100% perfect.

tec's right. I played 1.0 and I know why I quit. I waited til almost the last day to use my FREEHD credit because I didn't care for 1.0. No idea how 2.0 played. I like this version. It has flaws, every game has flaws, but, as a relative n00b, they feel minor to me.

Nice. this would give people a reason to move up divisions especially with the credit boost. Right now, I don't have a good reason to ever leave a program I built in D3 to go to and rebuild a crappy D2 team. The thought of moving up and rebuilding at D2 makes me cringe actually. I am content with sitting at D3 until I become eligible to move up to D1.

If tec's right why aren't we seeing an increase in DIII users?
Why?
Because the majority of new users don't like the current version and play it for 1-2 seasons and quit. Why? Who knows without having them fill out a survey on their way out.

No idea. I know, as a new user, I like this version. I don't know anything about 2.0. I certainly don't miss 1.0.

New users don't know anything, or care, about previous versions. We see the game for what it is. My biggest gripe is "WCSU storms back to win 67-74."

I think I have 5 seasons each in 2.0 and 3.0 after saying I would bounce. The game play hasn't bothered me any. It's been the lack of humans and the cheating scandal mainly. But my dumbass will renew soon also.

FWIW, I don't think one can say the "majority of the new users don't like the current version" with any conviction. They play their free season, or abandon ship before even testing the waters, and don't pay for a season. But I will confess that I didn't like my first season. I had a terrible team that I didn't recruit. I think I won 4 games. That was a loads of fun.

Posted by mullycj on 7/31/2017 12:27:00 PM (view original):
If tec's right why aren't we seeing an increase in DIII users?
Why?
Because the majority of new users don't like the current version and play it for 1-2 seasons and quit. Why? Who knows without having them fill out a survey on their way out.

Games like this are not for everyone. Maybe only 10% of the people who try it out stick around past the first season. Maybe it's more, maybe it's less. But for the sake of argument, let's say it's 10%.

The way to get more people to come and commit to the game is to increase the marketing. 10% of a large number of potential new long-term users is a lot bigger than 10% of a small number of potential long-term users.

You fill the worlds via volume. The more people you reach out to and make aware of the game, the more likely you are to get new customers to come in, try it out, and stick around.

This will probably be an unpopular idea, but what if they subsidized the cost of a big marketing campaign with in-game ads? If done correctly, I'd think it wouldn't be too intrusive and some ad revenue may help infuse the WIS team with marketing $$ or some developer time to work on improving the game. I would think you have a golden target demographic here, assuming most players have some amount of disposable income (you're paying $10+ a month to play a damn computer game).

Not sure I'm in favor of the idea, but I've often wondered why they don't do it. Seems like easy money to me. And probably a sacrifice I would make if it meant more players coming into the game and filling up the worlds.

I'd be happy to have some ads if it fills up the worlds.

Posted by tecwrg on 7/31/2017 12:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 7/31/2017 12:27:00 PM (view original):
If tec's right why aren't we seeing an increase in DIII users?
Why?
Because the majority of new users don't like the current version and play it for 1-2 seasons and quit. Why? Who knows without having them fill out a survey on their way out.

Games like this are not for everyone. Maybe only 10% of the people who try it out stick around past the first season. Maybe it's more, maybe it's less. But for the sake of argument, let's say it's 10%.

The way to get more people to come and commit to the game is to increase the marketing. 10% of a large number of potential new long-term users is a lot bigger than 10% of a small number of potential long-term users.

You fill the worlds via volume. The more people you reach out to and make aware of the game, the more likely you are to get new customers to come in, try it out, and stick around.

I totally disagree with most of what is said here. If the conversion rate of your product is that low (even close to 10%) then you shouldn't be investing resources into marketing. That is a terrible ROI.

Some new people sign up and try this game out every month. If you make the game better (or in my suggestion of this thread more financially attractive) then you will retain users who try out the game.

Posted by Benis on 7/31/2017 6:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 7/31/2017 12:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 7/31/2017 12:27:00 PM (view original):
If tec's right why aren't we seeing an increase in DIII users?
Why?
Because the majority of new users don't like the current version and play it for 1-2 seasons and quit. Why? Who knows without having them fill out a survey on their way out.

Games like this are not for everyone. Maybe only 10% of the people who try it out stick around past the first season. Maybe it's more, maybe it's less. But for the sake of argument, let's say it's 10%.

The way to get more people to come and commit to the game is to increase the marketing. 10% of a large number of potential new long-term users is a lot bigger than 10% of a small number of potential long-term users.

You fill the worlds via volume. The more people you reach out to and make aware of the game, the more likely you are to get new customers to come in, try it out, and stick around.

I totally disagree with most of what is said here. If the conversion rate of your product is that low (even close to 10%) then you shouldn't be investing resources into marketing. That is a terrible ROI.

Some new people sign up and try this game out every month. If you make the game better (or in my suggestion of this thread more financially attractive) then you will retain users who try out the game.

And here's how I know that the MKT idea is a bad one - they already tried it. People joined up for 1 season and then left. It didn't work.

There are LOTS of reasons why users didn't sign up for a 2nd season but I guarantee you, the cost had SOMETHING to do with it for a lot of them.

Your idea of "better" is not the same as everyone else's.

Most of you fail to understand that.

Posted by zagsrulez on 7/31/2017 12:19:00 PM (view original):
Nice. this would give people a reason to move up divisions especially with the credit boost. Right now, I don't have a good reason to ever leave a program I built in D3 to go to and rebuild a crappy D2 team. The thought of moving up and rebuilding at D2 makes me cringe actually. I am content with sitting at D3 until I become eligible to move up to D1.

Right, that was the idea.

But maybe people still want to hang on to a D3 team for some reason but would like to pick up a 2nd or 3rd or 4th or w/e. The idea is that they would do that with the intention of moving up the divisions because the rewards are much better.

In response to Tec who does not believe price is an issue: Part of the problem is people don't always want to throw $10-15 on an unknown game. Otherwise, they might be broke from trying all these games they see. the experience under FREEHD, especially in 3.0 where you can't even recruit your first team, is typically going to be a negative one, followed by that $12.95 price tag. Why would I throw $13 at something that I had no investment in season 1 (your own recruits) and that I understand wont even really be my team until season 3 or 4, before I can even hope to compete. I've now spent around $39 just to see if I like the game. Might as well go get NBA2K or an old copy of NCAA football for sim purposes.