3 ms·
I think presenting costs as a rough “per user/player” calculation might be more effective than presenting just the total cost. That way people are reminded of t
by freeAgent 2y ago
I think presenting costs as a rough “per user/player” calculation might be more effective than presenting just the total cost. That way people are reminded of their own personal resource usage, which seems like a more manageable/tangible number, and it can be accompanied by the broader stats since of course not everyone voluntarily pays (and some people pay more than their fair share).
- BizarroLand 2y agoBack of the napkin math, but if the servers cost $0.25/month/player and the owner would like to make $5,000/month (very conservative but sure, why not) and there is a 20% "future emergency fund" in place, when the game has 5,000 players then each player would need to contribute on average $1.50/month, or $18/year. I would want, in exchange for that, that the game be fairly stable, that there be things to do such as Quests or Tasks, and that I could enjoy the game for maybe an hour a week, maybe 2 if I'm in a rut.
- freeAgent 2y agoExactly, and I think that sort of request for contribution is much more likely to make people feel inclined to contribute than some abstract goal of getting $10k/mo in donations or whatever.