What really needs to happen with a change in the business model, is that the six individual cosmetics need to not be locked behind a minimum $375 pay wall.
I could agree with this, but offering cosmetics for a month is perfectly fine.
A small correction to your post though. McDonald's have the McRib as a buffer. If there is likely to be a shortage in beef, they are able to put the McRib on to soak up some of the demand for beef - as it doesn't use any. This is a function it can not serve if it were on the menu all the time.
They don't have it specifically as something to offer in a FOMO capacity, but some people do treat it as such, which leads some people to assume that is the reason it exists.
While there are indeed some products that some companies offer to try and maximize FOMO, the bulk of limited offer items are limited time for other reasons. In Ashes case, items are limited time so that players supporting the game now (when there is more risk - as the game is not released, may be delayed, may never release, may be shirt lived, or may not be to a backers taste). If there is a chance to get these same items later on, there is literally no reason to get them now, and there are actual, real reasons to get them later.
Intrepid offering items.s for a month is not an issue. People thinking they have a right to them all, however, is.
I love all you do for the community, but this has got to be the worst post I have ever seen from you.
#1 - Most of the first 5 people who responded clearly didn't even read the original post. You just felt it necessary to be on the opposing side of the argument, even though you didn't even understand the suggestion.
Just like OP you assumed myself and others did not read the first post. Which is false.
I later went on to fully explain that I don't think anything should be changed about the way Intrepid is doing things with the supporter packs. In doing so, OP's hatred for FOMO became even more explicit.
#2 - The Original Poster demonstrated that while they may have understood a part of the issue, in their later subsequent posts, they do not fully understand FOMO, because it is neither anti-consumer, nor malicious, nor an online only business practice.
Did you read OPs post? It clearly has a bias with hate for FOMO. He used words like "arbitrary locked" and put the word 'exclusivity' in quotes not to quote, but to show how he disagrees with the term as used.
The monthly live steam mounts/skins pitch is starting to piss in the punch bowl of positive vibes regarding the general perspective of the game.-OP
This to me sounds like he thinks what Intrepid is doing is malicious... Those are his words.
#3 - Supply and Demand have NOTHING to do with FOMO as a marketing technique. Yes, the inherent nature of low supply triggers a Pavlovian response when it comes to "you really want it and it won't be available" but this is not FOMO, this is the basic nature of supply = low then price = high.
Yes, but the supply will be low in the future. That is the point. These cosmetics will be more valuable to the people that have them because they know they are among the few that even have a supply of them. That is the point.
What the OP is saying is that Intrepid needs to look at how FOMO is negatively affecting their Public Relations image. As cosmetics and discussion of such is done on a near daily basis, CLEARLY there is some need to address this issue.
The better solution, would actually be to keep the monthly cosmetics on a rotating basis (although possibly look at increasing the time between from one month to three months and do these on a quarterly basis). This would more accurately align with Vision and Mission statements from Intrepid that they can afford to absorb these elongated development windows and additional staff (original 100 to 150) increases.
What really needs to happen with a change in the business model, is that the six individual cosmetics need to not be locked behind a minimum $375 pay wall. Allow everyone regardless of backer level to purchase any of the six cosmetics.
A person with limited monthly disposable income, is more likely to invest $25 one time for one item (such as the Santa Suit) vs having any level of reasonable expectation that they will wait until they have 15 months of disposable income to purchase a $375 pack.
There is no down side to this. People who have founder's packs, continue to have all the additional goodies (sub time, alpha access, etc) so if you want those things, you pay for them.
If you only want one or two cosmetics as singletons, you get them and Intrepid gets your money.
The only thing I agree with about your suggestion is the removal of the $375 pay wall. Otherwise, expanding the time you have to buy parts of a pack or rotating them would devalue the packs. If I know people have three months to buy a pack or that people can just wait for them to go on sale again, then I am not buying anything from a pack like that.
It would be like if Rolex came out with a 300$ mass market watch. It would destroy the brand overnight. Rolex has been putting out fewer watches on purpose to increase the value of their watches, and that has worked. These cosmetics are the same concept. Knowing that they are limited makes them special and makes people want to buy them. Any changes to that is bad for them.
Making the sales more open is not going to just generate good will. It is just going to make people not want them as much.
I think what they're currently doing is just fine.
I missed a pack that I wanted bad way back because I couldn't afford it. My buddy actually got it, tho. So, I saved and set aside some money so that when another pack I liked came out I could purchase it. And I did just that. It's really not hard for someone to save the money... and if it is, then you prolly shouldn't be throwing money at the pack to begin with. Shit, it's not like it's a mystery when they'll retire a pack and release a new one.
The idea of someone actually catching FOMO over game cosmetics is laughable. /lol
I think they could do better, though, and only release 1 pack a month and have it available for only 1 week out of said month. Keep the prices the same.
FOMO means Fear of Missing Out. This is the reason why companies like McDonalds don't offer the Shamrock Shake and the McRib all year long. First, by limiting the availability, they increase the number they sell because "a limited time". This is also seen for years when the Girl Scouts only offered cookies once per year. (This particular FOMO has now changed).
@Jahlon - from everything I’ve seen we tend to see things pretty much eye to eye. I just wanted to point out that this still seems to be the case, given you explain your assertion that FOMO has nothing to do with supply and demand by showing exactly how it relates to supply and demand. 🤗
Merry Christmas (if you celebrate), keep up the good content (been following you for years).
I seriously can't believe how ppl here are defending FOMO. That is just next level sad
I'm not defending FOMO, yet I am defending Intrepid.
In this case, FOMO is an issue in consumers, not a marketing technique Intrepid are abusing.
Intrepid limit the sale of cosmetics to one month for a very good reason, people that "suffer" from FOMO in relation to this are the ones with the issue. These are the people I am not defending, and are the people that need to fix their issue.
I love how people complain like FOMO is some sort of crazy anti-consumer practice.
You are exposed to FOMO marketing constantly. Google "FOMO marketing" and you will get dozens of everyday examples like a product being on a limited time sale.
Intrepid is selling optional cosmetics so they can run a business and make the game. It's really not a big deal if you have self control. Don't like it? Then don't buy it.
I love how people complain like FOMO is some sort of crazy anti-consumer practice.
You are exposed to FOMO marketing constantly. Google "FOMO marketing" and you will get dozens of everyday examples like a product being on a limited time sale.
Intrepid is selling optional cosmetics so they can run a business and make the game. It's really not a big deal if you have self control. Don't like it? Then don't buy it.
They make the self-control part really easy, too. We have not had a pack I like since June 2021. Every month I excited to see what the new pack is, and every month it's not my cup of tea.
If they went to quarterly sales, I don't think I would end up buying anything most years. It's already rare I like something in a given four-month period.
Here's the SINGLE BEST REASON having so much work done in cosmetics is objectively good, for the game:
In a word: 'Variety'; There are variations on every Cash Shop set that is to come out. This means that the NPCs' in-game wardrobe is already FAR more-vast than most MMORPGs'. Not only does this ensure that a broader universe of personal customization is open to us as players - but it also means that our game world's NPCs will possess a richer, more-varied wardrobe. The knights and Captains giving out quests? Yeah, I'd like to remember them well, when they re-occur later in the story by their unique appearances - instead of vaguely recalling these characters based on a facial feature, since their armor is all nearly the same.
When people decry customization-type work versus other developmental processes? Just think about this: Are the graphic artists at Intrepid all also universally software-and-system engineers? Just because the people who have been outputting so much customization work over these years are *on* the Dev team, it doesn't mean that they are doing (or even *can* do) the same things that people like the engineers are doing. Yes: You might free up a couple dozen people by taking them off the Graphic Artists' team - but do you really think that they know how to code a UE5 game engine asset that will mark the border of a Node and report to the back-end that specific Node's to-the-minute activity metrics?
There's no need to wind-down the Art production of AoC in favor of advancing other areas. I know some of you are eager for the game to be out - but this effort really should be made to be worth the wait. It might feel like FOMO to have specific appearance gear only be available in Pre-Launch - but anytime this issue is raised, it feels like it's always from someone who hasn't had enough exposure to information on the topic. Case-and-point? The "best-looking" variant of each outfit is supposed to be in-game achievable through looting and deeds. We won't be able to color gear (beyond matching to a central piece's color-theme), either - which leaves plenty of opportunity for a slightly-different color or shade of the same piece of appearance gear to be epically earned via deeds and questing - instead of being bought.
I do believe that them locking the ability to buy specific cosmetics without owning a pack to be counterproductive and I think it should be dropped since it is likely to increase their income.
there were times I saw an item or 2 in some of their monthly packs but didn't purchase them because I didn't like the rest of the pack and couldn't justify spending 375 on a pack I'll only use a single item from.
Doing this would also be a show of good faith and act as a way to facilitate the marketing team's job and put ashes in a good light in front of the MMO community, in addition to deflecting some of the complaints that some people had while talking about ashes.
and just to clarify, I do own the dying of the light pack, so it's not as if I'm not interested in the cosmetics.
I am very sympathetic to the OP's general feelings on cosmetics and I think the idea in his post is reasonable to consider. What if people could buy a skin every month or so and work their way up to a dollar amount equal to a package, and then be rewarded the benefits of that package?
In a sense maybe they already can, buy the 75 dollar package and just keep buying from there. But what if the skin sales were just opened up period, for anyone, at any amount?
I think we'd see more sales. But maybe less too because part of the exclusivity aspect of it would be gone. It's up to Intrepid to determine what makes for a better stream of revenue. I want Intrepid to make as much money as possible, with a strong caveat of as long as it's not in predatory or otherwise sketchy ways. Which I don't think it is right now.
I say I'm sympathetic to the OP, and I am. But at the same time I don't really care. And I thank God for blessing me to not care about skins.
But his post is a far cry from the constant nonsensical anti cosmetic posts we see on reddit. Worth at least thinking about I think.
I don't think the sales are limited as much as gated from an economic standpoint. I just ordered my voyager plus pack because I am interested in testing the game, believe in the vision of the game, and recently discovered the creation of this project. I can understand that $375 is a lot of money for the average family. For some people that could be near a month's rent for an apartment depending on where you live. If as some people suggested starting in 2022 they sold the items separately, then I think people would buy what they wanted, and sales would definitely increase. I think if you sold each item for $5 or $10 each, you would probably make a million sales.
As Margaret Khron said in the last livestream the cosmetic sales help the team spend resources in developing the world by adding more mobs, buildings, etc. You don't have to buy them. If they wanted them to be limited addition, they could sell the items individually for $1,000 each, given them only to the original kick starter backers who pledged $2,500 or higher. I did think this is a FOMO situation. Yes, would I like to go back and purchase some of the items from past releases which I think are awesome, sure. Right now they are attached to the preorder packet. All you can do is petition the company to not attach them and sell it individually starting in 2022. Get 5000 people to vote yes, we want it changed and maybe they would want to do it. If this was all about corporate greed it would be financially better for them to sell the items for $5 each to raise capital. Steven said in the last livestream that there are already a million preorders for the game and that we have a great community. At least they are not like Star Citizen making you buy the ship in order to use it.
0
AtamaMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I check every month, if I see something I like a lot I buy it.
I don’t buy most things and most of the time I don’t buy anything.
I don’t see what’s wrong or predatory about what they’re doing.
It's not wrong or predatory at all. I'm fine with it the way it is. It does reward people who are bigger supporters, and that has merit in it's own right.
There is an argument that can be made to expand the tent though. My opinion is that that's a financial decision for Intrepid to make, which they pretty much already have. But they could reconsider it at times, which Steven probably does.
I am actually amazed at the lack of any business sense from the majority of the posts I saw in this thread.
#1 - Most of the first 5 people who responded clearly didn't even read the original post. You just felt it necessary to be on the opposing side of the argument, even though you didn't even understand the suggestion.
I did read the post and I was the first to reply. I did not agree with the OP nor did I find it necessary to enumerate my reasons.
His disdain is obvious and I didn't feel like discussing it with him and so I made my position plain.
What really needs to happen with a change in the business model, is that the six individual cosmetics need to not be locked behind a minimum $375 pay wall. Allow everyone regardless of backer level to purchase any of the six cosmetics.
I was not aware of this.
In the details for the $75 Wayfarer Pre-Order it pack it states: In addition to the cosmetic items granted with the Wayfarer Pre-Order Pack at the time of purchase, you will also be entitled to purchase future monthly cosmetics as add-ons for the Wayfarer Level Pre-Order Pack and below.
Is this not the case? Are you not allowed to buy each and every monthly cosmetic as an Add-on if you own the $75 pre-order pack?
I am actually amazed at the lack of any business sense from the majority of the posts I saw in this thread.
#1 - Most of the first 5 people who responded clearly didn't even read the original post. You just felt it necessary to be on the opposing side of the argument, even though you didn't even understand the suggestion.
What really needs to happen with a change in the business model, is that the six individual cosmetics need to not be locked behind a minimum $375 pay wall. Allow everyone regardless of backer level to purchase any of the six cosmetics.
I was not aware of this.
In the details for the $75 Wayfarer Pre-Order it pack it states: In addition to the cosmetic items granted with the Wayfarer Pre-Order Pack at the time of purchase, you will also be entitled to purchase future monthly cosmetics as add-ons for the Wayfarer Level Pre-Order Pack and below.
Is this not the case? Are you not allowed to buy each and every monthly cosmetic as an Add-on if you own the $75 pre-order pack?
You can purchase up to Wayfarer cosmetics.
In other words, you can buy any cosmetic that is in a future Wayfarer pack, but not those that are in higher tier packs.
As an example, if you had previously purchased a Wayfarer pack, you could buy the Midnight mask, but not the Stars kind pet from this month.
You ppl keep treating them cosmetics as products and not as a "thank you for the support" feature. Hence your misguided or intentional demands for a change.
Why should you be able to buy a cosmetic when the game is still on Development? They are exclusive to supporters. Deal with it.
Even if Intrepid did everything the OP wanted, the vast majority of people that are anti cosmetic sales/exclusivity would still be bitching about the solution the OP wants. So I mean...it's just up to Intrepid and what they want their cosmetic sales business model to be. It really doesn't matter that much, to me at least. I know some people take skins pretty seriously though.
You ppl keep treating them cosmetics as products and not as a "thank you for the support" feature. Hence your misguided or intentional demands for a change.
Why should you be able to buy a cosmetic when the game is still on Development? They are exclusive to supporters. Deal with it.
generating more income without risking bad PR or back lash ?
You ppl keep treating them cosmetics as products and not as a "thank you for the support" feature. Hence your misguided or intentional demands for a change.
Why should you be able to buy a cosmetic when the game is still on Development? They are exclusive to supporters. Deal with it.
generating more income without risking bad PR or back lash ?
You ppl keep treating them cosmetics as products and not as a "thank you for the support" feature. Hence your misguided or intentional demands for a change.
Why should you be able to buy a cosmetic when the game is still on Development? They are exclusive to supporters. Deal with it.
generating more income without risking bad PR or back lash ?
What bad PR?
Exactly, this has been going on for years now and the Ashes fan base has only grown.
You ppl keep treating them cosmetics as products and not as a "thank you for the support" feature. Hence your misguided or intentional demands for a change.
Why should you be able to buy a cosmetic when the game is still on Development? They are exclusive to supporters. Deal with it.
generating more income without risking bad PR or back lash ?
What bad PR?
Exactly, this has been going on for years now and the Ashes fan base has only grown.
Come on now, the two are not mutually exclusive. People aren't coming to Ashes because of the cash shop. In fact, many are turned off by it. But more people like the game more than they hate the cash shop. The FOMO nature of the shop isn't helping drive interest to the game for sure. It's one of the main points of contention for people who aren't fans of the game right now, but who otherwise might view it positively.
I want to incentivize purchase in the cosmetic shop for sustainability of what expansions we have intended, since we are not a box cost. I want to incentivize purchase by offering limited items: limited time, limited quantity, so you have confidence that when you purchase them, they won't be offered later on in some other way.
Steven is straight up saying he is using artificial scarcity to incentivize sales. That's textbook FOMO marketing. And it does work in the short term to generate sales usually. However, there is evidence to suggest it lowers loyalty and reduces repeat occurences. In other words, they are hurting themselves in the long term, even when it comes to the people who've bought a pack.
Human beings are super easy to manipulate. Trillions of dollars are spent each year to manipulate us, because it works. FOMO is one of the methods. Not everyone is affected by the same things, but we all are by something, without exception. I am sure many are not affected much by the Intrepid cash shop tactics. There are probably people reading this who are in complete denial about FOMO affecting them in general though, and you should know this: You are more easily manipulated when denying it affects you, than you are by recognizing it and making a conscious effort to resist it. Anyways, it's easy to look on google scholar and find more info on FOMO.
My main fear is they intend to keep using FOMO marketing in the cash shop after release, because I am convinced it will hurt the game compared to them not using those FOMO tactics, as per the study linked above. If they are serious about this game being fully funded already, and serious when they say "don't buy the packs", then I am sure there is a way that is less reviled by many than the current "pressure tactic-y" way, to use a Steven expression, they can do the cash shop cosmetics.
Come on now, the two are not mutually exclusive. People aren't coming to Ashes because of the cash shop. In fact, many are turned off by it. But more people like the game more than they hate the cash shop. The FOMO nature of the shop isn't helping drive interest to the game for sure. It's one of the main points of contention for people who aren't fans of the game right now, but who otherwise might view it positively.
It's like sure, fair enough.
Still, I can't help but think the Ashes model is not EA game's bad. If it was, I don't think Ashes would be growing. I have said in the past many times that philosophically I don't like cash shops of any kind. There is however a spectrum that goes from pure evil(Genshin Impact) to acceptable(Path of Exile).
Right now, many see POE as having the most acceptable cash shop in gaming. Well, POE has paid for convince in the form of "back space tabs". Ashes is pure cosmetic. POE also has all of its cosmetics look better than anything I have ever picked up in the game. Ashes is clearly better than what is already seen as the good guy in live services.
No box cost and cosmetic only is an insane amount of good will in my opinion. Asking for more just feels dirty. Especially when the risks of making an MMORPG are so high.
Steven is straight up saying he is using artificial scarcity to incentivize sales. That's textbook FOMO marketing. And it does work in the short term to generate sales usually. However, there is evidence to suggest it lowers loyalty and reduces repeat occurences. In other words, they are hurting themselves in the long term, even when it comes to the people who've bought a pack.
Human beings are super easy to manipulate. Trillions of dollars are spent each year to manipulate us, because it works. FOMO is one of the methods. Not everyone is affected by the same things, but we all are by something, without exception. I am sure many are not affected much by the Intrepid cash shop tactics. There are probably people reading this who are in complete denial about FOMO affecting them in general though, and you should know this: You are more easily manipulated when denying it affects you, than you are by recognizing it and making a conscious effort to resist it. Anyways, it's easy to look on google scholar and find more info on FOMO.
My main fear is they intend to keep using FOMO marketing in the cash shop after release, because I am convinced it will hurt the game compared to them not using those FOMO tactics, as per the study linked above. If they are serious about this game being fully funded already, and serious when they say "don't buy the packs", then I am sure there is a way that is less reviled by many than the current "pressure tactic-y" way, to use a Steven expression, they can do the cash shop cosmetics.
You're implying that the study is saying that people who give in to FOMO regret it and are less likely to do the same activity again when that's not at all what it's saying. The study essentially says that when people are doing something (attending summer school, working overtime, or at a museum) and they experience FOMO, that they are less likely to want to continue doing the activity they were currently doing.
Nothing mentioned in the study says that they participated in the activity that brought on the FOMO and then regretted it, so I feel that study has extremely minimal to no relevance to the ashes cash shop situation.
As for sticking with the same FOMO cash shop after release, I get why it's not great but I haven't seen any alternative I'd strongly prefer over the plan. The only preferable one is no cosmetic shop period, but that ship has long gone. Some alternatives:
-They could just permanently offer all offered cosmetics after release, but I think after a year or two the cash shop would start to look very bloated and seem like they are being greedy with how many cosmetics are being offered. A new player would be able to buy thousands of dollars worth of cosmetics right off the bat instead of being limited to say around $100 at a time.
-If they made the cosmetics still swap but not exclusive anymore I could be fine with that, but only if there were never any sales. Buying cosmetics and seeing them offered again later for way cheaper really sours the experience. Still wouldn't prefer this over the plan though.
I'll admit I'm pretty biased on the exclusives stuff though, as like Steven I really love having exclusive stuff.
Comments
I could agree with this, but offering cosmetics for a month is perfectly fine.
A small correction to your post though. McDonald's have the McRib as a buffer. If there is likely to be a shortage in beef, they are able to put the McRib on to soak up some of the demand for beef - as it doesn't use any. This is a function it can not serve if it were on the menu all the time.
They don't have it specifically as something to offer in a FOMO capacity, but some people do treat it as such, which leads some people to assume that is the reason it exists.
While there are indeed some products that some companies offer to try and maximize FOMO, the bulk of limited offer items are limited time for other reasons. In Ashes case, items are limited time so that players supporting the game now (when there is more risk - as the game is not released, may be delayed, may never release, may be shirt lived, or may not be to a backers taste). If there is a chance to get these same items later on, there is literally no reason to get them now, and there are actual, real reasons to get them later.
Intrepid offering items.s for a month is not an issue. People thinking they have a right to them all, however, is.
Just like OP you assumed myself and others did not read the first post. Which is false.
I later went on to fully explain that I don't think anything should be changed about the way Intrepid is doing things with the supporter packs. In doing so, OP's hatred for FOMO became even more explicit.
Did you read OPs post? It clearly has a bias with hate for FOMO. He used words like "arbitrary locked" and put the word 'exclusivity' in quotes not to quote, but to show how he disagrees with the term as used.
This to me sounds like he thinks what Intrepid is doing is malicious... Those are his words.
Yes, but the supply will be low in the future. That is the point. These cosmetics will be more valuable to the people that have them because they know they are among the few that even have a supply of them. That is the point.
The only thing I agree with about your suggestion is the removal of the $375 pay wall. Otherwise, expanding the time you have to buy parts of a pack or rotating them would devalue the packs. If I know people have three months to buy a pack or that people can just wait for them to go on sale again, then I am not buying anything from a pack like that.
It would be like if Rolex came out with a 300$ mass market watch. It would destroy the brand overnight. Rolex has been putting out fewer watches on purpose to increase the value of their watches, and that has worked. These cosmetics are the same concept. Knowing that they are limited makes them special and makes people want to buy them. Any changes to that is bad for them.
Making the sales more open is not going to just generate good will. It is just going to make people not want them as much.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
I missed a pack that I wanted bad way back because I couldn't afford it. My buddy actually got it, tho. So, I saved and set aside some money so that when another pack I liked came out I could purchase it. And I did just that. It's really not hard for someone to save the money... and if it is, then you prolly shouldn't be throwing money at the pack to begin with. Shit, it's not like it's a mystery when they'll retire a pack and release a new one.
The idea of someone actually catching FOMO over game cosmetics is laughable. /lol
I think they could do better, though, and only release 1 pack a month and have it available for only 1 week out of said month. Keep the prices the same.
As long as "rotating" does not mean the packs rotate back into being sold again, no pitchforks need to come out.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
The exclusivity thing they do is fine. The FOMO exclusivity thing they do locked behind a 375 pay wall is not so fine.
3 lines later…
@Jahlon - from everything I’ve seen we tend to see things pretty much eye to eye. I just wanted to point out that this still seems to be the case, given you explain your assertion that FOMO has nothing to do with supply and demand by showing exactly how it relates to supply and demand. 🤗
Merry Christmas (if you celebrate), keep up the good content (been following you for years).
Please explain how it is sad. Then explain how it is sad on some kind of "next level" of sad.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
I'm not defending FOMO, yet I am defending Intrepid.
In this case, FOMO is an issue in consumers, not a marketing technique Intrepid are abusing.
Intrepid limit the sale of cosmetics to one month for a very good reason, people that "suffer" from FOMO in relation to this are the ones with the issue. These are the people I am not defending, and are the people that need to fix their issue.
You are exposed to FOMO marketing constantly. Google "FOMO marketing" and you will get dozens of everyday examples like a product being on a limited time sale.
Intrepid is selling optional cosmetics so they can run a business and make the game. It's really not a big deal if you have self control. Don't like it? Then don't buy it.
They make the self-control part really easy, too. We have not had a pack I like since June 2021. Every month I excited to see what the new pack is, and every month it's not my cup of tea.
If they went to quarterly sales, I don't think I would end up buying anything most years. It's already rare I like something in a given four-month period.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
In a word: 'Variety'; There are variations on every Cash Shop set that is to come out. This means that the NPCs' in-game wardrobe is already FAR more-vast than most MMORPGs'. Not only does this ensure that a broader universe of personal customization is open to us as players - but it also means that our game world's NPCs will possess a richer, more-varied wardrobe. The knights and Captains giving out quests? Yeah, I'd like to remember them well, when they re-occur later in the story by their unique appearances - instead of vaguely recalling these characters based on a facial feature, since their armor is all nearly the same.
When people decry customization-type work versus other developmental processes? Just think about this: Are the graphic artists at Intrepid all also universally software-and-system engineers? Just because the people who have been outputting so much customization work over these years are *on* the Dev team, it doesn't mean that they are doing (or even *can* do) the same things that people like the engineers are doing. Yes: You might free up a couple dozen people by taking them off the Graphic Artists' team - but do you really think that they know how to code a UE5 game engine asset that will mark the border of a Node and report to the back-end that specific Node's to-the-minute activity metrics?
There's no need to wind-down the Art production of AoC in favor of advancing other areas. I know some of you are eager for the game to be out - but this effort really should be made to be worth the wait. It might feel like FOMO to have specific appearance gear only be available in Pre-Launch - but anytime this issue is raised, it feels like it's always from someone who hasn't had enough exposure to information on the topic. Case-and-point? The "best-looking" variant of each outfit is supposed to be in-game achievable through looting and deeds. We won't be able to color gear (beyond matching to a central piece's color-theme), either - which leaves plenty of opportunity for a slightly-different color or shade of the same piece of appearance gear to be epically earned via deeds and questing - instead of being bought.
there were times I saw an item or 2 in some of their monthly packs but didn't purchase them because I didn't like the rest of the pack and couldn't justify spending 375 on a pack I'll only use a single item from.
Doing this would also be a show of good faith and act as a way to facilitate the marketing team's job and put ashes in a good light in front of the MMO community, in addition to deflecting some of the complaints that some people had while talking about ashes.
and just to clarify, I do own the dying of the light pack, so it's not as if I'm not interested in the cosmetics.
In a sense maybe they already can, buy the 75 dollar package and just keep buying from there. But what if the skin sales were just opened up period, for anyone, at any amount?
I think we'd see more sales. But maybe less too because part of the exclusivity aspect of it would be gone. It's up to Intrepid to determine what makes for a better stream of revenue. I want Intrepid to make as much money as possible, with a strong caveat of as long as it's not in predatory or otherwise sketchy ways. Which I don't think it is right now.
I say I'm sympathetic to the OP, and I am. But at the same time I don't really care. And I thank God for blessing me to not care about skins.
But his post is a far cry from the constant nonsensical anti cosmetic posts we see on reddit. Worth at least thinking about I think.
As Margaret Khron said in the last livestream the cosmetic sales help the team spend resources in developing the world by adding more mobs, buildings, etc. You don't have to buy them. If they wanted them to be limited addition, they could sell the items individually for $1,000 each, given them only to the original kick starter backers who pledged $2,500 or higher. I did think this is a FOMO situation. Yes, would I like to go back and purchase some of the items from past releases which I think are awesome, sure. Right now they are attached to the preorder packet. All you can do is petition the company to not attach them and sell it individually starting in 2022. Get 5000 people to vote yes, we want it changed and maybe they would want to do it. If this was all about corporate greed it would be financially better for them to sell the items for $5 each to raise capital. Steven said in the last livestream that there are already a million preorders for the game and that we have a great community. At least they are not like Star Citizen making you buy the ship in order to use it.
I don’t buy most things and most of the time I don’t buy anything.
I don’t see what’s wrong or predatory about what they’re doing.
There is an argument that can be made to expand the tent though. My opinion is that that's a financial decision for Intrepid to make, which they pretty much already have. But they could reconsider it at times, which Steven probably does.
I did read the post and I was the first to reply. I did not agree with the OP nor did I find it necessary to enumerate my reasons.
His disdain is obvious and I didn't feel like discussing it with him and so I made my position plain.
I was not aware of this.
In the details for the $75 Wayfarer Pre-Order it pack it states: In addition to the cosmetic items granted with the Wayfarer Pre-Order Pack at the time of purchase, you will also be entitled to purchase future monthly cosmetics as add-ons for the Wayfarer Level Pre-Order Pack and below.
Is this not the case? Are you not allowed to buy each and every monthly cosmetic as an Add-on if you own the $75 pre-order pack?
You can purchase up to Wayfarer cosmetics.
In other words, you can buy any cosmetic that is in a future Wayfarer pack, but not those that are in higher tier packs.
As an example, if you had previously purchased a Wayfarer pack, you could buy the Midnight mask, but not the Stars kind pet from this month.
Why should you be able to buy a cosmetic when the game is still on Development? They are exclusive to supporters. Deal with it.
generating more income without risking bad PR or back lash ?
What bad PR?
Exactly, this has been going on for years now and the Ashes fan base has only grown.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
Come on now, the two are not mutually exclusive. People aren't coming to Ashes because of the cash shop. In fact, many are turned off by it. But more people like the game more than they hate the cash shop. The FOMO nature of the shop isn't helping drive interest to the game for sure. It's one of the main points of contention for people who aren't fans of the game right now, but who otherwise might view it positively.
Steven is straight up saying he is using artificial scarcity to incentivize sales. That's textbook FOMO marketing. And it does work in the short term to generate sales usually. However, there is evidence to suggest it lowers loyalty and reduces repeat occurences. In other words, they are hurting themselves in the long term, even when it comes to the people who've bought a pack.
Human beings are super easy to manipulate. Trillions of dollars are spent each year to manipulate us, because it works. FOMO is one of the methods. Not everyone is affected by the same things, but we all are by something, without exception. I am sure many are not affected much by the Intrepid cash shop tactics. There are probably people reading this who are in complete denial about FOMO affecting them in general though, and you should know this: You are more easily manipulated when denying it affects you, than you are by recognizing it and making a conscious effort to resist it. Anyways, it's easy to look on google scholar and find more info on FOMO.
My main fear is they intend to keep using FOMO marketing in the cash shop after release, because I am convinced it will hurt the game compared to them not using those FOMO tactics, as per the study linked above. If they are serious about this game being fully funded already, and serious when they say "don't buy the packs", then I am sure there is a way that is less reviled by many than the current "pressure tactic-y" way, to use a Steven expression, they can do the cash shop cosmetics.
It's like sure, fair enough.
Still, I can't help but think the Ashes model is not EA game's bad. If it was, I don't think Ashes would be growing. I have said in the past many times that philosophically I don't like cash shops of any kind. There is however a spectrum that goes from pure evil(Genshin Impact) to acceptable(Path of Exile).
Right now, many see POE as having the most acceptable cash shop in gaming. Well, POE has paid for convince in the form of "back space tabs". Ashes is pure cosmetic. POE also has all of its cosmetics look better than anything I have ever picked up in the game. Ashes is clearly better than what is already seen as the good guy in live services.
No box cost and cosmetic only is an insane amount of good will in my opinion. Asking for more just feels dirty. Especially when the risks of making an MMORPG are so high.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
You're implying that the study is saying that people who give in to FOMO regret it and are less likely to do the same activity again when that's not at all what it's saying. The study essentially says that when people are doing something (attending summer school, working overtime, or at a museum) and they experience FOMO, that they are less likely to want to continue doing the activity they were currently doing.
Nothing mentioned in the study says that they participated in the activity that brought on the FOMO and then regretted it, so I feel that study has extremely minimal to no relevance to the ashes cash shop situation.
As for sticking with the same FOMO cash shop after release, I get why it's not great but I haven't seen any alternative I'd strongly prefer over the plan. The only preferable one is no cosmetic shop period, but that ship has long gone. Some alternatives:
-They could just permanently offer all offered cosmetics after release, but I think after a year or two the cash shop would start to look very bloated and seem like they are being greedy with how many cosmetics are being offered. A new player would be able to buy thousands of dollars worth of cosmetics right off the bat instead of being limited to say around $100 at a time.
-If they made the cosmetics still swap but not exclusive anymore I could be fine with that, but only if there were never any sales. Buying cosmetics and seeing them offered again later for way cheaper really sours the experience. Still wouldn't prefer this over the plan though.
I'll admit I'm pretty biased on the exclusives stuff though, as like Steven I really love having exclusive stuff.