Apparently some people really like cash shops.

Talking to some fellas on Reddit and never before have I had to unironically argue against cash shops. I am genuinely surprised that these people exist. Huh.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Sov54

Taleof2Cities wrote: »

Schmuky wrote: »

I judge not by company, but by what item gets added. And one item thats P2W will make me not buy anything from them ever again:))

You're right, @Schmuky. One MMO that does a decent job with a non-P2W cosmetic shop is ESO.

And it looks like Ashes is on that same path.

Really? I was disgusted by ESO cashshop to the point I had to stop playing.

Any achievement or progress was made thru cash.

I'd rather pay a monthly sub and box cost than being annoyed 24/7 being told that I'm a second-class player

For example: Everyone riding waaaay over-the-top mounts, but I couldn't care less for any of them, as all they had done to get them is pay. I was stuck with the slowest donkey, but at least I had got it in a fair way.

Spontancous6

Sov54 wrote: »

Taleof2Cities wrote: »

Schmuky wrote: »

I judge not by company, but by what item gets added. And one item thats P2W will make me not buy anything from them ever again:))

You're right, @Schmuky. One MMO that does a decent job with a non-P2W cosmetic shop is ESO.

And it looks like Ashes is on that same path.

Really? I was disgusted by ESO cashshop to the point I had to stop playing.

Any achievement or progress was made thru cash.

I'd rather pay a monthly sub and box cost than being annoyed 24/7 being told that I'm a second-class player

For example: Everyone riding waaaay over-the-top mounts, but I couldn't care less for any of them, as all they had done to get them is pay. I was stuck with the slowest donkey, but at least I had got it in a fair way.

That is exactly why I quit as well, the cash shop in ESO is ridiculous.

akabear

Not sure of the argument for ESO. As a pay to play game it was more than bare bones and completely playable. I played for 4-5 years but did not feel the same.

As pay to play and subscription, players were benefited with ability to pick and choose how they spent their benefits within the cash shop as they pleased.

Anything above that for a subscriber one had to pay more, and as a non-subscriber you had to pay.

ESO is not a Pay-To-Win game. Anything you can buy for Real Money -> Crowns -> Gold, you can get in game by playing the game. Perhaps the only difference with the cash shop was that there were some nicer looking items that perhaps in game one could not get. Mounts were basic looking in game, but obtainable with minimal effort and as far as remember same speed. Cash shops were visually more appealing.

Only thought is that the cash shop items is quite high and perhaps you could accelerate your progress in recipes though cash shop, but then that was a choice by all subscribers of how they use their coin each month.

Have I missed something?

Noaani

akabear wrote: »

Anything you can buy for Real Money -> Crowns -> Gold, you can get in game by playing the game.

I mean, this is kind of pay to win right here - or at least pay to get stuff faster.

This is why nothing from the cash shop in Ashes will be tradeable - so you can't buy it and then sell it for gold.

akabear

Ah, perhaps my message did not convey what I was trying to express and that cut and paste of Real Money > Crowns > Gold should probably be better written as

Buy items from in game gold or
Real Money > Cash shop crown tokens to buy cosmetics

As far as I know you cannot buy gold through the cash shop nor exchange / trade cash shop items.

Subscribing provides potential to all benefits, and non-subscribing means selective payment to do same.

A subscriber gets x number of tokens each month to spend in the cash shop but not sufficient to buy all at once.

Not sure then if that is pay to win.

Noaani

akabear wrote: »

Not sure then if that is pay to win.

Things like the experience scrolls are. Most of the things in the "utility" section would be considered pay to win. As can much of what is listed under "upgrades".

While subscribers do get some crowns with their monthly subscription, they can still use money to buy more, and more is an obvious advantage.

I actually like the way ESO offers cash shop currency with the games subscription. It doesn't stop the cash shop being pay to win, but I do like it.

akabear

I liked the aspect of getting x amount of crowns as part of the subscription.

You`re right about the utility & upgrades though, shame.

Noaani

akabear wrote: »

I liked the aspect of getting x amount of crowns as part of the subscription.

You`re right about the utility & upgrades though, shame.

Yeah, to me, that is the best way to support a game that is subscription, but allows for free to play still.

Give subscribed players full access to new content as per ESO, but charge non-subscribed players for it. Then have a cosmetic cash shop, and give subscribers about $5 a month to spend in it - enough that people that don't care too much about cosmetics would be able to get something "free" every few months, but those that want a new outfit every week or two would still need to pay.

I don't think it would work in Ashes situation though, it does seem more of a bonus for subscribing - which would require the game to not require a subscription.

That said, I could see an amount of embers given to accounts that subscribe for 3, 6 or 12 months at a time instead of monthly.

akabear

Yes and yes on the embers comment.. bit more of a reward & recognition for those that stick around.

Ferni

Noaani wrote: »

I don't think it would work in Ashes situation though, it does seem more of a bonus for subscribing - which would require the game to not require a subscription.

That said, I could see an amount of embers given to accounts that subscribe for 3, 6 or 12 months at a time instead of monthly.

Getting extra embers for subscribe for several months at a time sounds good, but I think maybe they will add some kind of discount like other games? Something like 1 month = 15$. 3 month = 14$ each one, etc.

This is a random idea that just came to my mind while reading about ESO in this post, but what about add two types of subscriptions in AoC?
- Base subscription: 15$, the default subscription.
- Base + bonus subscription: 20$, bonus of X embers every month.

I don't know if maybe it would cause the feeling of need to have to buy the bonus subscription for some people and turn into a bad idea.

McMackMuck

@Shoelid Every now and then I forget how bad Reddit is and get drawn into it. It's too easy to find someone that wants to disagree with you. If you say that the sky is light blue then you will find a Tulnar itching to say otherwise. Every topic, same result. It's like you've stumbled into a debating society where they just want to take an opposing position and prove you wrong. I just leave them in their own little distorted reality and walk away.

Noaani

Ferni wrote: »

- Base subscription: 15$, the default subscription.
- Base + bonus subscription: 20$, bonus of X embers every month.

The issue with this is that people could just buy the subscription and then purchase embers when they see something they like. There would need to be a fairly steep discount on it for it to be something most players would consider.

This is why I would think that - if anything - adding embers to a longer duration pack would make more sense.

If a subscription is $15, most games have a 3 month subscription work out to cost about $14, a 6 month to cost around $13, and a 12 month to cost around $12 a month.

Rather than that, what I think could be worth Intrepid doing is making the 3 month cost $14.50 a month (so, $43.50), the 6 month cost $14 a month ($84) and the 12 month cost $13.50 a month ($162).

That way, Intrepid would potentially stand to make more money off of some players (those wanting longer term subscriptions, but not at all concerned with cosmetics), and may also encourage people to spend the occasional few dollars to top up what they get with their subscription packs in order to get an item they quite like, but wouldn't pay full price for.

If the longer duration subscription still works out cheaper per month than buying a subscription a month at a time, most people that would have gone for it still will. The fact that the savings would only be half as much with this as with the industry standard is not likely to influence peoples decisions.

All that said, we have no confirmation at all as to whether they will bundle embers with subscriptions.

Ezenkrul

I don't love or hate cash shops. No one is forcing me to buy anything from the cash shops. If someone else wants to drop 1000 dollars into the cash shop to be "better" than other people then more power to them. I just play the game to have fun and when it is not fun anymore I stop playing.
On the other hand just give me a great MMO with no cash shop at all and I'd drop 100 a month for a sub.

RocketFarmer

Basically people aren’t wrong with what they want. It’s more about the means to accommodate them.

So let’s say a developer wanted to accommodate the PTW crowd. Dedicate a server or servers where they can do that. All of their purchases aren’t usable on the non-PTW servers.

Then let the player community decide which servers they want to play on. Those who value the grind and earned rewards will gravitate to the non-PTW servers and those who like PTW will gravitate to the PTW servers. If there are enough PTW people, then the costs to the non-PTW folks could be reduced or more features and content can be added (with a modest subscription I think most players may prefer content).

I don’t think it has to be an all or nothing proposition. If the objection from PTW folks are they don’t have an advantage over the non-PTW players, the response is simply yes, you don’t have that advantage. Their argument is no longer about paying for progress. That’s why we refer to them as PTW players.

Now there can be different levels of PTW or pay for “convenience”. One level would be for the casual player or whale who doesn’t want to spend a lot of time in game, but doesn’t necessarily have to have the best gear. Another are the ones who want all of the best gear money can buy with all the boosts and buffs that go with it.

I repeat the premise that the above assumes a given developer chooses to accommodate the PTW or pay for convenience players. So far Intrepid via Steven do not appear interested in that at this time or possibly ever. They have their niche in mind that doesn’t try to cater to these types of players at the expense of the rest. Those players already have several games that cater to them.

Ferni

RocketFarmer wrote: »

Basically people aren’t wrong with what they want. It’s more about the means to accommodate them.

So let’s say a developer wanted to accommodate the PTW crowd. Dedicate a server or servers where they can do that. All of their purchases aren’t usable on the non-PTW servers.

Then let the player community decide which servers they want to play on. Those who value the grind and earned rewards will gravitate to the non-PTW servers and those who like PTW will gravitate to the PTW servers. If there are enough PTW people, then the costs to the non-PTW folks could be reduced or more features and content can be added (with a modest subscription I think most players may prefer content).

I'll never understand players who are in favor of P2W. The big problem of P2W is it hurts the game healthy in the long way, breaks the economy, devalue ingame items, devalue time invested playing and eventually decrease the number of players in the game.

It's just a guessing but if they add a P2W only server I think it will be almost empty in less than a year.
Also, a P2W server could hurt Non-P2W servers. If you can test things faster and easier in the P2W server you will be able to progress much faster in the Non-P2W servers.

RocketFarmer

Ferni wrote: »

It's just a guessing but if they add a P2W only server I think it will be almost empty in less than a year.
Also, a P2W server could hurt Non-P2W servers. If you can test things faster and easier in the P2W server you will be able to progress much faster in the Non-P2W servers.

Losing the PTW server wouldn’t hurt the non-PTW server. If the PTW server is empty then it just means the PTW crowd moved on to other games or realized the virtues of non-PTW play.

As for PTW servers hurting non-PTW servers you need to elaborate. If each server is unique and dependent on the community, then what do you think will be able to progress much faster on the non-PTW server?

Ferni

RocketFarmer wrote: »

As for PTW servers hurting non-PTW servers you need to elaborate. If each server is unique and dependent on the community, then what do you think will be able to progress much faster on the non-PTW server?

You are right. I'll try to explain my point of view better.

P2W is progress faster, if not I would not call it P2W. If you can progress faster in the game you will get knowledge about how the game works faster and that's is an advantage. I assume that players on a P2W server will be able to reach max level much faster, improve craft professions faster and other stuff.

They said servers are going to be unique but I don't think they are going to be unique in everything. For example, the raid dragons they showed in the Dev Stream will probably be similar in all servers if they spawn on that servers.

Let's say dragon boss spawn on the P2W server where all my tryhard guild have an alter and spawn on my non-P2W server where I'm playing too.
Since my character progression is faster in the P2W servers because of what P2W means, my character is going to be stronger than my non-P2W character so I'll probably will be able to kill this boss first in the P2W server, farm it and practice the encounter.
So when I fight for that boss on the non-P2W server I will have advantage against all the non-P2W players, because I know the fight, know what to do, know how to react, etc.

That's one example why I think a P2W server could affect a non-P2W server. I don't know if I explained the idea well.

Adaon

Thoughts on the topic - and not necessarily directly related to anything anyone wrote, and I'll strictly be speaking about my mentality, and what I require in a game in order to enjoy it, and what I'm willing to "give up" in order to obtain it.

What I want in a game, is the old formula - > TIme invested = Pay out. Not money in = time negated, or pay out. I want time + aptitude invested to = rewards of recognition, noteworthy accomplishments. I do not want money invested ='s rewards that are near carbon copies of the rewards people need to invest time and aptitude to acquire in game, or in lieu of carbon copies - rewards that outshine in their aesthetic caliber, the achievements that require time and aptitude. This one hundred percent diminishes my enjoyment in a game, it is exclusivity that brings value to something, rarity, uniqueness, difficulty. That's how I personally function as a player, and I know I'm not the only one, even if it's a dying mentality.

How this relates presently to the gaming market. TBC announces boosts for sale <-- I won't touch TBC, even without all the other errors blizzard is making, this one thing, negates my enjoyment of the game. That's before touching on the mounts, and various other things present in their store that they'll likely implement. New world, already planning to sell "quality of life changes", boosts, faster experience rates, likely things like more storage(that tends to be a huge quality of life gimmick in f2p games), regardless, that's enough to put me off new world, I think the combat system in the game was terrible from my experience anyway, but I'd at least have thrown a few weeks into retail.

This sentiment has been relayed already, but if a game is good - it makes you want to waste time, and you won't even feel like you are wasting time. If a class is well made, if the combat system is good, if the game world is immersive, if you're constantly growing in power as you move on your way through the game world, no matter how small the increase - > then things like how long it takes to level will be entirely arbitrary, because simply playing the game, playing your class, going through the motions will be satisfying enough to keep you engaged. The moment you start including things to expedite that process, skip it, or anything along those lines - you basically concede it isn't all that fun to begin with.

The most fun I've had leveling in a game lately in the more modern era, was WoW classic, although between Layering, people abusing raids for exp gain, world buffs, spell damage gear that shouldn't have been in at release trivializing raid content etc, the end game was the least enjoyable aspect, but I enjoyed spending the two to three weeks it took. Other games, tend to be a week or less to level cap, and the end game in those games wasn't worth it, even at that minimal investment.

In general, the most fun I had leveling mmorpgs was EQ/UO/DAOC etc, honorable mentions to middle aged games like Rift, although I think that fell by the wayside and the end game was too trivial. I'm rambling, I'll get back to the p2w vs sub vs box etc.

I would be inclined to pay a box price, and in many cases have - and in many cases have gone all out on editions and overspent versus value, I'm all for subs, and would prefer box + sub STANDARD, in lieu of a cash shop personally, a sub is like an agreement that a company will continue putting out content worth playing month to month, at all points. You get what you pay for, and when you pay for nothing - you generally get nothing, and psychologically, who owes you anything. They might throw in some transactions that instill you with a bit of dopamine for a game you think you want to play, but realistically that's not a long term retention dynamic in my opinion. It doesn't keep me around at least. :P

I didn't mind a game like league selling cosmetics, but getting armor in league isn't really "the point" of league, like it is in an mmo, how you look is very much only relevant to you, and in some cases it's just a head ache to other players versus a "wow" factor, because the varied artwork can throw off interpretation of mechanics, whereas buying your way to "looking cool" in mmos, will pretty much always undercut some value in some items in the game, it's unavoidable. Necessary evil? I won't concede that, par for the course and not going anywhere? Probably, but can we not pretend that it's actually a positive

?

What comes to mind when I see cash shops like that is the endless asian mmorpg assembly line where one game comes out, you're already able to buy items in a cash shop from launch for that endless crafting grind, hey want your weapon to be +15? well buy these awesome hammers that increase your chances ad-nauseam, meanwhile the design team is probably already making their next mmo within a month working on the next cash shop and waiting to retire the previous game within a year or two. That's all I see from a perception stand point when I see cash shops.

I tolerated things like server transfers, or faction changes in WoW, and once the game was too far gone to care anyway, boosts - sure, but again, let's not pretend it's a positive. Even those transfers and faction changes aren't "entirely a net positive" it just enabled people to be opportunistic instead of work on their environments, or begin anew in a new environment. If the game is fun to play, why desire to skip it, and in doing so give license to the developers to stop focusing on ensuring that process is fun, is anyone going to argue that WoW for example has a "fun leveling process" at this point? Shadowlands is an endless chore with -maybe- semi well made raids, and no game world to speak of.

Anyway, sorry for rambling. :P There's some thoughts in here somewhere about payment models. lol Take care.

RocketFarmer

Will you be practicing the non-PTW version of all of the characters on the PTW server? Otherwise you may have strategies that might not work on the non-PTW server. And to figure out a potential cheat by spending time on the PTW server you will be behind everyone else on the non-PTW server. And that assumes all things being equal, which they may not be equal, in fact given the player interaction element the probability of two identical server experiences is probably very low and the ability to predict them even lower still.

Long term you can also gain information watching a stream. So realistically you are not really gaining a huge advantage by having a PTW server.

We also don’t know how much information the PTW player has given up in their attempt to get to the end, and that may actually be a disadvantage.

The PTW version of a game could also be a totally different experience.

And again, this is all hypothetical. Intrepid is not likely to entertain this arrangement. I only bring it up as an alternative approach if you wanted to go after the PTW market.

tautau

There will not be a PTW server, thank God.

If a veteran is wearing a silver star and a purple heart, people see those medals and respect the person who earned them. That is a bit like having accomplished things in~game.

If you see a non-veteran wearing a fancy t~shirt he bought which says "I a Hero and a Patriot", that is the PTW player. Maybe they don't realize people laugh at them, ya think?

Child Item