View Full Version : Greedzio
12-05-2011, 06:11 PM
I play CC and have spent plenty of cash on it. Can't say I foresee dropping a dime on this game. I think a much better business model would involve less expensive items. I'll shell out money when I can get a few decent weapons/buildings for $5 or $10 at a time and keep investing again to gain an edge. When I have to drop $20 + to make any impact, not happening.
Well, free games are always ruined by the cash shop. I actually like how expensive it is the gain an edge with cash because it lets the rest of us actually stand a chance against the people dishing out money. Just play the game and figure out how to become powerful without spending.
The way i think of it is this. If im going to play a game im going to earn everything i get and do well that way. If i spent money to get ahead, first of all that's a waste of money. Secondly i wouldn't have earned anything or really had any fun with the game. Lastly, when it's so easy to judt rise above with a few bucks the game doesnt last long, it gets old and boring. Which in turn makes the money spent even more of a waste.
12-05-2011, 07:28 PM
He has a point from a profit maximizing standpoint, though, which I'm pretty sure Funzio cares more about than difficulty balancing. If the "right now" amount is below a certain threshold, people tend to dismiss the decision making process and go on impulse, even if the small charges add up over time. By setting the lowest purchasing decisions at around $5 Funzio is turning away a group of people who realize that spending $5+ at a time will rapidly blow their budget, people who may have spent $50-$100 over a period of months had payments been smaller and more finely tuned. I think "greedy" is the proper adjective. Perhaps the success of Crime City generated some hubris. I'm having trouble identifying the audience that will spend a significant amount on this game. There also needs to be more creative ways to spend money. In fact, I think Modern War is a step backwards in this aspect as the setting is a faceless, barren landscape littered with utilitarian military buildings that all look the same. Even the decorations are drab, and Funzio was wise to decimate the amount of "aesthetic" gold purchases.
As it is this game is too derivative to be anything more than an in-between while waiting for some Crime City upgrade to finish.
12-05-2011, 07:55 PM
I totally agree, I spent way too much Money on Crime City and now they come out with this game which is awesome. But I am not going to spend a dime either. I can't afford to and if I did I would just continue to do so to gain an edge with this game and other games. Funzio needs to create a game that is fun, while still profiting. I like they don't have adds but I would rather have adds then dish out a hundred bucks or more to gain an edge on my opponent. I hope they also continue to develop Crime City and don't let this game occupy all their time. I hope they hired more employees to say the very least. Crime City is a great game but it still needs work.
12-05-2011, 08:07 PM
That's the catch-22. Modern War is constructed to appeal to the logical, edge-seeking player while Crime City is a hybrid of the same along with decorating a Sim City. Modern War totally eliminates the aesthetic appeal, but jacks up prices. The remaining edge-seeking players are going to recognize the comparatively poor value proposition. It's a game where the average level of competition is higher yet more expensive to play, and this type of game doesn't offer the depth required to warrant the price tag.