This pricing scheme seems rediculous. The only way I can see this making sense is if it works like this;
a)You pay $9.99 and get to draft a team in a public league
or
b)You pay $99.99 to set up a private league, and once set up the individuals who join the league join for free.
This makes sense, as it would encourage groups of people to set up private leagues with EA as opposed to ESPN where teams are around $30, but can play in either a private or public league.
Is that its due to the fact that there are a lot more available games for windows users to subscribe to, while not as much content, as far as games go, is put out for linux platforms.
Or could it be b/c windows sucks, and blue screens whenever users try to subscribe? We may never know.
"We'll see more change in the next five years in the way people shop than in the last 20," said Dan Hopping, a consulting manager with IBM who specializes in store operations and merchandising.
Did anyone tell this guy about the internet? Somehow I don't find talking shopping carts to be more of a revolution in shopping then internet sales. Talk to me when this talking shopping cart leaves from my house, picks up the items I want, then returns with my purchases. Now that's a revolution!
Im in no way sure of the legal facts about this, but I have a question maybe someone can provide some insight into. Isn't there something wrong with the RIAA in a sense profiting off of someone else's product.
Someone had to do all the coding and programming to be able to transfer the songs off of CDs and onto computers. Now the RIAA is going to try to make money off a product (mp3s) that were created by someone else? Call it a lawsuit or spin it however you want, they are trying to MAKE money, not recover lost money, it's not like someone broke their arm and they cant go to work for a month.
Isnt this almost in a way like an author trying to get all of the money from people who buy his book without paying any of the profits to the publishing company? Well thats my two cents, and it might be worth.00, but this who situation seems shady to me. If I'm way off base please try to right my ship instead of burning it down.
As was recently revealed Star Wars Galaxies reportedly has already over 275,000 subscribers, (sorry I dont have a link to article right now, perhaps someone else can supply). The SWG subscription is what most consider a little (a lot) on the high side at $15 dollars a month. Which comes out over $4 million per month just in subscription fees!
Being an avid fan of SWG, I can only see this number steadily increasing, especially if the developers can continue to fix problem areas of the game. This isnt even considering the amount of money they will make when releasing the planned space expansion (2004-2005?), which will almost certainly be bought by every subscriber (at $40 a pop, another $11 million in sales at least, im sure more by then.)
Its easy to see how when you hit the right market in the gaming industry, the sky is most certainly the limit! Besides with how bad this summers "blockbuster" movies were, who wouldnt rather stay at home in front of a nice video game?
While I do think that SWG was rushed out to say the least, it seems to me now to be headed in the right direction, despite the large volume of "whiners".
As I've experienced so far, SWG really challenges its players to adapt to the ever changing world, whether intended or not. I started as a rifleman, working my way up through master marksman and master rifleman. Then as all riflemen know came the T-21 nerf, and my character was needless to say pretty hosed.
Rather then bitch and moan I simply took my character in a new direction and tried out becomming an architect. I submitted my opinion to the devs that the T-21 nerf was extreme and now severly hurt the rifleman class, and went on my merry was building houses. As any other riflemen out there know the T-21 nerf was recently lifted and I can go about happily hunting again.
My advice, don't bother with SWG if your just gonna cry and quit if your perfect character gets slighted during one patch. This is one of the few cases I have seen in any online game where the developers listened to the gameing community and reversed a nerfing. So enjoy the game and be constructive with you suggestions for the devs, they just might listen.
Flooding the forums with "This game sucks now, I can't have 3 rancors" really doesnt help.
There was a large push made by some great mathematicians in coordination with poker proffesional to make a poker "robot" they called Loki. What they found was over a large period of time it could be profitable at low limit tables, playing limit hold'em. However, once the game changed to no-limit, there was simply no way for it to deal with the fluctuating betting amounts. It could pick up on patterns and beat many online limit players.
I would be willing to bet that they could design a sophisticated enough program to beat even higher-limit limit hold'em games, but I'm guessing right now they weren't quite confident enough to trust it with a serious bankroll!
A poker bot which could play in no-limit tournaments would be almost impossible to program, as anyone who has played in no-limit tourneys know, its very different from cash games.
Sorry if anyone allready posted about this, I didnt have time to read everything...
Slashdot Mirror
This pricing scheme seems rediculous. The only way I can see this making sense is if it works like this;
a)You pay $9.99 and get to draft a team in a public league
or
b)You pay $99.99 to set up a private league, and once set up the individuals who join the league join for free.
This makes sense, as it would encourage groups of people to set up private leagues with EA as opposed to ESPN where teams are around $30, but can play in either a private or public league.
Is that its due to the fact that there are a lot more available games for windows users to subscribe to, while not as much content, as far as games go, is put out for linux platforms.
Or could it be b/c windows sucks, and blue screens whenever users try to subscribe? We may never know.
"We'll see more change in the next five years in the way people shop than in the last 20," said Dan Hopping, a consulting manager with IBM who specializes in store operations and merchandising.
Did anyone tell this guy about the internet? Somehow I don't find talking shopping carts to be more of a revolution in shopping then internet sales. Talk to me when this talking shopping cart leaves from my house, picks up the items I want, then returns with my purchases. Now that's a revolution!
Im in no way sure of the legal facts about this, but I have a question maybe someone can provide some insight into. Isn't there something wrong with the RIAA in a sense profiting off of someone else's product.
.00, but this who situation seems shady to me. If I'm way off base please try to right my ship instead of burning it down.
Someone had to do all the coding and programming to be able to transfer the songs off of CDs and onto computers. Now the RIAA is going to try to make money off a product (mp3s) that were created by someone else? Call it a lawsuit or spin it however you want, they are trying to MAKE money, not recover lost money, it's not like someone broke their arm and they cant go to work for a month.
Isnt this almost in a way like an author trying to get all of the money from people who buy his book without paying any of the profits to the publishing company? Well thats my two cents, and it might be worth
As was recently revealed Star Wars Galaxies reportedly has already over 275,000 subscribers, (sorry I dont have a link to article right now, perhaps someone else can supply). The SWG subscription is what most consider a little (a lot) on the high side at $15 dollars a month. Which comes out over $4 million per month just in subscription fees!
Being an avid fan of SWG, I can only see this number steadily increasing, especially if the developers can continue to fix problem areas of the game. This isnt even considering the amount of money they will make when releasing the planned space expansion (2004-2005?), which will almost certainly be bought by every subscriber (at $40 a pop, another $11 million in sales at least, im sure more by then.)
Its easy to see how when you hit the right market in the gaming industry, the sky is most certainly the limit! Besides with how bad this summers "blockbuster" movies were, who wouldnt rather stay at home in front of a nice video game?
While I do think that SWG was rushed out to say the least, it seems to me now to be headed in the right direction, despite the large volume of "whiners". As I've experienced so far, SWG really challenges its players to adapt to the ever changing world, whether intended or not. I started as a rifleman, working my way up through master marksman and master rifleman. Then as all riflemen know came the T-21 nerf, and my character was needless to say pretty hosed. Rather then bitch and moan I simply took my character in a new direction and tried out becomming an architect. I submitted my opinion to the devs that the T-21 nerf was extreme and now severly hurt the rifleman class, and went on my merry was building houses. As any other riflemen out there know the T-21 nerf was recently lifted and I can go about happily hunting again. My advice, don't bother with SWG if your just gonna cry and quit if your perfect character gets slighted during one patch. This is one of the few cases I have seen in any online game where the developers listened to the gameing community and reversed a nerfing. So enjoy the game and be constructive with you suggestions for the devs, they just might listen. Flooding the forums with "This game sucks now, I can't have 3 rancors" really doesnt help.
There was a large push made by some great mathematicians in coordination with poker proffesional to make a poker "robot" they called Loki. What they found was over a large period of time it could be profitable at low limit tables, playing limit hold'em. However, once the game changed to no-limit, there was simply no way for it to deal with the fluctuating betting amounts. It could pick up on patterns and beat many online limit players. I would be willing to bet that they could design a sophisticated enough program to beat even higher-limit limit hold'em games, but I'm guessing right now they weren't quite confident enough to trust it with a serious bankroll! A poker bot which could play in no-limit tournaments would be almost impossible to program, as anyone who has played in no-limit tourneys know, its very different from cash games. Sorry if anyone allready posted about this, I didnt have time to read everything...