealthiest bankers in Iceland. In addition, theyâve seen multi-million dollar investments from outside concerns, including New Enterprise and Novatorâenough of an investment that it saw multiple partners at New Enterprise join CCPâs Board of Directors.
btw goiing a few years backwards and than slowly getting back to where it was years ago isnt stagnateing⌠i mean you didnt move forward but you moved
What pressure? Generally you break even soâŚgranted itâs a bit tedious at times but everything has a price. I think I worked it out that the old log-in bonus alone netted me 18B a yearâŚthatâs before all the free crap they give away. Remember when they gave all the explorer ships? My god that was a ton of free ISPâŚ
Wonderful job of pulling out a passive-aggressive strawman there, btw. Youâll note I never said they were identical, only that the decisions they made offered a similar enough set of options that they could be reasonably compared and evaluated in contrast to one another.
You, on the other hand, have repeatedly shifted your goalposts and generally attempted one dishonest argument tactic after another while attempting to claim that itâs impossible to compare two companies in similar situations: relatively small developers of aging MMOs that need to find ways to increase revenue.
I âwonâ the moment you had to resort to bad-faith arguments⌠so like⌠basically as soon as you started posting.
â 
