Monthly fee and microtransactions?

Looking at the packs it seems to me like the game si intended to have a monthly fee and microtransactions.
Is this true? It feels like double dipping to me.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

rikardp98

Overthrow wrote: »

rikardp98 wrote: »

If you play to for example lvl 10 then you would have a pretty good idea of how the game is.

Maybe 15-30 days of game time or to lvl 10-15, then $50 for the game + 30 days then that would be a total of 60+ days for $50.

4 months with just sub fee = $60

4 months with free trial + box fee + sub fee = $80-$90

$20-$30 isn't that a huge barrier for entry (for most people)

I don't think any games that cost $60 have a free trial that is accessible on launch day. I can't think of any examples of any, can you?

Having a free trial on launch day is unheard of xD

But I do think that a box fee is best for the game and the longevity of the development of the game. They could have a refund feature like Steam, if you have played less than a curtain amount of hours you can refund the game.

I guess I'm just a bigger fan of a box fee then a sub fee to support the developers instead of a cash shop that can easily evolve into something bad.

Actually this got me thinking, will ashes be available in physical copies or only online purchases?

Noaani

rikardp98 wrote: »

Why are you devaluing some peoples play style?

Because those people are trying to devalue the entire game.

Intrepid has been open about their cosmetic only cash shop from day 1. There has been no ambiguity on this matter.

Based on that, if a player does not like the concept of cosmetics in the game being purchased rather than earned in game, then Ashes is VERY clearly not the game for them - just as Ashes is VERY clearly not the game for someone that wants a WW2 flight sim.

If you want to play Ashes for raiding, and for PvP, cool - that is what Intrepid plan to offer. Don't also say that you sometimes like to play WW2 flight sims as well, and so Ashes should also allow you to do that.

This is not a hard concept to grasp.

Orym

@Noaani " perfectly fine for any gamer" as if you are some sort of spokesperson for the "gamer" community.

No im not fine with micro transactions. Why?
Because it takes away all form of credit to why they have that item. No effort or struggle was made to get it. I want ALL items to be achieved INGAME, by PLAYING the game, is that such a hard idea to comprehend?

That's more of a gamer viewpoint than anything.
Achieve an item by not playing the game or achieve items by playing the game.

rikardp98

Noaani wrote: »

rikardp98 wrote: »

Why are you devaluing some peoples play style?

Because those people are trying to devalue the entire game.

Intrepid has been open about their cosmetic only cash shop from day 1. There has been no ambiguity on this matter.

Based on that, if a player does not like the concept of cosmetics in the game being purchased rather than earned in game, then Ashes is VERY clearly not the game for them - just as Ashes is VERY clearly not the game for someone that wants a WW2 flight sim.

If you want to play Ashes for raiding, and for PvP, cool - that is what Intrepid plan to offer. Don't also say that you sometimes like to play WW2 flight sims as well, and so Ashes should also allow you to do that.

This is not a hard concept to grasp.

Again I'm not trying to argue something unreasonable like WW2 in a fantasy game or space ship. I'm arguing about a realistic situation were a fantasy player would want to look like a real high ranking soldiers that killed one of the hardest boss in the world.

I also do not mind the cosmetics they are selling now during early development, but when the game is out and people are buying the game (would be the best way of earning money) and a monthly sub fee, I do not think the cash shop is a good way to finance the continued development of the game. A cash shop Will Always push advertisement to players and they will always add cool items, mounts and costumes so players buy them. So instead of adding cool mounts and gear set rewards from hard bosses they will just add them to the cash shop.

And btw, I'm not devaluing the WHOLE GAME, I'm trying to game a part of the game MORE valuable.

Gaul_

Many people complain about a cosmetic cash shop, but they do not address that they are asking for a complete change of the game's monetization model which has all sorts of consequences. On top of that, they do not provide any comparisons or support that an alternate monetization structure would be better revenue for the game. It's not a very well thought out argument.

If you don't like it then don't buy it

Atama

rikardp98 wrote: »

So you are saying that looking cool and strong in a fantasy game isn't realistic?

Fantasy games and realism are very brief acquaintances.

You can’t really argue which glowing magic sword is more realistic than another one. I don’t have a real glowing magic sword to use as a comparison.

From my knowledge, kings and high ranking soldiers looked pretty over the top and legendary just to show of their power and richness.

That actually references one way that visual progression works in the game.

There are cosmetics that make you look fancy; like nobility or even royalty. Some are Kickstarter rewards, some are available for purchase from the shop.

However, there are also titles that you earn in game. That guy with a crown and ermine cape is a poser, he might as well have a Burger King costume on. But that guy flying around on a dragon? That’s a real king. (Being a king is a rare and temporary thing you can earn in game and while you hold the title you will be one of the few players with a real flying mount. No buying that in the store.)

There are rewards you can earn in the game you can’t get any other way. I’m sure anyone who has played the game long enough to experience progression will know from looks alone who has a Halloween costume and who is a real badass.

Noaani

Orym wrote: »

Noaani " perfectly fine for any gamer" as if you are some sort of spokesperson for the "gamer" community.

I was making this post.

Hexenkartothek wrote: »

Good. Much prefer that than MTX. Any gamer would.

Feel free to have a go at them, asking if they speak for all gamers.

No im not fine with micro transactions. Why?
Because it takes away all form of credit to why they have that item. No effort or struggle was made to get it. I want ALL items to be achieved INGAME, by PLAYING the game, is that such a hard idea to comprehend?

See, I agree with all of this.

Where I disagree is in calling a cosmetic an item.

An item has stats, effects, it is a thing you upgrade to make you more effective in combat. Everything you say above I 100% agree applies to items.

Cosmetics are just not items.

Noaani

rikardp98 wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

rikardp98 wrote: »

Why are you devaluing some peoples play style?

Because those people are trying to devalue the entire game.

Intrepid has been open about their cosmetic only cash shop from day 1. There has been no ambiguity on this matter.

Based on that, if a player does not like the concept of cosmetics in the game being purchased rather than earned in game, then Ashes is VERY clearly not the game for them - just as Ashes is VERY clearly not the game for someone that wants a WW2 flight sim.

If you want to play Ashes for raiding, and for PvP, cool - that is what Intrepid plan to offer. Don't also say that you sometimes like to play WW2 flight sims as well, and so Ashes should also allow you to do that.

This is not a hard concept to grasp.

Again I'm not trying to argue something unreasonable like WW2 in a fantasy game or space ship.

You are arguing against something that has been a core aspect of this game before the development of this game was made public.

Arguing against something that is a new addition (family summons), or to changes to what we have been told previously is fine. Arguing with something that has been in the game from the beginning and so far has not changed at all is not fine. When doing that, you may as well be asking for a WW2 flight sim.

rikardp98

Overthrow wrote: »

Many people complain about a cosmetic cash shop, but they do not address that they are asking for a complete change of the game's monetization model which has all sorts of consequences. On top of that, they do not provide any comparisons or support that an alternate monetization structure would be better revenue for the game. It's not a very well thought out argument.

If you don't like it then don't buy it

Yes changing monetization for a game is a big thing, but the game is not pit yet some they are not changing anything (But yes still a big thing). I do like the cosmetics they are selling now since in the future they will represent a supporter cosmetic which will be a status symbol. But once the games is out i believe it would be better to have a box fee + a sub fee. Yes a cosmetic shop may result in more money for the company but it will also lead to a lot of cosmetic shop advertising and more and more fulfilling/intriguing cosmetics to make people buy more and more of them.

Atama

rikardp98 wrote: »

Overthrow wrote: »

Many people complain about a cosmetic cash shop, but they do not address that they are asking for a complete change of the game's monetization model which has all sorts of consequences. On top of that, they do not provide any comparisons or support that an alternate monetization structure would be better revenue for the game. It's not a very well thought out argument.

If you don't like it then don't buy it

Yes changing monetization for a game is a big thing, but the game is not pit yet some they are not changing anything (But yes still a big thing). I do like the cosmetics they are selling now since in the future they will represent a supporter cosmetic which will be a status symbol. But once the games is out i believe it would be better to have a box fee + a sub fee. Yes a cosmetic shop may result in more money for the company but it will also lead to a lot of cosmetic shop advertising and more and more fulfilling/intriguing cosmetics to make people buy more and more of them.

Adding a box cost will kill the influx of customers. It's amazing that they are able to provide a game with only a subscription cost, and no pay to win. It will be a revelation if it works. Monkeying with that is like putting a mustache on the Mona Lisa.

Gaul_

rikardp98 wrote: »

But once the games is out i believe it would be better to have a box fee + a sub fee. Yes a cosmetic shop may result in more money for the company but it will also lead to a lot of cosmetic shop advertising and more and more fulfilling/intriguing cosmetics to make people buy more and more of them.

Well, your opinion is noted. I don't agree and that isn't the current plan for the game. Maybe it will change. I think we've exhausted the discussion

rikardp98

Overthrow wrote: »

rikardp98 wrote: »

But once the games is out i believe it would be better to have a box fee + a sub fee. Yes a cosmetic shop may result in more money for the company but it will also lead to a lot of cosmetic shop advertising and more and more fulfilling/intriguing cosmetics to make people buy more and more of them.

Well, your opinion is noted. I don't agree and that isn't the current plan for the game. Maybe it will change. I think we've exhausted the discussion

True, I will play the game either way xD

I just hope ashes will have a long and prosper life

Child Item