That Big Announcement... - Page 5

MacXXcaM · 2012-06-07, 08:14 AM

Originally Posted by megamold

i could be wrong, but i think a releasedate set in a specific period ( winter for x-mas for ex ) doesnt really apply that much to a F2P game, since it doesnt hit the players where it hurts most ( in their wallet )

ie. they wont have to choose between for ex cod or bf because these both cost money wich not everyone has loads of.
ps2 is free , so anyone can play as long as they have a pc.
this partially negates the rush to make a winter/summer launch imho.

Well, I mostly tend to choose between different games of a similar kind. And if a PlanetSide was there before a Battlefield was released I can imagine many would try PS2 first and be blown away instead of betting on the well known concept of a standard fps title.

Athanasios · 2012-06-07, 08:15 AM

Originally Posted by megamold

i could be wrong, but i think a releasedate set in a specific period ( winter for x-mas for ex ) doesnt really apply that much to a F2P game, since it doesnt hit the players where it hurts most ( in their wallet )

ie. they wont have to choose between for ex cod or bf because these both cost money wich not everyone has loads of.
ps2 is free , so anyone can play as long as they have a pc.
this partially negates the rush to make a winter/summer launch imho.

correct, still winter/spring are the bigest selling periods mostly due to the promoting campaigns they get; the majority of people (not only students but working people as well) have day-offs during these periods (Christmas/Easter holidays) and the purchasing power at that time (gifts) hits its ceiling.

A release "sometime" during the year requires more marketting/promoting to catch the attention of the people.

I bet on a beta on August or July

bigcracker · 2012-06-07, 08:18 AM

Is higby gonna look like IT from the adams family by the time beta gets here?

megamold · 2012-06-07, 08:27 AM

Originally Posted by MacXXcaM

Well, I mostly tend to choose between different games of a similar kind. And if a PlanetSide was there before a Battlefield was released I can imagine many would try PS2 first and be blown away instead of betting on the well known concept of a standard fps title.

true, but if ps2 was a payed game people would have to make a harder choice
do i shell out 50 for BF ( example ) or do i shell out 50 for ps2 ? in this scenario most people would pick BF over ps2
because ps2 is free they will buy BF but still play ps2 anyway because "what the hell its free" so why wouldnt i play it.

this could cause people to see ps2 is way more awesome then BF and leave that laying by the side of the road while switching to ps2 and spending the cash on it when they have the cash to spend.

Athanasios · 2012-06-07, 08:39 AM

Originally Posted by megamold

true, but if ps2 was a payed game people would have to make a harder choice
do i shell out 50 for BF ( example ) or do i shell out 50 for ps2 ? in this scenario most people would pick BF over ps2
because ps2 is free they will buy BF but still play ps2 anyway because "what the hell its free" so why wouldnt i play it.

this could cause people to see ps2 is way more awesome then BF and leave that laying by the side of the road while switching to ps2 and spending the cash on it when they have the cash to spend.

actually, this is not quite the case

according to basic microeconomics you have the "opportunity cost" for each good. By getting something for free AND not paying for something else, you minimiza that cost. And normally people tend to minimize their opportunity cost (although they might not even know what opportunity cost is

).

However do not "normally", because people do not always act rationally.

megamold · 2012-06-07, 08:45 AM

Originally Posted by Athanasios

actually, this is not quite the case

according to basic microeconomics you have the "opportunity cost" for each good. By getting something for free AND not paying for something else, you minimiza that cost. And normally people tend to minimize their opportunity cost (although they might not even know what opportunity cost is

).

However do not "normally", because people do not always act rationally.

i'm not sure i understood that correctly.
you mean that people are more likely to get something for free ( ps2 ) and not pay for something similar ( BF )
rather then buying something (BF) and getting the free thing also (ps2)

right?

Athanasios · 2012-06-07, 08:49 AM

Originally Posted by megamold

i'm not sure i understood that correctly.
you mean that people are more likely to get something for free ( ps2 ) and not pay for something similar ( BF )
rather then buying something (BF) and getting the free thing also (ps2)

right?

right, because paying for something similar (for the same need in general) increases their op.cost.

Opportunity cost is what you give up to get something in order to satisfy a need. Apparently if you can satisfy your gaming FPS need with PS2 (0$) and by NOT paying 50$ for a retail game, then it's like if someone gave you 50$

but as i said, not all people think this way, especially the ones with high income

Hermes · 2012-06-07, 08:50 AM

Radar made me spit out my tea with laughter

megamold · 2012-06-07, 09:02 AM

Originally Posted by Athanasios

right, because paying for something similar (for the same need in general) increases their op.cost.

Opportunity cost is what you give up to get something in order to satisfy a need. Apparently if you can satisfy your gaming FPS need with PS2 (0$) and by NOT paying 50$ for a retail game, then it's like if someone gave you 50$

but as i said, not all people think this way, especially the ones with high income

well ill be damned, i actually learned something

it doenst really apply to me personally tho, mostly because gaming is my hobby and i am in no way averse to spending money on that hobby.
thats not saying im rich or anything, but i set a part of my income aside for my gaming fix.