Marvel Heroes Dev Defends Pricing

[Marshall Honorof]

Marvel Heroes Dev Defends Pricing

Dave Brevik thinks $200 is a fair price for all of the game's starting content.

Whether you need to buy get ready to drop $200 [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spider-Man]. While the upcoming MMORPG is free-to-play and premium packs start at $20, Gazillion Entertainment CEO Dave Brevik thinks that the Ultimate Pack is priced to sell.

"You have to realize how much you're getting for that Ultimate Pack," says Brevik, who is perhaps best known as one of the leads behind Diablo and Diablo II. He points out that people - including himself - routinely spend more money than this on games like League of Legends and World of Warcraft, and that games in this price range are hardly unheard-of. "There are plenty of Collector's Edition-type things that are well over $100. This does happen." If you want all the content that Marvel Heroes offers and don't have time to earn it, Brevik also explains that the Ultimate Pack is cheaper than buying everything piecemeal. "It's an upfront discount. That's why it seems expensive, but in the long run you'll save quite a bit of money."

The Ultimate Pack does boast a lot of content: It unlocks every playable hero, four exclusive costumes, $100 in in-game currency, early game access, permanent bonuses for XP and item collection, and forum perks. Brevik also stresses that the pack is completely optional. Not only are most premium packs much cheaper, but to jump into the game and start playing costs nothing at all. However, while players can earn every hero and most costumes through dedicated play, a few items will only be available to premium purchasers. "In a lot of ways we're giving away almost everything," Brevik continues. "I would like to say everything, but it is technically not correct. But 99 percent of everything is attainable in the game."

Fans have also levied negative charges against the beta's storyline and graphics, but Brevik assures them that these will be ironed out by the game's launch. "[The fans] have to realize it's not done yet. It is a beta. We have definitive plans." Until then, take solace in the fact that even if you buy the Ultimate Pack, it's considerably cheaper than your own private battle jet [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batman].

Source: Eurogamer [http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-01-21-dave-brevik-doesnt-see-a-problem-with-marvel-heroes-130-ultimate-pack-hes-spent-over-USD1000-on-league-of-legends-already]

Permalink

 

[GenGenners]

This would be fun to justify to your family. "I need $200 for an internet game".

 

[Sixcess]

10/10 for honesty, I guess... but isn't the whole point of 'microtransactions' that it's a subtle drip feed of income that gives you the impression you're spending less, even if it does end up being more?

Just seems like a bad idea to draw attention to the overall potential expenditure by putting out what is essentially a really expensive Collector's Edition for an unproven game that I rather doubt will set the world on fire in any case.

 

[BrotherRool]

I thought this was a fighter when I saw the title so I was planning to say "What does it think it is? An MMO?"

So yeah if you pay $60 for WoW and then $15 for a year then thats $240. Admittedly this doesn't sound like it has as much content as WoW

 

[Zombie_Moogle]

In the current market of mobile & indie gaming seeing ever rising success & popularity at a price range of $1-$15 dollars, it's baffling to me that someone thinks a $200 DLC pack will sell

Sure, long-time subscription MMO players have paid much more than this for the content they enjoy... over the course of years. The entertainment value of their game was worth $15/month to them. Dropping $200 on content for a game they might only play for a month or two before bailing? I'm sure they'll move a couple of these packs, but the idea itself is gonna scare away far more prospective customers

 

[deanospimoni]

I just lost interest in this game.

 

[vxicepickxv]

I just lost interest in this game.

I just found out about this game, and immediately lost interest.

 

[Therumancer]

I'm in Beta for this one (like many other games) but under a NDA so I can't say anything except for the fact that my biggest complaint so far has been their testing times and being unable to access their beta forums despite numerous attempts. The testing times are just wild coincidence with a recent RL schedule though, not their fault... but the forums (grrr).

Without talking about the game itself I will say that $200 is about the going rate for a "lifetime subscription" or the equivilent to an MMO right now. Star Trek Online, The Secret World, Champions Online, Lord Of The Rings Online, etc... have all generally followed that price point.

The big question with a game like this is whether you like it enough to feel that it justifies the expense. $200 is a lot of money but to be honest if it's something you think your likely to play a lot, even if not constantly (ie periodically re-visting it) it's probably worth the content especially if it's going to give you the play time youd put into 4-5 other games, which is quite possible for an MMO.

My personal problem with the $200 founders package though is that it includes only initial content for the game. When you drop $200 for an MMO you usually get all of the upcoming expansions, and at least a point stipend if the game is running on a FTP model. This package includes none of those things, so if they add more characters, costumes, etc... later you have to pay cash for them. Ditto for if they add new areas/missions/adventures and that kind of content to
the game, they could very well charge you for that as well.

The $200 pack is basically a huge unlock bundle and while interesting, and perhaps worthwhile to someone who wants to play the game a lot, I don't think it includes enough long term guarantees (despite providing cash shop currency in one lump) to really be competitive with other, similar, offers. If they were to give you an automatic cash shop currency stipend as well, or guaranteed free access to all new game content that would be more worthwhile and competitive with similar offers.

To speak for myself I wound up buying two of the cheapest starter packs with a characters I wanted to play, as they came (currently) with as much $ value as I was spending in cash shop currency as well. It's a game I'll definatly try after launch despite what the company itself has said about their reception and criticisms (no comment from me as I'm under NDA) but to be honest I was neither too fond of their $60 packages, nor do I think the $200 offer is worthwhile
in it's current form.

As a totally seperate note, I also think the gaming industry as a whole needs to chill out with the DLC, and do some conferring on fair cost to value ratios. This is a general comment rather than just directed at Marvel Heroes, though it makes me think of the problem. Right now one thing pretty much all F2P games sell are "skins", that is cosmetic embellishments for character models, such as clothing, alternate apperances, etc. I find it kind of disturbing how much the prices fluctuate for pretty much the same things between games, as it can be pretty telling when it comes to greed, and I think also holds things back. In some games you can get a whole pack of skins following a specific theme for like $5, in others you might pay $10 or more for a single skin or character outfit. Looking at this you also have to compare the cosmetics to things that actually have some serious in game value like a new character, ship, or class of weapon. Even within the same game sometimes you'll see a pack of 3 skins being sold for the same price as a single skin. It's generally kind of a mess, and I think hurts microtransactions a bit since it seems like bean counters slap on the price tags without seriously thinking about the actual value of what's being sold. As much as I prefer the straight "everyone pays a subscription and everyone gets everything" model, I think F2P games would benefit from a bit more thought in this direction and consistincy. If you look at the costs of the revealed Marvel Heroes Starter Packs you might be able to deduce the relative costs of skins vs. characters, and why this game has gotten me thinking about the problem. Not to mention that when you look at say "Champions Online" you can pick up a pack of like 3 costumes you can mix and match parts from for $5.

 

[Covarr]

I just lost interest in this game.

I just found out about this game, and immediately lost interest.

This. Also, I'm not a very big Marvel fan.

Part of the reason that MMOs are able to bring in as much money as they do is because the prices aren't high all at once. $15/month may be quite a bit over the course of a year, but that's a longer term spend. If Blizzard were to sell WoW subscriptions on an annual basis rather than monthly, people wouldn't pay up. Microtransactions are much the same way. People are glad to spend a dollar here and there, and even buy packs if there's some sort of bulk discount attached, but a pack this big is out of reach for most people.

That said, they do offer much smaller bundles for people who don't wanna spend this much, so I really don't see what the big deal is. It's not like anybody's being forced to buy this.

P.S. Thanks

 

[Slash2x]

Hey way to be honest. To be truthful this is like the people who spend $100 on the collectors editions of other games for things they will never use. At least this is stuff in game you get..... Bah no matter what the game is there is always a version for people with too much damn money.

 

[Sixcess]

10/10 for honesty, I guess... but isn't the whole point of 'microtransactions' that it's a subtle drip feed of income that gives you the impression you're spending less, even if it does end up being more?

I would have thought it was simply more prudent to spred the payment out over time, instead of just dropping one huge lump sum.

I was thinking of it more from a marketing point of view. F2P games usually aren't very up front about how expensive it could be - indeed most of the time the emphasis is on how little you could spend, rather than how much. In this case this game already has a headline-grabbing $200 potential price tag attached to it, and they're already on the defensive about it.

Aside from that - are they really calling this an MMORPG? It's more of a Diablo clone really.

 

[zidine100]

sounds like pay to win

 

[Vegosiux]

Heh, what can I say, once again I'm happy my attention span is decent enough so I don't feel this nefarious desire to throw my money at every polished turd that's flung my wa---

.....ooooh, shiny! *wanders off*

 

[Shadow-Phoenix]

I thought this was a fighter when I saw the title so I was planning to say "What does it think it is? An MMO?"

So yeah if you pay $60 for WoW and then $15 for a year then thats $240. Admittedly this doesn't sound like it has as much content as WoW

Honestly I just wish they'd all drop this delusional idea that we would all be perfectly fine dropping $200-£200 into a digital game and just use the GW2 base model of paying for the game and then playing for it for free with maybe the tiniest of micro trans.

My roomie is living proof of how much money he sinks into multiple Japanese MMO's is a bad idea considering he throws in more than £700 a year (in some cases £2000 which was 2 years ago for his biggest dump of cash in the whole year)

And even if we don't wish to dump that much money I'm betting the time it would take to eventually get all what's listed there would equate to a massive waste of time.

 

[deanospimoni]

sounds like pay to win

Sounds like someone is jumping to conclusions.

 

[SonOfMethuselah]

sounds like pay to win

Sounds like someone is jumping to conclusions.

In a way, sure. But when you read this bit:

"...permanent bonuses for XP and item collection..."

I get the feeling it's not the most outlandish conclusion to jump to. I'll admit to having absolutely no knowledge about the game, so I don't know how the infrastructure works, what the character balances are like, and what is in the in-game shop that you can spend the $100 on, but it does sound like anyone willing to shell out money is going to potentially be in a better position when the game launches.

Which isn't fair. Yes, when you have a game that's free-to-play, people who choose to pay for the content should be rewarded in some way. But, at the same time, the rewards they get shouldn't be potentially hampering to the people who are taking advantage of the free option. You're offering that option, after all. Since most of the content can be unlocked through playing (from the sounds of it), I don't think it's going to be a long-term issue, but that potential boost to players with extra money to drop during the game's launch period could hurt the title overall.

OT: I have never bought, nor ever been so much as tempted to buy a Collector's Edition for a game. I think the standard pricing is egregious enough, without dropping more money for extra stuff that's then just going to collect dust on a shelf somewhere. But whenever I see a price tag like that for a game, I wince a little bit. The fact that someone, somewhere has enough disposable income to drop $200 on a game that's supposed to be free-to-play is baffling, and makes the collection of lint currently hanging out in my wallet seem all the more out of place.

 

[Hitchmeister]

A $200 Ultimate Pack is terrible. Break that up into a never ending stream of $2.50 to $15 purchases and people will spend $400 for less without ever batting an eye. Shine a $200 spotlight on your "micro-transactions"(1) and people will call BS on how that's too much money.


(1)There's nothing "micro" about $200, and $15 is almost as bad.

 

[Nalgas D. Lemur]

I'm in Beta for this one (like many other games) but under a NDA

I know you can't say much, but is it as awful as RPS says it is [http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/12/17/hands-on-marvel-heroes/]? Blink twice for yes. Heh.