DC Universe Online's revenue model and development discussed
Filed under: Business models, New titles, News items, DC Universe Online
To us, it sounds like there's a fairly good chance we'll see some kind of microtransaction system for DC Universe Online. And why not? Superhero games with lots of costume customization make for good itemization, such as the Cyborg Booster pack in City of Heroes.
It wasn't all RMT and business model discussion, though. Yanagi also brings his the team's desire to finish all the game's features before it ever hits beta, which we think is a wonderful idea. Between bad beta experiences and their effect on games and seemingly half-cooked features in launched titles, it's nice to see developers paying attention.
_thumbnail.jpg "Aion Beta: Asmodian Ascension Quest")
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
JP said on 11:20AM 12-29-2008
RMT = potential. I agree. There's got to be a better way to get these games to players w/out the sub based model. Just needs to be implemented right.
As far as "complete and polished" release... meh. This isn't anything I haven't heard before. BFD. They all say that.
Reply
craylon said on 12:59PM 12-29-2008
i still dont understand why rmt always seem to mean "let the players buy addons"
i mean dc is a comic book company
why not set a free to play universe with minor quests/stories and on top of that let the fans pay for content modules just like a comic book.
charge $2.00 for example for a good questline with a few subquests and an entertainmentvalue of lets say 6 hours.
i find this much more honest then charging 2.00 for a cyborg eye and it would bring in money based on quality of the content and not on some scam.
Reply
Kyle Horner said on 1:04PM 12-29-2008
Actually, the Cyborg pack is $10 and comes with a full costume set, new player FX, new emotes and a self-destruct power.
Unfortunately, I don't think we'll ever see something like $2 for 6 hours of quality content. Something of that length and quality would probably cost closer to $10 or $15 in actuality.
The trick is to figure out how much people are willing to pay for something. Charge too little and people will think it's not worth the money, but charge too much and everyone thinks you're trying to fleece them for all they're worth. It's important to find a happy middle-ground for both player and developer.
Atnor said on 1:27PM 12-29-2008
Here's an idea... how about charging me $15 bucks a month and give me all the content? Oh, they want MORE money... gotcha. I understand that RMT has a big upside for the gaming companies... I just don't understand why gaming consumers are so gung-ho over it.
I personally can't stand the idea of being nickel and dimed to death, or being guided to fork over an extra 2 bucks whenever I find something remotely cool or fluffy....
Reply
JP said on 2:33PM 12-29-2008
So… if you pay $15 in $3 increments b/c that’s how much and often you play.
And I pay $12 in $3 increments b/c that’s how much and often I play
And someone else pays $3 b/c they barely get on…
You’re still paying $15. What’s the big deal?
All this will do is allow for more casual gamers to be able to justify limited play time vs. how much they can spend. I don’t understand people’s angst against a system that could ultimately allow for more players to get involved in the game.
Atnor said on 3:07PM 12-29-2008
Have people pay less money depending on how much time they spend in-game.... I'd be all for it. I'd love for people who are in-game less to be able to pay less per month. Somehow though, I don't think that's what the developers have in mind with RMT style business models.
I guess my main skepticism with it is, if it's gonna just be fluff type stuff, I don't see how too many people are gonna want to spend any real cash on it. But, maybe they will. And, I doubt that companies won't have real pressure to not limit RMT items to just fluff. And if RMT things are available that aren't just fluff, then that's a game where real-life cash affects in-game play, and that makes me very apprehensive. But apparently the way things are going, I'm in the minority.
If they can find a way to do it that doesnt feel like they're trying to squeeze out every last dime from their customers, sure. I'm just highly skeptical by default I guess. :)
And yeah, no big surprise on the "we want to be polished" rhetoric. You always think they finally get that message, but titles just keep coming unfinished... weird.
Reply