With monthly fee, who is cashing in? Sierra or Valve?

[Zyphria]

Lets say that Half Life 2 and the professionally produced mods turns out to be a big hit, people end up dropping $10 a month on it. Who is getting that money? The developers? Sierra? Gabe's Swiss bank account and the one in the Caymen's? I'm not certain the exact $ figure on how much Half Life and Counter-Strike packages brought in, but I'm thinking that $5 a month might be more than enough to easily double revenues in the first twelve months for HL2 over HL.

Lets do some numbers!

Lets say that a conservative number of gamers go for the $10 a month dealy (and since CS 2.0 is only accessible this way): 250,000 people.

250,000 * $10 = 2.5 million dollars. Every month.

Now while a % of them may discontinue service after a month or two, the rate to which new gamers (especially around the Christmas season) begin to sign up, the number of users will only increase over time, possibly plateuing but I doubt it happening in less than three years.

So where does that money really go? Well more content apparently! Just like MMOG's apparently, only I suspect what we could see is the money going to developers creating mods, sort of kicking the whole UT2k3 million-dollar prize thing up a notch. Think about it, mod devs *could* quit their day job...if Valve has that in mind. They do have five years worth of mods that they can review to look for promising developers.

Alternative of course is Valve hiring either new employees or sub-contracting with other "professional" game developers to create mods and fund them to keep them updated. I guess we'll have to see how things pan out...but then again I'm all out of disposable time machines so that's our *only* choice....though mindless speculation does make for a good constructive argument!

 

[PriNcE oF SpAcE]

Valve gets the money...valve gets all the money they get thru steam.

as for what they'll use it for...prolly HL3 or any other projects coming along.

 

[DimitriPopov]

Originally posted by Zyphria
Lets say that Half Life 2 and the professionally produced mods turns out to be a big hit, people end up dropping $10 a month on it. Who is getting that money? The developers? Sierra? Gabe's Swiss bank account and the one in the Caymen's? I'm not certain the exact $ figure on how much Half Life and Counter-Strike packages brought in, but I'm thinking that $5 a month might be more than enough to easily double revenues in the first twelve months for HL2 over HL.

Lets do some numbers!

Lets say that a conservative number of gamers go for the $10 a month dealy (and since CS 2.0 is only accessible this way): 250,000 people.

250,000 * $10 = 2.5 million dollars. Every month.

Now while a % of them may discontinue service after a month or two, the rate to which new gamers (especially around the Christmas season) begin to sign up, the number of users will only increase over time, possibly plateuing but I doubt it happening in less than three years.

So where does that money really go? Well more content apparently! Just like MMOG's apparently, only I suspect what we could see is the money going to developers creating mods, sort of kicking the whole UT2k3 million-dollar prize thing up a notch. Think about it, mod devs *could* quit their day job...if Valve has that in mind. They do have five years worth of mods that they can review to look for promising developers.

Alternative of course is Valve hiring either new employees or sub-contracting with other "professional" game developers to create mods and fund them to keep them updated. I guess we'll have to see how things pan out...but then again I'm all out of disposable time machines so that's our *only* choice....though mindless speculation does make for a good constructive argument!

Ive done the same thing with MMOGs , UO makes TONS of money each month. And theres a sever lack of consequent service upgrades.

Its even worse with this , there are no huge servers to upgrade. Theres no consulers or what have you to pay to help people. All they need is enough to cover the sticker price of their future products. Thats alot of money to take in each month with relatively few expenses

 

[scribblehead]

but we won't have to pay $10 a month....oh wait this is hypothetical right? Right

 

[Feath]

It goes to pay for your copy of Half Life 2, Expansion Packs and standalone games.

This isn't a "Monthly Fee". It's a subscription. You are paying for the games in a different way. If you buy the game in the shop you don't have to pay anything. They are just two seperate ways of paying for the game.

So over all, the money goes towards the game developers' wages, as well as the cost to maintain the Steam Servers.

Obviously, the subscription cost isn't going to be value for money if you intend to play the game for 3 years. If you intend to play the game online until a different game comes out, then it's a good deal.

 

[FictiousWill]

Don't forget that Valve would also like to make a profit on HL2, it'll be some time before funds get funneled into HL3.

 

[Mackan]

Originally posted by Zyphria
and since CS 2.0 is only accessible this way

what?
cs2 is going to be buyable in stores just like hl2

the monthly payment is just instead of paying one large sum in the store..
if you do pay the monthly thing, then you wont have to buy cs2 in the store, cause it is included in the 10$

 

[Zyphria]

There is about a snowball's chance in hell that Valve doesn't turn a profit on Half Life 2.

Here are my guestimate on the number of Half Life 2 units that will be sold by type in the first three months:

2,000,000 Single Player only ($30) ($5-10 to Valve)
1,000,000 Multiplayer + Single Player ($50) ($15 to Valve)
250,000 Steam Accounts with Premium Access ($9.95 a month, all Valve)
50,000+ Collectors Edition's ($60-$70) ($20-25 to Valve)

$15,000,000 from single player only
$15,000,000 from single/multi
$2,500,000 a month from steam
$1,000,000 or so for the Collector's Edition

By Christmas, Valve should have about $40+ mil in the bank. Juggle the numbers if you like, but I guarantee Valve is going to turn a profit. One set of numbers I left out is the feature where single player only versions can buy an upgrade online to add multiplayer.

Now before you rush off to find some statistics showing me how little developers usually get per game, think about the kind of contract Sierra would have signed to keep Valve. Generous would be an understatement. And before you start pulling other numbers apart, I'll restate that these are ballpark guestimate figures.

So lets talk about development costs. I'd say for the most part, Half Life covered almost all of the cost of making HL2. While Sierra may have initially thrown a sum of money in shortly after HL was deemed a success and Sierra wanted a sequel made, for the most part, Valve has funded this on their own.

Something else to consider is that Valve has already begun licensing the Source engine to other developers. While the Vampire the Masquerade sequel is the only (?) confirmed game using the engine, I would speculate that numerous other developers are either negotiating a purchase or already have. The first generation (Pre-Unreal Warfare) sold over thirty licenses of that game engine in the first three years after Unreal was released.

 

[another-user]

ok this is a little off topic but im hoping some one can clear this up for me. from what i can understand, theres 3 versions of the game u can buy in store, single, single+mp, special edition. and if u buy it in store version of the game u dont have to pay the 10 a month, thats just if u buy one of the packages of steam. now am i on hte right track here or am i completly off?

 

[Zyphria]

Re: Re: With monthly fee, who is cashing in? Sierra or Valve?

Originally posted by Mackan
what?
cs2 is going to be buyable in stores just like hl2

the monthly payment is just instead of paying one large sum in the store..
if you do pay the monthly thing, then you wont have to buy cs2 in the store, cause it is included in the 10$

If you read through some of the e-mails from Gabe on the Pay to Play subject, you'll note that there *is* a difference between the $50 version in stores which have single and multiplayer and the $9.95 a month. He puts emphasis on the fact that by paying the monthly subscription (as someone reminded me of the right terminlogy), you would have immediate access to new content from Valve.

Translation: The multiplayer $50 version in stores will allow online and single player mods, but the only way to get new content from Valve is through the monthly. I'd like to also take the opportunity to agree with you that CS 2.0 will also be out in stores, but will also follow the same business plan by which certain exclusive content will only be available to subscribers.

 

[Shockwave]

Now if i want to download HL2 from steam..Will my first time fee be $9.95?. I imagine you have to sign up for a year or so or at least 6 months

 

[PriNcE oF SpAcE]

if you purchase HL2 over steam you will have two choices:

1) pay a full one time fee 50$ or less...this simply just buys you the game thru steam.

2) get the game via. the 10$/month subscribtion. this will get you the game, and all other steam content.

ps. and yes I guess there will be some sort of minimum subscription.

 

[FictiousWill]

No I would expect the monthly HL2 thing to be month by month. Otherwise it doens't make sense:

$10 * 6 months = $60 for six months of play
$60 * forever = $60 for as much gameplay as you like

$10 per month, in single month increments. For people who want to play it for two months and quit, thereby saving $40, its a good idea.

 

[Slash]

The "renting" of a game using the subscription service is a GREAT idea.. Valve will have a shitload of games on there and you truely are getting an awesome deal. If you are a casual gamer, it is great. If you are a hardcore clanner, you might be better off buying all the games for $50 a peice since you'll be playing for 5 years straight, most likely.

Shit, I won HL1 at a LAN party and been playing it in matches 3 days a week for the past 5 years. Great value I feel like I should send a check to Valve for $500 because that's how awesome the HL1 experience has been.

 

[Archangel]

however, if you subscribe, you probably get CS 2 or similar for free. So instead of paying 100$ for both games, you pay your 10$ a month and get a new game every few month. Doesn't make that much a difference. Its the same with renting an apartment. You can pay a shitload of money to buy it (don't know the prices for apartments, but I take it is around 100.000$) at once (even if you have to pay in rates), so you can live in it for as long as you want, or you can rent it. Surely someday the rent you paid will raise above the buying price, but it is far more payable.

 

[Lobster]

People already pay monthly for services like file planet and many mmporgsorgsorgsrpgsrogs watsits, and this is just the same but optional, with the benefit of getting instant free access to future retail games. I honestly see no problem with this, and people who do are conspiracy theorist teenagers who sit in the corner wielding there copy of sub7 at the nonbelievers...

 

[Zyphria]

I honestly believe the monthly subscription is aimed at the hardcore players as much as it is the casual. I guess only time will tell but I'm sure the marketing department will have a lengthy explination.

To paraphrase Gabe, 'yes you can pay a one time fee of $50, but I really think that the people who choose to pay the $9.95 will get much more in the long run.'

Also has Gabe made any remarks in reference to a minimum number of months to subscribe? That would be a terrible idea. Would scare away too many perspective buyers.

 

[nw909]

Hmm, I wonder if CS2 will be out in stores too.