Make it non-gold

[James]

Originally Posted by Tigairius

I will list a few things that are more expensive than Graal that we do quite a lot more frequently:

- The average person spends more than $40/week on groceries & food. (This is based off of the friends I've asked)
- Filling a tank of gas lately takes more than $40 depending on your car.
- Things like the average phone bill costs sometimes $60/m
- A console game usually costs $60, how long does that entertain you? Sometimes 3 months if it's really good. How long does Graal entertain you? Indefinitely.

I agree Graal needs to see more updates and changes to the system to become more successful, however, making more free things won't help the situation.

1) Food is pretty mandatory spending, if ya get my drift.

2) Gas is not necessarily mandatory, but in this day and age you really need a car to get around.

3) A cell phone really depends on your social status/job/etc., although not mandatory either, a lot people do need them.

4) You get to have the game forever, and XBOX Live really brings the replayability factor out with some games. I'd rather pay for XBOX Live Gold then Graal.


I do however agree with you on how people are confused. The website has been dumbed down and doesn't reflect Graal in the least. Heck, their first website ever was better than this one. I liked it better when all we had to do was upgrade for one thing and we had access to everything. I think Graal is worth about $10.00 for a whole year in its current state. I just feel like Cyberjoueurs is just going to let the game die and move to something else.

[Elizabeth]

so, what about people like me? i'm not old enough to get a job, i don't know anyone with kids- therefore i can't babysit, newspaper route would be hell around here, and i'm pretty sure my parents won't give me the money for a graal subscription. how am i supposed to pay?

[Bell]

Originally Posted by Elizabeth

so, what about people like me? i'm not old enough to get a job, and i'm pretty sure my parents won't give me the money for a graal subscription. how am i supposed to pay?

Make Stephen pay for it.

[Elizabeth]

Originally Posted by Bell

Make Stephen pay for it.

laff

[Tigairius]

Originally Posted by James

I think Graal is worth about $10.00 for a whole year in its current state.

What would you do to improve it and lift it out of it's current state?

[Rufus]

Originally Posted by Tigairius

I will list a few things that are more expensive than Graal that we do quite a lot more frequently:

- The average person spends more than $40/week on groceries & food. (This is based off of the friends I've asked)
- Filling a tank of gas lately takes more than $40 depending on your car.
- Things like the average phone bill costs sometimes $60/m
- A console game usually costs $60, how long does that entertain you? Sometimes 3 months if it's really good. How long does Graal entertain you? Indefinitely.

I think you're hugely misrepresenting the playerbase with these so-called expenditures.

• The average Graal player doesn't spend a penny on food per month, never mind weekly. I'd even go as far as to say the average gamer doesn't spend that much money on food at all.
• I'd love to know how many Graal players actually drive, because I don't think that many do.
• Phone bills are another thing that the average Graal player doesn't spend money on, that is why they have parents.
• As for the console game entertainment lol.. If you are spending money on a console game you can expect quality in what you are buying and you can expect a consistency in the amount of content you get from it. Graal does not provide entertainment "indefinitely" at all and even claiming something like that is just hilarious. In the case of Graal Kingdoms, a bunch of updates every 4 months is not the average gamers idea of indefinite entertainment either.

You seemingly ignored the fact that there is a huge MMORPG market out there, with many of the games being open for all players for free. In this saturated market there are tons of higher quality games charging at a lower price. Why is an average consumer going to pick Graal over the competition? Graal Kingdoms' gameplay is fairly average after all.

[Tigairius]

Originally Posted by Rufus

You seemingly ignored the fact that there is a huge MMORPG market out there, with many of the games being open for all players for free. In this saturated market there are tons of higher quality games charging at a lower price..

How do you think we could get higher quality for Graal?

[Rufus]

Originally Posted by Tigairius

How do you think we could get higher quality for Graal?

That's not for me to decide.

[Tigairius]

Originally Posted by Rufus

That's not for me to decide.

I think it is, very much so. You guys throw your weight around on the forums like you know what's best but when it comes to crunch time where are your solutions to the problems?

You, as a player, a staff member, (a developer?), should definitely have say in the future of Graal. In fact, I think you would be upset if you didn't.

If you're willing to to find all of the faults, certainly you could attempt find some solutions.

If you just point out all of the negative things but make no attempt to contribute you just look like a complainer.

You are just trying to rally up the people on the forums to perpetuate the argument in the negative direction. Where is the positive?

[James]

Originally Posted by Tigairius

What would you do to improve it and lift it out of it's current state?

First, it would help if Stefan was actually more involved in getting the client REAL new features. NewWorld supported layered-tiles, why hasn't this been made available after 7-8 years? The flying-technology (Mode 7 I believe) still isn't available to developers, or it has been made available to only a select few. I'm only brushing the surface here, Graal's editor needs some true updates. Gani shop needs to be updated and should be part of the main Graal editor as well.

Second, why should developers have to pay to create content? Even if someone were to create a high-quality playerworld, they are still having to shell money out of their pocket for their hard work. I don't see the justification in this, as Graal would only generate revenue, not the developers. Remember, the average Graalian age is 12 or something, right? Where are they supposed to get $120? I can't even post a damn link without it getting approved because of that. They should atleast make some sort of official testbed server for serious developers that don't have the cash. It shouldn't be insanely hard to aquire access to this either. I know it makes them fast cash or whatever, but in the long run it's not going to help them at all. At least they could do is help the developers out more, and not make it such a pain in the arse.

Third, why is there not a new flagship server? If they would have put some time into a new one over these past few years they could actually have something worth playing. I've always thought they strayed away from Classic too much. I think that if they'd create a hybrid server like Zodiac and a game like Final Fantasy 3/6, with awesome 2D graphics, and make it turn-based with a storyline and quests, they'd really have something worth playing. You'd have the classic feel with the quests, people could level and quest together via partying, an oldschool overworld like Final Fantasys would be amazing, and easy to make. Valikorlia used to have an overworld like that. I think it would even take less effort than their past flagship servers. The only part that would take some real time is tying in a storyline, but it could be done. It's up to the people that created the game to create the content, not the players.

They've always set the bar for playerworld standards, why isn't this happening anymore? Graal2001 and Kingdoms used to have a higher average playercount than the free worlds when they actually gave a damn about the servers.

I could ramble on about how I feel about the way they treat their customers but that's not either here nor there.

Basically, if this game was worth paying for you'd know that it was, and judging by the worlds that cost money -- it's not. In the past it was, and you knew that it was, because Graal2001 used to have 120 people on it, and Kingdoms used to have a huge playerbase as well.

Edit: On another note, I would propose Graal figure out what they are going to do in terms of making people pay. They can't do gelats and make people pay for the game. It doesn't work like that. In my opinion their best course of action would be to drop paying for the game altogether and make special things in-game buyable with gelats. You get people playing your game hooked for free, and then they want to buy items to seperate themselves from the people that don't pay. This works for a lot of games, and I guarantee you would see a surge in the playercount if the game was advertised better.

[Rufus]

Originally Posted by Tigairius

I think it is, very much so. You guys throw your weight around on the forums like you know what's best but when it comes to crunch time where are your solutions to the problems?

You, as a player, a staff member, (a developer?), should definitely have say in the future of Graal. In fact, I think you would be upset if you didn't.

If you're willing to to find all of the faults, certainly you could attempt find some solutions.

If you just point out all of the negative things but make no attempt to contribute you just look like a complainer.

You are just trying to rally up the people on the forums to perpetuate the argument in the negative direction. Where is the positive?

Don't make me out to be some compulsive disagreeing nitpicker, because if my posts didn't have any substance to them then no one would give a crap. What you said was completely misrepresenting the demographics that are being targeted for the game, and because of this your justification in the current pricing strategy didn't really work in the reality. Just because I might be a player, developer, or staff member doesn't mean that what I say is going to change anything. I always suggest possible fixes to everything that I post "negatively" about, being directly or indirectly, but even though most of what I post is seemingly common sense to people, nothing ever happens.

I'm not trying to rally up any kind of player distaste or "throwing my weight" at anything, I'm just simply showing you how you are incorrect, and in being incorrect on something as simple as demographics, you eventually cause more problems. I don't really feel that I need to keep repeating the obvious in order for people to understand that the problems that the Graal servers have are beyond fixing at our level. Sure the developers could make the best server ever, but with a limited global playercount it's just a case of stealing players from other servers, players we already had. The problems that are being outlined are not going to be fixed by making the server Classic, because the only players that it could possibly be attracting that it didn't before would be the non-paying customers. Graal needs income in order to continue, so 'demoting' their Gold servers wouldn't exactly seem a favorable action.

The market for 2d online games is not as saturated as the market for 3d. As Graal Online is predominantly 2d, even though they've tried to venture into 3d multiple times, it places the product in a market that is still quite popular, a market that is a niche. I believe that globally the servers need to be improved upon in nearly all areas including framework, structure and content. The last official server release was in 2002 and the servers themselves haven't really progressed beyond this point, with the exception of Zodiac of course. This is something that can be controlled on a developer level, but as most of the players on Graal don't really have the necessary skills nor training opportunities, it is proving to be a stagnation rather than a growth. Along with the lack of developers, the website, forums, and the client need to be adjusted to a more professional look. Like I said though, this has already been said multiple times and you probably already know this, so I don't know why you even asked.

[Tigairius]

Originally Posted by James

First, it would help if Stefan was actually more involved in getting the client REAL new features. NewWorld supported layered-tiles, why hasn't this been made available after 7-8 years? The flying-technology (Mode 7 I believe) still isn't available to developers, or it has been made available to only a select few. I'm only brushing the surface here, Graal's editor needs some true updates. Gani shop needs to be updated and should be part of the main Graal editor as well.

I agree.

Originally Posted by James

Second, why should developers have to pay to create content? Even if someone were to create a high-quality playerworld, they are still having to shell money out of their pocket for their hard work. I don't see the justification in this, as Graal would only generate revenue, not the developers. Remember, the average Graalian age is 12 or something, right? Where are they supposed to get $120? I can't even post a damn link without it getting approved because of that. They should atleast make some sort of official testbed server for serious developers that don't have the cash. It shouldn't be insanely hard to aquire access to this either. I know it makes them fast cash or whatever, but in the long run it's not going to help them at all. At least they could do is help the developers out more, and not make it such a pain in the arse.

You're not paying to create content. You're paying for the server space and to practice your skills. You can easily log onto any classic server and get a job for free if you have a lifetime classic subscription, if you don't have a lifetime classic subscription then you're just paying for the play aspect, not the development aspect of the game.

There is a testbed server for people to practice on, but if you want to continue with making a server you need to rent the server space.

Originally Posted by James

Third, why is there not a new flagship server? If they would have put some time into a new one over these past few years they could actually have something worth playing. I've always thought they strayed away from Classic too much. I think that if they'd create a hybrid server like Zodiac and a game like Final Fantasy 3/6, with awesome 2D graphics, and make it turn-based with a storyline and quests, they'd really have something worth playing. You'd have the classic feel with the quests, people could level and quest together via partying, an oldschool overworld like Final Fantasys would be amazing, and easy to make. Valikorlia used to have an overworld like that. I think it would even take less effort than their past flagship servers. The only part that would take some real time is tying in a storyline, but it could be done. It's up to the people that created the game to create the content, not the players.

No one is stopping you from starting it up.

Originally Posted by James

Edit: On another note, I would propose Graal figure out what they are going to do in terms of making people pay. They can't do gelats and make people pay for the game. It doesn't work like that. In my opinion their best course of action would be to drop paying for the game altogether and make special things in-game buyable with gelats. You get people playing your game hooked for free, and then they want to buy items to seperate themselves from the people that don't pay. This works for a lot of games, and I guarantee you would see a surge in the playercount if the game was advertised better.

I agree, and I've been trying to push this for quite a while.

[Crimson2005]

Originally Posted by James

Third, why is there not a new flagship server? If they would have put some time into a new one over these past few years they could actually have something worth playing. I've always thought they strayed away from Classic too much. I think that if they'd create a hybrid server like Zodiac and a game like Final Fantasy 3/6, with awesome 2D graphics, and make it turn-based with a storyline and quests, they'd really have something worth playing. You'd have the classic feel with the quests, people could level and quest together via partying, an oldschool overworld like Final Fantasys would be amazing, and easy to make. Valikorlia used to have an overworld like that. I think it would even take less effort than their past flagship servers. The only part that would take some real time is tying in a storyline, but it could be done. It's up to the people that created the game to create the content, not the players.

Originally Posted by Tigairius

No one is stopping you from starting it up.

Did you actually read what he said?

[Rufus]

[James]

Originally Posted by Tigairius

I agree.

You're not paying to create content. You're paying for the server space and to practice your skills. You can easily log onto any classic server and get a job for free if you have a lifetime classic subscription, if you don't have a lifetime classic subscription then you're just paying for the play aspect, not the development aspect of the game.

Regardless of how easy it is, how is that by any means practical? How many playerworlds on the classic tab are really going to let Joe Shmoe have NC access? GS2 should really be supported offline so we don't have to rent out server space to begin with.

There is a testbed server for people to practice on, but if you want to continue with making a server you need to rent the server space.

No one is stopping you from starting it up.

Yeah, and I'm not shelling out money to create content for a game that I don't own. If it was free it would be another story. Everything you can do online should be supported offline. It only makes sense.

I agree, and I've been trying to push this for quite a while.

I want to see this game succeed. I wouldn't be here after all these years if I didn't. They keep changing things that don't need fixing. The old website was perfectly fine, the flagship servers when they first came out were worth the money but over time they abandoned them. I don't understand why they can't just stick with something. If it works -- don't fix it.

[Tigairius]

Originally Posted by Crimson2005

Did you actually read what he said?

Sorry, I'm not sure where you've been for the past 10 years, but Graal is created by the players.

Originally Posted by James

Yeah, and I'm not shelling out money to create content for a game that I don't own. If it was free it would be another story. Everything you can do online should be supported offline. It only makes sense.

Well, like I said there is a testbed server you can use. The only thing that's required to have RC/NC on there is a will to learn and a classic subscription.

[Crono]

Originally Posted by Tigairius

Sorry, I'm not sure where you've been for the past 10 years, but Graal is created by the players.

Since when was GK created by the players?

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by Crono

Since when was GK created by the players?

I think it's fair to presume the topic had expanded from just Graal Kingdoms, despite the original topic and forum in which it resides.

[Crono]

Originally Posted by Stephen

I think it's safe to presume the topic had expanded from just Graal Kingdoms, despite the original topic and forum in which it resides.

My question still stands, Classic, G2k1, and G2k2 were "created" by Stefan (atleast I assume so). Stefan also went ahead and re-coded both Zone and Era. I'd say that's a pretty decent amount of servers, no?

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by Crono

My question still stands, Classic, G2k1, and G2k2 were "created" by Stefan (atleast I assume so). Stefan also went ahead and re-coded both Zone and Era. I'd say that's a pretty decent amount of servers, no?

Stefan has previously shown very little support for Graal Kingdoms - but not to scold him, he has recently been very helpful. He and I have a terrible working relationship, I have always treated him very poorly because of what I observed. However, seeing his recent efforts I have definitely reversed my opinion and treatment of him, although sadly I can't say the same for him

We have another update planned for late March or early April if everything goes smoothly. We'll probably still release even if we don't finish all of our goals (just carry them over into next quarterly update). As I already said we intend to approach the account status problems on Graal Kingdoms.

Believe me, we want to see it as active as it used to be as much as everyone else. We're dedicating a lot of time and effort to problems that people have brought to our attention and other problems we have noticed. We have a long term roadmap, and we're in this for the long haul.

[Curt1zzle]

Originally Posted by FenixTheBanished

And who are you Curt or w/e your name is? I havent even seen you before and i guarantee you know nothing of the situation, so please keep moving along to another server.

Oh Hi, I'm Curtis. I've been around since you were in the sack. I actually was previously part of the Kingdoms Graphics Team several years ago, and did translations for it as well.

[Switch]

Originally Posted by FenixTheBanished

And who are you Curt or w/e your name is?

God.
You have just lost respect points, shame on you.

Originally Posted by James

I do however agree with you on how people are confused. The website has been dumbed down and doesn't reflect Graal in the least.

It hasn't been dumbed down, far from it. That would be good (dumbing it down, I mean), making it simpler for people to navigate/understand.

Originally Posted by James

Heck, their first website ever was better than this one. I liked it better when all we had to do was upgrade for one thing and we had access to everything.

Can't really say much about the first ever one, but the one that was Kingdoms-based I really liked, and it's what first got me interested with "THESE GRAPHICS ARE SICK!" only finding out the game was nothing like it, but still okay.

Originally Posted by James

I think Graal is worth about $10.00 for a whole year in its current state.

They should actually try gradually decreasing the cost of Graal, and if it does nothing (more players/subscribers), then just slowly bring it back up. In my opinion, trial and error will never hurt an online game, just to see what changing something simple will do to the community.

Originally Posted by James

I just feel like Cyberjoueurs is just going to let the game die and move to something else.

iPhone/Pod apps.

[Googi]

Originally Posted by Bell

I have to agree. I think we need to simplify and reduce the number of subscription types

There's only one type of subscription available to buy (excluding developer subscriptions).

[Bell]

Originally Posted by Googi

There's only one type of subscription available to buy (excluding developer subscriptions).

Apologies, I forgot about the change to the whole gelats thing.

[MiniOne]

Originally Posted by Switch

God.
They should actually try gradually decreasing the cost of Graal, and if it does nothing (more players/subscribers), then just slowly bring it back up. In my opinion, trial and error will never hurt an online game, just to see what changing something simple will do to the community.

Agreed. Unless of course they are planning on spending the money they make on something which will progress graal and extend it to new heights then I'm fine paying $60 (Aus Currency xD) a year for it, but only if they are actually planning on spending the money productively towards Graal, E.g. getting a better source (the source is already quite good) or something alone the lines of that

If Not then make the price like drop a little (We are in a bad economic situation and a lot of the children's parents may not be so willing to allow their children to through $40+ dollars towards a game in a time like this)

[Schetti]

Originally Posted by MiniOne

a lot of the children's parents may not be so willing to allow their children to through $40+ dollars towards a game in a time like this)

WTF ur talking about?
I am 13, and my dad got no big problem to pay for me 40€ a year...
LIAR!

[Soala]

Originally Posted by Schetti

WTF ur talking about?
I am 13, and my dad got no big problem to pay for me 40€ a year...
LIAR!

You play zone, that's different.

[Schetti]

I stopped playing zone atm.
I played GK for 1-3weeks.
I currently play on playerworld.

[Ravenblade1979]

Schetti not everyones parent will pay the price for subscription. Just because yours does doesn't mean anothers will. MiniOne is right on this. Not alot of parents are willing to throw that much money on a online game when they would rather see their kids out of the house having a life.

If your dad doesn't care then good for you but don't call someone a liar based on your own experience. Its pretty biased.

MiniOne also pointed out economic crisis. Again he's right. Its everywhere and just because you live in a house that have parents that bring in a good amount of money doesn't mean that everyone else is in the same boat. Its tough out there and there's more important things then graal. Food, rent, clothing, utilities, payments etc.

I could go on and on about this but you seemed to have formed your own opinion. I really really hope that you don't feel the economic crunch like alot of the other people have. You will find out that sacrificing stuff just to play a online game isn't worth it.

[cyan3]

Originally Posted by Ravenblade1979

Schetti not everyones parent will pay the price for subscription. Just because yours does doesn't mean anothers will. MiniOne is right on this. Not alot of parents are willing to throw that much money on a online game when they would rather see their kids out of the house having a life.

I don't really see why this effects anything because you could use PayByCash or also buy subscriptions using SMS which most "kid" have access to.

[Rufus]

Originally Posted by cyan3

I don't really see why this effects anything because you could use PayByCash or also buy subscriptions using SMS which most "kid" have access to.

Which most "kid" don't pay for, so you're still going to need permission.

[James]

Originally Posted by cyan3

I don't really see why this effects anything because you could use PayByCash or also buy subscriptions using SMS which most "kid" have access to.

They may have access to it, but I'm pretty sure their parents would kick them in the ass for it without permission. It's not their money to spend.

[CABAL49]

Back before I had I job I had to work the money off. Maybe remove child labor laws?

[James]

Originally Posted by CABAL49

Back before I had I job I had to work the money off. Maybe remove child labor laws?

There are reasons for those laws, maybe to keep kids in school til a certain age? Times are rough especially for people that haven't graduated highschool, even college kids for that matter. I'm not saying that you can't succeed if you haven't graduated, but that doesn't happen much too often especially in times like these.

[kia345]

Originally Posted by James

They may have access to it, but I'm pretty sure their parents would kick them in the ass for it without permission. It's not their money to spend.

No kid with access to SMS is going to be punished for using it, that's a risk the parents take when they buy them a phone and pay the bills for it.

[James]

Originally Posted by kia345

No kid with access to SMS is going to be punished for using it, that's a risk the parents take when they buy them a phone and pay the bills for it.

Oh really, so you wouldn't be upset if your child racked up a $500 phone bill from buying gelats? It's different if they ask, but if it was done without my knowledge I'd be pretty angry. Please don't say, "Maybe they shouldn't have text messaging." Besides, I wouldn't let my kid have a cell phone if he/she wasn't paying for it or working it off somehow. I'd like to be able to trust my child.

[CharlieM]

Originally Posted by James

Oh really, so you wouldn't be upset if your child racked up a $500 phone bill from buying gelats? It's different if they ask, but if it was done without my knowledge I'd be pretty angry. Please don't say, "Maybe they shouldn't have text messaging." Besides, I wouldn't let my kid have a cell phone if he/she wasn't paying for it or working it off somehow. I'd like to be able to trust my child.

Explain how someone is going to buy 500 dollars worth of Gelats on one bill. Isnt that like 50 000 Gelats

[James]

Originally Posted by CharlieM

Explain how someone is going to buy 500 dollars worth of Gelats on one bill. Isnt that like 50 000 Gelats

It's not really the amount that matters, it's the fact that it could be done, and the principle of the matter. Even if it was $50, wouldn't you be upset your child didn't ask for permission?

[kia345]

Originally Posted by James

Oh really, so you wouldn't be upset if your child racked up a $500 phone bill from buying gelats? It's different if they ask, but if it was done without my knowledge I'd be pretty angry. Please don't say, "Maybe they shouldn't have text messaging." Besides, I wouldn't let my kid have a cell phone if he/she wasn't paying for it or working it off somehow. I'd like to be able to trust my child.

Kids rack up phone bills all the time, and stupid parents pay for them.

[James]

Originally Posted by kia345

Kids rack up phone bills all the time, and stupid parents pay for them.

I was just replying to the fact that you said no kids get punished for using SMS in a manner that it wasn't intended for. It's on the plan to text message, not to buy crap with. I know companies love the fact that they can charge over SMS just for those unsuspecting parents. I'd never let my kid have a cell phone on my plan again. I just find your logic unreasonable. No one gets punished for it? Please.