More ways to spend Diamonds in game & help Inno with Revenue?

[GlamDoll]

I would be tempted to buy diamonds more often, if I had more options on spending them (Or at least 100% or 200% offer every now & then).

The premium expansions are starting to get pricey for me & from what I hear, it makes The Spire even harder.

I don't know if a Game Store would work, but maybe items in the Magic Academy every now & then that are diamonds only to craft.

If I were to be able to craft artifacts or event buildings from days long gone, I would have to reconsider how many diamonds I do or don't have.

 

[ajqtrz]

I do like that you are thinking from Inno's perspective. After all they are a for-profit company and raising revenues pretty much insures raising profits in most companies. So presenting anything from Inno's point of view is a positive way to do it.

However, the work needed to make the changes means that the changes would have to increase the revenues enough to justify the cost of making the changes. I doubt that would happen. Here's why.

There are already many buildings you have to spend diamonds to acquire. I seldom see them, other than magic residences and magic workshops, in peoples cities. Counting the diamond ones in the culture tab of buildings I see 50 our of 120 total buildings. 50 buildings you can only purchase with diamonds. And some of them give huge pop, mana, etc. On top of the culture. So that sort of building is already offered for diamonds but not too many are taking advantage of them, from what I've observed.

In addition, you are right that the premium expansions do get pricey. The whole, "the more you buy the more it's going to cost you" mentality seems backwards to me, but that's sort of like gambling, isn't it? The more you gamble, the more expensive it gets because in the long run you are going lose more than you win. Gambling is based on the idea that you will lose more than you gain so there is little reason to discourage you from gambling. Of course, perhaps Inno's approach is not like gambling and the reason they increase the cost as you do more is to slow you down so you don't spend more and more? Perhaps there is some kind of moral imperative they are following which impels them to insure people don't act like thirty to fifty percent of gamblers in the casino's at any one time (according to Gamblers Anonymous) and become addicted to the point you spend recklessly. Yes, Virginia, there is such a thing as a corporate conscious.

As for offering these premium in the crafting I think that wouldn't work as it would take up one of the five slots and reduce the things offered for most players since most players do not spend diamonds on premium buildings (other than as noted). Perhaps a sixth "premium" slot could be added and filled with premium buildings all the time?

But I digress. As I said, overall I think this idea would do little to raise Inno's revenues because they already do that in one form and I doubt it brings in much.

AJ

 

[Ashrem]

As for offering these premium in the crafting I think that wouldn't work as it would take up one of the five slots and reduce the things offered for most players since most players do not spend diamonds on premium buildings (other than as noted). Perhaps a sixth "premium" slot could be added and filled with premium buildings all the time?

Each Crafting job could have a premium addon available. Click the green half of the button to get a 15AWKP instant, or the blue half to spend 20 diamonds and get a 20 instead. Press one button to craft a UU building or the other to spend 400 diamonds and get two of them. Press the green half to get a flower cage or the blue half to spend 50 diamonds and get "FlowerCage+" with slightly different art and better stats.

 

[GlamDoll]

Each Crafting job could have a premium addon available.

I had not thought of that, but I like it. Perhaps the time could also be increased, so it makes your MA come to a stop for a day while crafting something premium? So one would really have to consider which option to pursue with their crafting choices.

 

[Henroo]

It is not diamond related, but I think Inno is missing a chance for profits by not selling skins and stuff like that. Put difference appearance options for important buildings such as Ancient Wonders in the store. I think they would sell if priced reasonably. Lots of players would shell out a few bucks to alter and customize the appearance of their city.

 

[SoggyShorts]

I think Inno is missing a chance for profits by not selling skins

Absolutely. They could even use existing art: Look at all of the pure culture buildings that almost no advanced player ever uses. Any building of the same size could conceivably have the artwork from another building applied to it.
Or use a color wheel for residences/workshops.

difference appearance options for important buildings such as Ancient Wonders

Special skins for Ancient wonders (and cliff art?) is an excellent suggestion, and I think one with a very high chance of paying back the invested effort and time.
Also, seasonal skins are an obvious source.

 

[Deleted User - 1178646]

Problem seems that there are gremlins working at inno-games for the elvenar team who seem to have lille clue how the world works.
They seem to be constantly focussed on 1 single type of players and ignore the rest.

In an optimal scenario you have options to target multipla groups, from penny pichers to big whales, where whales might also spend on the penny pincher side but penny pinchers will never spend a whales money.

an simple example is pricing, a player willing to spend $5 will never buy a $50 item, while a $50 player might buy both.
But if you target well you might be able to have the $5 dollar person spend it 10x $5 over an extended period also resulting in a $50 income.

This requires a diversification of methods to target every single group of "players" with reasonable options ranging from $1 to $100.
The cheaper an item is, the more it should be targetted to multispending options, so ways to buy it multiple times.

Unfortunatly they are constantly searching for ways to "maximise" profit on a item for item basis, but seem to overlook "profit as a whole"
Digital distribution is unique as once it is developed there are no longer "cost" attached to it. unlike physical products who have things like production and distribution costs attached to it.

This means "designed" it's near 100% profit.

In elevenar if they would make a $5 option and it sells well, they raise it's price to $10, we have seen this before several times.
While it looks like this would increase profits and on a item per item basis it will it also creates a drawback.
You now exclude the people who are willing to spend more than $5.

A much better option would be to create an extra $5 option, so that the $5 player would still spend $5 and the $10 person would buy both $5 options.
Or you make 2 items 1 $5 and 1 $10, both options are valid.
In a perfect scenario you have a whole portfolio of item in every price bracket, tailored to each group of players
With the lower spec mainly be targetted on cosmetic changes, and maybe small ingame advantages and the more expensive options to be more focussed on ingame advatages and maybe a cosmetic change that shows how well you are willing to spend money (go $99 avatar glasses in I thought eve online years and years back when this was thought to be insane)

As long as they are to focussed on price per item instead of volume sales to me this topic is pointless, there needs to be a revolution first at HQ before they would even consider reading a topic like this with any proper interest.

 

[BrinDarby]

@CrazyWizard ,
I agree , I have always thought getting 5$ from 100k ppl is better than 25$ from 10k ppl...
but this also assumes that those 5$ purchases actually do some good....

when you look @ what you can buy with the smaller purchases its almost worthless....
The prices seem so high now, that anything less than like 50$ won't do much good.
If the MA is used as you say, then I see the slippery slope ending with every item crafted
having a diamond component.....

I see many other possible "charged for" items/upgrades, that also will end up in every
possible addon/feature/item/upgrade having a diamond component.
As much as pretty cities ( custom skins ) might sell well for a nominal cost, functionality items,
such as an early collect button on a 24 hr bldg would sell well prolly, as long as its not grossly
overpriced.

I agree, revenue as a whole, not in/of itself ....
BrinD

 

[ajqtrz]

According to one online game analysis site only 2% of players regularly spend any money. Another 2% will spend money once or less a per year (meaning, I suppose once every couple years on average). So 2% of players are responsible for 98% or more of the revenues if everybody spends, when they spend, about the same level. But that's not at all true. Most players, when they spend, spend modestly and the fewer times they spend in a given period of time, the less the value of the transaction. A "rare" spender will spend $10 every two years while a "whale" will do so every 2 weeks.

Now of who are these "whales?" Almost always they are the younger, more intense, players who have the income/allowance to spend when they wish to do so. They are the ones who will drop $20 on an FA so their fellowship beats those other guys who are on their tail. They are also the ones who will purchase 50k of diamonds and all the baubles offered for those diamonds because they can. So the real "trick" in revenues is to get the whales to cough up enough revenue or to turn the "low spenders" into whales. The former is much easier to do than the latter, since in many cases the immaturity (or should we say, "lower maturity level?") of the whales is easier to manipulate with "sales," "special buildings," and the pressure of "winning," than to make the low spenders feel rich enough they can drop $10 every two weeks.

AJ

 

[SoggyShorts]

who are these "whales?" Almost always they are the younger, more intense, players who have the income/allowance to spend when they wish to do so.

Really? I thought it was 40 to 55-year-old housewives. I tried to find an article about it, but the ones I found are all skewed by things like fortnite which obviously has a much different demographic than Elvenar which is more candy crushE-like than MMO.

In elevenar if they would make a $5 option and it sells well, they raise it's price to $10, we have seen this before several times.
While it looks like this would increase profits and on a item per item basis it will it also creates a drawback.
You now exclude the people who are willing to spend more than $5.

I've always wondered why they don't do the opposite. Take the 5 least popular items and put them on sale or reduce the price until everything sells well.
Every game I've played that has microtransactions has some very clear "These are the best and those are bad" things to buy.
Are they using that comparison to try and make item A look better because item B is so bad?

 

[Deleted User - 1178646]

Really? I thought it was 40 to 55-year-old housewives. I tried to find an article about it, but the ones I found are all skewed by things like fortnite which obviously has a much different demographic than Elvenar which is more candy crushE-like than MMO.

I've always wondered why they don't do the opposite. Take the 5 least popular items and put them on sale or reduce the price until everything sells well.
Every game I've played that has microtransactions has some very clear "These are the best and those are bad" things to buy.
Are they using that comparison to try and make item A look better because item B is so bad?

They indeed target the demographic you suggested here 30-55 housewives.
This group has the most stable income and money to spare.

I have heared of numbers how money is generated in elvenar,
I am not going into the exact numbers here but you could say that a fraction of the spending players generate an exceptionally way way way out of proportion large part of the generated income.

My argument to that is that it's logical that this is the case, because it's a self fulfilling prophecy.
If you "only" target "whales" it's obvious that they become your largest source of income, if you then focus even more and more on that target you essentially drive yourself into "whale" corner there you become so dependent on a few customers that you can no longer survive without them.
I am certain they are data driven, but common sense is sometimes stronger that data, because even when you are data driven you can steer that data into a certain direction that makes no sense. 1 decision can create a complete U turn and steer that date right into the abyss it requires but data driven information and skill combined to create a success.

Somewhere a revolution is needed to get them out of that corner, a sense that the route taken about 4 years ago was the wrong route. it was a short term succes and a long term burden.
A complete turnover with a start to develop a better product portfolio in elvenar. as some have notices and as I have written many times in the last year there are so many opportunities to improve both whale spending, but more importantly spending in the sub whale category.
There are options, but someone internally has to lead the pack to that goal.

If that miraculously happens before elevenar is "scrapped" (aka developent stopped but kept online for cheap income without costs) then topics like this would be awesome.

As for soggy's suggestion to start a bit high and then reduce, it has both advantages and disadvantages. but in would indeed lead to less customer aggrevations, and therefore refusals to spend money.
Reduces prices indeed feel like a win, while price hikes feels like money grabs, and when it comes to money grabs some people are really sensitive and stop spending because of it.

 

[ajqtrz]

Really? I thought it was 40 to 55-year-old housewives. I tried to find an article about it, but the ones I found are all skewed by things like fortnite which obviously has a much different demographic than Elvenar which is more candy crushE-like than MMO.

I'll try to find the source again. But it was speaking within a more general view of online gaming in context of the influence of emotional appeals and how they affect young people. These included, of course, FPS and MMORPG and so on.

AJ

 

[SoggyShorts]

As for soggy's suggestion to start a bit high and then reduce, it has both advantages and disadvantages. but in would indeed lead to less customer aggrevations, and therefore refusals to spend money.
Reduces prices indeed feel like a win, while price hikes feels like money grabs, and when it comes to money grabs some people are really sensitive and stop spending because of it.

Even more so for existing selections. Look at troop losses as an example. Replacing a lost stack of archers for 51 diamonds?! That's absurd and I'd be shocked if anyone made that purchase regularly.

 

[SoggyShorts]

I'll try to find the source again. But it was speaking within a more general view of online gaming in context of the influence of emotional appeals and how they affect young people. These included, of course, FPS and MMORPG and so on.
AJ

No need for a source, I'm confident that you are correct that in those games the money comes from the young.
I'm also pretty sure that there aren't many moms buying cool skins for their weapons in Fortnite though, and not a whole lot of young men are dropping paychecks on the FA.

 

[ajqtrz]

No need for a source, I'm confident that you are correct that in those games the money comes from the young.
I'm also pretty sure that there aren't many moms buying cool skins for their weapons in Fortnite though, and not a whole lot of young men are dropping paychecks on the FA.

On another note, it's good to see you around again.

AJ

 

[Iyapo1]

This game used to offer player specific % discounts. Did that stop?

 

[SoggyShorts]

This game used to offer player specific % discounts. Did that stop?

I got a +200% diamond offer the other day and I'm pretty certain that wasn't for everyone

 

[ajqtrz]

I got a +200% diamond offer the other day and I'm pretty certain that wasn't for everyone

I got an offer for coal. They said if I pressed it hard enough and long enough it would be diamonds. They were offering 400% bonus coal! Should I have taken it?

AJ

 

[BrinDarby]

When you slant a game for everyone to log once a day and log out, thats a recipie for disaster.
Your community will suffer greatly if you then subcontract out simple global chat. When the game
also is slanted into a corner by whale-centric model, then Inno spent for development for what....
2% of the playerbase, and that 2% will drive new dev or tweaking to cater to them.

MMOrphs like this, rely on the MM part. Once its whale-centric, the MM part is worthless cause
there isn't the MASSIVELY MULTIPLAYER model, its the un-massively whale model.

I keep watching this happen, the 2% that fund a site drive it into the ground cause the only ppl that
the devs listen to is thier Whales, leaving the 98% to wonder if they should just quit if none of thier
concerns are met/listened to.....

Or what a site then does is piss off all the whales and longtime players in favor of a new playerbase
that doesn't know how the company acts, and will blindly spend money.... Too many companies/sites
have no freak'n clue how to implement the F2P model correctly.

In a time-based structure, you have to have things to keep ppl interested during down times...
You also can't say, well we need more revenue, then when your playerbase says ,"we will pay
for things like XYZ", you offer ABC....... Stop selling Cogswell Cogs to ppl who want Spacely Sprocets !!!!

Whats better for current long time players ....... the game closing due to lackluster revenue, or changes
made to attract new players, and generate more revenue... ????? From what I can tell by reading the Forum,
is old players wanna roll the dice, that the game stays afloat.... rather than embracing new Ideas/playstyles
as Inno tries to increase revenuue or as new players struggle to conform to archaic 4 yr old FS rules.

New blood to a game = new ideas and playstyles... If this game was attracting new players like it should...
the section on FS need'n players, or players need'n FSs wouldn't be so deserted and it woouldn't be so hard
just to fill a FS with members......It shouldn't take 3-6-12 months just to find a decent FS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Iamaita]

This game used to offer player specific % discounts. Did that stop?

No, it did not. I would love to receive some of the offers I’ve seen other people get. Apparently their algorithm has me locked into mediocre offers targeted to bored “housewives” who make frequent small purchases while the great offers are reserved for people who qualify as serious gamers who will spend a lot at a time if they see a good deal. I’m tempted to experiment with different purchase patterns to see if I can change the offers I get... but I’m not that bored and my income isn’t that disposable.