Battlepass in MMOs

State your opinion, I'll start with mine

They're dumb they are meant for repetitive games like shooters, they give you something to do in a games that are arena pvp weather it be a MOBA or Shooter. MMOs are supposed to keep you busy. adding chores on top of that for things I should just be able to work for tends to leave a bad taste in mouth.

Also the monetization of it is kind of dumb as well. FFXIV and WoW have raked in large amounts of money just doing cosmetics on the shop, do that without the predatory fear of missing out.

One other argument for me was when I was playing NW I wanted to support the game, I bought up dyes and emotes and spent more money on that game then I have any other game as far as cosmetics, I supported it because it was simple and clean way for them to make extra money. I stopped giving them my money after they started doing the battlepass. It even made me not care about collecting all the emotes anymore. It wasn't even to protest, I just stopped caring.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Noaani

Dygz wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Battlepass with cosmetics does one of three things.

1, it takes developer time.
2, it takes additional developers, which just results in the above.
3, it uses cosmetics that would have ended up in the store without a battlepass, which again results in the first point.

Thus, the only way battlepass in Ashes makes sense is if people would pay more to get the same item via battlepass than via cosmetic shop.

I personally don't think enough people are that stupid.

I really hope they aren't.

None of that is true.

One of them needs to be true.

It is not possible for none of them to be true.

Noaani

Dygz wrote: »

When I played vanilla Fortnite it was Save the World

Keep in mind - Fortnite is widely derided for its monetization strategy, and has lost over half a billion dollars in law suits it has lost - and that is only the ones it has lost so far, more are in the works.

While it may be easy to say it was only aspects of monetization that are at fault, all of Fortnites monetization is a single system, designed with the deception and addiction that they are being sued with in mind.

When it comes to monetization, "but Fortnite do it" is absolutely not an argument to do something. However, "because Fortnite do it" is most definitely an argument to not do it.

Otr

Dygz wrote: »

Otr wrote: »

So I have no idea why this thread has so many posts.
(and I even had the chance to quote the largest post ever - I got no achievement though)

Most of the posts are about why people like or dislike Battlepasses.

The vid you posted is from 2018, the first year of development.
Battlepasses have become quite popular in the last 5 years.
2018 is a year or more before Intrepid developed their Battlepass for APOC.
Everything is subject to change. Except no P2W.

Battlepass fits in with a quarterly release of content.
And it's not unusual for Battlepasses to have a free path as well as a premium/paid path.
So... Battlepass is not a major tweak of those quotes.

Wiki states that
"Ashes of Creation Apocalypse was free-to-play.[15][16]"
and it seems that it was designed from the beginning with Battle passes in mind:
"There will be an optional Legendary Path that players can purchase for USD $10 per 10 weeks.[79][81]"
and most likely without DLCs.

Searching further to see what happened to the game, I see that it even landed onto Steam
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1133430/Ashes_of_Creation_Apocalypse/
Or better say crash landed.

Here in this article
https://www.pcgamer.com/its-been-10-years-since-valve-invented-the-battle-pass-and-changed-gaming-forever/

pcgamer say

"
... Gun Mettle Campaign Pass in Team Fortress 2 in 2015, which did grant access to some new maps like a more traditional DLC, but also offered daily challenges that would grant cosmetics if you completed them.
...
2016 ushered in the official arrival of the battle pass
Since then it has just grown and grown, even adding brand new game modes that could have easily been sold as substantial DLC.
...
Valve has decided to stop doing them in Dota 2 entirely. "Battle Pass season has grown to be a tremendously exciting time in Dota," the statement says. "But it leaves the rest of the year feeling barren by comparison."
...
Whether you like them or loathe them, battle passes are here to stay as long as they remain so powerfully effective—or until someone invents an even better hook for keeping us logging in daily and reaching for our wallets.
"

So the Battle Pass would be a major tweak to the statement from 2018.
It makes no sense to have both DLC and Battle Pass.
For cosmetics, the Battle Pass is not necessary. GW2 has them too and they rotate them every few weeks, sometime they have discounts too and the store works fine.
For new content, DLCs were promised. That leaves Battle Passes without purpose except "for keeping us logging in daily and reaching for our wallets".

I want to login daily because the game is fun all the time not because developers make the game fun only during a Battle Pass. I don't need Battle Passes. I don't need DLCs either but if they insist to make them using the monthly subscription, so be it. I would prefer frequent granular updates instead which fit with a living world and nodes being destroyed and built again.

People who need Battle Passes are probably players who cannot commit to one game only. They play several games and switch between them, knowing they do not lose anything important while there is no battle pass.
And they cannot commit because those games are made intentionally that way, to be more interesting when a BP is released.

Ludullu

Dygz wrote: »

If you get the rewards from the Cash Shop, they will definitely be more expensive than the $10 in the Cash Shop because the Battlepass is a discount.

To me it's about that difference. It's obvious that devs spend the same time to make more expensive cosmetics as they spend making cheaper ones. So why should players pay more for the same work?

Usually things go on sale when it's obvious that the thing being sold has run out of its general worth, so people will only buy it at a high discount. Quite often shops will increase the cost of the thing right before the put it on sale, as well. This is not really the case with games, but the first point still stands.

Having a BP right at the game's release means that the game's worth will have been spent even before the game came out. And if the cosmetics in the BP are even relatively close in quality to the ones being sold directly - the BP sales will take away profits from those cosmetics, at a much higher dev cost (cause they'll have to develop a ton of cosmetics for the BP, as opposed to making just one).

Dygz wrote: »

He says another great example is Deep Rock Galactic - which is pretty much how the Fortnite Battlepass works. Also NW. And the WoW Season Pass is kinda similar.

Don't all three of those have seasonal BPs that then remove the cosmetics forever? I watched several more videos about the BPs and people have said that Fortnite doesn't sell cosmetics from the previous BPs.

DRG not only keeps them forever, but even gets them into the gameplay sources, if I understood the comments correctly.

Mag7spy wrote: »

You can view it as a seasonal discount. Else you need to use the same agreement if the store has something for 50% off and say they are fing over people cause now its on sale.

I addressed this above. I don't want the game to come out at "a seasonal discount" on parts of its content.

Doakland

Battle passes seem like a shortcut that some gaming companies defaulted to instead of having a monthly subscription model.
I get it. It's easier to charge for a game pass once a year/quarter than it is to ask for a month-over-month subscription fee for about the same price.
For game passes that offer solely cosmetics I'm less likely to purchase. I do buy more game passes that are more content related.

Mag7spy

I think I'm done with it at this point, people are making up things at this point for their arguments that make 0 sense. I make as well read a book if I want to see people making things up.

Ludullu

Mag7spy wrote: »

I make as well read a book if I want to see people making things up.

I recommend Brandon Sanderson's books

My lights have been going out again, so I finally got back to listening to Elantris. An amazing book. Highly recommend GraphicAudio's version of the audiobook

p.s. I did read the og response, just chose not to respond to it.

Otr

Mag7spy wrote: »

I think I'm done with it at this point, people are making up things at this point for their arguments that make 0 sense. I make as well read a book if I want to see people making things up.

I've seen your big post before you removed it

Dygz

NiKr wrote: »

To me it's about that difference. It's obvious that devs spend the same time to make more expensive cosmetics as they spend making cheaper ones. So why should players pay more for the same work?

Players aren't paying more for the same work, rather they are paying less for the same work.

NiKr wrote: »

Usually things go on sale when it's obvious that the thing being sold has run out of its general worth, so people will only buy it at a high discount. Quite often shops will increase the cost of the thing right before the put it on sale, as well. This is not really the case with games, but the first point still stands.

Maybe.
I don't pay enough attention to the Shops to know much about items going on sale in general.
Like I said, I only buy something from the NW and WoW shops about once per year - and it's not a discount that draws me in.
With Fortnite, new stuff rotates in and out of the Shop daily and we can't really be sure when it will rotate in again, so... can't really hope for or anticipate something being discounted. Best to buy it when you see it if you want it.
Although, there's way too much stuff that I want, so I do often let items slide by and hope they will return in a few weeks or months.

NiKr wrote: »

Having a BP right at the game's release means that the game's worth will have been spent even before the game came out.

Not really, but... OK.

NiKr wrote: »

And if the cosmetics in the BP are even relatively close in quality to the ones being sold directly - the BP sales will take away profits from those cosmetics, at a much higher dev cost (cause they'll have to develop a ton of cosmetics for the BP, as opposed to making just one).

We've already seen how the Cosmetics will work with the APOC BP.
It's not a much higher dev cost. And it's not really "much higher quality"; it's just variations on a theme - AND -
The Cosmetics versions will be easily recognizable compared to similar in-game Cosmetics.

NiKr wrote: »

Don't all three of those have seasonal BPs that then remove the cosmetics forever? I watched several more videos about the BPs and people have said that Fortnite doesn't sell cosmetics from the previous BPs.

Fortnite has a disclaimer that says some items may later appear in the Item Shop.
And NW and WoW have items that can return again the following year around the same time.
I think the Marvel Comics Season rotates into Fortnite every couple of years.

NiKr wrote: »

DRG not only keeps them forever, but even gets them into the gameplay sources, if I understood the comments correctly.

The video posted states:
The Performance Pass runs for several months and during, all players are able to earn rewards along a linear track. This tends to bring back veteran players and new players into the fold on a Seasonal basis. And more players playing the game makes matchmaking feel better.
Once the Performance Pass season ends, the rewards can't be obtained by playing the game anymore. But they maaaayyy in the future eventually be added to the Cash Shop. This means that the Performance Pass items maintain their rarity and uniqueness for many months - perhaps even many years - and that feels great for gamers.
And, sometime down the line, you might be able to purchase them flat out for real world money if you missed out on earning them - which is great for both the gamers and the game's developers.
That's how modern Battlepasses work - Fortnite, NW and WoW among them.
That pretty much describes, in a nutshell, exactly what I've been telling you this entire thread.
(I'm not sure what you mean by "getting them into the gameplay sources").

Noaani

Mag7spy wrote: »

I think I'm done with it at this point, people are making up things at this point for their arguments that make 0 sense. I make as well read a book if I want to see people making things up.

You should have just gone with an argument of "I like it, even if I can't justify it".

The reasons behind a battlepass are undefensible. That is the basis of the point I (and others, I assume) are making.

If you like the end result, cool, you are allowed to like it.

What you can't do though, not when people like myself are around, is successfully defend it.

Ludullu

Dygz wrote: »

That's how modern Battlepasses work - Fortnite, NW and WoW among them.
That pretty much describes, in a nutshell, exactly what I've been telling you this entire thread.
(I'm not sure what you mean by "getting them into the gameplay sources").

He made a mistake and was corrected in the comments

If Intrepid did this kind of BP - I'd have fewer issues with it. Though I'd still be asking why even have it, if it's completely free and then also goes into other game systems.

Dygz wrote: »

Players aren't paying more for the same work, rather they are paying less for the same work.

I don't think you directly answered this question from before.

Do you expect Ashes to not have a direct cosmetic purchase store at all?

Because if we have a direct store - you think that any cosmetic there will be priced the same way as the monthly bundle cosmetics were, right? Which means that they'll cost $5-25. And with the BP having multiple cosmetics for, presumably, $10 - this means that anyone buying a cosmetic from the direct store will be getting fucked over, cause they'll be overpaying by upwards of x20 more for one item.

Apok

Even if the BP is made to where it's 100% monetization and fomo free, there's still no point in it. MMORPGs have quests, events, raids, gathering, and crafting for anything they could have in a BP.

And what options do you have in a BP that you should already get a reward for doing regardless of the BP. like go kill 20/20 of this mob, instead how about just go kill stuff to sell on the market for income and that's your reward?

now with that being said, you also have a lot of system that interact with each other from mobs and their drops, crafting, balancing, etc. would you rather have devs sitting down to discuss those things or a battle pass

same goes for the UI, do you want the UI team working on the actual games UI or do you want them working on some flashy battle pass UI.

even if a game has a lot of funding, you only have so much labor

Dygz

Otr wrote: »

Wiki states that
"Ashes of Creation Apocalypse was free-to-play.[15][16]"
and it seems that it was designed from the beginning with Battle passes in mind:
"There will be an optional Legendary Path that players can purchase for USD $10 per 10 weeks.[79][81]"
and most likely without DLCs.

Searching further to see what happened to the game, I see that it even landed onto Steam
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1133430/Ashes_of_Creation_Apocalypse/
Or better say crash landed.

I mean... the wiki is great and all - but it does kinda help to have been around for the entirety of Ashes' development.
APOC had a Free Path and an optional (paid) Legendary Path.
APOC planned to introduce Siege Mode and Horde Mode as DLCs, but... ended testing before they did so.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGbqQ1QpD3U

Otr wrote: »

Here in this article
https://www.pcgamer.com/its-been-10-years-since-valve-invented-the-battle-pass-and-changed-gaming-forever/
[A]t their best, they can be a great addition—an extra layer of progression that's satisfying to work through and showers you with cosmetics at a discount price.

They can be a great addition - like I said.

Otr wrote: »

So the Battle Pass would be a major tweak to the statement from 2018.
It makes no sense to have both DLC and Battle Pass.
For cosmetics, the Battle Pass is not necessary. GW2 has them too and they rotate them every few weeks, sometime they have discounts too and the store works fine.
For new content, DLCs were promised. That leaves Battle Passes without purpose except "for keeping us logging in daily and reaching for our wallets".

Battlepass is a form of DLC. It's not really a major tweak. Especially not after the APOC BP in 2019.

Otr wrote: »

I want to login daily because the game is fun all the time not because developers make the game fun only during a Battle Pass. I don't need Battle Passes. I don't need DLCs either but if they insist to make them using the monthly subscription, so be it. I would prefer frequent granular updates instead which fit with a living world and nodes being destroyed and built again.

Sure. Everyone wants that. Typically, 75% of the player population stops playing once they hit Max Level.
And return when new content drops - but typically it takes 12-18+ months for an Expansion, while Battlepasses drop new content every 3 months. And the population spikes at least 3x at the beginning of a new Season.
Steven hopes Nodes will make it so that a Battlepass isn't needed. I've said several times that I don't think a Battlepass will be needed. Hopefully, Nodes will be succussful, but...
Steven still plans to drop new content every Season - and that has most successfully been achieved with Battlepasses. I'm not aware of other MMORPGs that have managed Seasonal content drops without it being in the form of a Battlepass.
Ashes doesn't need a Battlepass.
I expect Ashes will have a Battlepass. Especially since the currently stated model is sub + Cosmetics Shop.
(And because Intrepid already had a successful BP with APOC - also while they had the Cosmetics Shop)

Otr wrote: »

People who need Battle Passes are probably players who cannot commit to one game only. They play several games and switch between them, knowing they do not lose anything important while there is no battle pass.
And they cannot commit because those games are made intentionally that way, to be more interesting when a BP is released.

Battlepasses appeal to players who are motivated by story and Cosmetics, rather than by combat and BiS gear. The masses of MMORPG players who typically stop playing after they hit Max Level and are waiting for new content to drop before they play again.
They cannot commit because MMORPGs run out of new content in 3 months and then players have to wait 9-15 months or more for the next expansion. If new content arrives every 3 months, you can expect fans of that game to return to play whenever the new content drops.

nanfoodle

If the BP is nothing but cosmetics, I say let them be sold to let people help pay for new content. As long as they are not required for progression. why care?

Voeltz

I'm sick and tired of all the monetization in games, but I understand why they need some in free to play. A box price and/or subscription should be plenty, everything else should be earned in game. Ashes opted for the kickstarter/pre order packs, a sub fee and cash shop, which is more than enough. Battle passes are obnoxious and I refuse to pay for them. I'd rather choose skins I like directly from the shop and be able to use them once I have a specific item/character it applies to. Why would you make me pay AND grind levels to use them as if I was just unlocking them normally in game?

Noaani

Dygz wrote: »

Everyone wants that. Typically, 75% of the player population stops playing once they hit Max Level.

This is blatantly untrue.

95%+ of all in game character time in WoW is on max level characters.

This figure is 90%+ in ESO, EQ, EQ2, GW2 and a number of other games.

It is 99.5%+ in Archeage.

I do not have figures for either Final Fantasy game, though would expect it to be around 90%.

Otr

Dygz wrote: »

Otr wrote: »

So the Battle Pass would be a major tweak to the statement from 2018.
It makes no sense to have both DLC and Battle Pass.
For cosmetics, the Battle Pass is not necessary. GW2 has them too and they rotate them every few weeks, sometime they have discounts too and the store works fine.
For new content, DLCs were promised. That leaves Battle Passes without purpose except "for keeping us logging in daily and reaching for our wallets".

Battlepass is a form of DLC. It's not really a major tweak. Especially not after the APOC BP in 2019.

Ok so let's use the word DLC then.
I say for an MMORPG they are exactly the same, not just "a form".
Why use a different name for an MMORPG?

Dygz wrote: »

Otr wrote: »

Wiki states that
"Ashes of Creation Apocalypse was free-to-play.[15][16]"
and it seems that it was designed from the beginning with Battle passes in mind:
"There will be an optional Legendary Path that players can purchase for USD $10 per 10 weeks.[79][81]"
and most likely without DLCs.

Searching further to see what happened to the game, I see that it even landed onto Steam
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1133430/Ashes_of_Creation_Apocalypse/
Or better say crash landed.

I mean... the wiki is great and all - but it does kinda help to have been around for the entirety of Ashes' development.
APOC had a Free Path and an optional (paid) Legendary Path.
APOC planned to introduce Siege Mode and Horde Mode as DLCs, but... ended testing before they did so.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGbqQ1QpD3U

Your argument was that it was an old statement: "The vid you posted is from 2018, the first year of development."
The wiki shows that both statements were made close to each-other, the same year. For the free game which was a battle royale they used payed updates (Legendary Path)
For the subscription based game they said the updates will be free on top of the subscription.

Dygz wrote: »

Otr wrote: »

I want to login daily because the game is fun all the time not because developers make the game fun only during a Battle Pass. I don't need Battle Passes. I don't need DLCs either but if they insist to make them using the monthly subscription, so be it. I would prefer frequent granular updates instead which fit with a living world and nodes being destroyed and built again.

Sure. Everyone wants that. Typically, 75% of the player population stops playing once they hit Max Level.
And return when new content drops - but typically it takes 12-18+ months for an Expansion, while Battlepasses drop new content every 3 months. And the population spikes at least 3x at the beginning of a new Season.
Steven hopes Nodes will make it so that a Battlepass isn't needed. I've said several times that I don't think a Battlepass will be needed. Hopefully, Nodes will be succussful, but...
Steven still plans to drop new content every Season - and that has most successfully been achieved with Battlepasses. I'm not aware of other MMORPGs that have managed Seasonal content drops without it being in the form of a Battlepass.
Ashes doesn't need a Battlepass.
I expect Ashes will have a Battlepass. Especially since the currently stated model is sub + Cosmetics Shop.
(And because Intrepid already had a successful BP with APOC - also while they had the Cosmetics Shop)

They tried to monetize the free game and to collect even more money, with a buggy game, presenting it as an Early Access.
Just because they look the same and are made by the same people, does not mean you can expect they will use the same monetization if they said they will not.

Dygz wrote: »

Otr wrote: »

Here in this article
https://www.pcgamer.com/its-been-10-years-since-valve-invented-the-battle-pass-and-changed-gaming-forever/
[A]t their best, they can be a great addition—an extra layer of progression that's satisfying to work through and showers you with cosmetics at a discount price.

They can be a great addition - like I said.

They are DLCs and were said to be free.
It is not great to change their name and charge money.
Players were quite upset in their reviews
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1133430/Ashes_of_Creation_Apocalypse/

Dygz wrote: »

Otr wrote: »

People who need Battle Passes are probably players who cannot commit to one game only. They play several games and switch between them, knowing they do not lose anything important while there is no battle pass.
And they cannot commit because those games are made intentionally that way, to be more interesting when a BP is released.

Battlepasses appeal to players who are motivated by story and Cosmetics, rather than by combat and BiS gear. The masses of MMORPG players who typically stop playing after they hit Max Level and are waiting for new content to drop before they play again.
They cannot commit because MMORPGs run out of new content in 3 months and then players have to wait 9-15 months or more for the next expansion. If new content arrives every 3 months, you can expect fans of that game to return to play whenever the new content drops.

Let's just say "DLCs appeal to players who are motivated by story" without the "and Cosmetics" part.
GW2 has a "pay to play" and sells the DLC and indeed has versions which cost more and the more expensive ones have additional cosmetics, gems, max level boosts...

But the story is the common part which has to be payed because they don't have a subscription model.
In AoC, we have monthly subscription which should cover all the new added story, quests, areas... without additional costs.
Therefore players who pay monthly (or a bigger amount an year in advance) should get the story for free and be able to buy cosmetics from the store with embers:

Embers is a virtual currency that can be used to purchase cosmetic items within Ashes of Creation.[9]

If they want, they can synchronize and present new cool skins, costumes, dyes etc with bigger updates and bundle them together as special offers in the store. If you buy all new cosmetics instead of each separately you might end up cheaper. But those packages should not be called DLCs or "Battle passes". Those are just store content.

If DLCs bring new cosmetics as part of completing story, those should be available for free for all, as they pay monthly subscription.

Example 1: if a DLC will add a new jumping puzzle which sometime has new random skins from a pool of skins, that pool should be same for everyone.
There should be no pool of 12 skins because you purchased 2 of them in the store and others to have just a pool of 10 skins.

Example 2: if a DLC unlocks through the additional story a new mount, then of course we have to complete the story and unlock the mount with the default in-game skin to have the thing onto which you apply the cosmetic. Or buy the mount from somebody who completed the story.

Example 3: Same as 2 but skin reward instead.
if a DLC unlocks through the additional story a new skin, then purchasing the same skin in the store (if available) should grant you the skin immediately and not force you to go and do quests or complete a story.

Cosmetics should be visible in your inventory as soon as you own them.

Certain mount types might be limited in time and purchase-able later from whoever wants to part with them. They do not die permanently (unlike ships in Eve).
Nodes will change too. Story evolves.
People will miss out the content which changes constantly as part of a living world concept.
That's fine for me. If they can make some story stay in-game as part of instanced content, that's ok.
The open world should change.

In a fashion war, one could say that buying the cosmetics from the store is pay to win.
And I want to be able to skip quests rather than being forced to do activities I do not want, just to get the cosmetics I purchased.

Imagine Steven forcing you to go into the deep ocean to get something you payed for.

So be careful what words you use for what kind of content and how the game will change if you ask for something.

Ludullu

Dygz wrote: »

while Battlepasses drop new content every 3 months

You keep saying this, but what do you mean by it? Are you talking about the cosmetic rewards? And if not, then how exactly is a UI menu bringing that other content? Or are you saying that the BP pays for the new content, which is why they're always linked?

If a company can release new content every 3 months - they can just release it every 3 months. BP has nothing to do with that and has no relation to said content.

And if you do mean "cosmetic rewards" - as Mag keeps saying, that's not content for the absolute majority of players. Yes, you can RP in it or show off your grind/money to others, but the amount of people who'd call that content (or let alone "enough content to keep playing the game) is miniscule.

Xeeg

NiKr wrote: »

If a company can release new content every 3 months - they can just release it every 3 months. BP has nothing to do with that and has no relation to said content.

This is something like what I was imagining for Ashes of Creation. New content being released in the form of story arcs/side quests/commissions triggered by the AoC algorithm. Especially as the player base on a server starts getting to max level. I imagined our "Dailies" to be more about gathering/processing/crafting and preparing for node seiges, which are the renewing end game loop for the server.

You don't need a battlepass to tell you to "kill 10 boars", when your node needs 1000 boar hides per day in upkeep and another 500 to prepare for sieges. Here, "new content" could be things that happen while going to grind spots. I don't see how there is any value to make an additional paid option for more things to do and stuff to unlock, when that should be available to all players for the sub anyways and distracts from the main game.

What next, a BattlePass for an exclusive instanced arena for pvpers? Distancing the player base even more from the actual game?

Noaani

NiKr wrote: »

Dygz wrote: »

while Battlepasses drop new content every 3 months

You keep saying this, but what do you mean by it? Are you talking about the cosmetic rewards? And if not, then how exactly is a UI menu bringing that other content? Or are you saying that the BP pays for the new content, which is why they're always linked?

If a company can release new content every 3 months - they can just release it every 3 months. BP has nothing to do with that and has no relation to said content.

And if you do mean "cosmetic rewards" - as Mag keeps saying, that's not content for the absolute majority of players. Yes, you can RP in it or show off your grind/money to others, but the amount of people who'd call that content (or let alone "enough content to keep playing the game) is miniscule.

Something you may have noticed - I definately have - with the two people wanting a battlepass; they really aren't even attempting to describe how it would look in Ashes at all.

I can only assume this is because they know how easily that would make it to just rip to pieces.

Child Item