Who’s to say they won’t give the game away free, if the MTs bring in sufficient revenue.
We as early access testers chose to pay whatever we have for involvement in Alpha stage.
I’ve read all of your posts Karko, and I’m still baffled as to why you object so strongly.
Who’s to say they won’t give the game away free, if the MTs bring in sufficient revenue.
Not everyone is going to pay for a subscription. Not everyone is going to rent a world. Not everyone is going to spend money on micro transactions. The majority of people will not do any of those things. Just like not everyone dropped $1000 on the game like you did.
What they are proposing for a cash shop is so far on the extremely tame side of things I find it difficult to really find any holes to poke at. Mainly cause there really aren’t any.
This assumption that tons of people are going to drop thousands on the game because of micro transactions is pretty silly and weak.
You are still getting everything you paid your $1k to obtain. If you were surprised a micro transaction store opened up for a game in 2018, I don’t know what to tell you. Most subscription games also have micro transaction stores. Its the best model around to allow a game to continue to expand. Since most do pure anesthetics its not a big deal. Path of Exile is a good model to look at. They provide convenience, but nothing is pay to win. Its mostly pay to look pretty.
There is a difference between sustainability and making it profitable enough to enlarge a company allowing for a game to have constant development. Subscription based games stop a lot of people from joining them out of principle. There are a lot of my friends in particular that believe they shouldn’t pay a subscription for a game they already bought. However, they have no issue dropping $10 a month for a new skin and whatnot. Doesn’t make sense to me, but it does to a lot of people.
From your posts it seems you are upset or have very strong feelings against what they are doing, and that is fine. Not all of us share the same opinion, and I think you will find most of us here aren’t brand new gamers blindly following the devs. We develop our own opinions off of what we want, and the 20-30 years of gaming experience a lot of us have.
Just something to keep in mind for everyone as they are posting.
Nobody is smoking anything, you paid 1000 to get the game built. You did not pay 1000 for the ongoing development of the game. Your payment covered what? 1.5 weeks of one person’s salary? The game’s been in development for 5 years, and it will continue to be in development after release. Us early accessers usually know that when we buy, we aren’t also guaranteed the “DLC” in the future unless explicitly told so. It would be a silly decision on their part if they guaranteed us a full ride scholarship for paying for early access. We helped fund the initial development of the game. Players who buy the game on release help fund the ongoing development. Let’s say devs want to keep the project running for as long as possible. Being locked by the initial backers and by the release purchases is not a good idea IF this game turns out to be success and they need to consider hiring new members and scaling up to increase their efficiency.
My bottom line opinion is that I don’t see any issue with having anything in game that is not buyable by real life money as long as it is available through regular gameplay also. If I want to drop money on diamond equipment why not? Someone has the time and someone has the money. With how game is becoming more complex I don’t think I’ll ever have enough time to experience everything there is. One option would be to buy boosters i.e. buffs to just enable you to do stuff more fast than usual, so you can’t buy anything but you can obtain stuff through gameplay in more convenient timeframe. Be mad all you want but not everyone has time to invest. All I see here is bunch of rage against how other games have hurt some of the people, and yeah there are disgusting examples all around. But it can all be done in nice way so everyone is happy. As long as there is no boxes with chance to get something I’m fine.
Yeah that’s a bit of a tough break, but 1000 bucks isn’t going to pay their bills for years to come. I understand that your choice could easily become a regrettable one, but I don’t blame the devs for this.
I don’t have their internal accounting numbers, but neither do you.
I mean, the point of these transactions is not that you should need to pay, but that should you want to, you can.
I said paid 1000 to get the game built because he was making the argument I was unwilling to pay. My point was I have paid for the game to be built, thus most of the cost I should be paying for in the continuation of the game, not buying it all over again through other mechanics. What was expected versus what I got is where the anger comes from. You either say pay me for the game and I will make it and charge you got the cost to keep playing it, Or you say this game is free and you can pay for it in micro-transactions. It is having paid for a game AND being microtranned that pisses me off. Especially when in the long term funding thread it was layout as subscription from hosting.
If they had said upfront hey look were going to microtran you. The expectations would have been set. Honestly if this was the model they planned to go with Ben should have said that in the EA video. Because then the consumer could have made an honest decision about whether or not they wished to support the endeavor.
Just to mention a few, there are many other games that you pay for in advance that also have microtransactions:
If you feel it should be a subscription why not spend X per month on the microtransactions? Or pay for the monthly VIP club that they will offer to match that model.
With the model that they propose you can also choose to pay nothing and keep playing the game for the rest of all time - banking on others who are happy to buy microtransactions to fund it for you. Or you can blow 1000s because you’re so happy with them. Why is the developers giving us choice a bad thing?
Because I want to pay a sum a money, and have access to all of the games content. In a sub model that is what happens. You saw pay me X and you can do everything the feature set has to offer. When you go to a micro tran instead of just building content because the revenue is in place. You have to start inventing all sort of additional content that you can exclude by paywall to try to get people to spend money on. Yes there is choice but it comes with a price, and it is a better value to eat it up front and enjoy the content, then constantly trying to be sold on something.
There has been no indication that content will be behind a paywall? Only plots + cosmetics for qubits - which can be earned ingame. And you have paid a sum of money, have access to all content and - by all indications - will continue to have access to everything new even if you decide not to spend a cent more.
-The micro transactions aren’t P2W.
-It’s debatable if anything could be P2W in such a passive game.
-The MTs won’t adversely affect other players who choose not to use them.
-the main benefit of MTs is to give extra plots, of which any backer will receive an increase of anyway.
-you’ll still earn plots as you level
I’m sorry but I’m still really struggling to understand your concerns Karko.
yeah thats against the law
I get why you are angry now, as you thought you were told one thing, now the model is changing or being described in detail, and have invested a lot into the game financially.
A sub model just isn’t sustainable. There is a reason almost all gaming companies don’t use it anymore. It doesn’t work in today’s market. I am old, I was around when it worked well, but these days people don’t want to pay subs, they’d rather pay as they go. - However, sub model + pay as you go usually works well, so people get a choice. I am not sure what the sub model would offer here, extra plot gain and more skins?
I’d say that there is a “feeling” side of the subject that gives an output of 2 main scenarios:
Devs release 1.0, then focus theyr mind only on fix bugs, DLCpay2download and microtransaction shop;
Devs release 1.0, then continue adding stuffs to the game and releasing new content with DLC for free while adding fancy/artistical to the microtran shop
What i mean is that the “feeling” on how the game is followed by the devs is really important, if the players base think they just wanna squeeze the chikken to get the egg, then obviously you don’t want to be squeezed…
but if you like the way the take care of the content, regardless the need you have of that fancy item, you will squeeze yourself - and that is why in LOL the skin shop works so much compared to runepages and other items that boost your account
make me feel like a wanna squeeze myself
after this i should change name, nick, nationality and vanish in the dark
I can certainly understand the source of @Karko 's concerns. As someone who has also invested more financially in the game than a Explorer supporter, I certainly do not want to feel that I am not getting what I paid for. I cannot speak for Karko, but I bought the higher level package for the perks once the game is launched. According to @james none of the perks offered to the higher level package owners are being affected. If they were not going to use the multiplier on plots purchased through the exchange, then I think there might be a valid complaint. Since my perks are not being affected, I am not unhappy with the proposal. I have enjoyed the game (ok I took a 3 month break and I am getting back into it), and by being in early we are at least able to express opinions that are in some instances actually affecting the game. I think the Developers are always listening to us and they do take our opinions seriously. They may tune what is available through the exchange and how it works based on some of the strong opinions being expressed. I would agree with a lot of the others that have stated that as long as there is nothing (other than cosmetic) that can be bought on the Exchange that cannot be earned or created in game, then I am ok with it. Since everyone will get qbits as they level, everyone has the option what to buy from the exchange. If you want more THEN you invest additional cash. I think this is an important dynamic that means you have the option to invest time in the game to get qbits instead of cash.
I am not dismissing @Karko and do not want it to sound that way. I would agree with others that by offering a subscription for undisclosed perks or micro-transactions through the exchange the game has a better change of ongoing financial success and it does offer people a choice. I think having a choice is good.
I was always concerned about the game being funded only by new players and rented worlds. If the renting of worlds is too expensive then fewer people will rent. The subscriptions and Exchange give them several more revenue streams that will hopefully keep the game running for a long time.
not that you were unwilling to pay, but that other people are willing to buy micro-transactions and you don’t have to buy them if you don’t want to.
I’m sure some (if not all of you) are aware of this fact but I thought I would just state it again.
You will be able to obtain everything from the exchange (excluding private worlds) without paying any money.
You can earn cubits by playing the game and levelling up. Paying money just speeds up how quickly you can get exchange items.
Edit: I forgot to say that VIP/Support Club will not be purchasable with cubits and only real world money.
That’s the main thing I ask for in a MT store. My greatest hope though is that being as the game is also supported by pay-to-play and rented servers, that the qbit acquisition rate is not so slow that a dedicated player such as myself has no hope of getting a sizable portion of qbit products in a reasonable amount of time. Obviously that is a broad and non-specific value, but I hope you all get the gist of it.
Will we be trying out the qubits and store before 1.0?