Microtransactions

ArchivedUser

Megs said:

Thanks @Ziltch for adding those quotes, got me feeling good about things!

No problem. I realized that maybe not everyone had seen them. They make me feel good about things too

ArchivedUser

nagash said:

MADE said:

FliP said:

Yes, you should get all the content, you paid for it. However, all the cosmetics? If everyone had everything just because "I paid for it, I have the right to get it, now!!" what would be the point in cosmetics then? Everyone would look the same, again, because everyone has access to the same cosmetic items and will follow a meta that looks "cool".

Your logic is heavily wrong. You just basically said "there will be only one/very few cosmetic items", which would be ****.
Idc how can anyone even think that players not look the same, cause they need to pay to get cosmetic. I guess ppls are that dumb nowdays....

LMAO the game company's are so greedy nowdays. The game aren't even released yet, but they already sell the cosmetics on a game, which have a continuous cost as a monthly base.
That's pure greed nothing else.
Some greedy company started to put microtransactions into a game which already cost money, and nowdays we are at a point where some company put microtransactions into a single player game.(not this game)
Well, that happens when someone doesn't know how to create a good game, so they instead milk the smaller player base with microtransactions to get profit.

Cosmetic microtransactions are ok in a 100% free game.
It's somewhat ok in a low cost game(<30$).
It's not ok in a full pierce game.
And it definetly not ok in a game which charges you every month.

But well, peoples are greedy, and the dumb peoples getting exploited, that's how the world works.

No one is forcing you to buy the items and if other people what to spend their money on the game what's to say they cant?

No one is forcing you to buy day one DLC, or loot boxes and microtransactions in a full priced game either. Just because no one is physically forcing you to do something doesn't mean that greedy publishers won't do everything they can to entice you to buy it and make easy money. It's just greedy, and that's a choice that intrepid will have to make. In a world with WOW as the king of mmos do you risk being greedy and turning people away? It's very funny to me that players are still OK with these practices even though we KNOW that publishers call you whales. You are their cash cows and yet you are happily getting your tits molested and milked at every corner for things that used to be fully included and didn't involve the publisher fondling you. The sad part is that it only takes a small portion of gamers to accept these practices for them to be justified to continue. 

ArchivedUser

Meudestroy said:
 It's very funny to me that players are still OK with these practices even though we KNOW that publishers call you whales. 

So.. Good thing Intrepid Studios is a Developer Studio and neither a publisher nor have a publiher then.

ArchivedUser

Ziltch said:

Meudestroy said:
 It's very funny to me that players are still OK with these practices even though we KNOW that publishers call you whales. 

So.. Good thing Intrepid Studios is a Developer Studio and neither a publisher nor have a publiher then.

They are publishing their own game so they are the publisher here. Regardless of the label, the practice and mentality remains the same if they choose to go down that path. 

ArchivedUser

Intrepid appears to be decided, they've made the choice, and have already been charging $40 for a cosmetic pax pack, CS is planned.

I applaud your enthusiastic dislike against them, but I'm happy that I'll be able to exercise my free will and not buy irrelevant pixels if that's what I choose.
No one gets to 'molest my tits' unless I give permission, and unless you're my man Thor in disguise that's not going to happen. (If you are, could you stick the kettle on hon?)

If I want to show financial support for ashes,  I'll buy things. It is after all, up to myself how I choose to spend my money.

You Might persuade Intrepid and Steven to change their minds... but if I'd risked the  'investment' of as much personal cash as they've done, I'd feel like to have the best chances of seeing a return aswell.  

Ok, so cash shops parasitically feed off the bloated wallets of gamers, but they also make sound business and economic sense.

As to moral sense, I'd also be happier living in a less consumer driven, capitalistic society.... but unlike yourself @Meudestroy I'm lacking the commitment and energy to significantly change modern society in any effective way.  I'll just keep campaining for better treatment of food producers by supermarkets instead rather than taking on THAt giant.

ArchivedUser

Megs said:

 
No one gets to 'molest my tits' unless I give permission

People should really be able to click both like and lol on posts. 

ArchivedUser

Megs said:

Ok, so cash shops parasitically feed off the bloated wallets of gamers, but they also make sound business and economic sense.

Good post except for this. This is exactly the problem and no it does not make sound business and economic sense. How many dead or dying MMO's are out there because of this practice? This thinking has resulted in the last 10(?) years of pump and dump MMO's.

75% of a cashshop's revenue comes from whales, and the rest from dolphins and the average gamer. Once a cash shop runs off the majority of the player base, the only people still playing are the few whales and the game dies. Enjoy that $40 cosmetic when there is no one to play with you. Gonna be fun? It is a very short sighted and negative business model. No rational business wants to burn repeat customers. How many people refuse to buy future products from a company that has burned them in the past?

Thor takes you out to that fancy restaurant you have been wanting to go to and the experience sucks. Seriously doubt you are going back there.

ArchivedUser

could you kindly link to the statistics?

ArchivedUser

Megs said:

could you kindly link to the statistics?

I knew that was coming. I will see if I can dig it up again.

ArchivedUser

Thanks

ArchivedUser

got them, don't worry

ArchivedUser

I got the reference from this vid (1:05) :https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahvhYLpHSEs&amp;t=91s

The channel is referencing deltaDNA  https://deltadna.com/

ArchivedUser

So after having watched the videos my opinion hasn't changed.

All four videos you posted were discussing specifically micro transaction cash shops that provide pay to win content.

Apples and oranges are both fruit, but they're very different beasts.

If ashes cash shop content is as they have been saying, only cosmetic only, then actually I am unaware of any previous or present scenario running the same structure, so where statistics can be realistic compared.

ArchivedUser

Megs said:

So after having watched the videos my opinion hasn't changed.

All four videos you posted were discussing specifically micro transaction cash shops that provide pay to win content.

Apples and oranges are both fruit, but they're very different beasts.

If ashes cash shop content is as they have been saying, only cosmetic only, then actually I am unaware of any previous or present scenario running the same structure, so where statistics can be realistic compared.

League of Legends is cosmetic only. I believe most common skins sell for around $5. From what I hear and see League is one of the few cash shops that are fair and do it right.

For my part I only have a couple of concerns.

1) P2W in the cash shop. Not an issue if Steven maintains the vision.

2) Over priced cosmetics. Really need more info on this but it is still a concern. Are these going to be one time / permanent / reusable skins? Account or character bound? Dyes- individually / packs / random? Trade-able? What kind of pricing are we looking at?

We can only speculate until more info comes out down the road. But in general I personally despise micro transactions. Cash shops are not typically in the best interest of the consumer and everything about them is designed to manipulate players. I would rather play a game without a cash shop over one that does have one.

ArchivedUser

We're on the same page as far as the concerns go, ie no p2w and accessible, realistic affordable pricing.
- last I heard no cs items tradeable, but permanent and account bound with only one toon able to use at once, although transferable between account chars and with no char bind on equip

 I think I may be a little more blasie about the cash shop concept manipulating gamers is because of my retail background.

For twenty years every decision I had to make had to be justifiable and show finanial return...
"So eight out of ten new visitors to the shop will look and turn right first, so I want my most popular \ highest margin \ most eye catching \ least nickable items there - mid height at comfortable reach..."etc etc

The fact is that we are being manipulated by almost every shop we've ever gone into, but we don't complain about the fact that the colour they've chosen to paint their walls is subconciously influencing the way we feel about ourselves and hence our shopping habits.... 
Or a small picture on the way in, that we glanced at out of the corner of our eye and we weren't even aware of registering, meant that we left with a large loaf of bread rather than a small one.

Manipulation is everywhere. 
If you however are sure of what you want our don't want you don't have to spend money. (there's reasons folks will tell you to take a list if you're going out shopping)

As to not being in the interest of the gamer....as an rper, cosmetics are in my interest, I'd prefer them to ALL be available in the game too, but can understand why 'special' or 'designer' cosmetics might not be.

I believe I do get your viewpoint though, there is just something instinctually wrong about the possibility that we're being manipulated and our choices aren't at all our own. So why have a cs at all.

As Long as there is a constant stream of cosmetics I'll be happy, cs or no. But as long as the concerns are addressed and we can be reassured that there will be regular 'reality checks' to ensure that the game remains true to its original ideals..I just personally see the cs as harmless.

ArchivedUser

I am old school, there was a time when you would buy* the physical copy of the game and you actually owned it and had access to the complete product in it's entirety by design...
those were the days.

Now it just rent and gamble DLC microtransaction garbage everywhere, AAA = 3x Asshole money grubbers. Publishers have lost their credibility and are just leaching middlemen and blind consumers have adopted this model as normal and are conditioned to tolerate and even expect this crap.

I hardly even use Steam and primarily support GoG and independent game developers.

Ashes struck nostalgic nerve with me, however the CASH SHOP* is a warning sign.
And the way the Summer campaign* was handled only concerns me more.

Fundamentally the addition of a cash shop detracts value from a subscription.

Any additional Microtransactions are just a death sentence.

if they want the Subscription to work, then any alternative sources of income must be kept to a bare minimum or preferably non existent.

I understand developers need to be profitable, but the question is how.

In nature we have the parasitic, symbiotic and epiphytic. Ideally Intrepid* needs to pursue the symbiotic path where all involved benefit mutually. 



 

ArchivedUser

Whocando said:

I am old school, there was a time when you would buy* the physical copy of the game and you actually owned it and had access to the complete product in it's entirety by design...
those were the days.

Now it just rent and gamble DLC microtransaction garbage everywhere, AAA = 3x Asshole money grubbers. Publishers have lost their credibility and are just leaching middlemen and blind consumers have adopted this model as normal and are conditioned to tolerate and even expect this crap.

I hardly even use Steam and primarily support GoG and independent game developers.

Ashes struck nostalgic nerve with me, however the CASH SHOP* is a warning sign.
And the way the Summer campaign* was handled only concerns me more.

Fundamentally the addition of a cash shop detracts value from a subscription.

Any additional Microtransactions are just a death sentence.

if they want the Subscription to work, then any alternative sources of income must be kept to a bare minimum or preferably non existent.

I understand developers need to be profitable, but the question is how.

In nature we have the parasitic, symbiotic and epiphytic. Ideally Intrepid* needs to pursue the symbiotic path where all involved benefit mutually. 



 

Everything I have been thinking. Great post.

ArchivedUser

I'm honestly shocked that some folks will actually try and defend it - Cash Shops should've never existed. It's destroying the MMO industry & cancerous to say the least.

If you want to know what the game has to offer, if want to look good, if want to be the best st something ... then you put in the effort to get there - the old-f&¿king fashion-way.

 .. and not buying your way to victory - because the your first impression of the game will be laughable.

It's understandable if you don't have the time for it anymore ... But that'll never suffice of letting-go of the True Experience of an MMO - that's *NOT*  good enough of a reason when you compare the two ...

ArchivedUser

Hatred said:

Megs said:

So after having watched the videos my opinion hasn't changed.

All four videos you posted were discussing specifically micro transaction cash shops that provide pay to win content.

Apples and oranges are both fruit, but they're very different beasts.

If ashes cash shop content is as they have been saying, only cosmetic only, then actually I am unaware of any previous or present scenario running the same structure, so where statistics can be realistic compared.

League of Legends is cosmetic only. I believe most common skins sell for around $5. From what I hear and see League is one of the few cash shops that are fair and do it right.

For my part I only have a couple of concerns.

1) P2W in the cash shop. Not an issue if Steven maintains the vision.

2) Over priced cosmetics. Really need more info on this but it is still a concern. Are these going to be one time / permanent / reusable skins? Account or character bound? Dyes- individually / packs / random? Trade-able? What kind of pricing are we looking at?

We can only speculate until more info comes out down the road. But in general I personally despise micro transactions. Cash shops are not typically in the best interest of the consumer and everything about them is designed to manipulate players. I would rather play a game without a cash shop over one that does have one.

Also League is a free to play game, which makes it a different story. Ashes is a sub game where we will have to pay every month. If Ashes goes free to play then by all means add cosmetics on to the shop but until then have some decency and don't kill your game before it even comes out. I was very interested in crow fall and followed the development until I saw their cash shop. Now I have zero interest in that game. 

 Also, if Ninja Theory can make a game that's better than most so called "AAA games" out there, sell it for $30 and still make a profit then Ashes sure as hell shouldn't have a problem making a profit if they make a great game without having to rob us in the process. 

ArchivedUser

Hatred said:

2) Over priced cosmetics. Really need more info on this but it is still a concern. Are these going to be one time / permanent / reusable skins? Account or character bound? Dyes- individually / packs / random? Trade-able? What kind of pricing are we looking at?

To lessen your concern. Steven have said that skins are better because you can outlevel/get better mounts and since skins can be reapplied to new mounts.
(In context of Kickstarter mounts being skins and not actual mounts)
Don't know about other types of skins but I don't see why they would use another system for other types of gear. 
Cash Shop items have been confirmed to be untradeable.

ArchivedUser

Eragale said:

I'm honestly shocked that some folks will actually try and defend it - Cash Shops should've never existed. It's destroying the MMO industry & cancerous to say the least.

If you want to know what the game has to offer, if want to look good, if want to be the best st something ... then you put in the effort to get there - the old-f&¿king fashion-way.

 .. and not buying your way to victory - because the your first impression of the game will be laughable.

It's understandable if you don't have the time for it anymore ... But that'll never suffice of letting-go of the True Experience of an MMO - that's *NOT*  good enough of a reason when you compare the two ...

1. Simple, because they've been very clear about not doing any P2W. that's why I don't see the issue about the Cash Shop.

2. Gives a way for casual players to look good, those who don't have that much time to play and put in effort as others. 

ArchivedUser

Ziltch said:

2. Gives a way for casual players to look good, those who don't have that much time to play and put in effort as others. 

Wouldn't this rationale run contrary to Steven's theme of equal opportunity but not equal outcome? I am thinking about Steven's comments about limited "legendaries," limited flying mounts, rewards of working with a large guild VS. playing solo, limited housing etc, all of which greatly affect casuals. I would conclude that if he is not giving a handicap to casuals in the over arching theme of the game, then it would make poor justification of a cash shop.

**edit**
Not trying to detract from anyone's play experience. I hope everyone that plays is having a good time and enjoys the game. However if two players on a completely equal playing field with the exception that one plays hardcore and the other plays casual. It cheapens the effort and time of the hardcore player if the casual can just whip out a debit card and look just as bad a$$ as the hardcore player.

ArchivedUser

Hatred said:

Ziltch said:

2. Gives a way for casual players to look good, those who don't have that much time to play and put in effort as others. 

Wouldn't this rationale run contrary to Steven's theme of equal opportunity but not equal outcome? I am thinking about Steven's comments about limited "legendaries," limited flying mounts, rewards of working with a large guild VS. playing solo, limited housing etc, all of which greatly affect casuals. I would conclude that if he is not giving a handicap to casuals in the over arching theme of the game, then it would make poor justification of a cash shop.

Not Steven's point, its my conclusion. I see no problem with it as it is just skins and not stat increasing gear in any form. For them to use a mount skin, they need to have a mount that the skin can be used on. So there's nothing to gain from it except "fashion". 

ArchivedUser

Ziltch said:

Not Steven's point, its my conclusion. I see no problem with it as it is just skins and not stat increasing gear in any form. For them to use a mount skin, they need to have a mount that the skin can be used on. So there's nothing to gain from it except "fashion". 

Saw this coming and didn't get my edit in before you got the post up. I would refer you to my previous post.

ArchivedUser

Hatred said:

Ziltch said:

Not Steven's point, its my conclusion. I see no problem with it as it is just skins and not stat increasing gear in any form. For them to use a mount skin, they need to have a mount that the skin can be used on. So there's nothing to gain from it except "fashion". 

Saw this coming and didn't get my edit in before you got the post up. I would refer you to my previous post.

On that point I agree with you. And I do hope, and think, that Achievment gained skins will not be sold in Cash Shop
But I really do wonder how they are thinking of splitting up the gained vs bought vs 'both ways' of getting skins.
I also feel that if you can buy something that is hard to gain, it will cheapen the effort. So I hope, and thnk, that Steven, as a fellow MMO player, is aware of this and has a good plan for how to divide it.

Excellent point btw.

ArchivedUser

Ziltch said:

Hatred said:

Ziltch said:

Not Steven's point, its my conclusion. I see no problem with it as it is just skins and not stat increasing gear in any form. For them to use a mount skin, they need to have a mount that the skin can be used on. So there's nothing to gain from it except "fashion". 

Saw this coming and didn't get my edit in before you got the post up. I would refer you to my previous post.

On that point I agree with you. And I do hope, and think, that Achievment gained skins will not be sold in Cash Shop
But I really do wonder how they are thinking of splitting up the gained vs bought vs 'both ways' of getting skins.
I also feel that if you can buy something that is hard to gain, it will cheapen the effort. So I hope, and thnk, that Steven, as a fellow MMO player, is aware of this and has a good plan for how to divide it.

Excellent point btw.

As much as I hate cash shops, I could see maybe the cheesy outfits put into a cash shop. I am talking about things like swim suits, bunny costumes, Steven's sandals and silly things like that. But skins that represent armor / class / fighting style and abilities etc should be in the game. There is sooooo much more value placed on the item by the player when they have to achieve to obtain it. An item acquired from a couple nights worth of questing or hunting is worth much more than one that can be bought for $10 and 30 secs of your time. Not to mention the story that it tells to those who see you. After all Ashes is supposed to be about the story that the players create. Rocking that set of evil armor with all the flashy purple effects, says way more if the only way to get it is to defeat boss (XXXX), rather than getting it outta the cash shop.

I would wager that even the RP crowd would rather ravage farmer Bill's farm, snatch his overalls from his still warm corpse, and use them to RP a dirty farmer. As opposed to breaking immersion, opening up the cash shop, digging out their card, and buying those overalls.

ArchivedUser

Hatred said:

Ziltch said:

Hatred said:

Ziltch said:

Not Steven's point, its my conclusion. I see no problem with it as it is just skins and not stat increasing gear in any form. For them to use a mount skin, they need to have a mount that the skin can be used on. So there's nothing to gain from it except "fashion". 

Saw this coming and didn't get my edit in before you got the post up. I would refer you to my previous post.

On that point I agree with you. And I do hope, and think, that Achievment gained skins will not be sold in Cash Shop
But I really do wonder how they are thinking of splitting up the gained vs bought vs 'both ways' of getting skins.
I also feel that if you can buy something that is hard to gain, it will cheapen the effort. So I hope, and thnk, that Steven, as a fellow MMO player, is aware of this and has a good plan for how to divide it.

Excellent point btw.

As much as I hate cash shops, I could see maybe the cheesy outfits put into a cash shop. I am talking about things like swim suits, bunny costumes, Steven's sandals and silly things like that. But skins that represent armor / class / fighting style and abilities etc should be in the game. There is sooooo much more value placed on the item by the player when they have to achieve to obtain it. An item acquired from a couple nights worth of questing or hunting is worth much more than one that can be bought for $10 and 30 secs of your time. Not to mention the story that it tells to those who see you. After all Ashes is supposed to be about the story that the players create. Rocking that set of evil armor with all the flashy purple effects, says way more if the only way to get it is to defeat boss (XXXX), rather than getting it outta the cash shop.

I would wager that even the RP crowd would rather ravage farmer Bill's farm, snatch his overalls from his still warm corpse, and use them to RP a dirty farmer. As opposed to breaking immersion, opening up the cash shop, digging out their card, and buying those overalls.

Yeah I agree, I have never liked costumes that breaks immersion etc myself either (talking about costumes based on events such as santa etc).
I just personally don't have a problem with the CS even so. To each their own imo, if people want to buy let them. It's also a nice way for those who want to support the company to do so. 
(Not saying that everyone who buys do it with that intent, but some do)

Tbh, having no clue what will be in the CS
(Except: Monster Coins, Dyes, Mount Skins)
but, I hope it will mostly just be mount/freehold etc skins instead of armor or weapon ones, tho I doubt that I will get that wish fulfilled :P

ArchivedUser

I'm fairly sure Steven already said no bunnies.... but I cant back that up with quotes.

I also feel like a few of you, any cash shop cosmetics should be second class to the epic cosmetics, ie armor etc,  found for in game achievements.

ArchivedUser

Megs said:

I'm fairly sure Steven already said no bunnies.... but I cant back that up with quotes.

I also feel like a few of you, any cash shop cosmetics should be second class to the epic cosmetics, ie armor etc,  found for in game achievements.

What about from an RPer perspective? I have not RPed in an MMO since Everquest I many years ago so I have been out of the loop. Do RPers prefer to scour the world looking for the outfits that suit their needs or buy them as needed from the cash shop? Do they take more pride in sets that are harder to obtain and thus more scarce in the RP community?

Surely Steven did not say no bunny costumes

ArchivedUser

Hatred said:

Surely Steven did not say no bunny costumes

I don't remember him saying anything about bunny costumes. They did say that bikini plate armor would probably not happen (video link), but armor and costumes are different concepts in Ashes.



They did mention seasonal cosmetics, so bunny costumes could be a thing if Easter is celebrated in-game.