Improvement Poll (General Discussion)

Improvement Poll // General Discussion

1  |  

sw comit

Jul 19, 2001, 6:25am
I was reading Brant article at awnews.com that AW is doing just fine. So I
was just thinking about it and anyway, what do people want?

1. General software improvements - pretty much all the stuff in the
wishlist and the stuff on Eep's website.

or

2. AWCom management as in community and organization relations, events, and
public world management.

Personally, I would go with the last part of 2. I've built in Alphaworld
since I first started AW many years back and I rarely see any big
improvements.

builderz

Jul 19, 2001, 1:26pm
How about both one *and* two? ;)

Builderz
Stuff-X - Bot & World Hosting Services
http://www.stuffx.com/aw/
PGP Key ID: 0xAC0E7073 (for non-commercial use)

wing

Jul 19, 2001, 5:12pm
I'll take C, all of the above.
[View Quote]

m a r c u s

Jul 19, 2001, 5:55pm
Big reason why people from communities and organizations that I am part of
outside Active Worlds don't stay here and purchase a citizenship is because
they want something free first before they pay. I don't want to get into an
argument about tourists vs. citizens, but if citizenship were free then many
of my friends would come and contribute to the overall establishment of a
community. Then this kind of action with others gives Active Worlds more
people to market worlds and additional features. To put this in
perspective, if they are not willing to give free citizenships they will
definately not finance a way to form communities and station people around
the worlds during the day.

Once something is offered for free and communities are formed, it doesn't
matter what you offer outside of the community because the people will tend
to want to stay and are willing to pay the extra money for something that is
more secure. If any of you used Firetalk before they died out, there were
people grouping together near the end to get a pay service (5/month,
60/year, that's 3 citizenships each year)just to keep Firetalk alive and not
go out of business.

Second biggy is pricing, if it costs $20 for citizenship and $69.95 to start
a world, $10 for the smallest world, we are looking at a $100 figure. I
know citizenship comes with a world, but many don't know this upfront so
after they get a citizenship they now have to decide if they want to pay the
extra or not for a world. Given they had full knowledge upfront, we are
talking about $80. Do you want to pay $80 for something you haven't tried
yet?

My suggestion with purchase of worlds is for Active Worlds to offer a $30
initial fee, then $10 each following month until that $80 is collected. If
the user doesn't want the world within those 5 months then they can get a
citizen with extra avatar choices or something for paying the fee. I think
a free based citizenship, and better marketing of priced worlds using a
monthly payment system like one I outlined would better keep people in the
program and using it.

Then when that is established and communities are formed, I am sure the new
features with software improvements will be addressed.

[View Quote]

goober king

Jul 19, 2001, 6:09pm
Umm... that's what trial worlds are for, Marcus. Those are free... And people can
come in as tourists to "test" AW before they decide they want to buy a citizenship...

[View Quote] --
Goober King
So much for "bringing the core issues to the front" :P
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

m a r c u s

Jul 19, 2001, 6:18pm
"Umm... that's what trial worlds are for, Marcus.", 30 days, not enough
time. Either you are done trying it out or you aren't, what if you aren't?
Well, I am proposing a plan to pay as you go. Active Worlds will more
likely make sales because people will be paying less each month, and over
time they'll just finish it off if they really want it.

Those are free... (define "those" - worlds being used for a month)

"And people can come in as tourists to "test" AW before they decide they
want to buy a citizenship..."

EXACTLY!!! They test it out to get a citizenship, not a world. That is the
point. If they were financed to get a world, then they might be giving
Active Worlds more money, and have a citizenship with the world. Right now,
you go to see a teacher as a tourist and then the next thing you know you
have a citizenship. Then you find out about a world, and now you pay them
$100 instead of the $80 if financed more properly.



[View Quote]

eep

Jul 19, 2001, 7:01pm
Um, first of all, learn how to quote correctly, newbie. Just reply to the already quoted text instead of copy-pasting it between quote marks.

Second, all you have to do is ask to have your citizenship merged with your world--that's what I did with mine. <shrug>

[View Quote] > "Umm... that's what trial worlds are for, Marcus.", 30 days, not enough
> time. Either you are done trying it out or you aren't, what if you aren't?
> Well, I am proposing a plan to pay as you go. Active Worlds will more
> likely make sales because people will be paying less each month, and over
> time they'll just finish it off if they really want it.
>
> Those are free... (define "those" - worlds being used for a month)
>
> "And people can come in as tourists to "test" AW before they decide they
> want to buy a citizenship..."
>
> EXACTLY!!! They test it out to get a citizenship, not a world. That is the
> point. If they were financed to get a world, then they might be giving
> Active Worlds more money, and have a citizenship with the world. Right now,
> you go to see a teacher as a tourist and then the next thing you know you
> have a citizenship. Then you find out about a world, and now you pay them
> $100 instead of the $80 if financed more properly.
>
[View Quote]

m a r c u s

Jul 19, 2001, 7:24pm
Eep, unless you are AW and know what money I sent them, you have no idea of
the details. There are facts you aren't addressing, and that is between me
and AW, not you. I would have given them more let's say if I had prior
knowledge. I know what you say is true, but in practice people are not
going to know upfront to do this merging. I bought multiple things, that now
I wouldn't have if I had known upfront and just got a world.



[View Quote]

goober king

Jul 19, 2001, 7:30pm
If it takes longer than an entire month for you to decide if you want to pay for the
world or not, then you have problems. :P

[View Quote] --
Goober King
It's called "thinking ahead"...
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

m a r c u s

Jul 19, 2001, 8:09pm
That isn't the point. The point is to offer a world and citizen, not just a
citizen because people who may want worlds to begin with won't know when
they go as a tourist and learn to build. Then they decide to get a
citizenship without becoming aware of worlds services. Multiple months is
an after effect to allow people pay on a basis which doesn't seem like a lot
upfront.

[View Quote]

eep

Jul 20, 2001, 7:13am
I have enough facts to know you're a moron. :) It's not AWC's fault you bought multiple citizenships ("things", I assume) and didn't look at world pricing and what comes with it. Sure, AWC could mention that in the tourist chat window spam messages but it's not that big of a deal since most people won't be getting a world anyway--or even a citizenship. Stop acting so helpless (and clueless) and pay attention and explore more and perhaps you won't have so many problems with things, sport. Drive through...

[View Quote] > Eep, unless you are AW and know what money I sent them, you have no idea of
> the details. There are facts you aren't addressing, and that is between me
> and AW, not you. I would have given them more let's say if I had prior
> knowledge. I know what you say is true, but in practice people are not
> going to know upfront to do this merging. I bought multiple things, that now
> I wouldn't have if I had known upfront and just got a world.
>
[View Quote]

m a r c u s

Jul 20, 2001, 8:46am
It's not AW's fault, and it's not going to be more money for them then.
It's their choice, offer the product as a whole, GET MORE MONEY, don't tell
the customer upfront, get less.

This is not a quest to find right or wrong, but to address manner. You
don't have manners, so you wouldn't understand.

[View Quote]

eep

Jul 20, 2001, 10:58am
Uh, English isn't your native language, huh champ? Manners isn't the issue here; your understanding of how AWC works is. Since you haven't been in AW long (and nowhere NEAR as long as I have: 4 years), I'll cut you some slack. However, I'd advise you to get a clue before posting and making yourself look like a fool yet again, kid...

[View Quote] > It's not AW's fault, and it's not going to be more money for them then.
> It's their choice, offer the product as a whole, GET MORE MONEY, don't tell
> the customer upfront, get less.
>
> This is not a quest to find right or wrong, but to address manner. You
> don't have manners, so you wouldn't understand.
>
[View Quote]

m a r c u s

Jul 20, 2001, 11:04am
lol, my suggestion still stands regardless how many years people have been
here. I have talked to programmers and some use my suggestions and some
don't. It's totally up to them, but I can say those that did benefited and
thanked me in the end. Also, others enjoyed the improvements. So, I'll cut
you some slack too since you don't seem like the "champ" who would take
suggestions but rather attack without thinking things out.

[View Quote]

eep

Jul 20, 2001, 3:20pm
You don't seem to pay attention to what is told you very well. I already AGREED with you about AWC making more of an effort to get tourists to buy a citizenship AND a world together through the chat window spam messages, and I even told you how to simply MERGE your citzenship with your world so you don't have to pay $20/year extra, but you STILL don't get it. Good god you're fucking incompetent. Well, into the filter you go in THIS newsgroup too.

[View Quote] > lol, my suggestion still stands regardless how many years people have been
> here. I have talked to programmers and some use my suggestions and some
> don't. It's totally up to them, but I can say those that did benefited and
> thanked me in the end. Also, others enjoyed the improvements. So, I'll cut
> you some slack too since you don't seem like the "champ" who would take
> suggestions but rather attack without thinking things out.
>
[View Quote]

m a r c u s

Jul 20, 2001, 3:36pm
Ok, you may want to re-read. Here I go with the numbering system, at least
it helps me know I have set order to the matter. You can either accept it
or ignore like you always say you will do, but must not LOL.

As it is now:

1. You sign on as tourist to preview the program
2. You learn to build
3. You buy a citizenship for $20
4. You buy a world

My suggestion was:

1. You sign on as a tourist to preview the program
2. You learn to build
3. You get an offer for $30 to have a world BEFORE getting a citizenship,
then be required to pay $10 each month for 5 months or more if you want a
bigger world. This allows people to use a world with the money they spent
on a citizenship. Then, as the months go, if they don't want a world, they
can simply opt out and still have the citizenship. Right now I would have
had a world, and Active Worlds would have more money. I am not going to
support the double-dipping scheme they have now. I don't need 2
citizenships, and I should be rebated $20 for the cost of a world.

[View Quote]

kah

Jul 20, 2001, 4:46pm
geez, M a r c u s never stops babbling about his opinion... I'd suggest you
let him alone, so he doesn't continue with another 50 posts containing the
same thing, just rewritten...

KAH

[View Quote]

eep

Jul 20, 2001, 6:52pm
Note the part "Well, into the filter you go in THIS newsgroup too."...

[View Quote] > geez, M a r c u s never stops babbling about his opinion... I'd suggest you
> let him alone, so he doesn't continue with another 50 posts containing the
> same thing, just rewritten...
>
[View Quote]

m a r c u s

Jul 20, 2001, 10:43pm
LOL, well at least you can realize it is the same thing mentioned with a
different slant. Now, without flaming, can you respond to the content and
say something nice or not say anything at all?


[View Quote]

kah

Jul 21, 2001, 9:01am
it's an okay concept, but I like the pay for a year method ten thousnd times
better... and Chicago 3D offers world rental anyway, so you DO have the
option of it...

KAH

[View Quote]

m a r c u s

Jul 21, 2001, 11:19am
Where is Chicago 3d?

[View Quote]

kah

Jul 21, 2001, 11:52am
http://activeworlds.chicago3d.net/

KAH

[View Quote]

m a r c u s

Jul 21, 2001, 12:09pm
Is there site down? I have tried 3 browsers and none are able to bring that
page up.

[View Quote]

kah

Jul 21, 2001, 1:04pm
don't ask me...

KAH

[View Quote]

sw chris

Jul 21, 2001, 2:53pm
Hmm... With the free citizenship part... there is a balance here that you
must keep in mind. It is either us casual customers who pick up the tab or
the corporate sponsors. Were we to have free citizenships, the balance of
power would shift and the company would probably listen even more to the
corporate sponsors in order to make up that chunk of change.

We would have less of a voice in the direction of the software's development
than we already do. This in turn would probably cause a substantial hit
into the user base, because some of those in the user base would leave AW
because it wasn't progressing the way they would like. Granted, most people
would be fine using the software as is and wouldn't care about the company
listening to its users suggestions for the software's development. It would
be nothing personal against us, the casual customers, just the business of
survival.

With free citizenships, the company would pick up a larger user base. Yes,
the community would thrive, but it would not be listened to in regards of
the software's developement. And more importantly, most of those users are
not going to pay for worlds. Why? Look at the current userbase. Most
citizens don't even own worlds. I think it's pretty safe to say that with
the influx of new citizens, and even if there was an increase of world
orders, that price would still not make up enough to cover the company's
loss by offering free citizenships.

And about your world marketting plan... you have some good thoughts. I
don't think a user should be allowed to back out of a payment plan and world
ownership. More than not, the company would lose money because of people
who would only keep the world for 1 or 2 months, clearly all the time it is
needed for some paintball worlds to hold an event in AW Festival or whatnot
and then just disappear. I know I would take advantage of this. >:)

Otherwise, I like your idea. I think the company should consider the idea
of offering a payment plan for worlds when bought. I would definitely get a
world if one were to be offered.

SW Chris






[View Quote]

mike zimmer

Jul 21, 2001, 4:17pm
Nope, I got on just fine

[View Quote]

1  |  
Awportals.com is a privately held community resource website dedicated to Active Worlds.
Copyright (c) Mark Randall 2006 - 2022. All Rights Reserved.
Awportals.com   ·   ProLibraries Live   ·   Twitter   ·   LinkedIn