Well I've been bored lately, mainly cause I can't play BF2 at all since 1.3 despite trying every known fix under the sun, and I came up with a good idea of how the customers could have gotten a good game and EA still would have raped in the cash.
What if they charged $10 for the game in its basic format, with 3 months playtime, and then charged a nominal monthly fee of say $5 a month for continued support and ability to play on ranked servers. This would:
A: Ensure a constant revenue stream for EA for the game so that they would be encouraged to patch the game more frequently and patch it properly. At the moment they take the money and run.
B: Do away with booster packs which segment the community. Instead the booster packs would just come in the form of an update, funding for which would be covered by the monthly fee and then all players of the game would be able to play the same maps. If the game was good, people would keep playing and money would continue to be generated for more content.
C: Allow people wanting a casual play to opt in for next to no money and also allow players who have had issues with the game to stop playing and paying with only a loss of $10 instead of the full amount. So basically if EA/DICE didnt deliver (like theyre kinda doing now) you wouldnt be as ****ed off.
Think about it, it works. Over a year the game would cost you $55 but for the extra price you get frequent and better patches and more content. Its more than EA make at the moment from the full retail price of the game and provided they deliver a good product they could have a better ongoing revenue stream.
Thoughts?
What if they charged $10 for the game in its basic format, with 3 months playtime, and then charged a nominal monthly fee of say $5 a month for continued support and ability to play on ranked servers. This would:
A: Ensure a constant revenue stream for EA for the game so that they would be encouraged to patch the game more frequently and patch it properly. At the moment they take the money and run.
B: Do away with booster packs which segment the community. Instead the booster packs would just come in the form of an update, funding for which would be covered by the monthly fee and then all players of the game would be able to play the same maps. If the game was good, people would keep playing and money would continue to be generated for more content.
C: Allow people wanting a casual play to opt in for next to no money and also allow players who have had issues with the game to stop playing and paying with only a loss of $10 instead of the full amount. So basically if EA/DICE didnt deliver (like theyre kinda doing now) you wouldnt be as ****ed off.
Think about it, it works. Over a year the game would cost you $55 but for the extra price you get frequent and better patches and more content. Its more than EA make at the moment from the full retail price of the game and provided they deliver a good product they could have a better ongoing revenue stream.
Thoughts?
Comment