|
Replies: 10 Brilliant Ideas
*Eyes pop out at all the typing*
Hmmm... I think you both have very good points, and well, here's my opinion:
I personally wouldn't mind having neopets be made pay-per-play if they got rid of all the new stuff, and also gave it a cleaner/faster loading interface (try playing Cheat). Also, they would definitely have to take off the ads if they charge.
However, "I" in this case, means a rich kid in semi-elitist Canada...
I definitely understand Shelley's argument that many (if not all) people will stop playing neopets. All my relatives reside in China, and they would consider paying for a game... well, pure insanity. :)
I've played/play other online games (I go on Yahoo! to play pool and play Diablo II heh). One online game, that is most like neopets (though a completely different genre), "Archmage" proposed the idea of pay-per-play because they weren't generating enough revenue from ads. They went from $20 a month to $10 a month to $10 a YEAR (they kept changing their minds) and finally, they announced that they would cancel those plans completely due to lack of memberbase interest.
What I'm getting at is that I don't think paying to play neopets is ideal for most. Sure it would get rid of scammers, but at what cost? I think that's for the Neopets team to find out.
Posted by TrozMan @ 05/04/2002 10:30 AM PST
*Eyes pop out at all the typing*
Hmmm... I think you both have very good points, and well, here's my opinion:
I personally wouldn't mind having neopets be made pay-per-play if they got rid of all the new stuff, and also gave it a cleaner/faster loading interface (try playing Cheat). Also, they would definitely have to take off the ads if they charge.
However, "I" in this case, means a rich kid in semi-elitist Canada...
I definitely understand Shelley's argument that many (if not all) people will stop playing neopets. All my relatives reside in China, and they would consider paying for a game... well, pure insanity. :)
I've played/play other online games (I go on Yahoo! to play pool and play Diablo II heh). One online game, that is most like neopets (though a completely different genre), "Archmage" proposed the idea of pay-per-play because they weren't generating enough revenue from ads. They went from $20 a month to $10 a month to $10 a YEAR (they kept changing their minds) and finally, they announced that they would cancel those plans completely due to lack of memberbase interest.
What I'm getting at is that I don't think paying to play neopets is ideal for most. Sure it would get rid of scammers, but at what cost? I think that's for the Neopets team to find out.
Posted by TrozMan @ 05/04/2002 10:28 AM PST
*giggle* Don't be mean to your boyfriend. He is right, this won't make any difference. But I like seeing what you are thinking and wanted to tell you what I think :-P I know I won't change your mind but I did want to make you think about people in situations different than yours.
And I still stand by my definition of someone being able to buy luxaries as being rich. Try living on my budget for a few years and you too may change your mind. I don't want huge amounts of money or to buy every cool thing going, but a few spare dollars occasionally to buy some fun without having to feel guilty over unpaid bills would be wonderful. And would make me feel not only rich, but lucky also.
Posted by Shelley @ 05/02/2002 05:20 PM PST
Hmmm, might I add that I forced my bf to read the comments that we were having regarding Neopets and the impact of it becoming a paid-game. He said that the whole thing going back and forth between us were pointless. In addition, he said that our whole debate over having a paid game being for rich people or not won't make a difference in life. He said that we shouldn't even be talking about all this.
Well, I just like to add that I find your comments very insightful Shelley. I may not agree with everything you said, but you brought up very key points that I failed to consider in my letter to the Neopets Staff. I'm glad you posted the comments that you did. So right now, I am refusing to talk to my bf right because what he said about our little conversation here in my blog. pffft.
Posted by Sunyee @ 05/01/2002 07:13 PM PST
Very good points Shelley. They probably do make a ton more money off those ads than anything else. Charging membership fees wouldn't be equivalent to the earnings they make from those ads.
Also, I reread your 1st comments several times and you did say that neopets would become "an exclusive game that only rich americans can play". Rich = money. Then the sentence after that was "Neopets will become just another elitist thing for those with money". Thus in that sentence you equated elistist = money. So if Rich = Money and Money = Elitest, it's easy to deduce Rich = Elitest.
So with that, you can't blame me for misinterpretating what you said in your first post about Neopets becoming a game in which only "rich americans can play" = "elitest americans can play". Then in your most recent post you said "those who can afford luxaries like computer games are rich". Well that's pretty much over half the population in the US and most of the population in Japan. Also I'm a part of that population (ones that own computer games) too, and I can say that I am NOT rich. So I don't see how a generalization of owning computer games can make someone a rich person.
Lastly, I NEVER said that you called "Americans rich elitists". You won't find a single word in my post with that, so "please read all the words I write". So touche (with accent over the e). =P
Posted by Sunyee @ 05/01/2002 04:41 PM PST
Um, and I didn't call Americans rich elitists. In this case Americans have the advantage which is why I didn't mention Japan (if Neopets was situated there I would have). As I said in the last comment, Americans would have the advantage. By making the game only available to those who can pay it would become elitist. In my opinion those who can afford luxaries like computer games are rich. (I know I can't afford stuff like this and I'm by no means poor)
Therefore it would become an elitist game for rich americans. NOT the same as saying americans are rich and elitist.
Please read all the words I write. Perferably in order.
Posted by Shelley @ 05/01/2002 04:08 PM PST
Neopets makes a gigantic profit from those ads. Much more than they will make from a small fee per user. Money is NOT the issue, that is not why they are making changes. The issue is scammers and cheaters who make the game unfair which will not change if we have to pay.
As I said before also, any fee I have to pay will have transaction fees added on (currency change fees aren't cheap) as well as the exchange rate problems. Therefore anyone outside the US will be at a disadvantage. It would cost me a lot more to pay than it would cost you. Enough more that it wouldn't be worth it.
($5 US is actually rather a lot of money in my country, particularly considering my income is in the region of $70 US per week.)
And since Neopets would lose lots of money on the deal and the problems the staff are trying to address would still exist, it would be a total waste of time.
Oh, and I would still have the same opinion if I did live in the US and could afford to pay. I personally want the game to be fair and want anyone with a computer and connection to be able to play no matter where they live or how much they earn.
Posted by Shelley @ 05/01/2002 04:02 PM PST
I just re-read your argument and I forgot that Neopets had these advertisement on their website. I think if the game does become paid, those ads need to go. I don't like all the stupid commercials that's popping up on the site. It's very irritating. Just like if I paid to go to a website, I don't want to see advertisments on them. Also, just because we have money to pay $5 for an account doesn't make us elitests. I often times work extra hard just to be able to afford items from Japan. Japan is a very rich and wealthy nation. All their products costs twice as much as the US. Why doesn't anyone call them rich elitests??
Posted by Sunyee @ 04/30/2002 05:30 PM PST
But Shelley, what happens if they charged $5/account? That's like 41 cents a month. People can afford 41 cents a month. Even a homeless man can find 41 cents a month on the ground. I'm not saying to charge an extraordinary amount of money like $20/month, but 41 cents a month. Or maybe $20/account for life?? Just something to keep up the quality of Neopets games.
Before I got DSL, I used to go out of my way for a fast connection. I purposely went to other people's workplaces on the weekends just to have a chance at Neopets with their fast T1 connections.
DSL is always needed to have fun at the restock or money tree. But if someone had a 56K connection doesn't mean they can't benefit from other aspects of Neopets if the game went back to the way it was.
Posted by Sunyee @ 04/30/2002 05:12 PM PST
Money isn't the issue. Scammers and making the game fair for everyone is the issue. And charging for it won't fix those problems. Scammers will still steal accounts and still screw up the game. People will still use bots and those with faster connections will always have an advantage over the rest of us. Neopets will still need to do stuff like they have been to keep it fair.
What paying will do however is make neopets an exclusive game that only rich americans can play. The majority of the international audeince would be gone in one sweep (I certainly wouldn't be there with the exchange rate and credit card fees and currency conversion fees). Many of the younger players, yes those ones the marketing company that neopets is owned by are aiming at, all gone. They don't have their own incomes and not everyone is lucky enough to have parents that can afford stuff like this. Or who even want to pay for something that pushs advertising at their children. All those players who don't have jobs or are single parents or retired or university students or whatever, none of them will be abe to pay. Neopets will become just another elitist thing for those with money and who live in the right country, denied to the rest of us.
And what for? Neopets as it is makes a huge profit for the company that runs it. I personally think they would lose money this way. They would certainly lose many more players than they are losing now.
As for keeping part of the site free, I've seen other places go to a split paid/free version thing and the free version always gets screwed over. Because why put lots of effort in to making two seperate sites, which takes twice as much work and resources, when you can just focus on one. If someting goes wrong they are obligted to fix the paid version first since they have a contract with those players, and often the problems in the free version never get addressed.
So I am totally against moving to a paid version and really don't see that it would make any difference to the stuff you are worried about anyway.
Posted by Shelley @ 04/30/2002 04:32 PM PST
|