Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Literally worse than EA

notch.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 141 posts

Re: Literally worse than EA

#11

Post by easytiger »

delucain wrote: post #10

Maybe this is a little off-topic, and I don't want to sound like an ungrateful player of minecraft. I actually really love the game and have put more hours into it than just about any other game but a few key titles like the Diablo, Elder Scrolls, and Fallout series. But, can someone explain to me how a game that has grossed roughly half a billion dollars (based on estimates I've read for all platforms) is still so f…

Think Lego.

I think estimates are that notch personally pulled in about $100m a year during the initial boom. I guess he just doesn't like boats. Which is understandable for a guy who grew up in front of a keyboard

Re: Literally worse than EA

#12

Post by shadowmint »

One price for all player teirs seem pretty reasonable in my oppinion.

The freemium business model is really only viable if you can hook the few so called 'high payer' users and everyone else gets a rubbish experience.

Notch is notoriously anti '"free to play" ... with in app purchases', and keeping that away from minecraft will ultimately benefit the players.

There's been some pretty heavy vitriol from seever hosts about this, but honestly, when you play in someone elses playground, its their way or the highway. Thats what you get.

Re: Literally worse than EA

#13

Post by dagw »

delucain wrote: post #10

Maybe this is a little off-topic, and I don't want to sound like an ungrateful player of minecraft. I actually really love the game and have put more hours into it than just about any other game but a few key titles like the Diablo, Elder Scrolls, and Fallout series. But, can someone explain to me how a game that has grossed roughly half a billion dollars (based on estimates I've read for all platforms) is still so f…

because it doesn't sound like Notch is cruising the Caribbean in a 175' yacht or anything.

He did however recently make news by buying the most expensive apartment in Stockholm.

Re: Literally worse than EA

#14

Post by Anderkent »

ableal wrote: post #8
espadrine wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> inability to find buyers for the ad slots given the perceived demographic I would love for you to expand on that. Is there an age range that no buyers in the ad business are interested in? What aspect of the demographic was toxic to them? How do they measure how effective a demographic is?

We're talking ten year old children, in my experience. I'm slightly amazed at how much they love playing Minecraft. With home WiFi they can run their own servers in their touch devices, and run around in each others play areas. P.S. I greatly appreciate Markus Persson's integrity, and consider this game one of my best purchases ever.

From what I remember, children are great advertisement targets - they're going to whine at their parents until they get what they want.

Re: Literally worse than EA

#15

Post by shadowmint »

awjr wrote: post #5

Yes Minecraft is awesome, however the selling of addons is just one more revenue stream to keep a server alive and the user base engaged. There has to be perceived value in having the addon to make the user experience better. I think this sums up the sentiment from a server's point of view: http://sterlingplays.com/

    However, that is EXACTLY what you’re encouraging here.
    Now not only will players who don’t want to pay not be able to
    have access to every custom-built feature or gameplay experience,
    they won’t have access to any of them because they won’t be able
    to get into the server in the first place.
What kind of strawman arguement is that?

Players unwilling to pay for feature X (previously unavailable to non paying customers), will now not be able have access to it as it wont exist at all.

What a compelling argument.

I suppose they wont have the luxury of watching other people having more fun than them now. How terrible for the players.

(I suppose there are some valid points in there, but after reading that I found it hard to take seriously)

Re: Literally worse than EA

#16

Post by lifeisstillgood »

Anderkent wrote: post #14
ableal wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're talking ten year old children, in my experience. I'm slightly amazed at how much they love playing Minecraft. With home WiFi they can run their own servers in their touch devices, and run around in each others play areas. P.S. I greatly appreciate Markus Persson's integrity, and consider this game one of my best purchases ever.

From what I remember, children are great advertisement targets - they're going to whine at their parents until they get what they want.

But what they want is minecraft.

Which might be the most approachable answer - purchase subscriptions to minecraft servers for your kids. However I would be reluctant to purchase anything that was not officially blessed - and would assume I could run a minecraft server for my own kids anyway ...

By the way, I personally want to puke when my kids play Minion Rush and I see three minutes taken up by thirty seconds running and 2.5 mins of sweeping through "buy buy buy" pages. Fucking disgusting.

Re: Literally worse than EA

#17

Post by watwut »

delucain wrote: post #10

Maybe this is a little off-topic, and I don't want to sound like an ungrateful player of minecraft. I actually really love the game and have put more hours into it than just about any other game but a few key titles like the Diablo, Elder Scrolls, and Fallout series. But, can someone explain to me how a game that has grossed roughly half a billion dollars (based on estimates I've read for all platforms) is still so f…

It is strategy, they want to use money to finance other future projects. According to one interview I have read, money from Minecraft are used to pay bills and development of other games until they luck out again and have another hit.

Developing games is risky and there are no guarantees of success. So, the successful projects have to pay for unsuccessful ones.

Re: Literally worse than EA

#18

Post by watwut »

Anderkent wrote: post #14
ableal wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're talking ten year old children, in my experience. I'm slightly amazed at how much they love playing Minecraft. With home WiFi they can run their own servers in their touch devices, and run around in each others play areas. P.S. I greatly appreciate Markus Persson's integrity, and consider this game one of my best purchases ever.

From what I remember, children are great advertisement targets - they're going to whine at their parents until they get what they want.

Isnt advertisement for kids highly regulated in many countries?

Re: Literally worse than EA

#19

Post by davidbanham »

espadrine wrote: post #4
davidbanham wrote: post #3

Hosting game servers is hard, expensive work. Hosting Minecraft servers is even tougher since the hardware requirements are pretty steep and the main userbase doesn't have much money to kick into the pot. Minefold was a YC company that tried to make a go of monetising Minecraft hosting in the Right Way. They were smart guys and built a great platform, but they're not around any more. I believe it's because it was jus…

> inability to find buyers for the ad slots given the perceived demographic I would love for you to expand on that. Is there an age range that no buyers in the ad business are interested in? What aspect of the demographic was toxic to them? How do they measure how effective a demographic is?

The perception amongst the buyers we spoke to was that Minecraft was for 9 to 13 year old kids. The only people they were familiar with interacting with the title were their own children and their friends.

Advertising to kids is ethically problematic and often has strict legal restrictions. I'm not aware of any of the large video exchanges operating in the space at all. None of our existing buyers were interested. If advertising to kids was a path we even wanted to go down, we'd need to broach a whole new market.

Re: Literally worse than EA

#20

Post by networked »

awjr wrote: post #5

Yes Minecraft is awesome, however the selling of addons is just one more revenue stream to keep a server alive and the user base engaged. There has to be perceived value in having the addon to make the user experience better. I think this sums up the sentiment from a server's point of view: http://sterlingplays.com/

If the players come to those server networks looking for the custom gameplay experiences they provide and every network stands to lose a lot of money from the EULA change what prevents them from hiring developers to replace Minecraft with a custom client? I mean this as a genuine question.
Post reply on HN