We haven't taken the easiest way with our first game: it's online game. Brief description could be: "Mix of Battlefield 1942, Jagged Alliance in Middle-Earth" ;)

Anyway - Little info about the game itself can be found from our website, but the real problem I have is how to bring our product into market? Usually single-player games can be "just put every download place there is", but in our case I fear that lack of players (of course there won't be much players in the first months) which can scare potential customers.

I have some ideas to prevent this:
-User can play trial demo and full version owners can also play same game (trial version players would see "this sword/shield/race/etc available in full game" icons here and there)
=> The idea for this is that If I get only two sales in first month hopefully I can keep those customers... because it isn't a good thing if I get one sale per month and I have to give his money back (as there will be money back quarantee) and so I would have one player playing game each month and wanting his money back...

-I will create AI bots (this will make game playable even when there are too small group of human players)

-I deal several (near 50) free licenses for demo testers who can test the game and play full version, this way I just might get enough players to keep people interested in the first phases.

Any suggestions which way could work?

I was also thinking of licensing the game (6 or 12 month periods, $2-4 per month) and I will bring free expansion packages for those who buy the license and also I will give free months for those who buy the longer period license (I was thinking payments could be something like $20 per six months ($3.33/month), $30 per 12 months ($2.5/month))

Another way of course could be single payment (near $20), but hopefully the online possibility can give the chance to use licenses as many online games do.

I think your first idea is near useless - why would I pay for your product when every game I can join is on demo terms? Or the other way around - why would demo players want to play with a full version player when they can't fight back with all available weapons?

The next two options sound nice though, especially the AI bot idea. That way, your potential customers can even check out your game without an inet connection.

I don't have a lot to say about pricing, other than I personally wouldn't pay a subscription, and definitely not if your game is not MM.

- elias

... Although I'd say that alot more than 50 free licenses is needed to gain momentum enough for others to join.

- elias

(Any idea why I can't edit my own posts in here?)

Originally posted by elias
... Although I'd say that alot more than 50 free licenses is needed to gain momentum enough for others to join.

- elias

(Any idea why I can't edit my own posts in here?)

Because you shall click edit button which is under your post, not the one which is above it. :)

@elias: good to hear your thoughts.

That way, your potential customers can even check out your game without an inet connection.
Yep, but the main focus is "online" game - single player mode is merely for the purpose of "training". and this game is not a massive multiplayer game (altough there can be over 200 people in same game, possibly more later if necessary)

Why wouldn't you pay licenses? If game costs $2.5 per month you don't think it's worth it? Even if you get free expansion packs with new weapons, monsters, levels, races and so on? What you others think? Is licensing out of question in a game like this?

Well, anybody knows why I can't edit Morphecy's post then? :-D

Anyway, yes, if enough players were online (>50-60 I'd say), 2.5$ would be a very fair price, and I'd actually consider it. But I should have emphasized _personally_ in the orginal post - I'm simply not a big fan of massively (or near massively in your case) online subscription based games. So the price options should really be commented on by others.

And I still like the AI idea (even a relatively stupid AI), even though it's just for training. I think it's equally important to get a feeling of your game in safety before jumping on the big netgame wagon. And the extra benefit of offline evaluation is always welcome to increase your sales.

Alternatively, you could create an online tutorial/beginners area, but that still requires a reasonable amount of players.
- elias

huge free betatests are ptrobably the best way to drum up a playerbase... I don't do online multiplayer, but I know lots of people who do, and that's generally how they get involved and spread the word. of course, you also need to be willing to cater somewhat to those testers, make them feel important, and add some things they ask for, so they feel important and VERY loyal and become your greatest salespeople.

@elias: okay.

@papillon: that sounds like a good idea, thanks! (still I don't know whether these betatesters should get a free license or whether they actually want to buy the full product when it's ready to be released...)

Originally posted by Morphecy
still I don't know whether these betatesters should get a free license or whether they actually want to buy the full product when it's ready to be released...

If you are going to charge a monthly fee, then maybe you can give two or three free months to the beta-testers.

Also, if the game is a RPG, you can give the beta-testers an edge over other players by letting them start from a level or two higher, or giving them some artifact/ weapon/ spell in the beginning itself (which other players may have to work for).

@Rohit: The game won't have any "levels" - the game sessions will be quite similar to BF1942, so no experience collecting or treasure hunt like diablo. (notice: this isn't BF1942 clone - mentioned only because just wanted to make sure you get the idea)

Get it running and put it online.

Find Web sites (like MPOGD.com (http://www.mpogd.com) and Multiplayer.com (http://www.multiplayer.com)) that list multi-player online games, and get listed. Most of these are free, and some will even do reviews if you ask (and offer a free review copy).

Be prepared to spend a lot of time on the game yourself, helping new players get started. Greet them when they log in and help them learn the ropes. Play with them.

Your community of players will build slowly at first, but it will build. Don't get discouraged.

Once you have a stable community of players, you won't have to show up as much, but you should still do so. It makes the players happy to rub elbows with the developers.

It'll take time to build up your base of players and get the game to point you envision. But if you stick to it, it will happen.

As for non-paying players competing with paying players, it can work. We've done it in a couple games now. You do have to be careful with how you balance the game. You may have to offer built-in protection for new players to prevent the paying players from using them as "practice". You'll find out as you go along.


-David

@DavidRM: Thanks for your precious pieces of advice, made reason.

Because a good number of players is what makes the game worth playing, and is also great for word of mouth advertising, it seems imperative to foster a large community as early as possible. So I agree with papillion, perhaps you could initially release the whole thing for free so that you can build a stable community.

You could start charging after that, but I think dishing out a good number of free or heavily discounted licenses would be well worth the investment. I don't have much experience with online multiplayer games but ending up a with an empty world that can't get started seems like the worst case scenario to me. AI players would be fun to have around, but nothing compares to playing against other humans. Get humans, and lots of em!

@lexaloffle: your words sound good also, but "You could start charging after that" is too harsh (if it isn't said in the first place). It is a tendency that people antagonize changes - especially big changes like FREE to PAYING method.

Every game has to start from *somewhere*. So, if you're going to charge for it, charge for it from the beginning. If you want it free during testing, that's cool. But that's a separate issue, and you should still set a date after which it's not free anymore.

Yes, an active community of players is an important selling point. And that's what you're going to build.

For the original Paintball Net, we started charging for the game in August 1996. It was September, over a month later when we had our first payment arrive. During most of this time the game was a pretty lonely place. I would log in and as often as not I was the only one there. I would stick around, though, to provide "live marketing" for the handful of players who would pop in one at a time. We had 3 payments that month.

It was October before there was a better than even chance of other players being online when I wasn't there. I can still remember the night I logged on and there 9 (!) players already there. We had 10 payments that month.

It was March of 1997 before the base of players really started growing on its own. As the number of active players grew, the number of payments processed each month went up too.

It may seem like a slow process, but never forget: Everyone has to start from somewhere.

-David

Originally posted by Morphecy
@lexaloffle: your words sound good also, but "You could start charging after that" is too harsh (if it isn't said in the first place). It is a tendency that people antagonize changes - especially big changes like FREE to PAYING method.
I wasn't imagining a *bam!* ok, you can start paying now scenario. The community-building phase would have to be construed as a beta-testing phase, or advertised as 'Free For A Limited Time!'.

This is all speculation though, DavidRM's experience surprised me. I though that _gradually_ starting an online game community would be like trying to start a file with no kindling.


EDIT: yikes, I meant 'fire'. 'voice' -> 'void', 'white' -> 'while'..
<:-)

Originally posted by lexaloffle
I though that _gradually_ starting an online game community would be like trying to start a file with no kindling.

Files? Kindling? What are you making, Enron: The Massively Multiplayer Online Game? Do you get to play as the Arthur Anderson accountants, or do we have to wait for the expansion pack?

In this point I must thank you guys, good & interesting points so far. keep'em'coming.

@lexaloffle: agree.

@LordKronos: I take it you asked that from me? Anyway - there's no player accounts, as said in the first post: It's more like "Mix of Battlefield 1942, Jagged Alliance in Middle-Earth" :)

@DavidRM: that is very interesting, I'd like to hear more about that publishing process. And also I'd like to know whether Paintball Net was bought by single payment or license model?

Originally posted by Morphecy
@LordKronos: I take it you asked that from me?

Actually I wasn't asking, I was making a joke. Unfortunately, I didn't notice that you weren't from the US, so theres a good chance you wouldn't get the joke. Enron was a US company that's been involved in a big scandal. The executies and accountants overhyped the company, used shady/illegal accounting practices to make the company look more profitable than it was, and a bunch of other bad stuff. When the company collapsed, the government came in to investigate what illegal activity happened within the company, but the company had already destroyed most of the evidence.

I noticed the file & kidling (I never make files without kidlings - strange Windows I have... ;)) but that Enron thingy was little odd for me, thanks for making it clear, heh :)

Ah back to the subject: I just might re-think that License part, maybe it's out of question because there isn't any accounts.

@DavidRM: was that PaintballNet a "single-shot payment" or subscription model? What is the current situation today?

Paintball Net started out with a very simple 2-tiered payment system. Payments were one-time payments, and the biggest difference in the levels was in the amount of "carry weight" a player had. "Carry weight" referred to how much equipment they could carry on their player. More weight allowed more equipment, which allowed more options to the player.

Before 6 months were up, there 4 payment levels. Each payment level cost $10. Players would pay for one at a time, or would pay $40 at once to get all of them.

The players got competitive, always wanting to carry more. At its peak, there were 14 payment levels.

Paintball Net was online from 1996-2000, just over 4 years. We took it offline because we hadn't designed the server to handle the load it was carrying, and the cost of daily maintenance and customer service was just too much.

We learned a lot about running online games in general from Paintball Net, which helped with Artifact (http://www.samugames.com/artifact). Of course, we're still learning as we go along.

-David

DavidRM: Is Painball net playable without your server? I'm curious how players responded to suddenly not being able to play the game. (I'm assuming it had many players if server and support costs were high)


Jack

Ironically some people actually made clones of paintball net and a few of them are still up and running. I think this (http://www.hvpb.com/) is one of them....

Originally posted by JackNathan
DavidRM: Is Painball net playable without your server? I'm curious how players responded to suddenly not being able to play the game. (I'm assuming it had many players if server and support costs were high)

Jack

The game was client-server, not playable without the server.

When we decided that we were going to pull the plug, we posted a notice 6 months in advance, and stopped accepting payments 3 months before the end date (or course, there weren't that many payments after the end was announced).

It's not like the players woke up one day and *poof* no server. That would irresponsible.

The players weren't exactly *excited* about the idea. Neither were we, for that matter. But when it's time to go, pack your things and leave. Dragging things out only makes it worse.

-David

@DavidRM: That payment method sounds interesting. I have to ask: were players able to create their own games? Or were they always playing on your servers? And I must ask same question about Artifact - can players create their own servers - or is it always at your servers where they can run games?