Is that true, the DB gameplay videos cost 2 times CS:GO price?


(Falcon.PL) #1

:smiley:
If so(I know), I’m really curious about how many founder packs were sold. Can you, SD, publish that data? I will pay… say $4.99 for it :slight_smile:

Yea, yea - joking, but I’m curious for real how things are going and I also wish you all the best in it - that’s another reason for the curiosity.

So, how’s the selling? Is that any secret? Before us? Really? :slight_smile:

Have a good day everyone!


(Nail) #2

buy in, find out


(Falcon.PL) #3

I’d rather like to look left and right before I cross.


(TacTicToe) #4

Yes, that is absolutely true. Dirty Bomb gameplay videos, for the game that is FREE, costs twice as much as the CS:GO game. Or once the game is released, if you send me the money for just one CS:GO game, I will send you a copy of Dirty Bomb game. Deal? :smiley:


(spacecadet3) #5

They should make the videos available to everyone so the game gains more popularity IMO


(ailmanki) #6

The game is in early development, as such I am glad they let us participate for such a low price. Some would pay much more to play and discuss with developers.


(Nail) #7

thing is, DB is twice the game
and if you wait, free
buy in now and help shape the game or wait, get it free, and deal with it


(Falcon.PL) #8

[QUOTE=Nail;450872]thing is, DB is twice the game
and if you wait, free
buy in now and help shape the game or wait, get it free, and deal with it[/QUOTE]

It solves me nothing. I don’t care about the videos that much(nothing solid, you all say), I want to know how effective the business model is. Could you do me a favour and feedback with some data on that? How many ppl plays alfa, how many bought which packs? Are these stats available somewhere on the founders-forum?

Finally - Splash Damage, why don’t you tell us something :). I think you’ve sold enough to be proud of it? If you didn’t, I’m no longer asking, if it’s a shameful result. There must be some reason why you are not giving that feedback to the community. And I believe it’s not tactical, because knowing that many ppl did the purchase makes it easier for others to follow in their steps. Since you agree with that - why not put some data public? :slight_smile: I’d prefer counters next to each option at the DirtyBomb site, that would be so awesome! Don’t you think? Veteran - N, Elite - N, Legendary - N. :slight_smile: And some chart with changes in purchase rates in time, with important decisions marked, like the videos at CS:GO*2 price :P.

PS: Twice a game? Not sufficient for selling teasers at regular game price ;-), it’s rather infinity times a game then. Quite hard to accomplish I’d say… but anyways - how’s the selling?


(RasteRayzeR) #9

This will happen, just not now. The reason is simple : if you do a video for pubs now, there are 100% chances things will have changed by the time a second video is released. Things move pretty fast, there is a lot of instability since we are trying many configurations and testing many features that may never reach the end game.

It’s closed alpha for a reason, and they have other things to do but videos right now ^^ Be patient, young padawan

Oh, and I bought the vip founder pack. No regrets so far, the game has great potential.


(Ruben0s) #10

Splashdamage said that they want to keep the player numbers small during the early alpha. They even gave a reason. And it’s pretty good.

So effective business model? Well a bit thinking would give you the answer. If they want to sell as many alpha’s as possible, they should have created a hype train, but they didn’t do that… yet.


(Falcon.PL) #11

[QUOTE=Ruben0s;450936]Splashdamage said that they want to keep the player numbers small during the early alpha. They even gave a reason. And it’s pretty good.

So effective business model? Well a bit thinking would give you the answer. If they want to sell as many alpha’s as possible, they should have created a hype train, but they didn’t do that… yet.[/QUOTE]

Sounds good yet with one inaccuracy. I believe we have no interest in SD getting around without income. I mean long after XIX century it’s no wrong to say “we need money to make the games.” And it is, or should be, the goal to get a nice profit. Also notice a hole in your argument, which as we have said is good, but it is not necessarily right. You can set the amount of alfa players without money system. You may answer the standard reply of the classical economists for that… but wait! The answer to that will be(after Einstein and plenty of others) - they are capable of choosing even better! And the above is solved, therefore your argument is dead and cries “I need medic!” :).

Anyways - I believe that business model is here to get decent profit, and that is the right thing it should be designed for. No one wants SD to starve, does anyone? As we want more games after DB, we want SD to stay afloat on the market, and that is why all responsible fans should be interested in how well is the selling going. Also, worth typing again - numbers next to each option at DB site would mainly do a good job. We can see already plenty of ppl who bought the 3 most expensive packs - why not show this to the potential customers?

Also argument - I used myself too - that the video would show nothing solid, as It is plastic stage of development of the idea of the game, this argument is not bad, yet it’s normal thing on the market to show alfa as alfa and ppl knows that things may change. That was the case with ET:QW videos for example, and that is - again - normal thing. You just type “Alfa build” and everyone understands it’s not final. Now talking about new fans of SD games - it would help to find some. Although it is not that important for an old fan, as we care most about the real thing… or even are busy helping to shape it - thank you ppl for participating in that! Good to see familiar players contributing in making the game. Kind of a good omen.

Have a good day!


(Nail) #12

If you actually think the money from selling founders packs is what is paying for Dirty Bomb, you’re way more delusional than is safe for people around you, that money would barely pay for the swag you get on release


(Falcon.PL) #13

So you’re a critic of the model? if so, What would you change to do it better? else What is the source of stability of SD on the market for incoming years? For as you noticed, it’s not costless exsistence.

Also, saying the amount of bought packs is not sufficient you need to know something about the volume of the sells! So, how’s the selling?

:wink:


(Kl3ppy) #14

DB is F2P, there is no “selling”


(Mustang) #15

DB is being developed with profits from previous games.

On release money will be made with in-game purchases, merchandise, premium services, events… that sort of stuff (suggestions welcome :D).

Founders packs are about listening to the community and getting feedback from people that care and want the game to be a success.

I’d guess the number of packs sold would fund the development teams wages for around 2-3 months, hardly a money making strategy.


(Falcon.PL) #16

There is a product, there is a price. Actually few products - each pack treated separatedly. Thus there is selling involved as ppl buy.

[QUOTE=Mustang;450950]DB is being developed with profits from previous games.

On release money will be made with in-game purchases, merchandise, premium services, events… that sort of stuff (suggestions welcome :D).

Founders packs are about listening to the community and getting feedback from people that care and want the game to be a success.

I’d guess the number of packs sold would fund the development teams wages for around 2-3 months, hardly a money making strategy.[/QUOTE]

Try different order as well ;-).
Say…
On release money will be made with packs, in-game purchases, merchandise, events… that sort of stuff.
Premium services are about serving customers.

See? Works either way :). I see it that way, these are all little parts of the same model, and they are all about financing the game development. Off course you may name them different, and while there is a single budget, there is not much sense in settling what income is for what expenses. It gonna rather be determined by the needs and maybe, just maybe, by some systemic analysis.

En fin de la compte - for I don’t know english version of summa summarum… - Founder packs, or just “packs”, both time-limited and base 3, that will be available also later, are means of financing the development or just SD. Being not the only source of income does not make a source of income a non-source of income.

As humans we mean the same saying it in different ways and then we quarrel :). That fenomenon will never cease to surprise ;-). For off course the immediate source of financing cannot be the future expected income, yet it does not mean it is not the goal, and does not mean SD lost their mind and want to make their last game ever, due to financial failure of the model.


(Dragonji) #17

I can’t see any point of this thread. Are you writing a book or something? SD has no reason to share that info with you.


(Mustang) #18

Sure they’ll be getting some money from them, what I’m saying is that they have not been priced at a point to encourage mass purchases because they don’t want lots of people to have access to the game right now, but only those that are passionate about it, or have seen some real potential and want to help be a part of something awesome.

So analysing how the number of sales works as a business model is the opposite of what’s trying to happen, thus futile.

It also might hurt to announce such figures because some would think negatively of low “sales” figures, when again, that is exactly the point. Not to mention such data is of course commercially sensitive so I doubt would be published at all.

The price is suitably high enough to keep the number of participants suitably low, that’s all that matters right now.


(f00st) #19

How on earth did you get…

from,

???


(Nail) #20

methinks he’s at uni in a mba prog and failing miserably
selling founders packs has nothing to do with financing the game, just financing the hoodies and caps, and I believe that’s an excellent idea.
The game is funded by previous revenue producing titles and possibly some investors, none of which is anybody’s business but SD, and if they divulged any of that I would be disappointed, don’t be parasitic