Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!
Options
Common Sense
Iridianny
Member
Reposting some common sense after being berated for suggesting that cash shops suck. Good to see the direction AoC is going with their community. No room for discussion. Regardless of the bartle test's "authenticity" people still play mmo's in a variety of ways whether you want them to or not. Now, I know it's hard to imagine... but not everyone agrees with:
Some people enjoy playing the game....several dozen hours of effort in order to get leveled up to the level cap - which is where I consider the game to begin.
I agree completely. I don't think anyone commenting on this thread has any sort of idea what a true MMORPG experience should be. All of you beside OP seem to only see games as these virtual accomplishment factories, where daddy Steven can give you all hard earned points without P2W but fail to see how the cosmetic model only forces P2W one of the four player types of an MMO. Anyone who has a slight grasp on how an MMO should be designed knows that you need to meet the needs of all four types of players.
Adding a cosmetic shop puts an unfair social pressure on the social player type to spend their money to look the coolest while they're roleplaying or socializing in the game. You are all so worried about having P2W affect your favorite aspect that you're all quick to forget about the socializers point of view.
Let's imagine a similar situation from the achievers perspective. There is a shop but all you can buy are achievements in game that you can't otherwise complete without spending your real world money. To the Socializer this doesn't matter at all and has no effect on the game they're playing. The killer player type doesn't care because they only want to kill other players and the explorers don't care as long as they don't have to pay to explore new areas.
Let's imagine it again from the explorers perspective, the cosmetic shop is now the Lands shop. It doesn't add any new gameplay but it does add massive lands to explore but you can find all the same materials in the non-paid for area. It doesn't achieve anything for your account besides giving you new places to visit. The only ones who would really care in this situation are the players who love to just explore games.
Let's now imagine one more time from the perspective of the killer player type. The cosmetic shop is now the Kill Shop. You can buy tokens that allow you to kill players and that's the only gameplay change, it only affects players who like to engage in PVP. The socializers don't care because they're not killing players, the achievers don't care as long as they don't have to kill players to achieve something and the explorers really could care less, in fact they'd sing it's praises because it means they'll less likely to get killed while exploring.
We can see that in all of these situations we've unfairly placed the P2W model on 1/4th of our playerbase.
It's true it's too late to change it for this game which is why I don't think this is the pinnacle of MMOs by any means.
Not thinking of Socializers gameplay decisions and just saying we can't have better is very closed minded.
The excuse that a box price and subscription makes the barrier of entry to high is really a cop out. Ashes could charge $100 entry + $30 subscription fee and they'd be perfectly fine. The fact that people can't stomach a slight price increase to not have a cash shop baffles me. Subscriptions have been $15/mo since 2004 while everything else has gone up in price. $30/mo is not a lot of money for someone with a fulltime job. People pay $200/mo for cable ffs.
There are plenty of other ways to allow players to try the game without paying the box price or the subscription, you guys just eat up the corporate bullshit though. Like actually letting them just try the game, if it's actually good then it will have no problem hooking them in the first few levels. I hate that argument that you have to play an MMO for 100+ hours to start to see the fun. That's just another cop out for poor game design.
This place is going to be just like the WoW forums but instead of a bunch of brainwashed blizzard shills it will be a bunch of unaccomplished losers who worship Steven and see him as some sort of God.
If you've already spent money on this game, that doesn't even have a release date, then you're already lost. That's like paying for a meal you can't eat for 5 years because the chef needs help funding his dream to build a kitchen first and then he will make all the meals, he promises, and it will be like the best meal you've ever eaten in your entire life.
Because the game was founded from the beginning on...All of the people who pledged many thousands of dollars..
0
Comments
Seriously asking. I never saw the 'Achiever' concept as being based on that in a test or assessment of players so I appreciate the data.
A followup question. Is it the exclusivity of any given 'Achievement' that matters?
My guess is that how you're trying to have a conversation is shaping the conversation you're attempting to have. For instance, if this is an example of a 'common sense' perspective, you're not going to gain much ground
Someone who believes they have the one, true list of 'thou shalts' for what constitutes the pure mmo is just adhering to a flimsy dogma with a congregation of one. Attempting to wrestle folks with a bunch of shoulds and should nots, and expecting them to see your perspective, isn't a winning strategy.
Talk about common sense...
Different people find different things fun. More people may enjoy raiding than do fishing, but you can enjoy both. Fishing and raiding don't really interfere with each other. We could make a long list of things people consider 'fun'.
Where the discussion gets most interesting is where one person's fun detracts from another person's fun, like with griefing or excessive PKing, which some people enjoy. Where this is a widespread problem, like with PKing, the game designers restrict it with things like the corruption system. Other people enjoy cheating, which (we most sincerely hope) will get them quickly perma-banned.
Some conflicts are less easy to understand, such as people who are irritated by role-playing.
My point here is, appealing to common sense rarely ends well
There's too much subjection in the world to try and cater to everyone. The problem is that if we are to balance the scales the way you want to, it just won't work.
Lets add another type to your archetypes: The Whale. Okay so you've removed the cash shop, so now the Fashionista is happy. But you have now taken away the one thing that makes the Whale Happy - being able to spend their money for satisfaction. Or perhaps instead of the Whale, it might be The Workaholic. Or The Casual. They don't have the time to earn these rewards and it would just give them the satisfaction of looking at least as cool as their counterparts if they could purchase that cool set, so that they may better use their sparse time on other elements.
Can you truly say that there are no people out there that actually want a cash shop that you think won't feel they are missing out?
There is no P2W. Achieving all the set has to be done in-game. Any cosmetics that apply to those don't negate your achievement. Any other costumes from the store don't count for your achievement.
So stop being a baby throwing his toys out of the pram because someone might wanna have a costume that you don't wanna buy.
Your repeated ide of adding a box cost (which would be around 60 bucks) is far more limiting on all types of players, than a cosmetic only store is.
So just stop. If this game doesn't align with your goals or ideals of gameplay loop/achievements, you're allowed to not like the game and not play it.
If you wanna be an adult, and realise that you can still fulfill your goals without resorting to the cosmetic store, and that other players will maybe use the store whilst their ideal achievements differ, then perhaps you have a place to play.
I suggested that there be a higher sub fee and a box cost with a week trial to remove barrier of entry. Then the scales aren't really tipped, they are neutral. As Franquito said, "Ashes could charge $100 entry + $30 subscription fee and they'd be perfectly fine. The fact that people can't stomach a slight price increase to not have a cash shop baffles me. Subscriptions have been $15/mo since 2004 while everything else has gone up in price. $30/mo is not a lot of money for someone with a fulltime job. People pay $200/mo for cable ffs."
This logic supports pay to win, too. The Workaholic and The Casual would want to log in sometimes to play with friends, but wouldn't be able to play with friends at a high level. They are likely more concerned with that than looking cool.
No, just that it takes advantage of a singular player type. There are plenty of alternatives that could be offered to meet all needs. Regardless, cash shops are a slippery slope and always have more negatives than positives on an mmo and the player base.
I see people trying to shut it down the same way I see people that are trying to slow down the development of the game. I start to suspect you work for Amazon or something.
That is a possible explanation for the hate you are getting.
Is a cash shop during the development period as a form of reward for investment fine? Yes. I am talking about it for the future of the game after it's released. Also, the game was fully funded.
And yet they won’t pay more. The game will fail if you double the subscription. I’m not even 100% sure that the $15 a month sub is viable long-term. I’ve played so many games that started with a sub and went free to play, because that was the only way to have enough players and enough revenue to keep the game going.
What makes Ashes different from a revenue standpoint is having no box cost, and instead having a totally optional shop with no pay to win. Will that work? I hope so.
Changing any of that will probably make the game fail. Raise the subscription or ask for a box cost, people lose interest.
It might still not work, but I hope it will.
You're making a whole of assumptions about what people can afford or care to pay for a game. If this game charged me 130€ just to even start playing, I would never play it. I'm sure a lot of other people would find themselves in this situation.
The goal is to get as many people as possible in the game and retain them. Making it cost 100€ before you ever get to play is going to limit the former. Increasing subscription is going to limit the latter.
And all this, just so you don't feel bad about someone having a look that you can't have.... You sound like a majorly entitled person with far too much money to waste on games. You decide to not spend it how Intrepid has decided to fund their game.
Plus, as nice as a box cost is for you, if you decide to remove a sub, then you're losing money past the initial player acquisition point. Not to account for further box costs every time there is an expansion.
I would rather get good expansions for free whilst paying my 15€ a month, and have cosmetics in an easily ignorable store, than spend upwards of 60€ every time an expansion comes out.
Anecdotal evidence that some can afford to pay more at all levels is a very poor argument.
If the game uses their resources to create a game that appeals to a variety of long term players, (yes, that includes the "fashionistas" or "socializers" or "roleplayers") then they will have no trouble keeping a player base willing to pay a reasonable price a month. A lot of people enjoy mmo's but are disappointed with the way they currently are offered. Many of complaints of retail wow and runescape 3 can often be tied to cash shops. I hope they keep their promise that the cash shop wont become pay to win as well. However, once it's released who know what will happen. A lot of game companies sell. Blizzard just did, too.
Do you know what the biggest fashionista MMO game is right now? FFXIV. FFXIV has a cosmetic store as well. And some of the cosmetics are also time limited.
The game is booming. I don't think the cash shop is the doom, you portray it to be, for fashionistas.
Actually, you sound entitled. You'd rather the game you enjoy be funded by the part of the player base who enjoys rp, than for you to pay a reasonable amount to compensate the work of creating an expansion of a game you'd have hundreds of hours playing by that point. You also missed where I suggested a free "week trial to remove barrier of entry."
I am meerly suggesting that it could be different. I don't know why you are so set on the point that it can't be. There's no reason to be upset by differing ideas and suggestions to the current model of monetization of a game that isn't released yet.
I'm paying the prices the company sets. Monthly. With expansions usually being every 2-3 years, that's up to 72 months of subscription. Far more than your proposed box cost.
I'm not making any demands to pay less than it's worth. If Intrepid set that price, it means they made projections with that in mind. And they set the price point. I'm meeting them.
There is no entitlement there. I'm paying what they think should be paid.
A free week trial is not gonna get people to pay 130€ to play past the week's end. At best they'll create a different account to try all classes and then be done with it.
Support is even more relevant after the game is released, it doesn't stay "fully funded" indefinitely.
I would much rather pay my own hard-earned money towards the art direction that I personally like than to an increase in sub-cost, at least there is some basis to it. That's my opinion, but I believe I AM fully entitled to that opinion because it is my money after all.
The basis of paying more for a sub is because you enjoy the game overall. Then they could add more art to the game as a whole and not a mount skin here and there.
What about WoW's transmog system? Say wow didn't have a cash shop and was just a box cost + sub. Do you think WoWs transmog system would ruin the game?
I ask this because this is how i see cosmetics. I don't see them as achievements, i see them as cosmetics that are easy to get, similar to sets from older wow raids that can be easily solo farmed. Do you see that as ruining the game?
Even with that, there is still gear that is rare like gladiator set and other gear/mounts that were only attainable by completing difficult challenges during a certain time.
I dislike wow's transmog system for many reasons, yes. It takes novelty out of gear and gear collection. An awesome item or set used to mean you achieved something, now it means you grinded a poorly scaled dungeon at max level for a transmog and or you paid for it.
The devs that make the art that I personally DISLIKE in the game would be equally funded and no one could tell the difference. It's much better to be able to support what you like.
Yea, I used to see it that way too but these days, I see most MMO achievements as a function of time. It's not because things have gotten easier but the playerbase has matured and everyone has gotten better. I think classic wow proved this.
If you played classic wow, did you ever get this feeling again?
Me saying that the game starts at the level cap is an issue with me, not an issue with the game or the games design.
It is my problem that I need to come to terms with on my own.
This is the same as your issue with the cash shop. It is your issue that you need to come to terms with on your own.
Basically, the cosmetic only cash shop is a thing, and if you want to play this game, you need to come to terms with that.
Except this isn't what you are doing.
You are trying to tell us all that the cash shop could cause the death of the game, when empirical evidence outright declares that it will not. That isn't just suggesting that it could suck
If it is discussion that you want, then that is what you are getting. The thing you were perhaps not expecting is that basically everyone here is against your suggestions. I take it that by discussion, you were expecting everyone to digitally high five you as soon as you said that cash shops suck, as if you broke some spell or said some magic word that we were all afraid of.
then your opinion is chucked out the window. You will never be taken seriously when you try and argue that Intrepid should add P2W to the shop instead of cosmetics. Honestly probably the worst take I've seen. Dumb as fuck.
I do and absolutely! I’ve played the rerelease into tbc on an rp server. I was also upset when they added boosts for tbc, not because play to win really affects the way I enjoy to play, but because cash shops are almost always negative.
It was a hypothetical stance to show that when it comes to affecting *your* type of gameplay it’s not okay now. Which you’ve proven here with your comment. I am against cash shops in all forms, it was to try to produce some sympathy and perspective for the players affected by cosmetic shops. Which seems impossible at this point. If you’ve read anything I’ve said you’d see I advocate for higher sub and box price with a free trial and don’t like cash shops. Have a great day.
If you're against cash shops of all forms, feel free to play a different game.
Same as if you're against PvP of all forms.
People play games for different reasons, yet this quote is condemning people for expressing their reasons for playing/desining a game. And then inserts THEIR reason for why they play/design as the "correct" reason.
I'm really confused by the "no one wants to have discussion with me here" yet when people are expressing their opinion on the matter, you just chalk it up as people trying to silence you. Maybe what they really mean is "no one is agreeing with me here" I see plenty of discussion. So much so that you had to make a second post about it.
Any real discussion you have is going to have opposing viewpoints. If it doesn't, you're in an echochamber.
Yea. Being called “dumb as fuck,” being told “end of discussion,” being called “a baby throwing a tantrum,” and repeatedly, “no one cares about your opinion,” etc, etc, is not having a discussion it’s just being childish and something I’ve not done to anyone with counter points. All I’ve been trying to do is share the perspective of players affected by the current monetization model, even if it’s a minority. All I’ve received is “it’s not going to change might as well shut up.”