Greetings, glorious testers!

Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.

To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.

Microtransactions

11314161819

Comments

  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited February 2018
    Id pay a box price and a monthly $15.00 or box price and optional monthly w/ a stipend of micro-transaction currency each month.  But I'd personally prefer a monthly sub and fluff items in the store like random mounts//pets//makeover kits etc etc.  As long as there are ways inside the game to get mounts and pets etc etc that are beautifully done as well.  I don't want to have to pay to look good or ride in style.

    As for those that are saying that there should be 0 micro transactions ever.  While id love for that to happen...  It's wishful thinking.  If say they make the game free to play then you better be ready for micro-transactions.  The game has to make money.    If they don't they can't afford to keep the lights on.  Look at games like Path of Exile as an example.  Tons of micro-transactions and is doing well.  Even with them being over the top expensive, but they have a new update every three months. As long as they don't do what SWTOR or STO did which basically, locked everything behind a pay wall they will do fine.  Even WoW, FFXIV and GW2 have micro-transactions and they are doing well.  Just has to be in moderation.

    Sorry to resurrect this thread :P
     
  • Eragale said:
    This had nothing to do with Trust - please stop resorting to that response.

    What a Player looks like should reflect on the adventures that Player have been through - not how much money they spent

    Everything in a Cash Shop can be put into in-game vendor(s) - literally content-material being separated via money
    This is my view as well. I'm against in game purchases that are exclusive to a CS, because that means that those items lack lore, and as they do, they are unimmersive.

    But since the CS is already in the plans from the beginning I really want to see more about how they are going to handle it before I know if I can tolerate it.

    I'd like to believe that if it was included by Steven, as much as he hates the Cash grab practices as he says he does. Because there was clear signs that the game wasn't going to have enough income with only the subscription from the get go and adding a box cost might slow down the population growth enough to make it dangerous, as the game is heavily dependant on community to drive it's content and launches are important (I mean look at wildstar), so they needed to make it accessible which the box cost is not.
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited February 2018
    Santy182 said:

    This is my view as well. I'm against in game purchases that are exclusive to a CS, because that means that those items lack lore, and as they do, they are unimmersive.


    There is going to be plenty of lore in the game.  And yes those items do lack lore but there are plenty of in game items without a solid story line other than were to get them. I mean there are going to be a lot of common items that you will not even think twice about.  Items that are parts of quests have lore and some rare drops or legendary gear but there is plenty of gear in game that is common with no lore other than were to get it. 

    Plus they do not create lore for every item that they put in game so...not really a valid statement in my opinion. In fact they have more items than they have lore...(literally cannot make a story for every item) so really there is no lore taken out of the game.  

    Now if you had a ton of stories but no items to go with that lore then I would see your point but that is not the case
  • the items that lack lore, the common and "trash" items that you mention rarely make you look very heroic, or like you have beaten an incredible boss, which will be the case with the CS cosmetics because unlike the common loreless rubbish, these will make you look shiny and powerful.
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited February 2018
    Santy182 said:
    the items that lack lore, the common and "trash" items that you mention rarely make you look very heroic, or like you have beaten an incredible boss, which will be the case with the CS cosmetics because unlike the common loreless rubbish, these will make you look shiny and powerful.
    Steve already confrimed that you will look shinyand powerful from in game items just as well as from the Cash Shop items and also confirmed that he wil not be making the items in the cash intentionally better than in game but will be on par with in game items. And that is coming frome the CEO of IS.

    Just go to the Ashes of Creation Wiki and search cash shop on there website search bar, to be better informed about this topic


  • yes, exactly, someone gets to pay to look just as badass as someone who beat the hardest boss of the game. At least he only looks badass.

    I will most likely learn to live with it. I just don't like it.
  • Santy182 said:
    yes, exactly, someone gets to pay to look just as badass as someone who beat the hardest boss of the game. At least he only looks badass.

    I will most likely learn to live with it. I just don't like it.
    So  it would make you feel better if he grinded it just like you.  I mean you are getting the better part of the deal cuase you have a much more sense of accomplishment than he did plus you did not have to pay for it right? 
  • Yes. You're right. I would be getting the better end of the deal. I Still feel like it dilutes the achievement a bit if someone gets to easily buy it. But it's not that big of a deal.
  • I don't see anything wrong with having the option to buy cosmetics from the shop ? in the end it's all appearance, this wont influence your stats so even though the in game and cash shop items will look equally awesome there is still a need to get those in game items so you actually have some proper stats/gear.

    I would understand if this was about p2w items from the cash shop like warframe where you can buy all the items or grind them for much longer, but in the end it all a cosmetic look for which you spend real money which you most likely worked your ass off to get.
  • I have no problem with a cosmetics cash shop as long as two 3 criteria are met. 
    1) There is no advantage to the cash shop items over what is available through gameplay
    2) The cash shop items are distinctive from the items that can be won or crafted by achievement in game (no cloned items with a slightly different color)
    3) No world breaking items. (I don't need a high fantasy game with anime rave girls and boys running around. As long as the items or wardrobe feel like they belong in the game it's fine by me)

    With that said I have no concerns of P2W so 1 is out of the picture. 3 I'm not concerned over either as they have been very big on keeping with idea of a high fantasy world and I can't see them wanting to destroy that. 2 is the only one I could see being an issue and I'm just going to hope they don't go this path. Looking awesome is great for both options but an experienced player should be able to instantly tell the difference between a hard won set of armor and a set purchased out of the cash shop.
  • I have no problem with a cosmetics cash shop as long as two 3 criteria are met. 
    1) There is no advantage to the cash shop items over what is available through gameplay
    2) The cash shop items are distinctive from the items that can be won or crafted by achievement in game (no cloned items with a slightly different color)
    3) No world breaking items. (I don't need a high fantasy game with anime rave girls and boys running around. As long as the items or wardrobe feel like they belong in the game it's fine by me)

    With that said I have no concerns of P2W so 1 is out of the picture. 3 I'm not concerned over either as they have been very big on keeping with idea of a high fantasy world and I can't see them wanting to destroy that. 2 is the only one I could see being an issue and I'm just going to hope they don't go this path. Looking awesome is great for both options but an experienced player should be able to instantly tell the difference between a hard won set of armor and a set purchased out of the cash shop.

    I wouldn't say IS will use copies but similarities between 2 armor sets are not very uncommon, of course I don't want to see any recoloured armors and them being called 'separate' sets.
  • AutumnLeaf said:

    I wouldn't say IS will use copies but similarities between 2 armor sets are not very uncommon, of course I don't want to see any recoloured armors and them being called 'separate' sets.
    It's completely fair to reuse geometry and repaint it for general armor and weapons. Not doing so would just be wasting resources. I'm mostly talking about avoiding selling a literal color shift of an epic weapon or armor in the cash shop.

    I don't see it happening but I have seen it done in other games and it destroys the impressiveness of the achievement.
  • AutumnLeaf said:

    I wouldn't say IS will use copies but similarities between 2 armor sets are not very uncommon, of course I don't want to see any recoloured armors and them being called 'separate' sets.
    It's completely fair to reuse geometry and repaint it for general armor and weapons. Not doing so would just be wasting resources. I'm mostly talking about avoiding selling a literal color shift of an epic weapon or armor in the cash shop.

    I don't see it happening but I have seen it done in other games and it destroys the impressiveness of the achievement.
    Ah maybe I phrased myself wrongly but this is excatly what I meant, simple recolours of the originals would be a sad excuse for trying to get more money but re-using the previous armors and changing a few things in them is more acceptable.
  • You mean like this?
    Kickstarter Exclusive - Obsidian Stallion


    Summer Exclusive - Radiant Stallion
  • Yea but we didn't see the Radiant Stallion yet ? as long as it's not a simple recolour then it's fine :3
  • A horse is a horse, of course, of course,
    And no one can talk to a horse of course,
    That is, of course, unless the horse is black, and the other white.
  • A horse is a horse, of course, of course,
    And no one can talk to a horse of course,
    That is, of course, unless the horse is black, and the other white.
    Just made my morning! I haven't watched Mr. Ed in years. That stated my issue is with items that require achievement in game being duplicated. I really see kickstarter items and Cash Shop items as about the same thing.
  • Ultimately, Intrepid Studios will make more money from "whales" who purchase large swathes of content from the shop; even when that content defers no real agency to the player.

    The subscription is a steady source of revenue that (unlike the volatile income from cometics) will ensure a steady flow of content. The shop will allow them to fastened more bells and whistles to the game than a box cost ever could, and possibly allow them to hire even more talent.

    Additionally, their referral system will reduce the subscription cost if you refer another player to the game.
  • I do not mind at all if they have a shop for cosmetics or any other non-game changing items. In fact, if the game is good and all I'm paying is a monthly subscription, I'll buy cosmetics not just for how awesome they might look, but because I enjoy supporting developers that make great games. Honestly though, just by watching Steven in the streams, I would be absolutely shocked if any pay-to-win items were ever added to the game so I don't think you have to worry.
  • I despise microtransactions of any kind. Call it an item mall, cash shop, vanity only items, it's all the same. It's a slippery slope where developers traditionally add advantage items like double experience potions and avoid death potions etc. in order to coerce players to spend more money.
    I play MMOs competitively but I refuse to compete with my wallet and will just unsubscribe if this appears to be the case in AoC.
    If Intrepid is truly only going to offer vanity items that do not offer any advantages whatsoever, they must be no trade no drop tagged in order to prevent players from trading them in-game for in-game coin or items, as that would constitute buying an advantage.
    Normally I disdain any restrictions on trading items but this is mandatory for items purchased outside the game world with real monies from the developer.
  • I think after BF2 and CoD, every game company should understand the danger of putting microtransactions in a game.  It turns out that players are very against paying money for a game and then paying more money in the game.
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited March 2018
    For me it gives the devs both a compulsory and voluntary source of funding. If people want to look pretty and fund the game better then awesome for everyone.
    The problem comes when the game is so mismanaged and riven by greed that the compulsory funding is not enough to maintain the game. Thats the point when the voluntary cash shop then becomes a compulsory source of funding that is required to keep the game afloat.

    The we start to see...
    1. 'Exclusive' items that can only be bought in the cash shop.
    2. An impossible grind in game so paying in the cash shop is the only real alternative.
    3. A deliberately broken RNG system that amount to an eternal grind that forces you to take the realistic alternative of the cash shop.
    4. where the shit really hits the fan...paying directly for an ever slimmer RNG chance of getting something 'exclusive' in the cash shop (loot boxes / gambling).

    I think that covers all the modern shitty practices. It is the 'illusion' of choice that 'guarantees' income.
  • I honestly don't get the issue here.

    No MMO that I have ever seen has been able to sustain itself on one source of income. Games like EverQuest, EverQuest 2 and WoW all had both box prices and subscriptions. On top of that, these games had expansion costs as well - what is an expansion to an MMO other than more content behind a payment barrier? MMO's now have largely moved to subscription and microtransaction instead of subscription and box, a welcome change to me. I mean, look at ESO; it has subscription (optional, admittidly), paid for content and a microtransaction store that - while not pay to win - has more than just cosmetics.

    With AoC having no box price, a $15 a month subscription fee (The same amount that I was paying in 2004 for EQ2) and a cosmetics only cash shop, playing it will be the cheapest MMORPG I've played in my 15 years of online gaming - and a very welcome change from paying ~$250 a month in Archeage.
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited April 2018
    Consultant said:
    Santy182 said:
    the items that lack lore, the common and "trash" items that you mention rarely make you look very heroic, or like you have beaten an incredible boss, which will be the case with the CS cosmetics because unlike the common loreless rubbish, these will make you look shiny and powerful.
    Steve already confrimed that you will look shinyand powerful from in game items just as well as from the Cash Shop items and also confirmed that he wil not be making the items in the cash intentionally better than in game but will be on par with in game items. And that is coming frome the CEO of IS.

    Just go to the Ashes of Creation Wiki and search cash shop on there website search bar, to be better informed about this topic
    Not quite lol. Here is a quote.

    Steven-07/17/2017
    I understand your apprehension. The state and direction of other Mmorpg's is why I started Ashes. You don't have to agree with the pricing structure of the crowdsourcing add ons, but rest assured Ashes will never include monetization practices that require players to pay to win or stay competitive. And there will be an abundance of in game cosmetics that are achievable and rare, some on par with marketplace cosmetics 

    Some on par with marketplace cosmetics.  Some usually refers to a few. Meaning there will be many items in Cash Shop that are better than what we can get in game. That's a direct quote BTW wish I had a link couldn't find it but that was linked from System Error earlier in this thread.

    ***

    Here is the thing many people argue that as long as it is not PTW and it is just cosmetics it is ok. But here is the thing looks in a game is very important. If I'm paying a sub fee and while there are things I can grind there will be that much more cooler stuff I have to buy that I can't get by playing the game that's imbalance and there is no justification that will change that.

    Goal is to create risk vrs reward, cash shops even just for cosmetics takes away from that. where is the risk in going to a cash shop to look better than someone else with no risk other than maybe missing a payment because you spent too much on a game to look good.

    Goal to create a tight community. Having Haves and Have Nots element "Cash Shops" takes away from that as well and creates a separation. Let's be real what's the number one thing in real life that separates the Haves and Have Nots? That's right image, appearance how one looks over another, Better cloths, better skin care, better stylist. Appearance in present day is important where it's in real life or in a game, it has a huge impact.  that is truth and that is reality.

    ***

    Cash shop to this day is my only apprehension for AOC and everything else about it I love. I really do hope it has balance I really do hope that if it gets out of hand it at some point it will get toned down. Making a lot of money is a funny thing tho and if cash shop ends up turning more profit than the subs it can get real ugly real fast and its gonna be hard to resist making more of it regardless of how it effects the game and honestly this is the biggest concern I have as well as the fact if I am paying a sub I feel I shouldn't have to be spending extra money to get something especially since it's not earned.

    The best and most memorable games I've played is where I had to work for the things I got not by paying for it and yes this includes how one looks.

    If it get's to the point where majority of cool stuff can only be gotten through cash shops that will be enough to turn me away at that point. If I've been playing for 2 years and I see a bunch of brand new players walking around looking better than me cause I prefer to earn the way I look rather than pay for it, that will be enough to turn me away from the game. How one looks in a game is an important factor it shows experience it shows effort put in. To have people walking around looking better than you and all they had to do was pay for it cheapens the game experience.

    This to me is what confuses me the most about AOC. Steve sounds like a great guy he has great ideas and has amazing people working for him and this community is amazing.  So for all the things he wants to bring to this game and all the best from old school games such as, risk vrs reward, a challenging game, a tight community. I don't understand why risk all that with a cash shop that could derail all those wonderful things. 

    ***

    If there is a cash shop and obviously at this point there will be:

    1) There needs to be a lot more items in game that are on par with cash shop items than just SOME. In fact, there should be more items in game that are on par with what is available in cash shops than there are those grade of items in ash shops.
    2) Cash shop items should not be better than what's available in game just different. That's a fine line and a hard one to make when money is involved.
    3) In game items that take a long time to acquire or are hard to get should alway look superior to anything you can purchase.

    If I want to make an inn look good it should be through effort crafting gathering the mats hiring goods or skill from players that are master crafters boosting game economy, over simply purchasing a skin for the in or residence. 

    To me all cash shops will ever do to a game is create rifts in communities and cheapen the game experience and yes even if its just looks. Is too high a price to pay for what we all hope AOC to be.

    I really hope by the time game releases and I know this is wishful thinking but I really hope box purchase and expansion purchase will replace cash shops if not at the beginning at some point.

    I'd rather $20 a month than a cash shop , box purchase, expansion purchase.

    Bottom line any time you can purchase over earning it cheapens the experience at a heavy cost to the wallet.

  • Namai said:
    I honestly don't get the issue here.

    No MMO that I have ever seen has been able to sustain itself on one source of income. Games like EverQuest, EverQuest 2 and WoW all had both box prices and subscriptions. On top of that, these games had expansion costs as well - what is an expansion to an MMO other than more content behind a payment barrier? MMO's now have largely moved to subscription and microtransaction instead of subscription and box, a welcome change to me. I mean, look at ESO; it has subscription (optional, admittidly), paid for content and a microtransaction store that - while not pay to win - has more than just cosmetics.

    With AoC having no box price, a $15 a month subscription fee (The same amount that I was paying in 2004 for EQ2) and a cosmetics only cash shop, playing it will be the cheapest MMORPG I've played in my 15 years of online gaming - and a very welcome change from paying ~$250 a month in Archeage.
    I'll pay box fee + sub fee / expansion fee any day of any millenium over any sort of MT.

    People undersell appearance in a game it has a huge impact of ones enjoyment. 

     I have never seen anything good come from having cash shops in game. At most some games don't get as greedy and try to balance things out. Even in thos games cash shops were never a good thing.

  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited April 2018
    I 100% agree with Dorje. Cosmetics are very important to me as well, and, in my opinion; Cosmetics earned through in-game time and effort should not be on par, they should be superior to cash shop cosmetics. They should show that you killed that badass boss, or solved that riddle nobody could figure out, or held your own in a monster coin event, or were the last man standing in that pvp tournament. Not show how heavy your wallet is.

    They are a badge of honor that demonstrates a feat of strength, or intelligence, or dexterity, and should be worn with honor so that everyone knows what you were able to accomplish, not what you were able to pay for.

    That's just my humble opinion.
  • Santy182 said:
    I 100% agree with Dorje. Cosmetics are very important to me as well, and, in my opinion; Cosmetics earned through in-game time and effort should not be on par, they should be superior to cash shop cosmetics. They should show that you killed that badass boss, or solved that riddle nobody could figure out, or held your own in a monster coin event, or were the last man standing in that pvp tournament. Not show how heavy your wallet is.

    They are a badge of honor that demonstrates a feat of strength, or intelligence, or dexterity, and should be worn with honor so that everyone knows what you were able to accomplish, not what you were able to pay for.

    That's just my humble opinion.
    Very nicely said, yeah cash shops whether it's PTW (which won;t be in this game thank god) or cosmetics just cheapens the game experience period. It seems justy so counterintuitive to what Steve wants to do with the game. I hope this becomes apparent to him at some point and decides to remove it. Even if its 6 months after the game comes out.  
  • I don't get the issue.

    MMORPG subscriptions since 2004 (I can't remember what I paid prior to 2004) have been fairly consistent at $15 per month  - adjusted for inflation that would now be $20.06.

    So we are paying 25% less for our monthly subscription than we were with games in the past - and as long as microtransactions are cosmetic only, we have no need to pay any more than that.

    Basically, we are getting a good deal here.

    However, if someone does want to buy costumes, they can simply put aside the inflation adjusted amount of $20.06 every month, and put what is left after their subscription towards microtransactions. They can do this knowing full well that they are paying the exact same (adjusted for inflation) fee that MMORPG's have always charged.
  • Take my money
  • Xombie said:
    Take my money
    For once we agree 
Sign In or Register to comment.