The point is to get users to consider the possible ramifications of the design instead of just nodding and going wow that sounds great without realizing what is being allowed to enter the game. The idea is not left field considering taxes are being built.
The hypothetical scenario proposed is basing the prestige value on number of plots which shouldn’t be the case in future. Other things like user activity, block types, block variety, shape variety and transactions would play a bigger role in how well a settlement performs. Yes, more plots means you can do so over a bigger area but it still needs all of the above to complete with other settlements.
I think it’s pretty realistic that someone would propose a reward for being mayor, top 5 prestige in a world, etc. And that we are prone to head nodding, without fully understanding the impact (because the idea will sound great).
@Karko is pointing out that we should be careful/critical of rewards that are influenced by plot gains
I too disagree with the suggestion that any of the above plans are even slightly P2W. I do respect the opinion of those who do though, and we should keep discussing like adults to help the excellent devs of this game.
I don’t see any significant alternatives to the plot ideas, as this is the most likely area of income, and no one can deny the developers funding, surely?
I’m about 250 hours in. Not as far as some of you. Perhaps some rich players can comment.
Personally I don’t agree plots = income at all.
Shops equal income.
Lucky mining runs equal income for me.
Having a popular location equals income.
That’s what I have experienced. If you can gain those things through paying for them, then yes, it would be pay to win. What we are winning who knows but it would fit the current popular use of the term. Buying or gaining plots doesn’t do that for you. Gathering resources does, stocking your shop well, or being a social well portal rich area.
Plots don’t equal prestige either, I am not sure where someone got that from. My wider expansive beacons/plots have very little prestige compared to my dense ones.
Personally as long as competitive play is not harmed by any system then I see no issue. Considering we are expecting to get a lot of worlds on release, space won’t be near the issue is could be with 12.
This looks like a good solution.
Capping the number of plots counted, or having exponential fall off would potentially make it balanced between a regular player and someone with extra plots. Making the extras truely cosmetic.
Daily player activity in some rolling average makes a lot of since because it solves the problem of alts being used to add to pop count because it would become extremely taxing for all the players to constantly have to keep logging all the characters in day after day. Thus allowing for a realistic view of activity a great metric!
Transactions are good as well the commerce centers truly are the functional cities, it is not easy to build a market hub, interesting twist this might encourage physical shops versus portal linked ones.
These mechanics would be a LOT harder to game than building requirements.
An idea in the same vein of increasing the complexity of prestige to prevent gaming. Some kind of metric that tracks socialization in a given settlement would also be a good addition. Players sitting around and chatting in game/ and also emoting each other are adding to the reality of a city. I have observed this in game and this would help to reward social players that really do just want to talk to people and meet other players. It is value add compared to a lifeless decorative city.
I’m not really know how to express this in english but… I’m love how Boundless’s dev team looks for feedback, player’s opnion and handles updates and new stuff to come.
About monetization, I’d pay for:
- Private worlds (specially if “creattive mode” were allowed there. I struggle to build before planning the exactly design of my builds)
- Animations, emotes, dances (That’s always nice to have)
- Skins (tattoos and diferent caracter customization)
- Effects (elemental particles, just for look)
- Beacon Fuel (That’s controversial, but as a full time workerd and student I have dificult time to enter the game (just login to fuel the beacon), so I’d pay to keep my beacon alive)
About plots, I don’t think I’d pay for plots for now, I never ran out of them, but I don’t think that would hurt ecconomy.
About armor. that’s something I’d like to be a game mechanic insted of liked to cosmetics, for you craft weapons and armor.
I like this too.
Do you think possibly plot purchase would be a concern outside economic issues? I worry the public worlds may be majority reserved by people with resource to do so.
I think if people are paying to reserve that much space (331,776 plots to reserve an entire planet), they will be able to afford to host new planets =D
Which is cheaper than buying all those plots.
Agreed but doesn’t have the prestige or troll value of owning plots on a planet. 331k plots but how many desirable plots? How many ringing each Sapphire spot on the Nasharil atlas? I’m probably overthinking it, as is my nature, but it just feels like without an upper limit it could be abused. I’ve watched people drop thousands of dollars without thinking on a game.
On the plus side: if people are purchasing plots and reserving the majority of all the worlds out there, they’re providing an income stream to the devs—which can be used to host more worlds
Your right that it would more that cover the cost of many planets. It will be largely effortless to add more planets. The system has been designed to be extremely scalable. However he is right that it could be used to troll with. I think a cap on the number of plots a player can claim on a public world would be a decent sanity check.
And what cap do you think is reasonable for a single character to be placed at on any individual public planet?
In terms of the 2D claim map. 5% of available plots. Within that 2D limit they can claim vertically all they want.
If someone drops several thousands of dollars to reserve an entire planet rather than rent one. - Well apart from being bonkers, I say let them and release 3 more lol.
I always find it interesting in monetisation discussions that people regularly fall back to the argument that real-life finances being able to have an effect on in-game happenings has the potential to totally ruin an otherwise ‘fair’ game.
Boundless (and in fact, any game where you accrue resources only by actively participating) is already an entirely unfair playing field due to factors directly related to player’s real lives. If there are complaints that someone with more money has too much of a potential advantage over others, why aren’t there complaints that someone with more time has too much of a potential advantage over others? Excluding the extremes of how much a person can either play or pay, I’d suggest that a person who is able to play 3+ hours a day during the week and more during the weekend has a massive advantage over someone who can only play for a couple of hours on Saturday and Sunday each. A much bigger advantage than I’d wager spending [£$€]10-20 a month gives over being free to play.
I’m definitely in the group that has more time than money, but I don’t begrudge people who have more to spend to make up for less time. To be entirely honest, any goal I could set for myself as an individual is just as easily rendered unachievable by a person who can spend 10+ hours a day playing as by one who can drop a grand on the game without flinching.
This is an great point I’m sad that I did not think of it myself.