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
Issue with Pre-Order Pack Cosmetics
Judeth
Member
So I was thinking of finally purchasing the Voyager plus Pre-Order pack, and I asked a question in the discord which has concerned me a bit...
Considering that these cosmetics are locked behind a $375 price wall, it doesn't really make sense for them to charge that much if you want to purchase the following months' cosmetics. The ability to purchase them, is essentially a reward for paying $375 to test their game.
What do you all think?
I think I will agree with what I've seen some others saying... Its a very predatory FOMO practice. If this game is already funded, then they shouldn't need us to "help them" put assets into the game.
The argument of, "if you don't like it, don't buy it", has never made sense to me. It's like a form of monetary gate keeping, and something people only say when they don't care about where their money is going. A poor argument that doesn't get either side anywhere.
I care where my money goes, and half of the reason for me wanting to purchase the pre-order pack was to purchase the following months' cosmetics items (the other half to participate in alpha-2). I just cannot justify paying $375+$125(month); not only for the fact that these are intangible cosmetics for a game that isn't even out yet, but because of the sheer fact that they are ludicrous prices for something that is meant to be a "reward" of sorts for paying the initial $375 (that reward, is the ability to purchase).
These cosmetics when seen in game, should be a sign of "Oh that person played during the alpha, that's a limited edition skin." Not, "Oh that person paid a lot of money for those skins." Especially in a game that claims not to be pay to win.
Note: They've been releasing these packs since 2018.
$30-$50 is more reasonable for the pack of items, considering what they are, and considering that is more expensive than my Netflix bill which gives me much more than hope and dreams.
Keep in mind, I am someone who fully supports the game, and wishes the best for Intrepid studios... I just will not walk around with rose tinted glasses on and say, "Oh this is the price of support." No, I'm sorry, this looks more like whale hunting.
Considering that these cosmetics are locked behind a $375 price wall, it doesn't really make sense for them to charge that much if you want to purchase the following months' cosmetics. The ability to purchase them, is essentially a reward for paying $375 to test their game.
What do you all think?
I think I will agree with what I've seen some others saying... Its a very predatory FOMO practice. If this game is already funded, then they shouldn't need us to "help them" put assets into the game.
The argument of, "if you don't like it, don't buy it", has never made sense to me. It's like a form of monetary gate keeping, and something people only say when they don't care about where their money is going. A poor argument that doesn't get either side anywhere.
I care where my money goes, and half of the reason for me wanting to purchase the pre-order pack was to purchase the following months' cosmetics items (the other half to participate in alpha-2). I just cannot justify paying $375+$125(month); not only for the fact that these are intangible cosmetics for a game that isn't even out yet, but because of the sheer fact that they are ludicrous prices for something that is meant to be a "reward" of sorts for paying the initial $375 (that reward, is the ability to purchase).
These cosmetics when seen in game, should be a sign of "Oh that person played during the alpha, that's a limited edition skin." Not, "Oh that person paid a lot of money for those skins." Especially in a game that claims not to be pay to win.
Note: They've been releasing these packs since 2018.
$30-$50 is more reasonable for the pack of items, considering what they are, and considering that is more expensive than my Netflix bill which gives me much more than hope and dreams.
Keep in mind, I am someone who fully supports the game, and wishes the best for Intrepid studios... I just will not walk around with rose tinted glasses on and say, "Oh this is the price of support." No, I'm sorry, this looks more like whale hunting.
0
Comments
Though I'm expecting the cosmetic prices on the store will remain at this level since its industry standard at the moment.
Cosmetics are never tangible. Cosmetics are always priced at however greedy the studio is. The fomo is always subjective, so yes, subjectively it could be seen as a terrible way to monetize support of the game.
I personally couldn't give fewer shits about these cosmetics and when I do buy the alpha2 access - I'll be paying for the keys and gametime, because cosmetics are useless to me. So in a way I'd even say that those who pay $250+, but don't care about cosmetics, are paying more than those who feel fomo about some pixels.
This system is even more unfair than I previously thought!! /s
Do you say the same thing about expensive clothes, designer bags, sports cars and other items? If you don't want to spend on it then don't spend on it - trust that the company has made the decision that they have the ability to charge these prices and still make money.
It's not gatekeeping in any sense, you will still be able to obtain similar items in the game, as long as you are prepared to pay the sub fee.
Great investment - especially since by 2019 some of my friends have joined the dev team.
Even if Ashes of Creation never releases, I want to support these devs working on creating the systems I want so that it's easier for them to implement them in future games they work on.
It's great to give IS some extra cash - especially since the development schedule is twice what Steven initially expected. And I at least have been able to play in the game world for Apocalypse and for Alpha 1.
Maybe you should just wait until Alpha 2 is about to open before you purchase a pack.
If you're that concerned about never being able to play or never be able to use the cosmetics you purchased.
So while we're all free to discuss this for the 100th times, we're also as free to say that the 101st time won't change shit.
All good, @Judeth. But just because it ‘doesn’t make sense to you’, doesn’t mean ppl ‘don’t care where their money is going.’ It just doesn’t make sense to you - and that’s ok - it’s your money.
This isn’t a novel discussion, even for this month; it’s just new to you. 🤗
Good point.
For me personally I care, because part of the reason for me wanting to purchase the pre-order pack is for the cosmetics. Since I like to have rare things.
I think the price point they have them at currently would make more sense if they weren't locked behind having to purchase a pre-order pack.
I originally planned on purchasing the key and the following cosmetic packs. I think now I'll end up just purchasing a key.
Honestly, I'd even side with not having the monthly cosmetic packs at all. I just hope they won't over shadow in-game cosmetics. That flows into another debate though.
My concern lies in the price point they charge for the cosmetics. As I've said, the prices would make more sense if the cosmetics weren't locked behind purchasing a pre-order pack.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/KpXsfimrkFo
You're right, I do understand this is something that is brought up often. I just found out about the cosmetic prices while getting ready to buy the pre-order pack today, and it made me want to discuss it and post my thoughts.
Honestly, I don't see any need for this and it just comes across and immature and uncivil. The forums are for discussions and debate. Trying to make fun of anyone for their financial status is simply gross and looks bad.
I personally don't feel any need to validate my wealth.
If you think someone having an opposing stance on a topic such as this, automatically means they are unable to afford, then that's just a state of your character.
Coming from the person choosing to ignore the statement from the company on why the prices are what they are, post on the forum and stamp their feet in the hope that the position of the company will change after having the set price be the same throughout all of development.
See you understand me nikr.
You're the type of person who thinks every forum post is argumentative. Just because someone makes a post about something in order to have a healthy discussion about the game and to express their view on something, doesn't mean they expect change nor are throwing a tantrum. It explains why you don't have any valid counter discussion, and instead resort to posting memes and vague insults about a person who has a differing opinion than you do. Because you intend to bully anyone off the forum who isn't on your side.
Please show me where in this discussion, I have been rude to anyone here, and would be deserving of your insults? I don't believe you can. The only thing I can think of, is that you took insult from me posting,
"The argument of, "if you don't like it, don't buy it", has never made sense to me. It's like a form of monetary gate keeping, and something people only say when they don't care about where their money is going. A poor argument that doesn't get either side anywhere."
Where my point was, saying "if you don't like it, don't buy it" is, in fact, a poor counter argument that doesn't get either side anywhere. And I was right for adding it to my original post, because I predicted that it would be a common response from people, when what I am looking for is an actual discussion.
Someone with critical thinking skills and enough of an open mind to foster a healthy debate, would instead provide information as to why they disagree with me. People like that, are who generate healthy forum discussion and would actually have a higher chance of changing my mind on the topic. As demonstrated here by some other members of the community.
You on the other hand, are just actively looking for an argument and attention, and this is the last of what I'm willing to give. I could sit here and throw petty insults, but I won't stoop there. The only reason I'm taking the time right now, is because admittedly, you have annoyed me, and I felt the responsibility to point out what the meaning of a real debate it.
I expect you to respond because you're insulted and you'll need to have the last word, but be forewarned - it won't counteract anything I've said here and therefor isn't worth my response. Nor am I going to continue to foster an irrelevant argument here.
Have a good day
The pre-order packs are an upfront commitment to the game. Both pre-launch and post-launch.
If you do not have faith, that they will have enough value to offset the costs, then don't buy them, with with any other product out there.
My only response is that you've already shut down your own debate.
You've posted your spiel saying you don't agree with the current funding model (at least during this testing phase) and the reasons justifying the price which have been given by the developers you don't agree with.
Since the devs have given their reasons and you disagree with their reasoning and fail to propose any alternative the only thing left to be said (which has been repeated throughout this thread and everywhere else you've been today) is: "don't purchase it if you don't wish to support this model."
No pay to win.
Cosmetic Only.
In-game achievable items are BIS.
For me, if those 3 core principles are adhered to, then get that bag and use the resources to invest in content for the game. We all know the development of something like this is crazy expensive. Steven has deep pockets but Intrepid has jumped into an arena filled with literal, multi-billion dollar monsters.
The monetisation is about players backing a studio whose core principles they agree with and want to see succeed. I don't see the "predatory" nature at all. Where else would people want to see additional funding for the game come from? A large corporate investment? That would mean deadlines, dates, delays, despondence and disaster.
I think we all want Ashes to be as good as it can be and hopefully, in a few years from now, we see a healthy player population spread out over a few dozen servers. Paying a subscription and Intrepid making healthy bank. If at that point they bring out some game-breaking item in the shop I will be first to pick up my pitch fork. Until then, take my money, I wanna believe baby!
$90 - 6 months of standard subscription time, so nothing overpriced there as this is a $15 per month game.
$100 - $100 on Embers, a discussion on their true value is moot as they will be able to be used on a lot of things and their value will also be partly opinion based.
This leaves me with $60 more spent, yet I also get some cosmetics and most importantly, Persistent Alpha (that's Alpha 2). So as far as I'm concerned:
$60 - Alpha 2, if it's at least 2 months then that's the same as 2 months subscription time and I'll have my value from it. Sure, Alpha is nowhere near like regular gameplay as we all know, but I'm sure Persistent Alpha will be more than 2 months, plus I also get Beta access.
As for the cosmetics, based on what I have described above I'm basically getting them for free and I have no interest in the ones you get with the pack (except maybe the cape) so it isn't money wasted.
I would not advise getting the top tier package if you are not keen to do A2/B1/B2. No amount of money is worth a onesie because that's what the cosmetics are - just onesies. Not just onesies, but, onesies which will have similar onesies in the actual game you can earn.
I kinda like that the actual price-point has me not trying to buy cosmetics every month.
That actually makes the cosmetics more rare since it's not everyone buying every cosmetic every month.
Do you truly want the world inundated with the slaughtered carcasses of Stuffertons day after day?
Stuffertons is a cute sweet bean and deserves nothing but love.
I honestly do not understand why it's not possible to buy only some of the monthly cosmetics, only the Alpha 2 access or everything together. IMO they'd make more money if people were able to buy every month's mount separately for $20 (example) instead of forcing you to spend $150 every month if you want every mount.
But, oh well, it's their loss, I'm spending $30+ monthly on Steam skins instead, which I can already use and try to make a profit.
As for why it's combined. I see it as the best way to make the skins exclusive, while also making sure that people who play alpha2 have a bigger chance of properly testing it because they invested a ton of money into it. If you had those things separated, waaay more people would would cosmetics and way more people would just come to alpha2 to fuck around.
Now, you could argue that "paying to test a game" is a bad practice, but at that point it's just "why should I not sell something that people are willing to pay more for?"