Charge playtime instead of days?

googleman · #1 02-04-2004, 07:45 AM

Doesn't look like it has been brought up before, but I have an idea.

What if Graal, instead of charging for days, charge playtime. This way if you go on vacation or sometime similar, you don't loose 7-20 days. This way have a certain amount of hours you can be online and be charged for playtime instead of days. What do you guys think? Personally I think its better for the players. What do you think?

James2k2 · #2 02-04-2004, 07:47 AM

I'm pretty sure they want to actually make money.

googleman · #3 02-04-2004, 07:49 AM

Yea, thats the thing I noticed about it, it gains advantages to players but not graal.

zell12 · #4 02-04-2004, 07:57 AM

That would be a nice idea, but the price would be double what it is now.

konidias · #5 02-04-2004, 12:53 PM

Look at it this way... it's only benefiting people who don't play often. If your plan went into action:

1) Graal would lose money
or
2) People that play A LOT, would have to pay even more

WanDaMan · #6 02-04-2004, 02:44 PM

I think it's a great idea o_o

URBANLEGEND · #7 02-04-2004, 04:42 PM

Ideas is good yes. But theres too many flaws in it....

Mykel · #8 02-04-2004, 04:43 PM

Bad idea. People who play an average amount and up would be screwed.

skyler87 · #9 02-04-2004, 04:49 PM

I kind of thought about this before, too..
Overall, I think it's a bad idea. However, it would be nice if there could be an option to where you could choose to buy like, a certain number of hours of online time for GK, for those people who don't play much at all.

R0bin · #10 02-04-2004, 04:52 PM

If they didnt play much at all.. why would they want to buy hours for it anyway?

superb · #11 02-04-2004, 05:02 PM

It also doesn't address what you do about things like forums and the other features you get with VIP.

SingleChance · #12 02-04-2004, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by R0bin
If they didnt play much at all.. why would they want to buy hours for it anyway?

so they could play when they want to?

R0bin · #13 02-04-2004, 05:14 PM

damn, so sign me up!

One hour of GK please, and the full 60 minutes this time!

Stefan: "Ok, that'll be $600"

You see my point?

SingleChance · #14 02-04-2004, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by R0bin
damn, so sign me up!

One hour of GK please, and the full 60 minutes this time!

Stefan: "Ok, that'll be $600"

You see my point?

i didn't say it was a good idea. I just answered your question.

narkotic · #15 02-04-2004, 05:26 PM

The current model is unlimited play between your subscription time.

I wouldn't look at it so much as days, but more so months.

You would also run into an issue with an hourly rate. If you get kicked out and your character is left in the game, it would drain from your time pool. This drain would result in you requesting a refund for the time as it wasn't 'your fault.'

I also agree that the hourly rate model would end up making more money for the developers. While an hourly rate is convenient to casual players, the market for online roleplaying games is the hardcore player. The hourly rate would be less convenient to them, and much more expensive. Why pay a premium for this game when there's so many more to play these days?

Honestly, I think the current model is better all around. With an hourly or time block based model you are limited on how long and when you can play. With the current system, you can play at any time, and for as long as you want during your paid period. I have absolutely no problems with that.