crapy clawn forums

$84m x 12 months = $1,008,000,000.00 a year.

What about Source?

The bon-bon and gravy costs alone have got to deal a crippling blow to their bottom line.

And that's why I'll never play a game that charges you for the game and a monthly fee.

Quote:

What about Source?

The bon-bon and gravy costs alone have got to deal a crippling blow to their bottom line.

I dealt a crippling blow to Gabe's bottom line.

Quote:

And that's why I'll never play a game that charges you for the game and a monthly fee.

Eh. Play a game, enjoy, move on. I got waaaay more then my moneys worth out of BF1942 and Vietnam... I'm on the way to getting my moneys worth out of BF2... Prolly won't buy 2142 as i don't care for futurism.

Red Alert was THE KING. Red Alert 2 was awsomer...

UT was the height of the Unreal family, so I refuse to comment.

CS vs. CS:S... both suffer a similar fate, they were used as tools to sell a platform (steam) and a game engine.

Feable arguement for wasting moneys, agent.

Quote:

And that's why I'll never play a game that charges you for the game and a monthly fee.

if you don't, then they'll just have to release crappy expansions that split the playerbase to make money.

what you should say is, "and that's why i'll never play an internet game that's made and maintained by a company trying to make money."

Cases where releasing expansions split the community:
Unreal Tournament
unreal tournament 2003
Unreal Tournament 2004
Counter-Strike
Counterstrike: Condition Zero
Counterstrike: Source
Battlefield
Battlefield 2: SF
Battlefield 2: Euro Forces
Battlefield 2: Armored Fury
Battlefield 2142

And i'm sure there are others i don't have experience with.

pick your poison:
a broken community and no continued support for your game (CS)

A monthly fee.

now, granted, if you're paying a monthly fee and the devs aren't continually upgrading and improving the game to your liking, then stop paying and quit. It'd be like buying a game you know sucks. Don't do it.

Make the game free and pay the monthly fee for the servers. Or pay for the game and make server connections (a la Diablo) free. Don't do both. That's what my beef is. Not just that there's a monthly fee.

smith: lawl, you cheap fucker. normal people with hobbies spend hundreds to thousands a year. Gaming is easily one of the cheapest hobbies to have.

Quote:

i totally agree, coqui. Which is why i've played guildwars (no mo. fee, 1 initial purchase) and Eve (free to try, no initial purchase.) I also have a healthy distaste for the grind of most Mmorpgs. I don't want to have to work or do chores in my GAME. guildwars and eve are rather free of it.

smith: lawl, you cheap fucker. normal people with hobbies spend hundreds to thousands a year. Gaming is easily one of the cheapest hobbies to have.

Author:	Agnt.Smith [ Wed Jul 12, 2006 12:13 pm ]
Post subject:	WOW.
6 million players currently subscribing to WOW... Dev costs = team of 300 for 3 years getting $45K year = $40,500,000 (WAY high estimation) $84,000,000 a month gross (est. $14/month subscription fee). 1 server = $10,000 (badass server + OS)... lets say they have (they don't) a thousand servers hosting the game. $10,000,000 once, paid off in less then a month. A team of 100 admins for the servers making $50k a year each.. $5,000,000. Once a year. Paid off in the first month. $214,500,000.00 gross, for the year. + game sales ($50 each for the 1.5 million users = $300,000,000.) $84m x 12 months = $1,008,000,000.00 a year. The game, in november, stands to make its 2nd billion dollars. Is my math messed up or is that insane. -edited for math.

Author:	Agent_137 [ Wed Jul 12, 2006 12:57 pm ]
Post subject:
developing cost isn't in there.

Author:	DRAGONHAWK [ Wed Jul 12, 2006 12:57 pm ]
Post subject:
WoW is evil. it must be destroyed

Author:	Agnt.Smith [ Wed Jul 12, 2006 1:01 pm ]
Post subject:
Also, my origional number was off, its 6 million people... adjusted main post to include that, an dev costs.

Author:	dime [ Wed Jul 12, 2006 1:27 pm ]
Post subject:
I'd love to see the collective numbers for the farming businesses. I know when I played, I knew 5 or 6 people who spent $100 or more a month buying gold.

crapy clawn forums http://crapyclawn.net/lolwords/

WOW. http://crapyclawn.net/lolwords/viewtopic.php?t=1520	Page 1 of 4

Author:	Agent_137 [ Wed Jul 12, 2006 2:07 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: $84m x 12 months = $1,008,000,000.00 a year. explain the nuts and bolts of that equation. also, i think blizzard is a privately held company. So yea, in anycase, they're rolling in the dough. Also, your upkeep costs are going to be high, they still have devs working to maintain and expand the world. And tech support costs, and all the support necessary to run such a huge gameworld with such a huge population. You can just setup the servers and walk off for a 2 month vacation.

Author:	Agnt.Smith [ Wed Jul 12, 2006 2:25 pm ]
Post subject:
a BILLION in support? Nah. 84Million ($14/month x 6 million users) x 12 months = $1,008,000,000. You honestly think they have more then 100 people still working on WOW? Well, lets do a crazy estimate and say its now 1000 people each making $50k/year. Thats still only $50,000,000. Or maby 2000 people? $100,000,000 a year on maintaining a game?

Author:	assrott [ Wed Jul 12, 2006 2:32 pm ]
Post subject:
What about Source? The bon-bon and gravy costs alone have got to deal a crippling blow to their bottom line.

Author:	Coqui [ Wed Jul 12, 2006 2:37 pm ]
Post subject:
And that's why I'll never play a game that charges you for the game and a monthly fee.

Author:	Hogg [ Wed Jul 12, 2006 2:56 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: What about Source? The bon-bon and gravy costs alone have got to deal a crippling blow to their bottom line. I dealt a crippling blow to Gabe's bottom line.

Author:	Agent_137 [ Wed Jul 12, 2006 2:57 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: And that's why I'll never play a game that charges you for the game and a monthly fee. if you don't, then they'll just have to release crappy expansions that split the playerbase to make money. what you should say is, "and that's why i'll never play an internet game that's made and maintained by a company trying to make money." Cases where releasing expansions split the community: Unreal Tournament unreal tournament 2003 Unreal Tournament 2004 Counter-Strike Counterstrike: Condition Zero Counterstrike: Source Battlefield Battlefield 2: SF Battlefield 2: Euro Forces Battlefield 2: Armored Fury Battlefield 2142 And i'm sure there are others i don't have experience with. pick your poison: a broken community and no continued support for your game (CS) A monthly fee. now, granted, if you're paying a monthly fee and the devs aren't continually upgrading and improving the game to your liking, then stop paying and quit. It'd be like buying a game you know sucks. Don't do it.

Author:	Agnt.Smith [ Wed Jul 12, 2006 2:57 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: Quote: What about Source? The bon-bon and gravy costs alone have got to deal a crippling blow to their bottom line. I dealt a crippling blow to Gabe's bottom line. I'll be dealin a crippling blow to your mahms bottom. Tonight.

Author:	Agnt.Smith [ Wed Jul 12, 2006 3:04 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: Quote: And that's why I'll never play a game that charges you for the game and a monthly fee. if you don't, then they'll just have to release crappy expansions that split the playerbase to make money. what you should say is, "and that's why i'll never play an internet game that's made and maintained by a company trying to make money." Cases where releasing expansions split the community: Unreal Tournament Counter-Strike Battlefield Battlefield 2 Battlefield 2142 And i'm sure there are others i don't have experience with. pick your poison: a broken community and no continued support for your game (CS) A monthly fee. Eh. Play a game, enjoy, move on. I got waaaay more then my moneys worth out of BF1942 and Vietnam... I'm on the way to getting my moneys worth out of BF2... Prolly won't buy 2142 as i don't care for futurism. Red Alert was THE KING. Red Alert 2 was awsomer... UT was the height of the Unreal family, so I refuse to comment. CS vs. CS:S... both suffer a similar fate, they were used as tools to sell a platform (steam) and a game engine. Feable arguement for wasting moneys, agent.

Author:	Hogg [ Wed Jul 12, 2006 3:13 pm ]
Post subject:
I can understand the distaste for pay-to-play games. I myself plan not to play any, because the kind of games that are pay-to-play just aren't appealing to me. I don't understand antipathy toward them, though. The worth of an item is how much people are willing to pay for it. Obviously the people who do pay consider the game worth their money. That would be more than I could say for Source, if I played it for real.

Author:	Agnt.Smith [ Wed Jul 12, 2006 3:34 pm ]
Post subject:
arguements, like Agents moms, are inherently full of holes. im just argueing with you, agent, because its the internet and thats its main purpose. i agree with you, and acknowledge my own closemindedness.. i would also like to submit that i did not purchase* more then 1 game a year at any point of my life, unless you count budget purchases ($10 or less for old titles at walmart). Hell, i didnt even buy HL1, my cousin did and dint like it... *thanks to the internets "Try before you Buy" policy.

Page 1 of 4	All times are UTC-06:00
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited https://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Agent_137 [ Wed Jul 12, 2006 3:20 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: Eh. Play a game, enjoy, move on. I got waaaay more then my moneys worth out of BF1942 and Vietnam... I'm on the way to getting my moneys worth out of BF2... Prolly won't buy 2142 as i don't care for futurism. Red Alert was THE KING. Red Alert 2 was awsomer... UT was the height of the Unreal family, so I refuse to comment. CS vs. CS:S... both suffer a similar fate, they were used as tools to sell a platform (steam) and a game engine. Feable arguement for wasting moneys, agent. Hardly. Not all of us like to play a game, enjoy, move on. Some like to stick with one game for a long time. I'm one of them. So your initial suggestion only applies to those who play games like you do. I did not get my money out of bf2, far from it. I got way the fuck ripped off. Of course, it was my choice, but i still spent far more on that game per hour than any other game I've ever played. And if UT was the height, then had the company had another type of income besides releasing another game, UT would still be one whole strong community. Now, it's 3 dying communities. The bottom line is, how much do you spend to game per hour, and enjoy it? You can't just say, "i won't pay to play ever," on the concept of saving money. You have to run the math. If you won't pay to play for moral reasons, whatever. But don't claim that you're saving money. If you buy two new games a year, that's 100 bucks, assuming you don't buy any expansions or upgrade your comp to play it, or any other extra costs. You play the hell out of those games all year long. Good for you. You only spent 100 bucks on your hobby for a whole year. Cheap by all comparisons. In contrast, Eve for a year costs 150, no upgrades or expansions needed nor ever will they be paid for. So if you buy 3 new games a year, it's the -same damn thing-. And since eve is monthly, (or any other pay to play, i only have experience with eve), you can quit anytime without having spent the whole hog. Play for a few months, want a new game, fine. Quit, buy a new game. The outlier to these generalizations is Counter-strike. It was able to hold our attention since years with only 30 or 50 bucks spent, depending on when you bought half-life 1. Oh wait, no, because we ended up buying CZ. And yea, I upgraded my comp for that. Oh yea, and not long after, CS:S came out, split the community again, and i had to upgrade for that, too, and it still runs like shit. Feable arguement for wasting moneys, agent. edit: p.s. saw hoggs post after mine. I say, "yea."

Author:	Coqui [ Wed Jul 12, 2006 3:33 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: Quote: And that's why I'll never play a game that charges you for the game and a monthly fee. if you don't, then they'll just have to release crappy expansions that split the playerbase to make money. what you should say is, "and that's why i'll never play an internet game that's made and maintained by a company trying to make money." Cases where releasing expansions split the community: Unreal Tournament unreal tournament 2003 Unreal Tournament 2004 Counter-Strike Counterstrike: Condition Zero Counterstrike: Source Battlefield Battlefield 2: SF Battlefield 2: Euro Forces Battlefield 2: Armored Fury Battlefield 2142 And i'm sure there are others i don't have experience with. pick your poison: a broken community and no continued support for your game (CS) A monthly fee. now, granted, if you're paying a monthly fee and the devs aren't continually upgrading and improving the game to your liking, then stop paying and quit. It'd be like buying a game you know sucks. Don't do it. Make the game free and pay the monthly fee for the servers. Or pay for the game and make server connections (a la Diablo) free. Don't do both. That's what my beef is. Not just that there's a monthly fee.

Author:	dime [ Wed Jul 12, 2006 3:51 pm ]
Post subject:
I don't mind paying per month to play. So I'm a dumbass? Probably. I enjoy it.

Author:	Agent_137 [ Wed Jul 12, 2006 3:53 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: Make the game free and pay the monthly fee for the servers. Or pay for the game and make server connections (a la Diablo) free. Don't do both. That's what my beef is. Not just that there's a monthly fee. i totally agree, coqui. Which is why i've played guildwars (no mo. fee, 1 initial purchase) and Eve (free to try, no initial purchase.) I also have a healthy distaste for the grind of most Mmorpgs. I don't want to have to work or do chores in my GAME. guildwars and eve are rather free of it. smith: lawl, you cheap fucker. normal people with hobbies spend hundreds to thousands a year. Gaming is easily one of the cheapest hobbies to have.

Author:	DRAGONHAWK [ Wed Jul 12, 2006 3:54 pm ]
Post subject:
i agree with coqui. i dont mind paying for a game or paying a monthly fee for a game. but i hate when they want you to pay for the game and then you have to pay each month to keep playing it.

Author:	Agnt.Smith [ Wed Jul 12, 2006 4:00 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: smith: lawl, you cheap fucker. normal people with hobbies spend hundreds to thousands a year. Gaming is easily one of the cheapest hobbies to have. blah blah house blah blah 2 cars blah blah rising price of gas blah blah 4 wrecked cards in 1 calander year blah blah travel blah blah lawyers for speeding blah blah

Author:	Agent_137 [ Wed Jul 12, 2006 4:11 pm ]
Post subject:
lawl, drive safer, buy more games.

Author:	Agnt.Smith [ Wed Jul 12, 2006 4:19 pm ]
Post subject:
nah. i only buy the ones required for online gaming... or the ones i honestly want to give someone money for. the rest, like music, can be enjoyed for free.

Author:	Hogg [ Wed Jul 12, 2006 4:25 pm ]
Post subject:
"the Internet's try-before-you-buy policy" LAWL

Author:	KingLoser [ Wed Jul 12, 2006 4:39 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: Quote: Make the game free and pay the monthly fee for the servers. Or pay for the game and make server connections (a la Diablo) free. Don't do both. That's what my beef is. Not just that there's a monthly fee. i totally agree, coqui. Which is why i've played guildwars (no mo. fee, 1 initial purchase) and Eve (free to try, no initial purchase.) I also have a healthy distaste for the grind of most Mmorpgs. I don't want to have to work or do chores in my GAME. guildwars and eve are rather free of it. smith: lawl, you cheap fucker. normal people with hobbies spend hundreds to thousands a year. Gaming is easily one of the cheapest hobbies to have. Theres a limitation by games set up like Diablo and Guild Wars though, which is very evident. You cannot play with more than like 8 people at a time, because the game worlds are hosted client side (at least with Diablo it was, not so sure how the servers work with Guild Wars, but the player interaction is still limited). With pay to play MMOs, since they have dedicated servers for the games, you can have a shit load of people in one area. It just depends on what you want to do with a game.