Charge playtime instead of days? - Page 3

Termina_Owner · #31 02-05-2004, 10:05 AM

Erm... I'd rather pay annually...

I'm pretty sure Unixmad wouldn't fall for...

1 month = 744 hours (31 days * 24 hours)

(To think the people with 2K hours... That's more then 2 months on without stop!)

Considering a player plays 5 hours a day, he can spend his 744 hours in 149 days... Which is roughly 4 months.

Now, why the hell would they want you to expect to buy a 3 month subscription (turned into hours) for the same price, when the amount of hours within the three months would be prolonged to over a year? -- This way, the 3 month span will turn into the 12 month cost fee... You don't want that. The end.

WanDaMan · #32 02-05-2004, 03:03 PM

No 1 said anything about the forums bit I guess if this does happen you won't be allowed on the forums? -Which is good I guess 3 quaters of graal don't post anyways...

googleman · #33 02-06-2004, 03:18 AM

But you must also take the servers into account, anyways I'm planning to get one anyways so I need that yearly vip,

.

Along those lines, you can have people pay if they want to play on GK, private servers, or classic, sort of like VIP but if you would want to play on Gold server, you could do an upgrade.

You could have the people with time on their account post in forum, and classics play on classic servers.

But then I guess they would have to cut the time in half to be able to afford a switch like this.

narkotic · #34 02-06-2004, 02:54 PM

I don't know where you're getting this five hours a day.

I see some people on the entire time I play, and at many times that can be up to 8 hours on weekdays. Weekends, it goes well past 12 hours at times (I do a lot of computer work in other windows

)

The hourly rate will cost players more money. I also agree that it would hurt the playerbase more than improve it. The MMO market is filled with the monthly pay-to-play model. Graal should be no different in this matter, besides maybe a lower monthly rate than those other games.

I can understand the concerns of the casual gamer. The pay by monthly plan isn't the best in the world. It best suits all the players across the board, however, while a pay by hour plan would only benefit a minority.

Perhaps an optional plan added would be good, but for now I would greatly prefer the current way payment and subscription is handled rather than this proposed idea.

jake13jake · #35 02-06-2004, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ziro_Vitrudestec
I have a good idea:
Let's get those people with classic subscriptions to stop leeching off for free. They play. They complain. They harass. They're nothing but trouble. At least make them pay a little bit since not ALL of them are so bad I guess :-/
By little bit I don't mean "Give me $1 and you can play my game FOREVER!!! RAAAAR!!!".... x.x I mean periodical payment like we do
And then fix current problems like GK....and G2k1

There is no possible way that I'd pay again for Classic access... I even had a hard time figuring out whether or not I'd pay for the one time. In my opinion, GK is no good. The game play is just to confusing to understand right away. On the other hand, there's classic. Classic has less confusing gameplay, but is loaded with bugs that nobody cares to fix. If they made classic subscriptions pay then I'd just go searching for another online game (I'd probably go back to playing Continuum more often). I'm sure that at least 50% of everybody playing Classic servers would do the same, and that some of them would probably even sue because of the lifetime access guarantee thing.

WanDaMan · #36 02-06-2004, 10:45 PM

I'm embarrassed by saying this but o-well
I was on graal for so long (Can't remember exact time) but my computer hadn't had a shut down in quite a fair bit of time.. I was playing graal and the moniter blew up :P. Don't know why it happed but I was mad because I couldn't save the level I made...

Termina_Owner · #37 02-06-2004, 11:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by narkotic
I don't know where you're getting this five hours a day.

I see some people on the entire time I play, and at many times that can be up to 8 hours on weekdays. Weekends, it goes well past 12 hours at times (I do a lot of computer work in other windows )

The hourly rate will cost players more money. I also agree that it would hurt the playerbase more than improve it. The MMO market is filled with the monthly pay-to-play model. Graal should be no different in this matter, besides maybe a lower monthly rate than those other games.

I can understand the concerns of the casual gamer. The pay by monthly plan isn't the best in the world. It best suits all the players across the board, however, while a pay by hour plan would only benefit a minority.

Perhaps an optional plan added would be good, but for now I would greatly prefer the current way payment and subscription is handled rather than this proposed idea.

ERm.. I took in consideration that the people HAD a life.

And, I was just saying that the people who do spend 10 hours a day, would have to pay a whole year for half, seeing that the standard I described was based on the price-range was for people who play 5 hours a day.

jake13jake · #38 02-06-2004, 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by WanDaMan
I'm embarrassed by saying this but o-well
I was on graal for so long (Can't remember exact time) but my computer hadn't had a shut down in quite a fair bit of time.. I was playing graal and the moniter blew up :P. Don't know why it happed but I was mad because I couldn't save the level I made...

lol, funny story, lol