General Discussion

I keep hearing how greedy SoE is and all that yet lets look at the way they handle billing.

In EQ2 i am charged $14.99 + VAT playing from europe no matter if i play on the euro servers or USA servers i am actually given a choice.Something I don't have in many other mmorpg like say WoW.

This translate roughly to £7.60 + VAT.Its calculated at the exchange rate in a fair manner.If you have an american express card you can actually bypass the VAT in europe.

You are also given the option to pay in a similar assumed hyperinflated rate though for  those unwilling to take 2 secs to check the exchange rate and see its a bad deal but i am sure many do not .

But lets look at WoW and AoC

http://www.wow-europe.com/en/info/faq/general.html

http://community.ageofconan.com/wsp/conan/frontend.cgi?func=publish.show&&func_id=2421&table=CONTENT

Rather then permit us to pay $14.99+ VAT and let the market forces take place like SoE they give us a hyperinflated rate of "their own " exchange rate .

Which is £8.99 + VAT in both games.This is even worse for those paying in euros as they are charged 12.99 euros + VAT in the case of AoC which is a $20+ without counting VAT.So over a year europeans are forced to pay an extra $60 without counting VAT due to this stupid inflated exchange prices superimposed by funcom .

Thats more then the cost of a full game or any expansion .

Surely this is pure greed from blizzard and Funcom not to let the actual exchange rate play a part and force europeans to pay more even without counting the stupid VAT we are forced to pay.

While I know someone going to come and talk about how its not even the price of a pack of cigarretes or what not it still shows how greedy this companies despite how much you hear SoE is the greediest of them all.

Even the cost of 3 adventure packs in EQ2(which they even stop making now) does not offset  this difference

Ill give this 5 postings after mine before the SOE haters come and troll.

Ill up your logic as well:How many expansions (paid or not) does the original EQ and EQ2 have?Now count how many WoW has?

At least SOE churns out the content and new areas and doesnt leave you hangin for over a year.

You do make a good point, but most people see SOE as greedy because they don't make quality games.  Rather they absorb them and take all the revenue.  Also, your economics are off a bit, AOC is charged a set rate that is common in Europe.  The exchange rate should actually cause the US to be charged more, but open market doesn't allow for increased price.  Also, you cant just take the current exchange rate and translate the pricing, since its rather unstable and changes daily. 

They set the rates so that exchange does affect it in the short term.   Oh, I do think the VAT is rather dumb and cost European's alot of extra money.

yea but...

SOE=

I don't think people hate on SOE for the price they charge, but rather for the ACTIONS in MMOs and their obvious disrespect towards their customers.

SOE charges a pretty standard rate for MMOs and the station pass was actually a good idea when it was less than the price of 2 MMOs. 

The flaw in your Funcom comparison is that if Age of Conan actually delivers a finished product on launch day that is fun then they will have done something SOE has never done.  By finished I mean a game that doesn't require massive revamps, overhauls and core design changes for the first several years after launch so that those few people who stick with the game can say how much better the game is than when it launched.  The devs won't make promises that never get kept: like new hair styles, fixing the skeletal models that limit character armor, collision detection, etc.

I'm sure Conan will have its fair share of launch issues just like all MMOs.

Originally posted by Opticaleye

Ill give this 5 postings after mine before the SOE haters come and troll.

Ill up your logic as well:How many expansions (paid or not) does the original EQ and EQ2 have?Now count how many WoW has?

At least SOE churns out the content and new areas and doesnt leave you hangin for over a year.

 

John Smedley: <<snip>>  The challenge is that, with EverQuest and EverQuest 2 on the shelves together ... why would people want to play a nine-year old game? Honestly the acquisition in EverQuest has slowed down a lot, and it's hard. We've refocused on one expansion a year with these games now, I think we let quality slip too much when we were doing two, and I'm happy with where we are on that. We have a great player base and we're making some money so there's no point in not continuing.

Nothing says value and entertainment like the president talking about lack of quality in their products that get "churned" out.

I think funcom is charging the UK gamers around 9.50 GBP which is around 20 dollars.

The cost of running games has increased. The depressed dollar makes things cost more. fact is, $12 you paid 6 years ago is worth more than $12 today. So not its higher.

I expect all upcoming releases will soon have higher than $15/month

Originally posted by Daffid011

I don't think people hate on SOE for the price they charge, but rather for the ACTIONS in MMOs and their obvious disrespect towards their customers.

 

SOE charges a pretty standard rate for MMOs and the station pass was actually a good idea when it was less than the price of 2 MMOs. 

 

The flaw in your Funcom comparison is that if Age of Conan actually delivers a finished product on launch day that is fun then they will have done something SOE has never done.  By finished I mean a game that doesn't require massive revamps, overhauls and core design changes for the first several years after launch so that those few people who stick with the game can say how much better the game is than when it launched.  The devs won't make promises that never get kept: like new hair styles, fixing the skeletal models that limit character armor, collision detection, etc.

 

I'm sure Conan will have its fair share of launch issues just like all MMOs.

 

Well prices aside ,funcom history with mmorpg has been nowhere even as good as SoE.

I was there when funcom opened the chatroom for AO and was like less then 20 regulars .I was there when funcom came to the exhibition in london and saw the game crash within minutes and was unable to get it running again.

Let me tell you that funcom made loads of promises to the core community in the chatroom (was a dev in every night) and then shadowed away the regulars from beta and released a extremely buggy laggy and devoid of many promised features in Anarchy online.

So in my eyes ,the history of funcom has been one of the worst when it comes to promises and releasing a product.

However that said I have high hopes for them in AoC and hope they learnt from AO.So in effect funcom has existed as a mmorpg just as SoE has for years and does have a terrible history.

Originally posted by Daffid011

I don't think people hate on SOE for the price they charge, but rather for the ACTIONS in MMOs and their obvious disrespect towards their customers.

 

SOE charges a pretty standard rate for MMOs and the station pass was actually a good idea when it was less than the price of 2 MMOs. 

 

The flaw in your Funcom comparison is that if Age of Conan actually delivers a finished product on launch day that is fun then they will have done something SOE has never done.  By finished I mean a game that doesn't require massive revamps, overhauls and core design changes for the first several years after launch so that those few people who stick with the game can say how much better the game is than when it launched.  The devs won't make promises that never get kept: like new hair