Monetization

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!

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Iridianny

Noaani wrote: »

...this matter is settled.
Just don't bother having that conversation in the context of Ashes, as in this game, the matter is settled.

Are you trying to convince me or yourself that "the matter is settled"? I don't think you get to decide that or when a conversation ends that you cannot see the other side of to begin with.

Geronimo

Iridianny wrote: »

The game has been fully funded already. I am not claiming to understand their budget system by any means. Simply that a cash shop seems like a slippery slope into future pay to win when people start to get bored with content and an unnecessary cash grab on role players at the start.

This thread is getting silly now, Steven said it is never going to be pay to win. So now it's just about whether you believe Steven or not.

Like I said earlier, I am not a role player whatsoever, in 20 years of MMOs I have participated in 20 minutes of RP. However, I do support the cosmetic shop and purchase cosmetics to support the development and the art direction of what I like to see in the game, I do not purchase the cosmetics that I dislike. At least Intrepid will know what I think is worth money and what I don't think is.

If it was an increased subscription I would have no idea what my money is supporting and neither would Intrepid, with cosmetics I know exactly what type of artwork my money is supporting.

Iridianny

Babayugah wrote: »

No.

There's no other answer to be given and no explanation needed in response to your statement other than No.

It was a hypothetical stance and if you read anything before typing, you wouldn't have felt the need to respond. Obviously I don't want either nor was I seriously suggesting it.

Iridianny

Geronimo wrote: »

Like I said earlier, I am not a role player whatsoever, in 20 years of MMOs I have participated in 20 minutes of RP.

Then you offer little perspective to why it might be important to a roleplayer and should consider understanding other types of players viewpoints.

ItsFayne

Iridianny wrote: »

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!

So you like cosmetics but just have an issue with where they come from?

Atama

Iridianny wrote: »

Atama wrote: »

When you resort to insulting people who disagree with you, clearly you are bankrupt of ideas and rational arguments. Frankly you're just trolling now.

I've participated in the various iterations of this message board for years (I think this is the 3rd board now) and someone like you always pops up, makes a lot of noise about this issue, then goes away forever. I'm just waiting for this to fizzle out like it always does.

What did I say that was insulting? Many people have been citing and clinging to "Steven's words" since this post started as if it was their own thoughts. I was not asking for his words, he's quite biased as the creator of the game and I can find them myself with a quick search. I am sharing an opinion of monetization and mmo's in general. That's nice that you have offered no beneficial conversation to an idea that has continuously been brought up, and clearly dismissed, in hopes that it will "fizzle out." There are things to be learned from different perspectives. Have a nice day.

Claiming that people are worshipping Steven, essentially accusing people of being in a cult, you don't think that's insulting? You're being ridiculous. You were intentionally insulting, and now you're playing coy about it, and it's unappreciated. That gets you put in ignore land, where clear trolls go. Fortunately, I'm sure you'll flitter away from this board soon, assuming your increasingly hyperbolic rhetoric doesn't lead to a ban before then.

The idea keeps getting brought up by people who are unfamiliar with the game and ignorant about how it works. They are one-issue gadflies who have no real interest in this game at all. They hear that a game is coming out that allows microtransactions, create an account to whine about it, then go away because they don't have anything else to talk about.

Steven Sharif is the Creative Director of the game. He started it, and he makes the decisions about it. He's the head honcho. That means that if he wants something to be a certain way, it will happen. We can give feedback about things, but if he is dead set on something, that's what is going to happen.

I have my disagreements with the game, and with Steven's decisions. I've made them public. I have voiced those disagreements here. But I've done so knowing that ultimately if that's how he wants to go, that's how it will go. Basically, there is no greater authority about anything in this game then him.

It's like griping about Amazon then wondering why people are talking about this "Bezos guy", as if what he says matters.

Anyway, ta-ta. One thing that's great about a message board is that you get to erase people that have negative value.

Dygz

If Ashes were going to slip to Pay to Win in the future due to player boredom, it would do so regardless of having a cosmetic cash shop.
But, Pay to Win is a pet peeve of Steven's, so it's highly unlikely slip to Pay to Win will ever happen.
Steven sees cosmetic shop as a very, very different thing than Pay to Win.
Even though they may seem similar to you, Steven doesn't share that perception.

Noaani

Iridianny wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

...this matter is settled.
Just don't bother having that conversation in the context of Ashes, as in this game, the matter is settled.

Are you trying to convince me or yourself that "the matter is settled"? I don't think you get to decide that or when a conversation ends that you cannot see the other side of to begin with.

I didn't say the conversation is over, I said the matter is settled.

If you are going to argue against what someone says, at least get what they said correct.

As a discussion, this will likely not be over until the game closes down. However, the matter is still settled. Steven has seen all the arguments you have made (and better arguments that have been better presented), and stands by his decision.

There would likely be a riot and mass exodus from the game if Intrepid changed things now. Not necessarily because of the change, but because we are all here based mostly on trust in Steven and Intrepid. If they go back on a major aspect of the game that they have said many times is just how it is, then that trust is gone.

So, the matter is settled.

Geronimo

Iridianny wrote: »

Then you offer little perspective to why it might be important to a roleplayer and should consider understanding other types of players viewpoints.

Incorrect, I am trying to broaden your perspective of why there is a cosmetic shop, it is not just for RPers. But I can see why they would like to use it.

Jahlon

So here it is plain and simple: You don't like the monetization model. That's ok. Don't play the game.

Until you can come back with a load of data that can prove Intrepid would be better with a higher than $14.99 a month sub and not lose customers, all you are saying is you want it this way.

This isn't BK, you can't have it your way. Th

Iridianny

ItsFayne wrote: »

So you like cosmetics but just have an issue with where they come from?

Hello! Yes, I love cosmetics and I think they are an important part of any mmo. Hence why cash shops are successful. However, when I pay my monthly fee like everyone else, I shouldn't necessarily have what I find most enjoyable about the game be charged extra for. I stated many alternatives to that extra revenue in this thread and how it affects gamers like me! Also, how it could make the game more enjoyable in the longevity to make cosmetics earned and not just cash grabs. Here's an example I've stated before:

You are roleplaying as your character being able to fight dragons in a fantasy world. Some people play in a different way. AoC said there are many types of progression besides combat. That was a core principle. You can be a mount breeder, a tavern owner, a baker, etc... They were trying to appeal to people who enjoy social aspects of mmo's with their principles of making many paths of progression and not the typical xp to level 100 and done.

Hypothetically, I should be able to be a (for example) baker as my gameplay when I pay my monthly sub. Now, it the "baker" costume costs $20 on the cash shop, my entire gameplay has a barrier to entry that no one else had. It's not about the one costume, though, this could be hypothetically said about any cosmetic that they charge extra for.

By this logic, I prefer a box price. I'd rather pay $60 once than $20 multiple times to get the furniture for the shop, the different costumes, etc, etc, etc. If you are the 1/4 of the player base that is wanting to play this part of the game, it now has the burden of being monetized.

Iridianny

Geronimo wrote: »

Incorrect, I am trying to broaden your perspective of why there is a cosmetic shop, it is not just for RPers. But I can see why they would like to use it.

I understand that you want a voice in the art direction. But like I said earlier that you didn't address, there are alternatives like community voting that don't affect a portion of the player base negatively.

Iridianny

Jahlon wrote: »

Until you can come back with a load of data that can prove Intrepid would be better with a higher than $14.99 a month sub and not lose customers, all you are saying is you want it this way.

No, I am offering a suggestion on how it could be done differently to not negatively affect a portion of the player base and how the community can have a voice in these things! Just like many had a voice in why they are changing the art of the dwarves with feedback *right now*!

Noaani

Iridianny wrote: »

Jahlon wrote: »

Until you can come back with a load of data that can prove Intrepid would be better with a higher than $14.99 a month sub and not lose customers, all you are saying is you want it this way.

No, I am offering a suggestion on how it could be done differently to not negatively affect a portion of the player base and how the community can have a voice in these things! Just like many had a voice in why they are changing the art of the dwarves with feedback *right now*!

The art of the player races was not a core aspect of the games design. It can be changed without impacting the game or the company. Changes to those models really is just a preference thing with no real impact on anything.

The cash shop can not be changed without affecting the game or the company. If you get rid of it, Intrepid need to either increase the subscription - which will see many players opt out of the game - or add a box cost - which will see many players opt out of the game.

You are looking at things only from your perspective, not taking other perspectives in to account at all - and then claiming the rest of us are doing just that.

Iridianny

Noaani wrote: »

As a discussion, this will likely not be over until the game closes down. However, the matter is still settled. Steven has seen all the arguments you have made (and better arguments that have been better presented), and stands by his decision.

There would likely be a riot and mass exodus from the game if Intrepid changed things now. Not necessarily because of the change, but because we are all here based mostly on trust in Steven and Intrepid. If they go back on a major aspect of the game that they have said many times is just how it is, then that trust is gone.

So, the matter is settled.

You know... they can change... anything in the game. And there probably wouldn't be a "mass exodus" since it seems many of these people are invested You are arguing from the point of view that you work for them and know the absolute facts and maybe even Steven personally. You don't really know all of their plans just from watching some livestreams with carefully selected and released information to consumers like you.

Geronimo

Iridianny wrote: »

I understand that you want a voice in the art direction. But like I said earlier that you didn't address, there are alternatives like community voting that don't affect a portion of the player base negatively.

Sorry, how will selling cosmetics adversely affect a portion of the player base?

Because they don't have enough money to buy them?

In that case, how will increasing the subscription cost help them?

Noaani

Iridianny wrote: »

You know... they can change... anything in the game. And there probably wouldn't be a "mass exodus" since it seems many of these people are invested

People are invested in Steven, and in Intrepid.

Most of us playing MMO's for decades are sick of developers and publishers that say one thing and do another. If Intrepid display any suggestion of being just one more in that line, then yes, many people will leave.

Azherae

Iridianny wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

As a discussion, this will likely not be over until the game closes down. However, the matter is still settled. Steven has seen all the arguments you have made (and better arguments that have been better presented), and stands by his decision.

There would likely be a riot and mass exodus from the game if Intrepid changed things now. Not necessarily because of the change, but because we are all here based mostly on trust in Steven and Intrepid. If they go back on a major aspect of the game that they have said many times is just how it is, then that trust is gone.

So, the matter is settled.

You know... they can change... anything in the game. And there probably wouldn't be a "mass exodus" since it seems many of these people are invested You are arguing from the point of view that you work for them and know the absolute facts and maybe even Steven personally. You don't really know all of their plans just from watching some livestreams with carefully selected and released information to consumers like you.

Now you're getting into a different type of 'disrespectful' territory.

They told us their plans. In detail. And told us that they will be transparent about whatever they can. Other people explain those plans to you.

You would have an argument if you were saying 'no, you misunderstood what they said'. But you're not. You're saying 'things could change' and now you're saying 'do you think they told you everything' (with the implication that somehow this would allow things to change).

If you can't at least respect Intrepid's promise and claim, why even bother engaging on the subject?

Iridianny

Noaani wrote: »

The cash shop can not be changed without affecting the game or the company. If you get rid of it, Intrepid need to either increase the subscription - which will see many players opt out of the game - or add a box cost - which will see many players opt out of the game.

You are looking at things only from your perspective, not taking other perspectives in to account at all - and then claiming the rest of us are doing just that.

I see. You are reliant that the sub price will not change because there is a cash shop. That's not necessarily fact and many video game companies have changes their monetization after the game is released. It's okay to rework something while the game is in development if it might be a better option. People can change their minds without "trust being lost."

Iridianny

Geronimo wrote: »

Sorry, how will selling cosmetics adversely affect a portion of the player base?

Because they don't have enough money to buy them?

In that case, how will increasing the subscription cost help them?

Please read my original post and the "baker" example in this thread.

Child Item