Monthly Locked FOMO cosmetic offerings need to end.
Uncommon Sense
Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
As a Backer I get the reasoning behind not opening cosmetics to general public sales so the "exclusivity" remains intact.
However the KS campaign has served it's purpose. Since then there have been many adjustments to allowing ongoing player driven funding/support.
But its been over a year now of monthly arbitrary locked cosmetic offerings and I feel it's time to stop with the FOMO marketing.
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.
I believe Intrepid are aware of the monthly meme worthy context and it's cumulative negative impact.
I think 2022 would be a good time to acknowledged this fact and open all NEW ongoing cosmetic offerings to general sale with no time gating.
All prior cosmetics/backer rewards can and should retain their exclusive status as not offend those backers/customers.
However the KS campaign has served it's purpose. Since then there have been many adjustments to allowing ongoing player driven funding/support.
But its been over a year now of monthly arbitrary locked cosmetic offerings and I feel it's time to stop with the FOMO marketing.
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.
I believe Intrepid are aware of the monthly meme worthy context and it's cumulative negative impact.
I think 2022 would be a good time to acknowledged this fact and open all NEW ongoing cosmetic offerings to general sale with no time gating.
All prior cosmetics/backer rewards can and should retain their exclusive status as not offend those backers/customers.
5
Comments
Something has to pay for all this.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
Did you even bother to read my post.
This is not about ending the cosmetic cash shop (as much as i would prefer) this is about ending FOMO marketing monthly locked business practices.
Yes, the way they are doing it is perfect.
I don't want the FOMO to end. It drives more sales from month to month.
It is better for the game.
Why would I buy anything if I thought people were going to have a huge window to get it? That is stupid. I don't want anything that everyone has. The time gating is the only reason I bought anything.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
Either you want a thing and so should buy it, or you do not want the thing and so shouldn't buy it.
If it is a non-necessary item (such ass a cosmetic for an MMO that is years away), and you do not have the money for it right now, you shouldn't buy it whether you want it or not.
As far as I am concerned, it really is that simple.
This is why I straight up don't see the issue the OP (and ONLY the OP) is talking about.
Unfortunately I don't agree with your sense of self entitlement.
I also don't agree that's it's better or offers any long term benefit to the longevity of the game.
In fact I believe it's becoming detrimental from a PR marketing point of view.
But if you like piss flavored punch then I won't judge. I even recommended that you keep your exclusive collection.
How would you suggest Intrepid make money pre-launch then, @Uncommon Sense?
Hopefully, your answer isn't "pre-order packs without cosmetics".
Because that's essentially selling Alpha & Beta key access only.
Some people like it, some people do not.
Since you do not like it, it appears as if it is a negative from your perspective - but that does not mean this is the truth.
I still can't understand how any adult can be susceptible to FOMO anything, honestly. IMO it is people that fear missing out that are the ones that are over entitled (you can't fear missing out on something unless you assume you have a right to it).
I am entitled?
I guess anyone who bought an original piece of art is super mega entitled! I mean, they got the only one of a good that will ever exist!
TALK ABOUT FOMO! I guess I better go to ever art exhibit on earth and buy everything all the time, just in case something is considered a masterpiece at some point... I don't want to miss out on that.
All I am doing is keeping a few bucks on the side in case something catches my eye and keeping up with the game. If the devs do something I like, I throw them a few bucks. What an asshole thing for me to do.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
This is a really awkward response. You understand that ‘FOMO’ is a fundamental economic driver, right? When supply is low, FOMO is used to drive demand and increase prices.
Expecting a seller to give that good away because well you just want it, is the epitome of entitlement.
So, no. I disagree with your assertions.
As the OP states I am not suggesting that all previous 'exclusive content' become openly accessible.
I don't want my kick starter exclusive lifetime subscription jeopardized, just as much as I don't want you to loose whatever it was you purchased in the cosmetic shop over the last 2 years or however long it has been.
But I do not support the assertion that arbitrary lockouts increase prices or profit margins...
Allowing more potential players and consumers full continual access over the lifetime of the game is far more profitable and goodwill generating.
I believe the only reason why Steven implicated monthly cosmetic exclusivity was not to offend KStarter backers 'exclusivity' I feel that window is now is passed.
I never suggested the seller to give away anything...
I suggested forthwith that all future cosmetic store content be accessible to everyone for the lifetime of the game...
a consumer friendly practice if you will indulge.
So shove you epitome of entitlement up your proverbial. we've gone beyond tainted punch bowl to koolaid levels of consumer conditioning.
Yeah, well, we support it. I will continue to support it because I do think it is better for the game.
It's not, I would have never bought anything if I thought everyone was going to have it. You can still buy all of the preorders for FFXIV and I still own none of them.
Exclusivity is a powerful motivator. Why do you think consoles even exist?
Not a single console is remotely as powerful as my PC. Yet over the years I end up owning them all because there tends to be 1-2 games I can't play otherwise.
The only reason the "Supporter packs" exist. Is to "Support" the development of the game. They are doing something unique by coming up with an interesting way to keep the money flowing through development.
This is best practice as far as I am concerned. They have come up with a way to sell their players a good instead of having to beg outside investors for money who are going to force their own ideologies and agendas onto the game. This would really taint the project.
I honestly think more games should be using this monthly supporter model. We would see a lot less half ass projects out there, for sure.
You sound like someone who has just watched too many Jim Sterling videos and are one step away from being radicalized.
You have an average of over 700 hours to look at a sheet of concept art and see if there is anything you feel like throwing a few bucks at. That is all this is.
Unless you are buying a car or a house, you don't need 700 hours to make a decision on if you want to buy something. If you are buying a house, good luck. The market is rough out there.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
You are right.
The super adult move is to keep some money set aside and pay attention.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
On the other hand I think stopping their monthly content would be a mistake from an art pipeline stand point and a marketing stand point. Monthly support packages are a really good and easy way to focus on an underlying theme to get necessary stylistic content for the wider game, and keeping the rewards a constantly fresh talking point for the marketing team. I cannot understate how important they have been in keeping the social media teams job much easier during the past three months of empty informational content. Overpriced FOMO is a small price to pay for keeping @MargaretKrohn and co sane and able to do their job in an easy and effective manner. Times like the past three months are some of the toughest stretches in a marketing campaign where it's mostly a lot of waiting but you have to keep oxygen in your campaign. Especially when you are the sort of person used to constantly producing and managing regular content and wanting to share hype with others.
It's really easy to strike a balance here however and evolve their current approach to one that suits the next phase in Ashes Development. Simply switch from 'you are getting this exclusive set of items no one else will get' to 'hey, we are selling you this content before anyone else will get it' (assuming they have a seasonal based rotation of cash shop choices.)
This option would have to be thoroughly discussed by the finance and marketing team, obviously. But it does suit their overall approach to monetization in a way that is a bit less aggressive. I think finance might disagree with my assessment and not want to switch to this until after Alpha 2, but I think it'd be better to do sooner than later from a pr stand point. But obviously I am biased. I am a marketer and a customer.
Once the game comes out then yes, they shouldn't be exclusive, or at least all of them shouldn't, but now that is the only value they can give their supporters.
Its good though. It means we will see a very diverse amount of cosmetics when the game is live.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
I can see what would lead you to that conclusion, but when you think about why exactly it has value to be exclusive, you might come to a different conclusion.
Essentially it is 'the promise of being special/unique'. But in my proposed compromise that is still what is being sold. 'You are promised to be special/unique for a certain important time period so you can get recognition for it.'
I understand that variety is good, but I just want the plain game at launch, I just want a simple first day of launch with a clean base game, then add cosmetics along the way if you want. Same with addons, let's start without anything and maybe 2 years later we can have whatever.
A pipe dream. I understand the desire, but it's not going to happen. People are going to speed run to cap, and you are going to be seeing all of the cosmetics as soon as people can get them on.
Add-ons are a different matter. We will likely start to see DPS meters near the end of beta or just after launch. Intrepid really has no say in this matter unless we want to let them spy on our PCs to make sure we are not using them.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
No one tell him its actually been 4 years.
#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.
#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.
#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.
Let's drop some Jahlon Knowledge on you.
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).
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.
Now you say they should make those cosmetics (which so far, non of them was anything spectacular for ppl to fomo.....) need to be more accessible, no longer exclusive, because it hurts their PR.
Their PR is doing great since Steven says everytime "dont contribute financially, give us feedback". There's no two-way about it. It's a fomo issue for some ppl like the OP, no matter how inteligent you want to present it (in order to show off your ego once more). People need to grow up and realize that some things arent worth their time and most importantly making demands from others, and let it go.
Those cosmetic discussions will not harm the development. People just dont know their place and they thing they can influence the direction the planet is spinning with their constant posting. Not true.
Now put your knowledge to the side and hear my advice. Humble your self a little bit, if you want to be a proper content creator.
And if you still feel so accomplished that you dont care to change your behaviour, still, humble your self a little bit.
Every time you pop up somewhere and I hear you speak (9 times out of 10 redirecting any subject to promote your brand) I feel embarrashed on your behalf about the way you place your self amongst the ppl you interract with. It's a weird feeling I swear, although short, because I immediately close down the window.
Humble your self a little bit and maybe the grandiose way you appear will give way to something more appealing.
I don't know how much of that is rooted in not having the data structures or confidence in existing data structures to track those sorts of things long term.
I also don't know if they are actively discouraging it this way on a philosophical/strategic level since they might want to lower the overall cosmetic cost later in development and therefore might worry about the pr issues that might arise from less committed supporters complaining that they overpaid. I personally would find that risk acceptable relative to the increase in income and relative justifiedness they would have in ignoring that criticism. Buyers remorse is not a companies responsibility if they give you exactly what you were promised. But I am not their pr team nor is it my 40 mil on the line. Still, I would rather them gladly take people's money more freely than they currently do.
I disagree with your rotating content idea relative to the utility a constant new stream of content produces as described in one of my earlier posts. The downside is definitely the marketing team having less new art pieces to talk about during informational dry periods in their campaign and therefore having less tools for focusing hype during those times. If you didn't mean that they shouldn't be making new content and should just rotate existing content, my apologies but I am less certain what else you could have ment.
If Ashes does not do well and launches in a poor state, then selling cosmetics during this development period will be seen as a massive scam. Intrepid Studios having an open development process does alleviate this issue quite a bit. No one who is paying attention can honestly argue that Ashes of Creation is vaporware. It may fail before launch, but it is clearly a good faith effort.
If Ashes does do well then selling these cosmetics will still be a gripe by players who can't get them anymore, but the overall success of the game will outweigh that issue enormously. If the game works as planned, then no one will care about this because the Ashes community will be at least 100x larger than it is now.
Cosmetics that become unobtainable are not a problem for successful games. WoW and League both have unobtainable cosmetics, and no one is presenting that as a major issue in the communities.
Either way, it's a business decision in order to monetize the game. People have proposed all sorts of changes. Lock them behind some in game achievement or stop these bundles altogether. They are wasting their time. They might as well be arguing for the game to not have a subscription. It's not going to change.
Personally, I would never have gotten a cosmetic pack if Intrepid Studios didn't have an open development process that I carefully reviewed before purchasing.