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

Geronimo

@Iridianny earlier you yourself said that 25% of the players need to use cosmetics as a core part of their gameplay.

This means 75% do not need to use cosmetics as a core part of their gameplay.

However, you are proposing a solution to force 100% of the players to pay additional money to support the 25% minority.

The 75% do not want to have to pay any additional money for something they will not use at all.

Hopefully you see why you are not getting any agreement here.

Iridianny

Geronimo wrote: »

Iridianny wrote: »

All cosmetics are relevant to RP. This game is an RPG. Why do they think it will be enough for revenue if a cash shop doesn't affect but a nontrivial number of people?

I'll say it again, the cosmetic shop is not only for RPers.

I'll say it again, you keep ignoring the idea of community polls for art releases which would have a better effect on the "influence" you want to have on the art direction of this game.

Geronimo

Iridianny wrote: »

I'll say it again, you keep ignoring the idea of community polls for art releases which would have a better effect on the "influence" you want to have on the art direction of this game.

Your increased subscription fee will have a worse affect on my wallet though.

CROW3

Iridianny wrote: »

I guess so if you have nothing better to do with your degree than comment on video game forums that are irrelevant to you.

Bwahahahaha!

Iridianny

Geronimo wrote: »

@Iridianny earlier you yourself said that 25% of the players need to use cosmetics as a core part of their gameplay.

This means 75% do not need to use cosmetics as a core part of their gameplay.

However, you are proposing a solution to force 100% of the players to pay additional money to support the 25% minority.

The 75% do not want to have to pay any additional money for something they will not use at all.

Hopefully you see why you are not getting any agreement here.

Yes, I understand you value the 75% being not at all affected over the 25% being severely affected, but perhaps everyone could be minorly affected so that the game doesn't lose 25%.

Karthos

Iridianny wrote: »

Geronimo wrote: »

Iridianny wrote: »

All cosmetics are relevant to RP. This game is an RPG. Why do they think it will be enough for revenue if a cash shop doesn't affect but a nontrivial number of people?

I'll say it again, the cosmetic shop is not only for RPers.

I'll say it again, you keep ignoring the idea of community polls for art releases which would have a better effect on the "influence" you want to have on the art direction of this game.

He keeps ignoring it because it's irrelevant for your self admitted 75% of the population, ergo it's irrelevant to the conversation.

Iridianny

How about this... no box cost, no cash shop, $19.99 a month plus pay for extra character slots? There's an easy alternative monetization idea. There's lots of them!

Geronimo

Iridianny wrote: »

Yes, I understand you value the 75% being not at all affected over the 25% being severely affected, but perhaps everyone could be minorly affected so that the game doesn't lose 25%.

That same idea can be taken both ways:

You say all 25% will just not play the game if there is a cosmetic shop.

I could say we will lose the whole 75% because of the sub-fee increase.

I do not think either is true however.

It just makes 100% more sense to cater to the 75%. If we get scientific about this and count the number of people with strong opinions about this subject on the forum you will also find the 75% is actually much higher.

CROW3

If 80% of the whining comes from 20% of your customers, increasing your customer segments outside that 20% may offset the revenue impacts of carte blanch eliminating 80% of the noise. That's what you call 'a worthwhile investment.'

Azherae

Iridianny wrote: »

How about this... no box cost, no cash shop, $19.99 a month plus pay for extra character slots? There's an easy alternative monetization idea. There's lots of them!

Why?

If I see a costume I want and it costs even $20 (I'm going by Black Desert here).

Why not let me buy it for four months of 'additional' fee?

How many costumes are even needed here?

Even my group's 'costume lady' won't be bothered that much by this. Until the cost of the costume hits around $50, not even the people who want costumes are doing better in this situation.

Karthos

If you have such a huge issue with a MAJOR aspect of the game, do you even want to play this game?

Or do you want to play a version of it that's not it, but kinda like it?

Because coming into something with an invested community, who are all okay with said system, and wanting them to change it because you personally don't like it, because some minority of players MIGHT also like it that way is selfish as fuck.

It's like me walking into Taco Bell and saying "I don't like Burritos, you need to make me Spaghetti".

I'd get laughed out the door.

This is why people are not "understanding" your points. You are asking for Spaghetti in Taco Bell.

Geronimo

CROW3 wrote: »

If 80% of the whining comes from 20% of your customers, increasing your customer segments outside that 20% may offset the revenue impacts of carte blanch eliminating 80% of the noise. That's what you call 'a worthwhile investment.'

Someone give this man his degree back!

CROW3

Karthos wrote: »

It's like me walking into Taco Bell and saying "I don't like Burritos, you need to make me Spaghetti".

Well, wait - did you take the time to explain to Taco Bell how they can shift their entire price structure to accommodate your demand for spaghetti?

Karthos

CROW3 wrote: »

Karthos wrote: »

It's like me walking into Taco Bell and saying "I don't like Burritos, you need to make me Spaghetti".

Well, wait - did you take the time to explain to Taco Bell how they can shift their entire price structure to accommodate your demand for spaghetti?

I did.

I even had them take a personality test to show to them that there is a small portion of people who also like pasta, and that they need to shift their entire product line to accommodate this small portion of the population.

Babayugah

Iridianny wrote: »

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.

You do realize that cosmetics are obtainable in game, correct? This isn't BDO or PoE. Good-looking and relative cosmetics will be earnable in-game. The only concern you seem to have is how the current monetization model affects you and the minority like you. Your suggestions, real or not, have no bearing or thought on how it will affect others being the majority.

Do you really expect a box price to cover the game/expansions/cosmetics? Your logic is non-existent when wanting a full game, expansions, cosmetics, etc on just a box cost lol.

Noaani

Iridianny wrote: »

The free trial is at the beginning to get many people hooked so that the box cost can come after for a "full download". Then, you can charge per month after that.
Or, they could just charge more than $15, say $19.99 and people wouldn't freak out over a $4 difference like is being assumed.

If an MMO launches with a free trial, all it is doing is telling people the developers have no faith in it.

Most games add one years later - as I suggested Ashes may.

As I said above, since Intrepid have no track record at all of running an MMO, they can not at all charge higher than the industry standard for subscription fee. It just isn't feasible.

You say you would rather not have a box cost, and would like to see the subscription stay at $15. You get that, so yay for you.

The cash shop isn't influencing gameplay.

Iridianny

Karthos wrote: »

t's like me walking into Taco Bell and saying "I don't like Burritos, you need to make me Spaghetti".

I'd get laughed out the door.

This is why people are not "understanding" your points. You are asking for Spaghetti in Taco Bell.

How? Is the monetization really the "meal" of this game to you?

ItsFayne

Iridianny wrote: »

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.

Yeah this is a lot of illogical fallacy nonsense.

What makes you think the baker costume would be cash shop only? I think its pretty clear that there will be variations and options in game. (I mean, they've only said it 1000 times, so yeah).

Also, I'd like to point out the real facts.
We've been paying $15 since 2004. Inflation alone would make that same price today $30. You're cool paying $30 a month then? because if so...just buy $15 worth of embers each month...

Atama

Taco Bell did once have a Mexican Pizza (and supposedly they're bringing it back this year). Maybe they can do a Mexican Spaghetti. There is a dish from Central Mexico called Sopa Seca de Fideo which is extremely similar to spaghetti.

I'm sure Taco Bell would find a way to screw it up.

Iridianny

No box cost, no cash shop, $19.99 a month plus pay for extra character slots is a great alternative that prevents cash shops from existing and expanding into pay to win in the future, which yes I know you have your promises written down in your journals, but it could happen! You don't like this idea because it again affects your play style but don't care to see how cash shops affect other's play style. :'(

Child Item