Ryzom

boinged wrote:Make it free to play with payment for 'optional' items like consumables, tp tickets, crafting mats, access to certain zones, using the same model as a lot of Korean MMOs.

That would destroy most of the good things about the game and its community.

In other words: NO.

I would be willing to pay close to 20 for a month at first to help them get back to normal then have them drop to the competitive rate as the other MMORPGS.

Yes, I'd pay more.
This is an elite game catering to the needs of a small audience. Most people need to be taken by hand and told what to do through quests; few enjoy a sandbox-style game.

Since this is a business and needs to make money (or at least break even), the only solution is to raise the subscription price. Remember, it's not enough to keep the game alive, some content needs to be added - as much as I love Ryzom, I cannot play the exact same game for years.

Also keep in mind that we have inflation. The 15 USD I used to pay 7 years ago when I started my first MMO is worth a lot less now.

Several posts hit the nail on the head here - nothing we all didn't know already, but succinctly put, i.e. that Ryzom is a niche game, and needs to be recognised as such by its new owners, marketed in the right way to the correct demographic. How to do that is beyond me, but I would imagine to be sustainable the pricing has to be adjusted accordingly.

I used to own and run a speciality food shop in a small town in west Wales, and while I KNEW that a lot of my prices were competitive and in some cases even low for some things, other things were, by nature of being made by small-quantity, high-quality producers, expensive compared to the pricing power of local supermarkets and multinationals, and therefore I was percieved as being expensive. The point? Specialty and niche markets are there to be exploited by astute business minds, but first and foremost the business end must be taken care of first, and a balance has to be found between marketing the niche to as wide an audience as possible without alienating those it is aimed at through compromise or over-pricing.

Long story short: yes, I would pay more to play, Ryzom has something that few if any other current games can offer; but on the flip side of that, they must be very careful not to price themselves out of the market.

Without knowing the development objectives, discussing advertisement and pricing is not very practical. However, that does not make it an uninteresting subject.

If the game is to stay lore/story centered, I agree with Faa that targeting the nonstandard gaming community is they way to go. I think finding a way to get exposure on political/issue based blogs would garner some nice rewards. I feel the lore of Atys is designed to mirror the friction between sets of real world ideals, socialism vs. capitalism, environmental purism vs. exploitation, etc... There is very little, if any, strife causing situation that can not be symbolized in some way within the existing framework of the history of Atys. Imagine the glee that readers from the Dailykos would have at slaughtering pixelated readers from the Rush Limbaugh website and vice versa.

I do not think going back to the mainstream gaming community media in search of new players will create a different result then the previous one, unless of course the game becomes more of an industry standard.

I would think it best to keep the monthly fee, an item based game has a customer base that does not suit the existing style of this game. I do not think the Ryzom community or the prospective non paying player would be pleased with their Ryzom experience.

As for monthly cost, I think that would be dependent on service. Ryzom has been hemorrhaging players since it opened. I do not think charging more then previous subscription rate for essentially the same product would end that trend.

arfindel wrote:I beg to differ. Both SWG and Ryzom fate prove with no doubt that this kind of game shouldn't sell for same price as WoW ones or they cannot be... viable. Both games proposed players complicated environments and an evolution that didn't imply only be taken by the hand, led to quest A and then continue through B, C,...N while N means master. By the way, they call it content. From this point of view Ryzom lacks content, there are compeltely different things that Ryzom defines as content.

I don't agree, sorry (EDIT: I agree). You forgot the only sandbox game that, despite it cannot be considered a huge success, is living pretty well: EVE Online.

It's not casual that many people on other forums, always pointed out that Ryzom could be the EVE equivalent with a different settings.

I agree with this vision: if Ryzom will get the necessary features, it can grow up enough to sustain development.

I know a lot people really tired of item-centric dumbed MMO's, regarding the fantasy setting.

Ryzom can fill this hole and became the fantasy sandbox the same as EVE is the sci-fi sandbox.

And EVE cost is almost the same of others.

That's my opinion.

EDIT: sorry Faa, i didn't read well your post, in fact you said almost the same thing ...

Difficult Question, I'm afraid I don't have a single answer. I guess it depends on how the service would be operated, how the new owners would communicate and whether they suceed or not on making me believe on "The Saga of Ryzom with the 95% and the Canopy and all the planets to be discovered in 8 years" dream.... again (funny tho, more than 4 years have passed, already). That said, after all those years of Nevrax and Gameforge twists, I am less willing to "buy the idea" though.

In short: if, as some may fear, the game was bought with the idea of being operated "at minimum cost", that is, to keep the server running with one or two (or a handful of) technical people for the billing and regular maintenance, with almost no updates / upgrades (basically as run by Gameforge) then I would take part in the agony until I got tired and I'd be willing to pay a reasonable cost (competitive prices). "same game, same cost" - 12 Eur for a glorified 3D chat with digging and crafting mini-games, seams reasonable.

I am having trouble to see what exactly could make me pay more. It would (almost surely) be based on a promise of "great things to come", for it would be naive to expect radical changes in a short period of time. This time, it is going to be harder at least for me to "stick around" while waiting. I am already smiling at the (foreseeable) posts of "oh, they are new, don't be so sarcastic, and give Nevr^h^h GameF^H Spiderweb some time!!"

So this question raises more: what do you expect from Ryzom? in short / medium / long term? are you aware of the real status of the game, covering the (almost nonexisting) metalore or pending changes?

Who knows, maybe in short we will have yet another Phelan^H^H VL dev chat!


Finders Keepers!

I'd pay £18.99. If the place was fixed and just as wonderful. (and exactly the same)

Dear Ma'Duk, who suggested an item shop?

I'll master axe just for you mate.

danolt wrote:[...] I think finding a way to get exposure on political/issue based blogs would garner some nice rewards. I feel the lore of Atys is designed to mirror the friction between sets of real world ideals, socialism vs. capitalism, environmental purism vs. exploitation, etc... [...].

Great idea indeed, mainly if it goes in articles not just plain ads.

And of course a relaunch should be done having in mind the bad history of Ryzom plus all the bad advertising it created. An advertising campaign should be done on an almost new product , this inlcudes price policy and all.

But the new publisher has a handful of testers here eager, happy, dazzled to work for them and help and a game concept + world already working. That's a huge asset that usually takes years to get.