Again…HOW. Yes it should drive the over all goal of fiscal solvency. Duh. But we are in the weeds on HOW it does since it really not that great of a conversion compared to the others…60 items for $10. yeah there is more to it than that.

@Hansel suggests that it’s enticement to get Crom coins and therefore the cost factor of the BP is more about marketing to get them used to the microtransaction and having the Crom coins spent means you have to spend $ to renew your commitment to the deal of the BP. But that is indirect benefit.

Others have stated (and the whole freaking point of the OP) that playing enticements matter in terms of an online games-as-a-service model. With that, the goal is to maintain player #'s. You can’t do that if you create a system that can be easily bypassed into just a blip of time. Which goes to my overall point in that the rewarding players for time played needs to be very simple and very direct with no wiggle room of methodology to exploit (as it is with any attempts to wrangle skill based rewards into this since that is easily exploitable in single player games) However time playing is something that isn’t easily replicated (although you could just leave your game running…but you gain the positive metrics for such a thing as well) but at the same time not removing the overall need to funnel the revenue stream. This is why the 1cc/hour is great. There isn’t anything to exploit and the rewards are balanced as something to acknowledge as a gift but isn’t going to give them a spider skin…if anything it gives the vets the ability to circumvent any pricing strategies that put a just-out-of-reach CC price point so the consumer has to buy the next tier up bundle and therefore nullifies (to a point) the complaints against that pricing strategies since they can easily respond that the cc/hour is calculated into the pricing strategies.

3 Likes