September 09, 2010, 05:27:13 AM
News: As promised, here is another update of the editor with improvements and bug fixes
Pages: 1 [2]
Print
Author Topic: Business Strategy  (Read 1200 times)
TorakunSama
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 422


Designer


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #15 on: September 11, 2009, 04:33:10 PM »

Business strategy, is a way for the creator of the Pangean universe to make it even bigger. In order for the game and the engine to grow we'll need funding. Just saling a game would do, the trend now is to have players pay a monthly fee, on an online game. However, by the time Pangea comes out as a full fledged online game, it will probably find extremly matured games in the market, primary rivals : Entropia Universe; Infinity Universe; Eve Online, and probably more to come.
At the exception of Entropia all these games have builtin economic systems that allows players to develop in the game. In my vision of the game, Entropia's is the model to follow. Only that every player has to bring in his own pocket money to the economical system. If a society is expanding, it needs funding. Now we could create a virtual central bank and create more virtual money, but still the amount of belongings one person can have in a game like Pangea, may quickly become astronomical, so we'll need more hardware support, the subscription fee might not be enough, but what will motivate the players to invest more, if is not the possibility to make profits if not a living out of the game?
Of course, the smaller the game, the simpler it should be... but take a look on the current engine, what's simple about it?
Besides, perfection does not derive from simplicity and petty work, but from taking the hard way and work your head up to the top.
Logged

'If you're not born a natural genius, can become one if you try hard enough! ' Gai-sensei
awakened
Newbie
*
Posts: 22


View Profile Email
« Reply #16 on: September 11, 2009, 05:17:14 PM »

I think linking ingame economy with real money is a potentially horrible idea.

for that to work you have to be 100percent sure that its balanced, fair, not abusible, etc., else you have had users for the longest time.
Its true that it kind of works for second life to incorporate real money, but the basic premise is totally different, as the money isn't directly linked to a game system (as second life basically has nothing like gameplay) but is just used for the same transactions people would make in real life, only in game. When people decide that ingame assets are worth enough that they actually start going to ebay for gold, than thats all fine and dandy and then is the time to think about how to use that value that people attached to game objects. But thats vastly different from actively trying to sell people stuff, or letting them earn money ingame.

The kind of system that actually could work, and was already mentioned, is (even if its a buzzword thats used an awful lot lately) Micropayments, like special ships, or real estate like in second life, or stuff like that. The problem is, you need people who are actually willing to spend real money on it, and you need to make it cool enough that they feel its worth it, but not too cool, else all the players who don't want to (or can) spend a lot of money (or any at all) in the game leave because all the cool stuff is only accessible for a fee anyways. And a playerbase is what an online game needs most. Thats also what an online game loses fastest if it makes only a small mistake, and orders of magnitudes faster if real money was involved in the mistake.

When linking real money with a game in a different way than paying to be able to play that game, you tread dangerous ground. Creating the next big thing and a 'real' virtual universe which people see as a sufficient alternative to real life that they consider investing money there, isn't very likely to happen.
Not to mention the potential legal issues arising, especially with the vastly different legal situations in many countries.

I don't say it cannot work, i just say its highly unlikely that you can set out to do something like that from the beginning. After all you want to make a game, not a living environment for gold farmers, whom you pay out of your own pockets.

PS: Eve is really the best example for a complex in-game economy. its also the best example for how to keep all but the most hardcore players out because its so freakin complex Wink Not to say it isn't cool, i would play it if its combat were more like wing commander or freelancer or jumpgate online, and not WoW in space.

PPS: my post may sound pretty negative, but im just very sceptic about that kind of thing, and you should be very very certain that you know what you're getting yourself into when you go in that direction. In my experience most players react very allergic when real money starts spilling into a gaming environment.
« Last Edit: September 11, 2009, 05:30:53 PM by awakened » Logged
TorakunSama
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 422


Designer


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #17 on: September 11, 2009, 05:53:46 PM »

Sure, you've got good points! But, you see, even on EvE, developers found ways to allow players to gain more ISK with real money. Besides, the money injected in the virtual economy is part of the subscription fees, and it stays on the player's pocket. Then he'll use that money (converted into game money) to fund himself, by buying stuff another player might be selling. Besides, I'm talking about a very high cnversion rate so that you can by a car with the equivalent of 1$. The real money is so diluted players wont make millions with it. But the fact of being able to make money and being able to extract it from the game, is the point I'm aiming at.
Economy will run like in every game, but players will have a monthly income from their own fee, that will allow them to pay for example, a loan they made on the bank, to build a ship yard. And making more money will result from mission accomplishement, trading and investing. All things are acquired with game money. The only difference is that you can convert your earnings into real money and vice versa, the money will come from the players, the let's say 30% pocket money will be managed by the players in the virtual market. So it's player's money for the players.

Besides is a game, people go to casinos and lose tones of dollars in 'funny' games and they don't always beleive they're being robed.Having a fun game, with a fair economical system that gives a chance to everyone to have access to technology or build an Empire, might be as well atractive.
Logged

'If you're not born a natural genius, can become one if you try hard enough! ' Gai-sensei
Jochen Stier
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Posts: 498


Founder/Programmer

jochen.stier@gmail.com
View Profile
« Reply #18 on: September 11, 2009, 10:23:26 PM »

Quote
The only difference is that you can convert your earnings into real money and vice versa, the money will come from the players, the let's say 30% pocket money will be managed by the players in the virtual market. So it's player's money for the players.

"vice versa" is very risky! Who is going to come up with the real money. I like the idea of giving every player a fixed amount of money with a monthly subscription, but that should be non-refundable. If someone wants to exchane their in-game money into real money then they should do so on the free market...i.e. E-bay. An economic system is very tricky. If you increase the money supply by some percentage every month you could easily cause inflation if you don't increase the number of goods at the same time.
Logged
awakened
Newbie
*
Posts: 22


View Profile Email
« Reply #19 on: September 12, 2009, 03:19:40 AM »

Quote from: TorakunSama
Besides is a game, people go to casinos and lose tones of dollars in 'funny' games and they don't always beleive they're being robed.Having a fun game, with a fair economical system that gives a chance to everyone to have access to technology or build an Empire, might be as well atractive.

They keyword is "lose". Casinos don't expect to lose money, they want to make it, so the whole system is rigged to be close to a zero-sum game for the players, skewed a bit in the losing direction, so the casino has a huge net gain. That works because they have a big enough money pool to buffer the occasional lucky devil hitting some jackpot, and still walk out with their pockets stuffed, as their system is intentionally unfair. And because people, for unknown reasons, still think the casinos are willing to give them money for free, and completely disregard that the chances that they win something are close to zero, a thing that gambling does to people.

In Pangeas case that would mean that you have to either carefully design the in-game economy to be unfair enough that you walk out with profits (pretty hard, seeing as the economy would be nowhere close to as simple as a game of poker or a slotmachine), or be prepared to pay the players for playing your game, out of your own pocket.
Although it could be an interesting simulation of a bubble market Wink until the bubble crashes that is ...


Quote from: Jochen Stier
...

pretty much the most critical parts of my thoughts summed up, and with the restrictions you said (keeping the money going one-way only) i think it could be a nice way to make players feel they gain more for their subscription than just the right to play the game. Although if you want to base a real economy on that money, there has to be a drain on the other end, else too much money is created, inflation, bubble, yadda yadda.

« Last Edit: September 12, 2009, 03:22:14 AM by awakened » Logged
TorakunSama
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 422


Designer


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #20 on: September 12, 2009, 06:01:09 AM »

Quote
In Pangeas case that would mean that you have to either carefully design the in-game economy to be unfair enough that you walk out with profits

Profit is calculated when the monthly fee is decided. The game earns with the 7$ from the monthly fee. There is no need for the system to be unfair, since it's rigged to make the players actually get money

It seems that I'm not clear enough.

We wont be paying anyone out of our pocket, since the economy is run by the players. The money they get is the money that is brought into the game by other players. And if there is too much money in the bank (we set a limit of cash one can have at home), we can collect the extra as a war effort or for the building of a big thingie, or even by increasing the taxes. Besides that money is to be refund to the players anyway, so there's no need to even touch it. The aim is not to make money out of the economy. Such economical system is in order to give more to the players (fun+money). People can also learn from that (budget management), or even get rich. We can also give some tips to help losers so they can also have some gain. When there's enough money in the market, it will become easier for players to earn more out of it.

So it goes like in a challenge were 10 participants bet 10 dollars each, and the winner gets 50%, the 2nd gets 30%, 3rd 20% and the rest nothing! The earnings for the winners come from the losers.

Such a system can of course be implemented afterwards, but i don't think is really a bad idea.
Logged

'If you're not born a natural genius, can become one if you try hard enough! ' Gai-sensei
awakened
Newbie
*
Posts: 22


View Profile Email
« Reply #21 on: September 12, 2009, 08:51:06 AM »

It seems i misunderstood where you were aiming at.

Stated like this, it may actually be not that bad of an idea, although im still a bit sceptical Wink
But if the available pool of money really consists only of a small percentage of what players paid as a fee, at least it has less dangers attached and problems for the developer side.
If, as you said, the amount a player can get "refunded" is limited to, lets say his monthly subscription fee (to use an arbitrary value that is easy to calculate with) that would enable a small percentage of players to play without paying (roughly 1 in 3 at the ~70% "tax" you set), and the rest just plays normally, that would indeed may be a reason for some of the players to work hard in game, without (m)any negative effects for the others.

I'll retract my fiercest counterpoints, but still have to think a bit about what merits this really holds. But i grant you, it could be an interesting system.
Logged
TorakunSama
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 422


Designer


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #22 on: September 12, 2009, 10:43:59 AM »

Oof! I should have realized earlier that my message wasn't clear enough. I'll carefully investigate and come up with an entire system propositions which can be very attractive. My original idea was to combine pocket money and the event manager. This way players could start their custom bets, challenges, street fight, street race, pirate missions, etc, adding some spices to the game. But the main objective is to allow players to build many cities, adding more to the game...
Logged

'If you're not born a natural genius, can become one if you try hard enough! ' Gai-sensei
Pages: 1 [2]
Print
Jump to: