Microtransactions a bit too pricey?

One thing i think was a stupid decision was to make 10$ be worth 96 points.

I dont disagree with the economic idea behind it (entice people o buy larger packs), but it wouldve made MUCH more sense to make the shop items be odd denominations instead. A pet should be 27 pts.

It may seem like something small, but it would raise less eyebrows if the purchase packs were flat numbers, somewhat matching the $ amount. (10$= 100 pts)

As it is now, the 5$ and 10$ packs dont look like a good impulse buy. They look fishy. they just scream- "hey, this will be worthless"

just my personal opinion.

(oh, before crying "well dont buy it"- i already have 100pts in reserve)

"

GameQB11 wrote:

One thing i think was a stupid decision was to make 10$ be worth 96 points.

I dont disagree with the economic idea behind it (entice people o buy larger packs), but it wouldve made MUCH more sense to make the shop items be odd denominations instead. A pet should be 27 pts.

It may seem like something small, but it would raise less eyebrows if the purchase packs were flat numbers, somewhat matching the $ amount. (10$= 100 pts)

As it is now, the 5$ and 10$ packs dont look like a good impulse buy. They look fishy. they just scream- "hey, this will be worthless"

just my personal opinion.

(oh, before crying "well dont buy it"- i already have 100pts in reserve)

GGG has made an official statement as to why they priced the lower packs like this. They incur a larger credit card processing fee for smaller dollar amount transactions. So it helps to promote people to buy the larger packs so that they don't lose as much money in fees to process the transaction.

"

GameQB11 wrote:

One thing i think was a stupid decision was to make 10$ be worth 96 points.

This is kind of annoying, but I know GGG said it was to do with how much *they* get charged in fees per transaction. It's come up a few times and I know it tends to be a red rag to a bull for a lot of the people here.

I'm just kind of grinning and bearing it. I'd much prefer a nice round 100 for my $10, but I like the game enough to not make a deal breaker. :(

"

Elynole wrote:

"

jetv72 wrote:

Okay for the LAST time if they LOWER their prices they will GET MORE SUPPORT! not many people are willing to spend so much. But if they lower their prices they will see that WAY MOE PEOPLE will be buying stuff. Getting more of a PROFIT meaning that their servers will stay up! LOOK AT LoL sell stuff cheap a million people buy it sell stuff low 50,000 people buy it...

Economics doesn't work like that, sorry to tell you. But they've given those that can't afford the higher priced cosmetics options as well. Your analogy may of been correct if they didn't offer lower packages. Adding a second element, which is the "collectible" element, further enhances such.

I'm an avid LEGO collector. You can see this in the LEGO market as well. There are LEGO sets, that, brand new cost 500 bucks. What kid ages 6-12 has 500 bucks to spend on LEGO? What parent spends that much?

It's because it's a collectible. The adult market for such has continued to grow over the years, now they offer LEGO sets anywhere from 2.99 mini-figures to 500 dollar sets. So that they can cover all financial market areas. If they reduced the price of that 500 dollar set to 2.99, sure a bunch of people would buy it. Buy do you think that'd make up for the bunch of collectors or people that could buy if there buying it for X% increase? No.

What this person said.
Cosmetics are made to make you look exclusive and have significant aesthetic differences from the freebie players. The "collectors" stuff isn't supposed to be cheap.
There are also some things for lower prices. Which you can get if you want.

It's like when you want to buy a bike. And there are several options. Many regular ones, and a few made of stronger materials/look prettier/made of diamond/gold just for the sake of "collecting" and "showing off".

You don't go complaining "Oh man this gold bike is expensive as hell, can't you just lower the price to the average consumer?".

I know that they can copy/paste the models for videogames and it's much easier to duplicate them. But that's not why their prices are so high.

It's because of the "status" and the "I supported this much" tag. At least that's how I see it.
If you want to look "pimped as fuck", you gotta consider spending a few. And it's not necessary to buy anything in this game. But if you want to look all fabulous and shit, be ready to support the company. Because after GGG giving you people a deep-hard-edge game and all that for free and a fair "No pay to win" play system - they sure as hell deserve some support from the community.

If you need all these extra additions in micro store to enjoy playing the game, then you are in the wrong place.
Or "get a job."
OR learn to live without materialistic cravings. :U Go read up on Buddha or some shit.

"

GameQB11 wrote:

One thing i think was a stupid decision was to make 10$ be worth 96 points.

I dont disagree with the economic idea behind it (entice people o buy larger packs), but it wouldve made MUCH more sense to make the shop items be odd denominations instead. A pet should be 27 pts.

It may seem like something small, but it would raise less eyebrows if the purchase packs were flat numbers, somewhat matching the $ amount. (10$= 100 pts)

As it is now, the 5$ and 10$ packs dont look like a good impulse buy. They look fishy. they just scream- "hey, this will be worthless"

just my personal opinion.

(oh, before crying "well dont buy it"- i already have 100pts in reserve)

i can't find it but they explained in another thread that this 5-10$ point conversion rate is due to credit card fees eating up a decent amount of the dollars spent. so if they only get 4,5 of your 5$ they can't give you 50 points worth 5$

Chris Wilson explained why the points packs were priced the way they are: Credit card charges. Credit card companies charge vendors like GGG more on a small transaction than on a large one. So, if you buy that $5 pack, you get fewer points than dollar parity, while if you buy a higher price pack, you may get more points back, as GGG returns some of their savings to you. =^[.]^=

"

GameQB11 wrote:

One thing i think was a stupid decision was to make 10$ be worth 96 points.

I dont disagree with the economic idea behind it (entice people o buy larger packs), but it wouldve made MUCH more sense to make the shop items be odd denominations instead. A pet should be 27 pts.

It may seem like something small, but it would raise less eyebrows if the purchase packs were flat numbers, somewhat matching the $ amount. (10$= 100 pts)

As it is now, the 5$ and 10$ packs dont look like a good impulse buy. They look fishy. they just scream- "hey, this will be worthless"

just my personal opinion.

(oh, before crying "well dont buy it"- i already have 100pts in reserve)

"

Chris wrote:

"

Magnicon2 wrote:

"

Silatt wrote:

What I do have a problem with is the number of points offered in new packs. The fact that $5 and $10 packs offer less points per dollar than closed beta and the $20 pack offers no bonus points. Then the first pack that offers a bonus at $50 gives you 16 extra points. Nothing in the shop ends in a 6. Everything is a multiple of 5 or 10. If you're spending $50, you should get a completely usable number of points.

Of course you should get a completely usable number of points. Sadly, after all this time of claiming "ethical microtransactions", they decided to do the same generic greedy BS that every other F2P game does.

Between the high prices and nonsensical coin purchasing, they are on route to lose out on profits like every other game. Its getting kind of sad that developers can't learn from others mistakes after all these years.

inb4 troglodyte fanboy suggests I think GGG shouldn't make a profit

We do this because of credit card fees. Smaller transactions have much larger fees. If people spend more in one go then we save money. This allows us to give you more points for those purchases.

If we wanted to be greedy then:
a) We would not have anchored the price at 10 points = $1 for all of Closed Beta (and the most popular $20 pack in Open Beta). Every single other company we found used weird ratios to try to make it confusing what things cost. Here we're happy to say that a 75 point effect is very close to $7.5.

b) We would offer more incentive for the higher packs. As it stands, it's just a few percent. We could have made it 20 points for each dollar for higher packs, but that'd reduce the value of points that Closed Beta members purchased for high packs.

Not to mention the whole free game with no pay-to-win, etc. I understand you're probably trolling me, but it's so frustrating to read this after doing literally everything we could to make it all fair.

People who think the prices are too high are not :

- entitled
- cheap
- suggesting GGG shouldn't make money
- wrong in their opinion

Far as I'm concerned the prices are way too high. I currently wont be spending any points, or buying more as long as the prices are what they are. The amount of coins you get is a typical F2P money grab tactic. That's simply a fact, and espeicially pathetic after claiming "ethical microtransactions" all this time.

Anyone who responds to people with "if you dont like it leave", or something similar, is a moron and doing GGG a disservice. Disagreeing with certain choices doesn't mean they don't like the game or don't want to support it.

They're worth whatever people will pay for them, and if enough people are paying the current prices then more power to GGG. Personally I am willing to pay 5 or less for basic enchants, and up to around 8-10 for fancy enchants.

"

Magnicon2 wrote:

People who think the prices are too high are not :

- entitled
- cheap
- suggesting GGG shouldn't make money
- wrong in their opinion

Far as I'm concerned the prices are way too high. I currently wont be spending any points, or buying more as long as the prices are what they are. The amount of coins you get is a typical F2P money grab tactic. That's simply a fact, and espeicially pathetic after claiming "ethical microtransactions" all this time.

Anyone who responds to people with "if you dont like it leave", or something similar, is a moron and doing GGG a disservice. Disagreeing with certain choices doesn't mean they don't like the game or don't want to support it.

$2.50 is a lot of money these days man and definitely unethical. I don't know how anyone would spend that on a cosmetic.

/sarcasmoff.