Pay what you want for the game

Championship Manager did it for a period of time last year and I thought it was a great idea, I've heard Kasabian or someone did it too when selling an album, I personally think it's about time Football Manager tried this by letting us pay how much we want to for the game maybe within the next 2 years.

I know you're gonna' get alot of people paying as little amount as possible but I don't think £30.00 is a reasonable price for this years game. I felt happy to pay that much for it at the time but once I've started my game and got into the season I seriously don't see any MAJOR changes compared to last year and think it's a bit of a let down.

Radiohead did it with "In Rainbows". Because they were in a position to do so.

I doubt SEGA/SI are in that position.

radio heads ablum and this game are 2 whole different kettles of fish

According to Wikipedia regarding In Rainbows "According to an Internet survey conducted by Record of the Day of 3,000 people, about one-third of people who downloaded the album paid nothing, with the average price paid being £4"

It really isn't going to happen. Radiohead did it because they could - SI can't because SEGA won't.

As a business, SI have responsibilities. Spending millions to develop the most comprehensive management simulation on the planet, and giving it away for free, is not one of their responsibilities.

What has happened to CM since this experiment, anyone know?

As a business, SI have responsibilities. Spending millions to develop the most comprehensive management simulation on the planet, and giving it away for free, is not one of their responsibilities.

just out of curiosity, i wonder how much money actually went into creatng this game (advertising not included)

There's a difference between what I want to pay and what I think the game's worth. Personally, I think £30 is pretty good considering how much use I get from it.

But I WANT to pay £0 and probably would if I could.

i played FM10 for over 700 hours according to steam which worked out at around 4p (yes four pence) an hour. i'm sure there are people here who have played a lot more than that.

can anybody here honestly say they get even remotely close to this sort of value for money?

some games are over in a matter of hours. even long term games struggle to reach these levels (i have been playing final fantasy 8 for 101 hours and i'm 2 hours from completing it)

why should SI and Sega have to resort to such stupidity when there is no justifiable reason for doing so?

What has happened to CM since this experiment, anyone know?

you mean that game they aren't releasing this year because it has got progressively worse year after year?

I'm not saying do it for the whole course of the year, Champ Man did it for a month I think, I bought the game for £2 something I think and up until FM came out I thought it was worth it.

They're obviously going to lose out i'm just saying that if they did a 'pay what you want' for like a week/2 weeks, real fans of the game can pay how much they want to because they'll read more about the game itself and find out the offer by themselves whereas newcomers to the game don't tend to buy it as soon as it comes out therefore they'll end up paying full price anyway so SEGA or whoever it is still get there money?

doing this would count as suicide, and then we would still get idiots coming on here moaning they paid nothing and pointing out bugs plus it could lead to people buying loads of copies and flogging them for the full retail price after its done

I thnk it was a bit of a publicity stunt to try and get those who usually buy FM to buy CM instead... seemed to not have paid off seeing as the PC version of CM is now on hold ... and I suspect SI/Sega aren't in need of a sales boost for the game

+ I also think seeing as I also played a good 600/700 hours on FM2010, £30 is pretty good value for money

I don't think pay what you like is even worth calling a business model, it's just a horrible idea commercially, especially for a product that requires an entire team to build. It's nice when you do a hobby open source project, or you are already millionairs, and want to do something for your fans, or want to do a little experimenting.

I think the price for FM is very reasonable.

They can also try the Microsoft model:

We split FM up in 4 versions, with some left out or special platform features:

FM Portable FM Home FM Home Premium FM Ultimate

Each we then split up in a 32bit and 64 bit version

Each we then split up in a stand alone and an upgrade version

That gives people 16 versions to chose from. Now that would be cool.

Can't believe people moan about the price. I paid 30 quid on Steam. Works out about 50p a week over the year for gods sake.

I don't think pay what you like is even worth calling a business model, it's just a horrible idea commercially, especially for a product that requires an entire team to build. It's nice when you do a hobby open source project, or you are already millionairs, and want to do something for your fans, or want to do a little experimenting.

I think the price for FM is very reasonable.

They can also try the Microsoft model:

We split FM up in 4 versions, with some left out or special platform features:

FM Portable FM Home FM Home Premium FM Ultimate

Each we then split up in a 32bit and 64 bit version

Each we then split up in a stand alone and an upgrade version

That gives people 16 versions to chose from. Now that would be cool.

Why would it be cool?

It's absolute fine as it is now. The price is less then alot of computer games these days, you'll get alot more use of it and everybody gets the same game.

£30 isn't alot to be honest but i can see were your getting your idea from and it could work well if you remove the noggins who would pay £1 just for the sake of getting the game at a stupid price

A minimum would have to be set due to all the time and effort SI put into creating this game each year.

And for those saying Sega aren't in a position to do that.... a revenue of £882,452,082.00 recorded last year....

And for those saying Sega aren't in a position to do that.... a revenue of £882,452,082.00 recorded last year....

The consumer games division made ¥6.3 billion ($68.2 million) in operating income, returning to profitability despite a year-over-year drop of 7.5%. The profits in this division were driven by ridiculously strong sales of Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Winter Games (6.53 million copies!), as well as million-plus sellers Aliens vs. Predator (1.69 million), Bayonetta (1.35 million), and Sonic & Sega All-Stars Racing (1.07 million).

It would never happen but just for the principle of it, I'd rather pay after the 2nd patch or at least when the game is properly up and running, for instance things like the 'transfer bug' whether you think it's a big deal or not it's flipping annoying and just knowing that you're money is only going after the game is working well would be nice. But as for moaning about £30 I think that's ridiculous, you can find it for £15 after a few months anyway and compare it to the average play of a PS3 or Xbox game for most people at £40 it's a bargain.

I'm sure if we all payed what we wanted for the game, FM12 and future releases would be a shambles because SI wouldn't have the budget to develop.

$40 is way worth the money considering the vast amount of hrs spent playing.

CM was "pay what you want" because they are light years behind FM and knew it was the only way they could possibly compete with sales.

£30 is actually very cheap for a game if you ask me; the value/entertainment ratio is much better than going to a football match, going out for a meal, or going to the zoo. You get to spend 100's of hours on it, for £30. What's that? A fraction of a decent weekly wage.

I don't like the idea of somebody actively asking for this, it stinks of greedy consumerism. We as consumers aren't entitled to get things for a pittance. We're already spoilt with what we have available to us, but it seems that isn't enough and everybody is desperate for more, while paying next to nothing.

It would never happen but just for the principle of it, I'd rather pay after the 2nd patch or at least when the game is properly up and running, for instance things like the 'transfer bug' whether you think it's a big deal or not it's flipping annoying and just knowing that you're money is only going after the game is working well would be nice. But as for moaning about £30 I think that's ridiculous, you can find it for £15 after a few months anyway and compare it to the average play of a PS3 or Xbox game for most people at £40 it's a bargain.

Well just wait to buy it after the 2nd patch.

I think this could work if done several months before the next planned release. That way, most customers who would buy it would already have done so. This may reel in extra revenue from those who are curious about the game but wouldn't pay full price.

Well just wait to buy it after the 2nd patch.

I'm not saying the game's unplayable just paying for the finished version would be less irritating then paying up front for the buggy initial versions. Like I said though it's not a realistic idea but in an ideal world it'd be nice to pay for a game that's close to perfect rather than the release day rubbish that needs patched twice.