Options

Monetization

IridiannyIridianny Member
edited February 2022 in General Discussion
I am really discouraged to hear that the monetization will be coming from cosmetics. Cosmetics are a big part of the immersion of an mmorpg for me, a long-time role player. Having to pay for cosmetics with real money takes player customization out of the game and makes me enjoy it less.
Player customization is one of the most important features of a game for me. I don't necessarily mean face sliders either! I mean collecting things in game that are unique and special to my character. Collection is a huge feature to me in any mmorpg, but I do not like to pay extra for it as it feels like the fun of playing the game...
Things like outfits, house items, pets, and mounts are what I am assuming is going to be monetized. I feel that this added art could be continuously compensated fairly through a monthly fee.
These things add to the experience of playing the game... like rare items, specialty clothing shops, achievement items, etc.
It gives more to do in the game itself when specialty cosmetic items are earned. A monthly subscription fee is something many mmo players are comfortable and willing to pay for an engaging game. I would be willing to pay more than the average for a game with consistent "free" cosmetics being added to collect!
«13456789

Comments

  • Options
    tautautautau Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    I believe there will also be in-game 'earned only' cosmetic type items and gear.
  • Options
    tautau wrote: »
    I believe there will also be in-game 'earned only' cosmetic type items and gear.

    That's good, but it doesn't remove the issue I find with paid for cosmetics.
  • Options
    When I have played an mmo and I have seen someone on a purchased mount I personally think, "oh that person paid extra for that." I'd much rather think, "oh that person found a rare creature or worked really hard on their animal husbandry skill and perhaps has them for sale! I should interact with them."

    I know there are a large amount of people who aren't concerned with cosmetics at all, and all they care for is gameplay. I have read many opinions where they are more concerned with pay to win because being behind unfairly bothers them. Which is a fair issue to have. Pay to win has the same negative feeling that pay for cosmetics does to a player like me.
    Also, I don't think that is the point of this mmo is to be the best at combat skill, I am fairly sure there are many ways to progress, like just owning a tavern. In that case, there are many types of players who will enjoy this game! You can see what type of player you are using the Bartle test here: https://matthewbarr.co.uk/bartle/

    ALL types of players should be accounted for in monetization and how it affects their experience.

    If there must be two paths of revenue, box price and monthly fee sounds great to me! Doesn't affect any type of players. <3
  • Options
    TalentsTalents Member, Intrepid Pack
    edited February 2022
    Iridianny wrote: »
    When I have played an mmo and I have seen someone on a purchased mount I personally think, "oh that person paid extra for that." I'd much rather think, "oh that person found a rare creature or worked really hard on their animal husbandry skill and perhaps has them for sale! I should interact with them."

    I know there are a large amount of people who aren't concerned with cosmetics at all, and all they care for is gameplay. I have read many opinions where they are more concerned with pay to win because being behind unfairly bothers them. Which is a fair issue to have. Pay to win has the same negative feeling that pay for cosmetics does to a player like me.
    Also, I don't think that is the point of this mmo is to be the best at combat skill, I am fairly sure there are many ways to progress, like just owning a tavern. In that case, there are many types of players who will enjoy this game! You can see what type of player you are using the Bartle test here: https://matthewbarr.co.uk/bartle/

    ALL types of players should be accounted for in monetization and how it affects their experience.

    If there must be two paths of revenue, box price and monthly fee sounds great to me! Doesn't affect any type of players. <3

    Steven's reasoning for not having box cost + sub. https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/comment/271565#Comment_271565
    nI17Ea4.png
  • Options
    Some people don't want to pay the box cost and some others prefer not having a subscription. Some prefer light monetization from cosmetics, other don't want them at all.

    In the end, your singular distate for them is not going to alter the entirety of their revenue stream and business model.

    There will still be plenty of gear and mounts (if not the absolute majority of it) that will solely be acquirable through gameplay. Other skins will only be able to be applied to already owned mounts/gear. For example: you go the Hippopotamus mount, with the default palanquin on top. The cosmetic would simply alter the look of the palanquin and other decorations.

    As I understand it, store mounts are mostly being sold right now as a way to entice people to ge the alpha and beta keys. I'm not sure if there has been word on any mounts being sold in the store after launch. The way I understand it, they will sell skins for your existing mounts.

    And again, as they often remind us: Equitable cosmetics, both from a quantity and quality standpoint, are achievable through in-game means.
    Sig-ult-2.png
  • Options
    They don't want the price of a box set to be a barrier to people playing the game. Hence, they are not charging $60 for the game, nor are they charging $30-40 for expansions. You pay $15 a month to play. If you don't like the game, you are out $15. Steven has said you don't need to preorder the game. The cosmetics help with the creatures and give more variety to the world. They have said that players will be able to obtain similar quality outfits from raiding and world bosses. So, if you like the white outfit from January, buy it. There will be other good outfits to EARN. We are playing Ashes of Creation, not Fashion Fashion Revolution.
  • Options
    Asgerr wrote: »
    Some people don't want to pay the box cost and some others prefer not having a subscription. Some prefer light monetization from cosmetics, other don't want them at all.

    In the end, your singular distate for them is not going to alter the entirety of their revenue stream and business model.

    It is early days of this game, if they were to change things, now would be the time. They seem receptive to feedback actually! I am offering a counter perspective on behalf of the people who prefer no cosmetic monetization as it affects their experience with the game.
    Like I said, pay to win affects a type of player and pay for cosmetics affects another. Both are equally important and if one isn't being considered neither should the other. Box price affects no type of player.
  • Options
    IridiannyIridianny Member
    edited February 2022
    Boanergese wrote: »
    We are playing Ashes of Creation, not Fashion Fashion Revolution.

    Then why offer it at all? How is fashion, being the mayor of a city, mount skins, armor, combat skill level, etc. any more important than another part? It is all part of the same game. There are different types of players.

    If you feel this way then perhaps you'd be okay with pay to win as well? There are no ranks on who is the best player on a server, so why not allow people to pay for skills and higher levels? Perhaps they want to get to the end where they can finally play the "fashion fashion revolution" part of the game at max level.

    Actually pay to win would probably be a betterform of revenue as many more people are willing to pay for higher levels than fashion, like you said.
  • Options
    Iridianny wrote: »
    Asgerr wrote: »
    Some people don't want to pay the box cost and some others prefer not having a subscription. Some prefer light monetization from cosmetics, other don't want them at all.

    In the end, your singular distate for them is not going to alter the entirety of their revenue stream and business model.

    It is early days of this game, if they were to change things, now would be the time. They seem receptive to feedback actually! I am offering a counter perspective on behalf of the people who prefer no cosmetic monetization as it affects their experience with the game.
    Like I said, pay to win affects a type of player and pay for cosmetics affects another. Both are equally important and if one isn't being considered neither should the other. Box price affects no type of player.

    Trust me on this: your point has been made for the past 4 years at the very least.
    Sig-ult-2.png
  • Options
    No, what you are saying is you need to accommodate me personally and my preference of wanting transmogs to be unique and earned. What I am saying is 98% of the population are not collectors. They may want to have a nice outfit to look good, but they are playing the game for the PVE, PVP, Crafting, etc. You are like the 100th person to start a post like this. Check the forums. If they were to stop this now or undue the purchases, then they would upset the other part of the community. They have been selling monthly packs for 2-3 years. They are not going to allow people to go back and get the old packs. I was doing a meme from Dance Dance Revolution if you didn't pick that up. The end game is not your outfit. Additionally, as I told you, when you get tier 5 plate armor like Steven showed in the last developer discussion video people will know you have accomplished something by getting the armor from whatever drops it. People are buy the Alpha/Beta access who believe in the project and choose to support it. Steven has said a billion times there is no pay to win.
  • Options
    Boanergese wrote: »
    You are like the 100th person to start a post like this. Check the forums.

    :* Seems like it's important to many of their player base, before the game is even out yet, and should be taken more seriously.
  • Options
    IridiannyIridianny Member
    edited February 2022
    Boanergese wrote: »
    Steven has said a billion times there is no pay to win.

    Sure, but maybe they should replace pay for cosmetics for pay to win is what I am saying. It would make them a lot more money if having multiple revenue streams is important and it doesn't ostracize players that enjoy cosmetics and social gameplay. They are unfairly putting the burden of monetization on the socializer type players who will:
    1. Be the first to build a community in the game.
    2. Are more likely to pay for cosmetics due to social pressure.
    3. Are the reason to create an mmorpg and not just an rpg.
  • Options
    Taleof2CitiesTaleof2Cities Member
    edited February 2022
    Iridianny wrote: »
    Boanergese wrote: »
    Steven has said a billion times there is no pay to win.

    Sure, but maybe they should replace pay for cosmetics for pay to win is what I am saying. It would make them a lot more money if having multiple revenue streams is important and it doesn't ostracize players that enjoy cosmetics and social gameplay.

    If you're weighing pay for cosmetics versus pay to win ... pay for cosmetics is the lesser evil by a country mile.

    It's not even close.
  • Options
    IridiannyIridianny Member
    edited February 2022
    pay for cosmetics is the lesser evil by a country mile.
    It's not even close.


    Why? Why weigh it like that rather than doing a different type of monetization that isn't evil and doesn't affect an entire player type?
  • Options
    Iridianny wrote: »
    pay for cosmetics is the lesser evil by a country mile.
    It's not even close.


    Why? Why weigh it like that rather than doing a different type of monetization that isn't evil and doesn't affect an entire player type?

    Because cosmetics are purely optional ... they don't affect gameplay at all. There's no requirement for players to buy them and no competitive advantage.

    If pay for cosmetics were removed, how do you propose the game pay for itself, @Iridianny?

    I hope your answer isn't just the monthly sub. That won't be enough to sustain the servers much less new content.
  • Options
    Iridianny wrote: »
    pay for cosmetics is the lesser evil by a country mile.
    It's not even close.


    Why? Why weigh it like that rather than doing a different type of monetization that isn't evil and doesn't affect an entire player type?

    You can't be that dense....

    To quote myself answering to you on a different thread:

    Box price affects far more people, in that someone may not have 60 bucks to fork out up front for a game they might not like after a bit. Meanwhile with no box cost, you only pay 15 bucks one month and you get the choice to carry on or not depending on your enjoyment. You literally get to experience 4 months of the game for the price of a box-cost game.

    Just because you're able to pay those 60 up front, doesn't mean everyone can. tAke eVeRyoNe iNtO aCcOunt, smh

    As for P2W: it means that if you don't pay you can't compete and you can't progress. This hurts everyone. Because everyone is either left to leave the game or force to pay to actually enjoy the game.

    Pay for cosmetics (P4C?) only asks that if you don't like what the gear you have looks like, and you like the look of a particular item in the cosmetic store, you can buy it. It affects literally no one else.

    If you can't handle seeing someone looking a little different from you, because their armor is white and you can't get the white version in game.... you have a whole different level of mental issues.

    You are not forced to buy cosmetics to play and look good. You are if you try to enforce P2W. Which in your ideal world it would mean: 60€ for the game + 15€/month + P2W items.

    Sounds like you're just someone that's unhappy that others may look better than you.... MAY!
    Sig-ult-2.png
  • Options
    George_BlackGeorge_Black Member, Intrepid Pack
    edited February 2022
    I dont like cosmetics either. I prefer it the old way, when you'd see a knight in spectacular armor and know straight away he/she is high lv.

    But come on.... It's 2022. You cant expect video games not to capitalize on cosmetics. Did you rly need to start such a topic?


    In AoC cosmetics will have grades. You wont be able to equip a high grade cosmetic if your gear is low. You wont be able to wear robe and slap a heavy armor cosmetic. And lastly, I have yet to see a good looking cosmetic that will make me say "I wish the ingame sets are like this."
  • Options
    GeronimoGeronimo Member
    edited February 2022
    @George_Black mostly right on all counts, except for the heavy armor over robe bit, I recently found out that is a thing
  • Options
    George_BlackGeorge_Black Member, Intrepid Pack
    You cant hide robe item with heavy cosmetic.
  • Options
    If pay for cosmetics were removed, how do you propose the game pay for itself, @Iridianny?

    I hope your answer isn't just the monthly sub. That won't be enough to sustain the servers much less new content.

    Do you run an MMO with a monthly sub and know the revenue and budgets? Do you know for sure it's not enough? I have suggested a higher monthly sub than the average and a box price. This takes the burden of monetization off of cosmetics. Doesn't have to be $15 and $60 like WOW! There are tons of options, and they could do a one week free trial to remove the entry barrier. They already have received money through paying up to $500 to play alpha and beta, which... is kind of a box price... so they aren't completely against the idea.
  • Options
    Because cosmetics are purely optional ... they don't affect gameplay at all. There's no requirement for players to buy them and no competitive advantage.

    This does affect some players. Many players find cosmetics to be important to their gameplay experience and would rather it not be monetized.
  • Options
    Asgerr wrote: »
    You can't be that dense....

    No need to be rude about this, it's just a discussion about a video game.
    Asgerr wrote: »
    To quote myself answering to you on a different thread:

    Box price affects far more people, in that someone may not have 60 bucks to fork out up front for a game they might not like after a bit. Meanwhile with no box cost, you only pay 15 bucks one month and you get the choice to carry on or not depending on your enjoyment. You literally get to experience 4 months of the game for the price of a box-cost game.

    Just because you're able to pay those 60 up front, doesn't mean everyone can. tAke eVeRyoNe iNtO aCcOunt, smh

    Doesn't have to be $15 and $60 like WOW! There are tons of options. Higher monthly fees and smaller box price. Also, they could do a one week free trial to remove the entry barrier.
    Asgerr wrote: »
    As for P2W: it means that if you don't pay you can't compete and you can't progress. This hurts everyone. Because everyone is either left to leave the game or force to pay to actually enjoy the game.

    Pay for cosmetics (P4C?) only asks that if you don't like what the gear you have looks like, and you like the look of a particular item in the cosmetic store, you can buy it. It affects literally no one else.

    I am not advocating for p2w, but do you see how you felt and reacted when it was suggested? You assume that p4c doesn't affect anyone because you don't care and couldn't possibly see a different perspective from the way you play an mmorpg.
    Asgerr wrote: »
    If you can't handle seeing someone looking a little different from you, because their armor is white and you can't get the white version in game.... you have a whole different level of mental issues.

    You are not forced to buy cosmetics to play and look good. You are if you try to enforce P2W. Which in your ideal world it would mean: 60€ for the game + 15€/month + P2W items.

    Sounds like you're just someone that's unhappy that others may look better than you.... MAY!

    This is not true. I could care less what other players look like. I am talking about what I enjoy in a game in regards to my character and how it feels a bit unfair to put the burden of monetization on players who enjoy collecting cosmetics. If you read my original post you may understand.

  • Options
    NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    You cant hide robe item with heavy cosmetic.

    You can if you use full costumes. There are no restrictions for them.
  • Options
    tautautautau Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Every time there is an 'anti-buy cosmetics' thread, I go to the store and buy some cosmetics.
  • Options
    IridiannyIridianny Member
    edited February 2022
    I dont like cosmetics either. I prefer it the old way, when you'd see a knight in spectacular armor and know straight away he/she is high lv.

    Yes! That's the perspective I am trying to offer. If many people feel this way, why can't we express it? We are the consumers, producers cater to us.
    But come on.... It's 2022. You cant expect video games not to capitalize on cosmetics. Did yoy rly need to start such a topic?

    Why can't it be discussed? It's 2022 and this game wants to be "a breath of fresh air" to mmorpgs. So perhaps they could consider doing something different and not put the burden of monetization on players who enjoy cosmetic collection as part of their game experience.
  • Options
    tautau wrote: »
    Every time there is an 'anti-buy cosmetics' thread, I go to the store and buy some cosmetics.

    Okay? I am simply offering a counter perspective to monetization, but it sure is interesting that it sparked you to spend money.
  • Options
    tautautautau Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    @Iridianny I admit I'm odd like that.
  • Options
    GeronimoGeronimo Member
    edited February 2022
  • Options
    Cosmetics are whatever and honestly, after the last stream, the in-game gear looks FAR better than anything they've put up for sale within the past year. If anything, they need a new person to be in charge of the art direction for them because it's horrible and because of that, I'd take a $25 monthly sub over the god awful cosmetics. It'd increase the bar of entry for the game by quite a bit, but at least the game will look better for it.
    tautau wrote: »
    Every time there is an 'anti-buy cosmetics' thread, I go to the store and buy some cosmetics.

    I'd agree, if they were actually good.
  • Options
    Iridianny wrote: »
    Because cosmetics are purely optional ... they don't affect gameplay at all. There's no requirement for players to buy them and no competitive advantage.

    This does affect some players. Many players find cosmetics to be important to their gameplay experience and would rather it not be monetized.

    From a combat perspective it doesn't affect the gameplay experience though.

    I don't see Steven changing a fundamental part of the game's revenue stream ... due to "gameplay experience" as it relates only to cosmetic appearance.
Sign In or Register to comment.