Crown prices in China have exploded and it was not due to exchange rate

Ajintse

Nemesis7884 wrote: »

Having the same amounz regardless of country seems weird...35 eur for 5k crowns for me as a person with a good salary from a rich country seems very expensive, in most other nations this seems insane probably...prices are usually adjusted for ppp...i mean the average salary in poland i sloke 1000 eur? In my country its 5000 eur, you cant expect them to pay the same

5k euro? Dude, the hell? Where do you live?

ForsakenSin

Slick_007 wrote: »

cant believe you got away with paying half of everyone else.

Darth_Trumpious wrote: »

Cant believe you didn't read on the first part re steam pricing policy.

Swifigames wrote: »

Can't believe everything's got to turn into an argument. Oh wait.. -_-

anitajoneb17_ESO

WhiteMage wrote: »

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Scraelos wrote: »

Digital product has production costs, but production of it's copies has zero costs. With such product nature you are free to set any price per copy which will give you maximum profit. Which will you choose: sell 100 items for 100$ per item or 1000 items for 50$ per item? And keep in mind that you have constant production costs no matter how many items you sold.

Nothing says that lowering the price of crowns would lead to selling more of them. At least, not in a linear way.
Inversely, nothing says that increasing the price of crowns will lead to selling less of them. At least, not in a linear way.

If I allotted $35 dollars to buy crowns, how many packs would I buy if they cost $40? Zero.
If I allotted $35 dollars to buy crowns, how many packs would I buy if they cost $20? One.
If I allotted $35 dollars to buy crowns, how many packs would I buy if they cost $10? Three.
If I allotted $35 dollars to buy crowns, how many packs would I buy if they cost $5? Seven.

In this example, they stop making more money after they drop the price to $5, but the idea still stands that if I budget myself, the closer their price comes to a factor of the money I'm willing to give them, the more of it they can have. I am assumed to be an intelligent consumer here that will stick to my budget and not fall for the knock-off crown packs that come at the higher price per unit.

That's because of your reasoning with "budget".
Now let's reason in terms of "needs" or "wishes".
I want that costume that costs 4000 crowns.

If 4000 crowns cost 40USD, how much will I spend ? 40USD. Because I want that costume and I think it's worth it.
If 4000 crowns cost 60USD, how much will I spend ? 60USD. Because I want that costume and I still think it's worth it.
If 4000 crowns cost 20USD, how much will I spend ? 20USD. And not more, because all I need is this costume.

Customers with that logic are ALSO intelligent.

If you have a 35 dollar budget for crowns and crowns are cheaper, you don't necessarily buy more crowns. You can also decide to spend less on crowns and more on something else.

Also, note that in your example, you always spend 35USD. Not more. Sure, you buy more crowns, but you don't spend more. ZOS isn't interested in selling more crowns, they're interested in cashing more USD...

WhiteMage

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

WhiteMage wrote: »

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Scraelos wrote: »

Digital product has production costs, but production of it's copies has zero costs. With such product nature you are free to set any price per copy which will give you maximum profit. Which will you choose: sell 100 items for 100$ per item or 1000 items for 50$ per item? And keep in mind that you have constant production costs no matter how many items you sold.

Nothing says that lowering the price of crowns would lead to selling more of them. At least, not in a linear way.
Inversely, nothing says that increasing the price of crowns will lead to selling less of them. At least, not in a linear way.

If I allotted $35 dollars to buy crowns, how many packs would I buy if they cost $40? Zero.
If I allotted $35 dollars to buy crowns, how many packs would I buy if they cost $20? One.
If I allotted $35 dollars to buy crowns, how many packs would I buy if they cost $10? Three.
If I allotted $35 dollars to buy crowns, how many packs would I buy if they cost $5? Seven.

In this example, they stop making more money after they drop the price to $5, but the idea still stands that if I budget myself, the closer their price comes to a factor of the money I'm willing to give them, the more of it they can have. I am assumed to be an intelligent consumer here that will stick to my budget and not fall for the knock-off crown packs that come at the higher price per unit.

That's because of your reasoning with "budget".
Now let's reason in terms of "needs" or "wishes".
I want that costume that costs 4000 crowns.

If 4000 crowns cost 40USD, how much will I spend ? 40USD. Because I want that costume and I think it's worth it.
If 4000 crowns cost 60USD, how much will I spend ? 60USD. Because I want that costume and I still think it's worth it.
If 4000 crowns cost 20USD, how much will I spend ? 20USD. And not more, because all I need is this costume.

Customers with that logic are ALSO intelligent.

If you have a 35 dollar budget for crowns and crowns are cheaper, you don't necessarily buy more crowns. You can also decide to spend less on crowns and more on something else.

Also, note that in your example, you always spend 35USD. Not more. Sure, you buy more crowns, but you don't spend more. ZOS isn't interested in selling more crowns, they're interested in cashing more USD...

I wouldn't put that type of consumer on the same level as the one who budgets. As the goal here is making the most money, you have to factor in that they will be selling to both consumers that will buy it at any price and consumers who will only buy it if it is reasonably priced. They could milk your consumer type for everything they're worth but they won't sell a single one to the budget-conscious consumer. As they lower the price, more budget-conscious players will buy it as it gets in their price range. If it costs 1 crown, there is a good chance they will sell it to everyone in the game. Somewhere in the middle is the point where earnings are optimized.

Every salesperson loves it when they find a sucker who will pay any price because they just want it and have to have it. I wouldn't consider that consumer to be intelligent (at least with his money) unless this is his one "toy" that he allows himself to splurge on.

anitajoneb17_ESO

WhiteMage wrote: »

I wouldn't put that type of consumer on the same level as the one who budgets. As the goal here is making the most money, you have to factor in that they will be selling to both consumers that will buy it at any price and consumers who will only buy it if it is reasonably priced. They could milk your consumer type for everything they're worth but they won't sell a single one to the budget-conscious consumer. As they lower the price, more budget-conscious players will buy it as it gets in their price range. If it costs 1 crown, there is a good chance they will sell it to everyone in the game. Somewhere in the middle is the point where earnings are optimized.

Every salesperson loves it when they find a sucker who will pay any price because they just want it and have to have it. I wouldn't consider that consumer to be intelligent (at least with his money) unless this is his one "toy" that he allows himself to splurge on.

I did not say "will buy at any price". Nor did I say "sucker". You say it.
It's just "will still buy even if it's more expensive, as long as they think it's worth it".

Your "budget" type, buying 2000 crowns instead of 1000 just because they have "budgeted" the price for 2000 even if they need only 1000, could also be called "suckers" or "stupid".

The point here is not to qualify whichever behaviour as stupid or not. It's to realize that the price vs. quantity sold of any given good or service is NOT linear. People will NOT buy double if the price is halved, nor will they buy half if the price doubles. Companies analyze and modelize those various consumer behaviours via studies and statistics, and so does ZOS. That's why, when players think they're stupid with their crown pricing, I just laugh. ZOS knows EXACTLY what they're doing.

WhiteMage

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

WhiteMage wrote: »

I wouldn't put that type of consumer on the same level as the one who budgets. As the goal here is making the most money, you have to factor in that they will be selling to both consumers that will buy it at any price and consumers who will only buy it if it is reasonably priced. They could milk your consumer type for everything they're worth but they won't sell a single one to the budget-conscious consumer. As they lower the price, more budget-conscious players will buy it as it gets in their price range. If it costs 1 crown, there is a good chance they will sell it to everyone in the game. Somewhere in the middle is the point where earnings are optimized.

Every salesperson loves it when they find a sucker who will pay any price because they just want it and have to have it. I wouldn't consider that consumer to be intelligent (at least with his money) unless this is his one "toy" that he allows himself to splurge on.

I did not say "will buy at any price". Nor did I say "sucker". You say it.
It's just "will still buy even if it's more expensive, as long as they think it's worth it".

Your "budget" type, buying 2000 crowns instead of 1000 just because they have "budgeted" the price for 2000 even if they need only 1000, could also be called "suckers" or "stupid".

The point here is not to qualify whichever behaviour as stupid or not. It's to realize that the price vs. quantity sold of any given good or service is NOT linear. People will NOT buy double if the price is halved, nor will they buy half if the price doubles. Companies analyze and modelize those various consumer behaviours via studies and statistics, and so does ZOS. That's why, when players think they're stupid with their crown pricing, I just laugh. ZOS knows EXACTLY what they're doing.

Neither of us said it was a linear relationship. It's not, though you could probably approximate it as linear in certain conditions. I think it's more important to think about what players pay for crowns, which they might never have enough of, as opposed to what they exchange the crowns for. It's pretty clear that the purpose of crowns is to desensitize you to the fact that that you are spending real money (or life energy, depending on your situation/mindset) and by and large the things you spend crowns on are one-off things.

The cheaper crowns are, the more of them they sell. That much is clear, otherwise they wouldn't keep discounting them. If someone insists on buying exactly enough crowns to purchase what they want, only when they want it, then such an impulsive buyer wouldn't buy more crowns even when they are discounted. Yes, ZOS would lose some money on each of them, but the amount of sales they would gain from other budget-minded consumers would (and do) outweigh those loses, by a respectable margin.

Is the relationship between sales price and revenue linear straight through? No, there's a definite curve, but is it linear near the optimized price, probably. That isn't particularly important though. The basic economic lesson is that they will sell more units as the price per unit drops.

That budget-minded consumer, by the way, is very intelligent with his money. If he doesn't buy any crowns with his $35 crown budget, he's $35 richer than if he had.

Alpheu5

Economics is hard.

anitajoneb17_ESO

WhiteMage wrote: »

Neither of us said it was a linear relationship. It's not, though you could probably approximate it as linear in certain conditions. [snip]The basic economic lesson is that they will sell more units as the price per unit drops.

The fact is, that you do not know (and neither do I) if and how linear the relations between crown price and crown sales is, because neither of us has figures or data nor knows how this curve looks like.
How can you draw a final conclusion which the exact opposite then ? The fact that they will sell more units as the price per unit drops is exactly what we should NOT assume. And again, let's not forget that their goal is not to sell as many crowns as possible, but to cash as many dollars as possible.
Especially when it comes to online gamers, I believe this category of players (us) has a very, very specific typology, and we should not assume anything about it (just look at some posters here who claim to have 80K crowns and nothing to spend them on... ?).

WhiteMage wrote: »

The cheaper crowns are, the more of them they sell. That much is clear, otherwise they wouldn't keep discounting them.

Again, NO. Sales are an entirely different process, based on rarity and short-term, playing with the psychological feeling of actually "saving" money - which tricks us into spending more. It belongs to a marketing strategy, not to a pricing policy.
It does NOT lead to the conclusion that the cheaper they are, the more of them they sell. And again, the point is NOT to sell crowns, it is to earn real cash.

Jawasa

@Slick_007 You seem very bitter. Pretty sad that you are glad that other people get screwed over. Sure I dotn feel sorry for chines millionairs or rich Russians. But the average chines/Russian gamer that makes a lot less money then you and me wont be enjoy nice costums and race changes any more.

WhiteMage

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

WhiteMage wrote: »

Neither of us said it was a linear relationship. It's not, though you could probably approximate it as linear in certain conditions. [snip]The basic economic lesson is that they will sell more units as the price per unit drops.

The fact is, that you do not know (and neither do I) if and how linear the relations between crown price and crown sales is, because neither of us has figures or data nor knows how this curve looks like.
How can you draw a final conclusion which the exact opposite then ? The fact that they will sell more units as the price per unit drops is exactly what we should NOT assume. And again, let's not forget that their goal is not to sell as many crowns as possible, but to cash as many dollars as possible.
Especially when it comes to online gamers, I believe this category of players (us) has a very, very specific typology, and we should not assume anything about it (just look at some posters here who claim to have 80K crowns and nothing to spend them on... ?).

WhiteMage wrote: »

The cheaper crowns are, the more of them they sell. That much is clear, otherwise they wouldn't keep discounting them.

Again, NO. Sales are an entirely different process, based on rarity and short-term, playing with the psychological feeling of actually "saving" money - which tricks us into spending more. It belongs to a marketing strategy, not to a pricing policy.
It does NOT lead to the conclusion that the cheaper they are, the more of them they sell. And again, the point is NOT to sell crowns, it is to earn real cash.

I don't know what the specifics for ZOS are, but I can mock it it with hypothetical numbers and observe the general relationship that appears and reasonably expect that ZOS's accountants observe a similar trend, albeit on an entirely different scale. In theory, this would apply. I doubt ZOS operates on an entirely different sales paradigm or whatever.

Yeah, they "trick" us into spending more, but I'm assuming we are already in a prime spot to be tricked and the discount will end before we leave that prime zone. And of course the aim of ZOS isn't to maximize units sold, otherwise they'd price it at 1 crown. They are trying to optimize (units sold)*(price per unit). As you increase one, generally the other will decrease.

anitajoneb17_ESO

WhiteMage wrote: »

I don't know what the specifics for ZOS are, but I can mock it it with hypothetical numbers and observe the general relationship that appears and reasonably expect that ZOS's accountants observe a similar trend, albeit on an entirely different scale. In theory, this would apply. I doubt ZOS operates on an entirely different sales paradigm or whatever.

Yeah, they "trick" us into spending more, but I'm assuming we are already in a prime spot to be tricked and the discount will end before we leave that prime zone. And of course the aim of ZOS isn't to maximize units sold, otherwise they'd price it at 1 crown. They are trying to optimize (units sold)*(price per unit). As you increase one, generally the other will decrease.

Well, you persist in assuming that what you guess and assume is probably and generally close to the reality, and my point is exactly the opposite : that it could well be all reversed, that we don't have data and should not assume anything.
As a result, I suggest we simply agree to disagree

WhiteMage

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

WhiteMage wrote: »

I don't know what the specifics for ZOS are, but I can mock it it with hypothetical numbers and observe the general relationship that appears and reasonably expect that ZOS's accountants observe a similar trend, albeit on an entirely different scale. In theory, this would apply. I doubt ZOS operates on an entirely different sales paradigm or whatever.

Yeah, they "trick" us into spending more, but I'm assuming we are already in a prime spot to be tricked and the discount will end before we leave that prime zone. And of course the aim of ZOS isn't to maximize units sold, otherwise they'd price it at 1 crown. They are trying to optimize (units sold)*(price per unit). As you increase one, generally the other will decrease.

Well, you persist in assuming that what you guess and assume is probably and generally close to the reality, and my point is exactly the opposite : that it could well be all reversed, that we don't have data and should not assume anything.
As a result, I suggest we simply agree to disagree

Agree to disagree indeed. I wouldn't let uncertainty prevent any and all action...

wondertroll

Darth_Trumpious wrote: »

For those of you that don't play on steam - games on steam were priced differently based on the purchasing power of different regions. Those "developing countries" (China, Russia etc) that have issues with either purchasing power or piracy often have games priced cheaper than the "first world", i.e. US, Canada and Europe etc.

Based on the prices charged on steam (China Region)

Before ZOS' price adjustment: 5500 Crowns = US$19.99

AFTER: 5500 Crowns = US$41.23 (Yes it is more expensive than US/Canada)

Adjustment effect: Price hike = 106%

Same treatment was done to Russia (more expensive than US/Canada)

I understand Gina has responded in another thread that "the changes was made in response to "exchange rate fluctuation" but a 106% jump in crown prices seems to be hard to justify and not consistent with what other games were priced on steam's China/Russia region.

Put all jokes on politics / hacking / botting / piracy aside, those who spent hard earned money (especially in the developing countries) on crowns are the legitimate gamers and customers of ZoS.

Could you please check with steam's usual practice on "developing countries" and review on the pricing policy or speak with the guy in charge? @ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_JessicaFolsom @ZOS_RichLambert @ZOS_MattFiror

I agree,those that live around the region around china/russia are drastically affected by this.

For those who do not know the severity of this, let me draw an analogy.

In the United states, with USD $1 you can buy 1 cheeseburger.

In Cina, with USD $1, you can buy 3-4 cheeseburgers

In the United states you earn $2000 USD per month for doing a job.
In China, you earn $50 USD per month or much lesser for doing a job

Increasaing the price by 106% will affect asian players who play, and love to be a part of ESO, and I strongly suggest that the Steam prices for china/russia be converted back to their original price so players from around the world can enjoy the Crown store fairly together with other ESO players from around the world!

@ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_JessicaFolsom @ZOS_RichLambert @ZOS_MattFiror

/sign thread

TERMINAT0R_XVII

Slick_007 wrote: »

Darth_Trumpious wrote: »

Slick_007 wrote: »

so now you're getting charged about the same as everyone else.
currently 49.95 AUD = 39.72USD for 5500

cant believe you got away with paying half of everyone else.

Cant believe you didn't read on the first part re steam pricing policy.

the bit that was rewarding your country for piracy? and now you arent being rewarded for it. and paying about the same as everyone else.

Developing countries have gotten away with crap like this for too long. It's time they paid their dues, if you don't like it play a game like Skyrim SE where premium currency doesn't exist

Queo

LOL

You all need to get Dave Ramsey in your life.



I had a funny meme with a stormtrooper saying, Dave Ramsey told me to sell the tie fighter... but its not posting...

wondertroll

TERMINAT0R_XVII wrote: »

Slick_007 wrote: »

Darth_Trumpious wrote: »

Slick_007 wrote: »

so now you're getting charged about the same as everyone else.
currently 49.95 AUD = 39.72USD for 5500

cant believe you got away with paying half of everyone else.

Cant believe you didn't read on the first part re steam pricing policy.

the bit that was rewarding your country for piracy? and now you arent being rewarded for it. and paying about the same as everyone else.

Developing countries have gotten away with crap like this for too long. It's time they paid their dues, if you don't like it play a game like Skyrim SE where premium currency doesn't exist

They pay based on their purchasing power, as do you.

Let's say you earn USD 300 per month and spend USD $50 for 500 crowns.

In other countries, they earn much lesser than you.

In Philippines, people earn lets say 300 pesos a month, and they spend 50 pesos a month for 500 crowns.

They pay the same PPP ratio as you to enjoy the game. How is that unfair?

Dragath

looks like ZOS wants to test how much they can milk their customers.
if sales in china and russia drop too much, they will adjust the pricing.

ArchMikem

Darth_Trumpious wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

Darth_Trumpious wrote: »

Those "developing countries" (China, Russia etc)...

So, hate to break it to you, but Russia and China are Second World countries, not Third. They're not LDCs, they're developed nations with their own, relatively healthy, economies. In fact, China has experienced explosive economic development in the past forty years. Can't say exactly the same thing about Russia, but that's an entirely different issue.

You are the only person who made a sensible reply so far (though I am not here to take a lesson in economy or arguing with others over pointless topics). Thank you.

I do understand the fact that China appears to be one of the countries that had benefited from the economic growth, though from a personal perspective the individual players still suffer after the price change - in fact Russia/China are now playing over $40 for the 5500 crown packs when others are paying for less than $40.

I am just pointing out the adjustment might need to be reviewed, nothing else.

Ive always had to pay $45 for the 5500 packs. Why should anyone else have the right to pay less for that in USD? Id LOVE those packs to have been half off normally.

Darethran

The amount of gatekeeping is adorable. People paying less for a virtual integer on a database, due to their spending power being fractions of Americans, is offensive because...?

I wonder. Are the people taking glee in this American? I've got a hunch 'ere.

Zbigb4life

Ajintse wrote: »

Nemesis7884 wrote: »

Having the same amounz regardless of country seems weird...35 eur for 5k crowns for me as a person with a good salary from a rich country seems very expensive, in most other nations this seems insane probably...prices are usually adjusted for ppp...i mean the average salary in poland i sloke 1000 eur? In my country its 5000 eur, you cant expect them to pay the same

5k euro? Dude, the hell? Where do you live?

Yeah tell me where you live if the average salary is 5000 eur. I thing we have a little lair here

Kikke

Norway - monthly avg income = 4625.31 Euro.

before taxes. I'd guess xD

Dragath

MajinCry wrote: »

The amount of gatekeeping is adorable. People paying less for a virtual integer on a database, due to their spending power being fractions of Americans, is offensive because...?

I wonder. Are the people taking glee in this American? I've got a hunch 'ere.

i think it has more to do with the fact that they don't understand the concept of purchasing power.

Saturnana

Dragath wrote: »

MajinCry wrote: »

The amount of gatekeeping is adorable. People paying less for a virtual integer on a database, due to their spending power being fractions of Americans, is offensive because...?

I wonder. Are the people taking glee in this American? I've got a hunch 'ere.

i think it has more to do with the fact that they don't understand the concept of purchasing power.

I'll just leave this here..

Dragath

lnsane wrote: »

Dragath wrote: »

MajinCry wrote: »

The amount of gatekeeping is adorable. People paying less for a virtual integer on a database, due to their spending power being fractions of Americans, is offensive because...?

I wonder. Are the people taking glee in this American? I've got a hunch 'ere.

i think it has more to do with the fact that they don't understand the concept of purchasing power.

I'll just leave this here..

might even better to leave a link directly to the fitting GPD here.
its a lot more accurate for the situation than a countries GPD, but still not nearly good enough to see the differences in real income.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita

Saturnana

Dragath wrote: »

lnsane wrote: »

Dragath wrote: »

MajinCry wrote: »

The amount of gatekeeping is adorable. People paying less for a virtual integer on a database, due to their spending power being fractions of Americans, is offensive because...?

I wonder. Are the people taking glee in this American? I've got a hunch 'ere.

i think it has more to do with the fact that they don't understand the concept of purchasing power.

I'll just leave this here..

might even better to leave a link directly to the fitting GPD here.
its a lot more accurate for the situation than a countries GPD, but still not nearly good enough to see the differences in real income.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita

I stand corrected then. Did not see that link on my quick google search, apologies.
My initial link probably does give an indication on why ZOS hiked the price up, though (albeit based on numbers that definitely don't paint the whole picture). Even though the figures per capita indicate a HUGE income gap between different social classes, the country as a whole seems to be doing much better than the entire European Union combined. So they might've gone by those distorted figures, or at least not wholly representative ones.. but it's an explanation nonetheless.

To compare; 99% of the residents in my country have a home-connection to internet. I am assuming that this is not the case in China, meaning ZOS' marketing and pricing strategies are likely only targeting the social classes that are 'responsible' for keeping China's GDP/PP average that high - even though the differences within the country are huge and there are millions of people who can only dream of having that same purchasing power. One could argue whether or not that's fair, but ZOS probably doesn't care as the people who don't have that PP are not the ones purchasing crowns (I think). I would assume they're more concerned about filling basic needs.

Dragath

lnsane wrote: »

Dragath wrote: »

lnsane wrote: »

Dragath wrote: »

MajinCry wrote: »

The amount of gatekeeping is adorable. People paying less for a virtual integer on a database, due to their spending power being fractions of Americans, is offensive because...?

I wonder. Are the people taking glee in this American? I've got a hunch 'ere.

i think it has more to do with the fact that they don't understand the concept of purchasing power.

I'll just leave this here..

might even better to leave a link directly to the fitting GPD here.
its a lot more accurate for the situation than a countries GPD, but still not nearly good enough to see the differences in real income.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita

I stand corrected then. Did not see that link on my quick google search, apologies.
My initial link probably does give an indication on why ZOS hiked the price up, though (albeit based on numbers that definitely don't paint the whole picture). Even though the figures per capita indicate a HUGE income gap between different social classes, the country as a whole seems to be doing much better than the entire European Union combined. So they might've gone by those distorted figures, or at least not wholly representative ones.. but it's an explanation nonetheless.

To compare; 99% of the residents in my country have a home-connection to internet. I am assuming that this is not the case in China, meaning ZOS' marketing and pricing strategies are likely only targeting the social classes that are 'responsible' for keeping China's GDP/PP average that high - even though the differences within the country are huge and there are millions of people who can only dream of having that same purchasing power. One could argue whether or not that's fair, but ZOS probably doesn't care as the people who don't have that PP are not the ones purchasing crowns (I think). I would assume they're more concerned about filling basic needs.

no need to apologize.
online gaming in asia is a huge market, and access to the web is seldom a problem.
i think ZOS is smart enough to understand basic economics, as seen in the way they use their crown store and crates especially.
i suspect, they just want to see how far they can go. if sales drop too much, prices will be changed accordingly.
the only real question is, if the whales can stem the tide and keep buying.

Saturnana

Dragath wrote: »

lnsane wrote: »

Dragath wrote: »

lnsane wrote: »

Dragath wrote: »

MajinCry wrote: »

The amount of gatekeeping is adorable. People paying less for a virtual integer on a database, due to their spending power being fractions of Americans, is offensive because...?

I wonder. Are the people taking glee in this American? I've got a hunch 'ere.

i think it has more to do with the fact that they don't understand the concept of purchasing power.

I'll just leave this here..

might even better to leave a link directly to the fitting GPD here.
its a lot more accurate for the situation than a countries GPD, but still not nearly good enough to see the differences in real income.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita

I stand corrected then. Did not see that link on my quick google search, apologies.
My initial link probably does give an indication on why ZOS hiked the price up, though (albeit based on numbers that definitely don't paint the whole picture). Even though the figures per capita indicate a HUGE income gap between different social classes, the country as a whole seems to be doing much better than the entire European Union combined. So they might've gone by those distorted figures, or at least not wholly representative ones.. but it's an explanation nonetheless.

To compare; 99% of the residents in my country have a home-connection to internet. I am assuming that this is not the case in China, meaning ZOS' marketing and pricing strategies are likely only targeting the social classes that are 'responsible' for keeping China's GDP/PP average that high - even though the differences within the country are huge and there are millions of people who can only dream of having that same purchasing power. One could argue whether or not that's fair, but ZOS probably doesn't care as the people who don't have that PP are not the ones purchasing crowns (I think). I would assume they're more concerned about filling basic needs.

no need to apologize.
online gaming in asia is a huge market, and access to the web is seldom a problem.
i think ZOS is smart enough to understand basic economics, as seen in the way they use their crown store and crates especially.
i suspect, they just want to see how far they can go. if sales drop too much, prices will be changed accordingly.
the only real question is, if the whales can stem the tide and keep buying.

I was basing my assumption off these numbers, although I don't know how accurate they are as they list my country in the ~93% range instead of the higher number I expected (could be either me not checking facts correctly, or misleading info in other sources.. the first, hopefully ). But if they are accurate, that means only slightly more than half of China has access to internet. Which is low compared to Japan, Singapore, South Korea and a lot of other Asian countries in the list (especially considering what you mentioned; online gaming is a really popular thing in Asia).

I'm most definitely not trying to back up ZOS here as I wholeheartedly agree with you that it feels as though they're just trying to see how far they can go, which is a really low thing to do. I think it does give more insight into why the price hike happened, though. (The divide between rich and poor in terms of PP seems to be the same one as internet or no internet. Meaning they're targeting the wealthy half, and making things even more expensive and unreachable for the other half of the country).

Looks as though the only way we can counter these shenanigans (and reduce the money-flow to ZOS as a signal from the player-base), is discouraging the whales to keep pumping in the large amounts of money into the game they currently are.

Morgul667

I stopped buying crowns the day they did this change.

Hope others will do it.

Too much is too much. Seriously price increase was crazy.

Dragath

lnsane wrote: »

Dragath wrote: »

lnsane wrote: »

Dragath wrote: »

lnsane wrote: »

Dragath wrote: »

MajinCry wrote: »

The amount of gatekeeping is adorable. People paying less for a virtual integer on a database, due to their spending power being fractions of Americans, is offensive because...?

I wonder. Are the people taking glee in this American? I've got a hunch 'ere.

i think it has more to do with the fact that they don't understand the concept of purchasing power.

I'll just leave this here..

might even better to leave a link directly to the fitting GPD here.
its a lot more accurate for the situation than a countries GPD, but still not nearly good enough to see the differences in real income.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita

I stand corrected then. Did not see that link on my quick google search, apologies.
My initial link probably does give an indication on why ZOS hiked the price up, though (albeit based on numbers that definitely don't paint the whole picture). Even though the figures per capita indicate a HUGE income gap between different social classes, the country as a whole seems to be doing much better than the entire European Union combined. So they might've gone by those distorted figures, or at least not wholly representative ones.. but it's an explanation nonetheless.

To compare; 99% of the residents in my country have a home-connection to internet. I am assuming that this is not the case in China, meaning ZOS' marketing and pricing strategies are likely only targeting the social classes that are 'responsible' for keeping China's GDP/PP average that high - even though the differences within the country are huge and there are millions of people who can only dream of having that same purchasing power. One could argue whether or not that's fair, but ZOS probably doesn't care as the people who don't have that PP are not the ones purchasing crowns (I think). I would assume they're more concerned about filling basic needs.

no need to apologize.
online gaming in asia is a huge market, and access to the web is seldom a problem.
i think ZOS is smart enough to understand basic economics, as seen in the way they use their crown store and crates especially.
i suspect, they just want to see how far they can go. if sales drop too much, prices will be changed accordingly.
the only real question is, if the whales can stem the tide and keep buying.

I was basing my assumption off these numbers, although I don't know how accurate they are as they list my country in the ~93% range instead of the higher number I expected (could be either me not checking facts correctly, or misleading info in other sources.. the first, hopefully ). But if they are accurate, that means only slightly more than half of China has access to internet. Which is low compared to Japan, Singapore, South Korea and a lot of other Asian countries in the list (especially considering what you mentioned; online gaming is a really popular thing in Asia).

I'm most definitely not trying to back up ZOS here as I wholeheartedly agree with you that it feels as though they're just trying to see how far they can go, which is a really low thing to do. I think it does give more insight into why the price hike happened, though. (The divide between rich and poor in terms of PP seems to be the same one as internet or no internet. Meaning they're targeting the wealthy half, and making things even more expensive and unreachable for the other half of the country).

Looks as though the only way we can counter these shenanigans (and reduce the money-flow to ZOS as a signal from the player-base), is discouraging the whales to keep pumping in the large amounts of money into the game they currently are.

you don't have to be wealthy to have access to the internet. you just have to live in the right region. there are a lot of middle/low class gamers in china. the relatively low percentage of internet users is a bit misleading. there are a lot of factors to be considered. child policy and agriculture for example.