Pay what you want - FM?

Hey all,

I have just seen that for the release of Championship Manager 2010 you can pay what you want for the game from as little as 1p similar as to what Radiohead done with there last album. I think this is a pretty good idea perhaps those at Sports Interactive might be willing to consider the same for the release of Football Manager 2010, it would certainly stop those that winge about the game if they only paid a 1p for it don't you think ??

What are your views on the idea ??

For the amount of time I spend playing it, FM is always far better value than any other game I've ever bought. I think I'd still buy it if it cost £100. Obviously this wouldn't be the case for most people though.

I ready to pay upto $30 for FM. just for note: In my country new retail PC game costs around $19-22 (according to current exchange rate)

No need to do this when it is so commercially succesful I would guess.

For the amount of time I spend playing it, FM is always far better value than any other game I've ever bought. I think I'd still buy it if it cost £100. Obviously this wouldn't be the case for most people though.

I'd agree wholeheartedly with this and if the recently released cm10 demo is anything to go by I could see a fair few cm users demanding their penny back tbh.

Try not to discuss the Champ manager game in this thread to please as a moderator told me the thread will be closed if this happens

Thanks

I don't understand how that'd work though, because you could just buy the game and then sell it for more at Gamestation or whatever? Surely you could get quite a bit of money by doing this..?

You're having a giraffe. We'll pay top dollar for FM10 in October, but only get a working version about 4 or 5 months later.

I don't understand how that'd work though, because you could just buy the game and then sell it for more at Gamestation or whatever? Surely you could get quite a bit of money by doing this..?

It's 'pay what you want' for the download version only, I think.

If FM said pay what you want, i'd still pay the full price. If any game was deserving of my money it's FM. The amount of time I, and im sure most of you, spend playing it makes it better value for money than any game i've played before.

SI said the average FMer plays the game for 240 hours, game costs £30. I would think that people on this forum would probably play it for more too seeing as we're sad enough to join a forum dedicated to it.

Your average action game on the xbox lasts for about 8-10 hours and costs £30.

You can have no complaints on the price.

SI said the average FMer plays the game for 240 hours, game costs £30. I would think that people on this forum would probably play it for more too seeing as we're sad enough to join a forum dedicated to it.

Your average action game on the xbox lasts for about 8-10 hours and costs £30.

You can have no complaints on the price.

i agree amazing the amount of time people play FM, i gladly pay full price for it every year and like you say console games only go for 10hrs max and retail at 40 pound

No need to do this when it is so commercially succesful I would guess.

But if they done this it could get more people to try the game who wouldn't normally buy it for it's full price thus expanding their already huge fanbase further

But when Radiohead offered their last album for pay what you want, i think about 60% paid nothing. Its also worth pointing out that CM will have 6 £5 updates over the year.

I do agree with those above, i am still playing FM09 every day and for £30 you really cant argue with the value

Considering me and my girlfriend often blow around £100 whenever we go out in an evening I'm quite happy to pay a measly £30 for something that I get 100+ hours of enjoyment from.

If CM had the fanbase that FM does - then they wouldn't be doing this.

I would with no doubt pay £100 for FM if I had to an even more than that...

This...plus the fact they have a terrible product, I wouldn't download it for free let alone £2.51 ;-)

If CM had the fanbase that FM does - then they wouldn't be doing this.

Another big point about Radiohead.

The figure above that 60% that paid nothing is probably true, and IIRC the average price out of paying people was £3 or something.

Despite this however, Radiohead made more profit on that album than both of their albums previous because after the record label have taken their massive slice, publishing company takes their slice, distribution takes their slice, producers and engineers get paid, studio fee's have to be paid, the cost of making the cd's have to be paid etc. After that is all paid off, during which the band gets nothing, they get about 70p per cd sale, with the vast majority going to the record label and all those other people still in line before the bands cut.

Self releasing without a label and on the internet meant that Radiohead kept all the profit that the label and distribution companies usually take, and didn't have to pay for cd printing and such, meaning that web hosting and the recording of the album were the only two things they had to pay for. So despite selling the album for much less, they made more profit per album sold.

However, none of this applies to SI. They don't have a record label taking most of the profits. If they were to set pay what you want, they would have to deal with all the same costs as before but with less money coming in from sales as everyone apart from a very minor few would cheap out and get it for peanuts. Also keeping in mind that FM always tops the charts for months and months, they don't need to attract more customers, they have a huge fanbase.

It could be a viable concept for the music industry, more so for established bands such as Radiohead, but wouldn't work for SI, they have nothing to gain.

Another big point about Radiohead.

The figure above that 60% that paid nothing is probably true, and IIRC the average price out of paying people was £3 or something.

Despite this however, Radiohead made more profit on that album than both of their albums previous because after the record label have taken their massive slice, publishing company takes their slice, distribution takes their slice, producers and engineers get paid, studio fee's have to be paid, the cost of making the cd's have to be paid etc. After that is all paid off, during which the band gets nothing, they get about 70p per cd sale, with the vast majority going to the record label and all those other people still in line before the bands cut.

Self releasing without a label and on the internet meant that Radiohead kept all the profit that the label and distribution companies usually take, and didn't have to pay for cd printing and such, meaning that web hosting and the recording of the album were the only two things they had to pay for. So despite selling the album for much less, they made more profit per album sold.

However, none of this applies to SI. They don't have a record label taking most of the profits. If they were to set pay what you want, they would have to deal with all the same costs as before but with less money coming in from sales as everyone apart from a very minor few would cheap out and get it for peanuts. Also keeping in mind that FM always tops the charts for months and months, they don't need to attract more customers, they have a huge fanbase.

It could be a viable concept for the music industry, more so for established bands such as Radiohead, but wouldn't work for SI, they have nothing to gain.

Probably being a bit nosy here, but I wonder just how much of a cut SEGA take for distributing the game? Then you've got the likes of HMV, GAME, Amazon, Play.com etc. Anyway, it's just a thought and I don't really expect an answer.

CM is doing this because they're desperate to get people on board to try and sell future games. Someone should have told them that they'd only stay on board if the game's good, which CM isn't.

SI have no reason to do this as FM has a huge fanbase already.

In my opinion, FM doesn't need to do this. Why?

First of all, Football management games is a niche market. It not played by millions of people like WoW or L4D or COD etc.

There are only 3 players in this footy manager genre. FM, CM and FifaMan. So the race is between these 3 guys only and FM is already leading the race by a mile.

By lowering the price you can't make a COD gamer to play FM - so what's Eidos is trying is to lure FM and FifaMan gamers to play thier product. I am sure FM fans will not move out. Let's see they can lure FifaMan fans or not.

I'd agree wholeheartedly with this and if the recently released cm10 demo is anything to go by I could see a fair few cm users demanding their penny back tbh.

Yeah, I thought the demo looked like a beta of CM01/02, despite the **** Dev's over at BGS proclaiming themselves the leading name in football management sim's.

I reckon the forum will be hysterical when all the fanboys over there get riled at people wanting a refund on a game that cost a penny.

I cannot help but feel an urge to go and be a problem myself having found the demo so appallingly poor.

I would probably also be willing to pay more for FM then the retail price.. I dont play that much anymore, but this is definately worth it.. Only game for me thats worth more than the retail price. Buying FM always seems like I'm making a bargain

I think SI should let us pay what we want for FM 2010 and then, the real price for the third patch !

CM actually NEEDS to do this, because otherwise hardly anyone would buy it.

SI have no need to adopt a similar stance, since they make the market leading product, and shift huge numbers of units at a "normal" price

CM actually NEEDS to do this, because otherwise hardly anyone would buy it.

SI have no need to adopt a similar stance, since they make the market leading product, and shift huge numbers of units at a "normal" price

Exactly, SI/SEGA have no need for this gimmick. Football manager 2010 will sell by the bucket load at the market price. CM clearly need to do this to attract new buyers.

if CM wants to put themselves outta business, who are we to stop them

I would probably also be willing to pay more for FM then the retail price.. I dont play that much anymore, but this is definately worth it.. Only game for me thats worth more than the retail price. Buying FM always seems like I'm making a bargain

Completely agree with this too. No other game gives me as many hours play as FM so i'd pay over the odds too if i were forced to. Total value for money. I bought FM 2009 on release day and i'm still playing it today. Not bad for £30.

Hey all,

I have just seen that for the release of Championship Manager 2010 you can pay what you want for the game from as little as 1p similar as to what Radiohead done with there last album. I think this is a pretty good idea perhaps those at Sports Interactive might be willing to consider the same for the release of Football Manager 2010, it would certainly stop those that winge about the game if they only paid a 1p for it don't you think ??

What are your views on the idea ??

Forgetting that the FM team is much much smaller than its Championship manager counterparts and SI is a smaller company so just would not be viable. Also, the whole 'pay what you want' idea makes me personally lose confidence in the product. COuld translate that the people behind championship don't know what its worth.

Forgetting that the FM team is much much smaller than its Championship manager counterparts and SI is a smaller company so just would not be viable. Also, the whole 'pay what you want' idea makes me personally lose confidence in the product. COuld translate that the people behind championship don't know what its worth.

or that they know EXACTLY what it's worth

or that they know EXACTLY what it's worth

Be funny when the sales reports come in and they have made £3.59

Having tried the demo, the game isn't worth £2.51.

They have the cheek to make an offer of pay what you want, an offer which expires before a patch is even released to fix a severely broken demo.

£2.51 doesn't sound much, but I am not happy with the data research either so there's no way I could appreciate anyway.

As for FM, I've played it since CM93... they don't need a pay what you want scheme. FM09 was already the biggest selling CM/FM iirc.

For every 1 copy of FM sold it is likely that CM will have to sell at least 3000 to make the same profits and that doesn't take into account overheads.

Let's see they can lure FifaMan fans or not.

I dont think they'll be able to lure anyone.

You still have to pay £5 per update for 6 updates over a year meaning it will cost more FM anyway, not sure what the updates are I assume patches and stuff as the article I was reading didnt say.

SI have absolutely no need to do this. BGS/Eidos do.

COuld translate that the people behind championship don't know what its worth.

Don't agree on that. It's more like saying to the people who buy it "how much do YOU think our product is worth". It's actually something I would say is quite alright, since there are a lot of games, movies, music...you name it, that really isn't worth the money asked for. I don't care how much time you spend on doing something, if it's not done well, it's not worth much.

Unless I'm mistaken the deal is £5 for all 6 updates, rather than £5 per update. Just to clarify.

I'll download the demo and if it's even half decent I'll probably buy it for £2.51 just for a bit of variety. I'll still pay full price for FM but they would never have got my £2.51 otherwise so I guess it's a good ploy for them.

C********** M****** are doing that to try and get randomers to buy their game who wouldn't normally, hoping to get some fanbase for next year when they will bump up the price considerably I suppose. Their even probably trying to nick some of FM's fans...Football manager do not need to do this as they already have such a huge fanbase.

You still have to pay £5 per update for 6 updates over a year meaning it will cost more FM anyway, not sure what the updates are I assume patches and stuff as the article I was reading didnt say.

They're data updates with up-to-date results, transfers etc.

The first will probably contain a patch as well (not confirmed) but they've not said anything about future patches.

One quote from them was something along the lines of "I doubt we'll charge non-subscribers for patches" - alarm bells are a'ringing.

just downloaded and played the cm demo and fm have nothing to worry about a thought it was shocking.

Everything from the poor detail of my home team to and wayward transfer budgets to Livingston still being in the first division.

The free kick editor seems you could easliy spend about half an hour on it and easily score from every one.

match engine was poor, they spent two years on that, what a waste of mine and there time

They're data updates with up-to-date results, transfers etc.

The first will probably contain a patch as well (not confirmed) but they've not said anything about future patches.

One quote from them was something along the lines of "I doubt we'll charge non-subscribers for patches" - alarm bells are a'ringing.

I remember something like that being said on the video on youtube, I think.

The downfall of CM will be the match engine and the set piece editor which can be used to exploit the game far more than even the corner cheat in FM.

To me it reeks of desperation. I think a few months ago CM felt they could compete with FM but this current tactic suggests they needed to 'price' the product to enable people to buy both games and hope enough people buy again next year.

Good thing fm doesn't do this. I wouldn't be able to afford it if they did .

Probably being a bit nosy here, but I wonder just how much of a cut SEGA take for distributing the game? Then you've got the likes of HMV, GAME, Amazon, Play.com etc. Anyway, it's just a thought and I don't really expect an answer.

Exactly. The numbers may be different, but it's still rather similar. Except that modern video games cost a developer their arm, their legs and their first-born son to make. We're talking about projects lasting 1-3 years in the making. We're talking big teams working full-time on those projects - wages and all. Though there are alternative methods of funding a project popping up, games are largely still being made with the most traditional business models of all in mind: The publisher funds the game and gets his money back in turn, and when all is said and done and sold to the consumer, retailers and distributors get their slice of pennies too.

I think CM is an interesting experiment, but it could backfire a great deal simply because of the costs. Records are cheap investments compared to a modern video game. Beautiful Game Studios have been working on this for what, two years now? That's twice the development time of any other football management game on the market right now. How many people have been working on this? I don't know how popular the CM series still is but... You do the Maths.

I'd pay a third of the original price. Reason being, THEY OWE ME for the jokes that were (in my opinion) FM08 + FM09.

If loads of people downloaded this game for pay as much as you want then I wonder if they are doing it in the hopes of outselling FM, this would mean for CM11 they can place on their cover that they are the top selling football management sim on the PC.

I'd definitely pay full price.

The amount of money you save not going to the boozer spending a fortune on beer and kebabs more than makes up for the cost of the game.

i just hope that the game runs quikcer on my pc this year