Boundless is Dead. Long Live Boundless!

General
63

I have read through all the posts and have some comments I would like to make.

As someone that has spent a great deal of money supporting the game in early access and once it went live, I will likely be willing to continue to spend money on the game (depending on the direction Monumental takes). I have been willing to rent planets and buy gleam club. I have purchased cubits to exchange for plots. The one thing I do not see myself purchasing on a regular or semi-regular basis is cosmetics. If a purchase does not offer some benefit in game (like a rental planet or gleam club), then I will not be spending any money on it. Hopefully Monumental will find a way to monetize the game in a way that can support running the MMO and in addition providing enough additional funding they can support ongoing development. I also hope that the way is more than offering a different colored hat each month.

I do think it is a bit distressing to read comments from players that want to play in an MMO with a public universe of over 50 planets and think that their initial purchase should give them full access to anything in that universe essentially forever without them ever needing to put in any additional funds. I do understand that not everyone has the free cashflow to pay for rental planets and gleam club. But to then turn around and say it is P2W for these to be offered or that every rented planet should be open to all players to do as they wish is just confusing to me. You want to play a game that has ongoing costs, you do not want to pay for those ongoing costs, but you do not want the players that are essentially paying for the universe you are using to exist to get any sort of benefit for the money they are spending??? I will never understand this position.

I could make an argument it is unfair to allow a player to play the game for 3000+ hours a year since I do not have that amount of time to dedicate to the game. In the end, the game will need a way to encourage players to be willing to spend a great deal of time playing the game and in spending money on the game to keep it running, Both types of players offer something to the community.

The current size of the Boundless universe was largely driven by the free player weekend on Steam where we had over 1000 simultaneous Steam players which was in February 2019. Just like at launch, there were issues with planets being so full of players that other players could not reach them. Unfortunately, the new players did not seem to stick around and we ended up with more planets than needed (and the cost of running those planets) and a bunch of empty builds that we had to wait for the beacons to die before they went away. I do think this and other items do show how bad the NPE is and I am personally glad that Monumental also sees this and will focus on this once they get a team in place. The population is never going to grow into the existing universe unless we can get and retain new players at a much higher rate than it does now.

Edit:
I must also agree with the statement made that Monumental needs to do what is best for the ongoing survival and development of the game and not necessarily for the existing players. There are unfortunately, not enough of us to pay for the running of the game and ongoing development. Hopefully Monumental will find a way to draw in and keep new players and encourage players to stay with the game and spend money on an ongoing basis to support the game. I have no idea what that will be like, but I at least acknowledge the possibility that it might not be a game I want to play. That is just the reality given the current situation. Monumental finds a way to make Boundless profitable or it shuts down.

3 Likes
64

There is no planet that has a dedicated server instance, I’m positive. Maybe there’s a regional situation right now somewhere but currently AFAIK, all servers are supporting multiple planets. The server data is available but I don’t know if there’s a compiled list right now of which planets are grouped.

As far as disk space requirements, the planets are pretty big. I’m not (yet) inspired to start collating data from the forums here but I think that Luca or Ross may have posted some info on this. It’s multiple gigabytes, before anyone starts editing. Traffic, actual cycle consumption is another issue and that can fluctuate wildly.

A half dozen people can lock up an entire planet. A dozen can do it easily. I’ve seen one player make at least an entire region inaccessible. The portals will try and open but if you’re near them it may take a few minutes or a pause in their activity to allow it to open.

Yeah, I’ve never seen this as a “real” problem. It’s a perception issue, and publishing real numbers would address it for most, IMO.

65

It is hard to get real numbers. We have steam numbers
Boundless - Steam Charts

And these numbers are total players (PS and Steam) on non-exo planets

Boundless Crafting

These are point in time and do not give us any sense of unique players in a month or even over a given day.

1 Like
66

Man at this point, that’s putting in some work :beers:

For sure this is key. Here we have other people saying that’s the only thing they’re likely to spend money on (the colored hats) so at least it’s clear that there are players interested in a wide and varying set of options.

I’m for separating gleam club into at least two packages. There are IMO plenty of people that would happily pay for the current functional perks. And I guess there’s a market for a package that includes strictly beacon maintenance perhaps with some additional plot and beacon related perks.

Cash for portals, always hotly contested. But look if we have gleam club that gets you “gleaming” with cosmetic and decorative perks, and another package that gets you the permanent beacon fuel, maybe a plot bonus, and a single portal for network attachment, other people are going to buy that, some will buy both.

I’m happy to pay for gleam club, when I’m really active. I’d be happier if there was a cost reduction to just retain builds when I’m less active. I personally think there’s room for change here.

This crappy attitude is one of the two main reason this conversation exists. The other being “it’s a sandbox so I should be able to do absolutely whatever I want”. The way this game is built, throwing that particular buzzword at it was obviously a huge mistake. It’s proved out very poorly, and where we are right now in terms of who has stayed the obvious disdain for creative building doesn’t help.

They should have gone with “open world”. It took me a couple of years to even understand the problem here, but it’s very real. People want to flex with “sandbox play” in the actual persistent MMO verse and it just hasn’t panned out.

This is so key, and with the summary of issues here, the (intended) thrust of the conversation.

To date this conversation always goes very poorly. It generates a ton of negativity and grandstanding with very little productivity. I understand people had high hopes. People in general also tend to approach an existing situation with the idea that it’s perpetual, or that key points shouldn’t be changed. This creates an awful “all or nothing” scenario, and look where we are now.

IMO anyone who actively argues against this point is pure noise. And there you go. With no idea what direction Monumental has in mind some of our talk may be wasted speculation. But just taking every opportunity to harp on any mention of ways to support the game is pointless and suppresses useful conversation.

If you’re never going to pay - honestly - sit back and take what comes your way. There are others who will support the game for you but not necessarily to your liking. Personally thoughts and opinions are all welcome but just actively dragging everybody through the mud over it is wrong.

EDIT: The filter alerted me to my use of a word. Probably Y7 acceptable for TV purposes, too. :rofl: I changed it to “harp”.

67

Yes in a way they’ve proven counter-productive, too. Here we were sitting and discussing those numbers, looking at player levels as low hundreds, then james came out and said MAU was actually around 3k.

3k is a workable player base. If there were that many people even logging in monthly to sustain their builds or other involvement - that’s a fair base for some more pointed monetization. More but less expensive options (even just a more pointed breakdown of the existing perks) should result in increased interest, and improved engagement. At least that’s what I think.

68

For me personally. I think gleamclub is perfect. But would pay for a gleamclub + for added perks. Like I mentioned before. Added plot bonus is a great way to entice people to pay more.

Also. Sure some people won’t pay for cosmetics. But every person I’ve spoken to in voice from multiple guilds said they 100% would pay for cosmetics.

Looks at how much money people spend on Fortnite or warframe. Just 2 examples there’s a ton of other games that can be added to this list.

Once the NPE is created and a lower price point for the game and some advertising. I could see a steady flow of players giving boundless a try. Needless to say not everyone will stay. But the ones that do will likely spend money initially.

Making buying plots a little more enticing would help too. Currently I don’t think you get enough plots for money. And many people have said the same to me.

4 Likes
69

This is … not wrong. Someone mentioned the number of plots they had and I did the math. I wanted to point out that it was roughly USD1400 worth of plots, at retail. I’m fully supportive of many forms of monetization but for that amount of money vs. the amount of plots you get? No.

F2P up front might help justify that, but it’s still very discouraging. There need to be more and smaller channels, to encourage more regular spending, I think.

1 Like
70

One big element that has been missing imo is advertising. Monty mentioned it (IIRC) & bringing in thousands of new players. IDK if that would be from giving out keys to content creators and their followers, putting it on Keymailer, finding streamers or what. You can farm your current group of players until they’re tapped out, but you need the new player acquisition machine running. There will always be an issue with player retention. All games suffer from that - it cannot be prevented. You do need a healthy influx of new/curious players to keep everything humming along. The beauty of Boundless is that the way it was created, it can be easily scaled up to meet & exceed demand.

I agree with this. Boundless isn’t a game you buy at Walmart, then take it home to play by yourself. It’s a living universe that is ever changing & expanding with live events, etc. You can’t expect professional adults to go to work everyday 9-5 to keep it running and/or adding content, keep paying for the forum, owners to pay employee wages, for the initial purchase price you paid once, 4 years ago. It would be nice, but things don’t work that way. Servers & databases aren’t free either. There are operating costs that have to be paid. I think it’s good if they can keep a lot of purchases optional (ie: rental planets, Gleam Club, etc) since this game is somewhat directed at kids.

If they add a subscription that includes a monthly allotment of portal time, oort, and/or plots for Sovereigns…please take my money!!!

5 Likes
71

I’m not sold on F2P. At least not right off the hop. $10-20 price point is fair in my eye. (Current price on PlayStation is $50-60 Canadian Dollars for the base game and about $100 for deluxe edition)
If they ever put boundless on the monthly free game on PlayStation Plus there would be a surge of players for sure. But definitely shouldn’t do that before a NPE is complete.

3 Likes
72

IDK how players who are paying the full price really feel about that when they realize there are still a ton of legitimate $2 keys on even some of the less “shady” sites.

I refuse to link anything, but please people if you go looking for this stay off of any site offering steam accounts or weird packages!!

The second round of the humble bundle package really did a number on this. The difference in what people have paid to get in game is pretty startling - and I’m not including gifted keys in that.

I’m pretty sure the full price for digital deluxe is still USD60 here.

Yeah I always say this whenever advertising comes up. The game is not ready for a flood. A fully viral situation would break it badly. Not just the NPE but some form of addressing the expansion/contraction issues are fully necessary for this to be an overall positive.

1 Like
73

This is exactly my feel for a price point. I think it keeps Trollers out and yet still drives some income for the game. I did read where someone suggested like a Perk package you could get for Wayfarer Totems, iron fist, to craft and such that later players could say pay for as a separate purchase. Allowing them to craft them as well. I think that would be nice as i believe that the numbers of those that could have dwindled.

3 Likes
74

I’d pay for the wayfarers totem recipe and the chieftain head piece.

4 Likes
75

I am not a fan of the idea of taking the items that were granted to players who either paid more already to get them (like a backer package) or the items granted for early access and making those available again to all players, even if it is for cash. Seems to me like a slap in the face to those players that paid for an exclusive item. What else are they going to take away from early backers and allow anyone to get? The early backers did not necessarily get everything promised to them as it is.

If you want to take the item and recolor it or like with the fists, offer it in another material, then I have less of an issue. I am still not sure it is the right way to treat players, but is a compromise that might put some easy money into Monumental’s pocket for other things.

1 Like
76

I got distracted, I was going to dig up an earlier discussion on this. If people are interested I can find the link.

I’d love a supporter package. I don’t know if I’d be willing to pay the USD 5000 that people paid for that 200% bonus. Ah hell, right now there’s no way I could pay for that. People talk about it longingly but yeah, don’t forget it came with a $5000 price tag.

I don’t think that they should sell any of those items personally. Higher tier plot bonuses and new items would be extremely welcome, though. Just not selling the items that were well paid for, and promised to be unique.

EDIT:

I reposted that list recently. Honestly some of what was missing was overpromised. But they really failed on some simple items as well. They had more than sufficient material to create a digital art book, for instance, and a graphic designer whose work wasn’t getting used.

I came after release, but for those early backers, the struggle was real. I have lots of sympathy.

77

well i would just say put qol features behind a paywal. automatic sorting system? hell i am in.
single block storage, like the reclaim, that is accessable settlement wide but has to be expanded by money – yummy
automatic bow augement refill - yes pls ;-;
craft all and take all but - no that one has to be free for everyone
someting like timegated exp booster - possibly
inventory expansion - yes
moar cosmetics - yes yes

i mean the possibilities and even low hanging fruits for this are basically boundless

2 Likes
78

I heart the input lol.

Some of the basics just need to be added for basic retention. The craft and move all, sheeeesh.

Some of the other items many people have already stated they would pay for. Low hanging fruit indeed.

Again with the tokenized world fuels, as well. It seems like a no brainer to capture that revenue and also remove incentive for any “dark” markets.

79

I get your point but but how many early backers are still around to make the items? If they are around then the items become extinct? Making the early backers version an exclusive color/material is a great idea as long as the function of the item does not change. It is a new company and they now can monetize in any way they need to keep the game running and still make a bit of profit.

2 Likes
80

Monumental could definitely add some options for players to purchase. Inventory expansions, tool skins, machine skins, outfits, emotes, extra fuel slots for portals, re-apply buffs/augments, multiple beacon reclaims, and sovereign color resets are some ideas that spring to mind. In order for continued development on the game I hope to see them increase monetization along with working on the new player experience.

2 Likes
81

Some older discussion on this topic, I went ahead and dug up the link.

Some people have expressed concerns about overpowering those items, but that’s too much I think. The items are supposed to be unique but not necessarily the best.

We should have some lucent totems by now IMO. Mmmm there would be crying but stuff like that could be fed in via new packages.

Also I just about guarantee that if you set up and make a post, someone will show up and craft wayfarer totems for you within 24 hours. The masks - they stand for something. Again bring us new items instead.

Just IMO of course, but we already know it’s a widely held opinion.

There’s a lot to add. There’s a lot of room to grow. I think the only reason we’re still staring jealously at the early backer stuff is because there’s really been very little added for all the years since.

I’m trying to find the list, it’s frustrating I just posted it recently. If you look though, there’s already a lot more on there that they didn’t get, than what they ever got.

I’ve been trying to bring awareness to this but sovereigns enable some much more flexible use of the reclaim system. Just open/close could be part of a package.

83

Do remember many of the backer things in general weren’t fully delivered on either in some ways…

1 Like