Funds
Salut a tous je sais pas ci vous avait remarquer cette augmentation des funds c'est devenue hors de prix 40€ pour 90.000 funds et 4.55 pour 6000 ca commence a faire très chère la plupart des gans qui ...
Forum Discussion
> @gamerdruid said:
> Please remember to post only in English in this forum!
>
> I challenge all that have complained to find examples of big American or European gaming companies that varies their online worldwide prices according to local income levels.
>
> Do Apple charge less, or Microsoft? Do other gaming companies charge less in areas according to local wage/income levels?
Very different kinds of companies and situations - A lot of the Apple products are based on lifecycle costing due to a presumed 12-18 month lifespan, with costs lowering towards the end of the product life. You need to look at an equal comparison.
From a very quick think/look I raise you Netflix - A subscription service - Google says in the UK its £11.99, Argentina is 499 ARS (£4.91) - I've selected the most expensive package in both situations. This game really needs funds to make it playable - To me the model should be similar to a subscription service as you can't do much with 12 hours RT and 100CP. Subscriptions are usually affordable for all - Look at iTunes which has a monthly cost of circa $15
I also challenge your last point on "Do other gaming companies charge less in areas according to local wage/levels" - Even looking at iTunes - I can't get the data easily across global countries, but I don't need to. College students receive a cheaper rate due to their limited income. If you make concessions for people of a younger age and income, why not make concessions for weaker economies?
To me mainly there's 2 issues at play here - One is $40 is a ridiculous price for 50k funds full stop. This translates into nearly 2 weeks worth of food shopping for me as a single person household. The other issue extends from this - People in the UK and US have voiced they feel it's too much and they won't buy/buy as much - in this case in countries with a poorer economy it's definitely too much.
I urge your contact at EA to think about the costing and pricing strategy at hand here as the current model doesn't seem appropriate or wise. There's actually an opportunity here where they could find that the game is more profitable by changing the strategy. I have a few ideas on how this could be achieved, and purely based on the limited background knowledge I have on the costs to EA for the game, it shouldn't be difficult to do.
> Please remember to post only in English in this forum!
>
> I challenge all that have complained to find examples of big American or European gaming companies that varies their online worldwide prices according to local income levels.
>
> Do Apple charge less, or Microsoft? Do other gaming companies charge less in areas according to local wage/income levels?
Very different kinds of companies and situations - A lot of the Apple products are based on lifecycle costing due to a presumed 12-18 month lifespan, with costs lowering towards the end of the product life. You need to look at an equal comparison.
From a very quick think/look I raise you Netflix - A subscription service - Google says in the UK its £11.99, Argentina is 499 ARS (£4.91) - I've selected the most expensive package in both situations. This game really needs funds to make it playable - To me the model should be similar to a subscription service as you can't do much with 12 hours RT and 100CP. Subscriptions are usually affordable for all - Look at iTunes which has a monthly cost of circa $15
I also challenge your last point on "Do other gaming companies charge less in areas according to local wage/levels" - Even looking at iTunes - I can't get the data easily across global countries, but I don't need to. College students receive a cheaper rate due to their limited income. If you make concessions for people of a younger age and income, why not make concessions for weaker economies?
To me mainly there's 2 issues at play here - One is $40 is a ridiculous price for 50k funds full stop. This translates into nearly 2 weeks worth of food shopping for me as a single person household. The other issue extends from this - People in the UK and US have voiced they feel it's too much and they won't buy/buy as much - in this case in countries with a poorer economy it's definitely too much.
I urge your contact at EA to think about the costing and pricing strategy at hand here as the current model doesn't seem appropriate or wise. There's actually an opportunity here where they could find that the game is more profitable by changing the strategy. I have a few ideas on how this could be achieved, and purely based on the limited background knowledge I have on the costs to EA for the game, it shouldn't be difficult to do.
