I can work with that as long as there is enough warning beforehand so that people have time to trim galleries and save avatars elsewhere before anything gets deleted.
A full page seems a lot more workable to me than 5-10 avatars, so that's nice.
I will start some trimming on mine tomorrow.
Stupid doomed timeline...Tons of people love having huge galleries.
So we'll still get money from that, I'm sure.
Quest 64 thread@Eddie - Right, I guess I figure that if you charge five for forty, they will pay twice for eighty, meaning more money per avatar. Also the microtransaction model has been shown to work on Steam and the like, so I'm thinking more, smaller payments would end up making more money. I'm basically talking outta my ass since none of this is in my field of expertise.
edited 6th Apr '12 8:05:14 PM by Martello
"Did anybody invent this stuff on purpose?" - Phillip Marlowe on tequila, Finger Man by Raymond Chandler.Waaaait...so I could be charged because someone hasn't deleted an avatar I sent them and it counts toward my numbers?
edited 6th Apr '12 8:09:51 PM by lu127
"If you aren't him, then you apparently got your brain from the same discount retailer, so..." - FighteerUnder ten bucks a hundred, you'll make more money, but more people will desert/trim down to the free max. Under five bucks a page, the net gain from extra avatars will be less, but fewer people will flip out.
Under either, I doubt I myself will ever pay *, as I don't plan on having a whole lot of avatars stored at any one time anyway; also, the aforementioned trimming will trim down the profit more the more warning you give.
Now I think of it, you're not actually going to get a whole lot of money out of this either way. :/
Also, the lower the limit is, the more alienated people who couldn't pay if they wanted are going to feel. There are a lot of teens in these fora, and I doubt all that many of them have a way to even donate.
Ponders too much; thinks too little. Currently goes by Knowlessman.Sorry?
I uploaded, shared, and deleted two avatars in the last week or so; neither are in my gallery. Do they count towards my total?
Also, how would sharing work once you started having to pay for more avatars? Would there be a confirm box that popped up before it actually went into your gallery?
edited 6th Apr '12 8:22:30 PM by Artemis92
Ponders too much; thinks too little. Currently goes by Knowlessman.Bullet'd answers:
- Yes, sharing an avatar could have an economic consequence.
- If a ban is made final, the gallery would go down.
- You should be able to "buy" your present gallery.
- You should have a chance to reduce the gallery down to what you can afford.
- It looking like 40 @ $5 feels fair to folks.
- I suppose a box could come up telling you when you need to either reduce your gallery or buy a new page.
edited 6th Apr '12 8:24:32 PM by FastEddie
Goal: Clear, Concise and WittyAnother thing to help keep costs down. Can we start letting embeds from imageshack instead of hosting them ourselves for the forums only?
The amount of suggestions for IP I have uploaded has got to be a drain....
edited 6th Apr '12 8:29:34 PM by Raso
Sparkling and glittering! Jan-Ken-Pon!

Well, if the only effect will be to reduce all galleries to forty, there isn't much point. It might make hosting the forums a little less expensive, but it doesn't increase revenue. We are trying to find a way to get the people who value the non-workshop parts of the forums to kick in some money. That being the economic gauge of how much they value the experience.
edited 6th Apr '12 8:01:37 PM by FastEddie
Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty