Think longer they already said the last game they took over it took around 10 months to build a team and release the first updates.
1 Like
Man I wrote a monster post here. Nah, deleted that. Xaldafax really already hit it with a TL;DR
The only way to increase monetization to very profitable levels right now is to squeeze the existing player base for more money per capita.
There’s one face to this, and that is the fact that the existing channels for monetization have room for more use. And those existing players happily paying a bit more. And some of that is so obvious we wouldn’t need hundreds or thousands of cumulative forum posts on the topic, you would think.
Not finishing the character models has been a huge mistake. The technical complexity, on the surface level, of some of what they have developed is very cool. But come on.
****in pants. Shouldn’t have to say more, but I’m also going to say “shoes” 
Ah what the heck I’m poking the bear let’s even say “Armor” 
Zero (apparent) development in this area for 4 years now.
We can have scarves, headdresses, mouth pieces already though and what do we have there? 11 items (most from release) and a couple of event/seasonals 
The models may not (yet) have attachments for clothes or armor. We’ve got body paints though (which can already be used as outfits, at least) which can also be pretty easily crowdsourced - this has been done successfully.
What do we have in this area? 13 items. Most from release. A couple of event/seasonals.
It’s always led to F2P/P2W spats but people will pay for blocks, block sets, etc… and some people will cry it’s not “100% fair” but also welcome to reality. At the end of the day it’s an entertainment service, not a virtual utopia 
People want this, and it would seem to require pretty minimal development to take advantage of some of it. Some of it though requires development that would support monetization more than game play (character model development) so it’s been neglected.
To further milk the existing demographic, and have them enjoy it, this is what can be easily done. To get past that, to sustain the sort of player base needed to fund the game past continuous maintenance/breaking even with a cash shop model that doesn’t heavily imbalance game play the number of players needs to increase.
Throwing a ton of players at the existing monetization model seems like it could readily scale up to support and even profit levels - in terms of numbers. But in terms of actual achievability - throwing those kind of numbers at the current real world situation is likely to be a recipe for disaster.
I don’t want to veer off topic with that here. It was made pretty clear that the situation - a year ago - was a mess. But also that the system was working. It just wasn’t getting the kind of numbers/use needed to sustain.
In light of that and what is known - or easily inferred against known data, additional systems for or methods of monetization are honestly probably a bad focus at this time. It’s about actually using what’s in place to better effect, while the systems to support larger numbers of citizens are worked out.
Again I don’t want to veer too far here, I’ll start another thread on that because honestly I feel like the more critical issues are not currently in the code. The monetization system is failing, because the game is failing. It was looking very unlikely that “old management” would ever address it.
“New management” definitely has a chance.
Ugh I deleted a massive post and replaced it with another rant 
sorry.
2 Likes
It’s a catch 22 really. Change the landscape and the monetization to squeeze more out of the current population is probably a VERY bad way to handle it or at minimum explain it.
A better way to explain it (and maybe do it) is to say the goal is to increase the player count and maybe dropping the price (hasn’t worked before alone) combined with a better NPE, a better marketing plan, more visibility, and an active dev team and community manager may be more than enough. But sure, if it’s all cosmetic stuff perfect. Skins are great!
Armor could just be added to the base game and then skins for those as cosmetic purchases. If the armor was sold in the store as skins with no added benefits other than looks perfect, otherwise totally against. Plenty of players that do pay quite a bit already may not be happy with paying a little bit more.
You tend to say this often when a discussion happens that is over a certain number of posts. I love the discussion and love that it continues, you could very well just ignore it and not add more to. I hope you do discuss it, but let discussions happen. I think we have had enough silence from James.
Discussions are great.
1 Like
Sure but in reality, that’s because I’m boggled by some of this. And also the fact that over time it’s tiring in a hurtful way to watch new excitement get crushed by the same cycle that could be, not suppressed, but more effectively channeled if the information was allowed to accumulate in a useful fashion.
I’m not shy and I continue to participate, even if that is only sometimes to point out that more information is available, or honestly that I feel people or persons are being hurtful or way out of scope with something.
In this case it regards the fact that the game has swirled down the tubes with conflict and, eventually (to your point) neglect. It is (of course in my opinion) so out of the larger scope, that at this time investing resources towards additional ways to monetize would be - perhaps fatally - a silly thing to do.
I think I’ve stayed largely on topic here. From the OP:
This is largely true, though “how much” is obviously arguable. But also unimportant in the context.
I’ve added a couple of points, though arguably they’re just refinements of “Purchasing of cubits”.
“Purchasing premium currency” is something that, for me at least, is the primary mode of monetization available here. And it hasn’t really even been tapped, much less explored. I’d venture to say with the fury against any hint of anything considered P2W, it’s been specifically neglected.
There are a number of relatively simple ways to address this, I think. With or without impacting the beast of “game balance” and whether or not blocks you don’t have to farm and craft represent paying to win.
Get people using it. Which means addressing other obstacles first right now.
Well I stayed on topic with the title
I think, give this a second, that gleam club should be pared back to nothing but beacon fuel.
This would avoid making it a further nexus of social impact and F2P/P2W issues. It would still be an issue - it would just be a standalone issue. It’s the primary chore required to persist in this persistent universe (fueling your beacons), and people want to pay for that.
Bling packs, Portal packs, Subscription style perks, Gameplay enhancements …
I’m all for it. 100% since day one. You comment on my adds but a bored and presistent researcher tracking me on this would find I’ve never wavered. You note I’m blunt well I’ve always pointed at this and asked why. It’s pay-to-play and IMO the pay-to-win argument has always been moot.
Just, not more separately valuable and also separately arguable things piled onto Gleam Club.
2 Likes
Probably bad news for boundless updates really because it’s not just one thing that needs fixing so maybe expect Changes around Christmas 2023 with a big content dump all at once hopefully they do testing servers first so at least we can see if it all works smoothly
First off, I hope I didn’t come off as disrespectful. Secondly, I actually value your opinions and observations as well as I value Dhusks.
Pay 2 Play almost sounds more ominous that Pay 2 Win … but I do agree there is no technical way to win in Boundless only allowing players to get ahead.
As I stated with the many things I feel that need to change, and most likely will according to the many posts from @monty1, once those are in place and vetted out, they will see what happens and if it brings in any more players. If it doesn’t, I totally foresee the game going full F2P with quite a bit more monetization. We all hope that if this happens it’s at least a fair F2P model as there have been so few.
I hope that if a GC+ was introduced it at least would only be one level. Maybe you get monthly benefits such as a new skin or skins monthly, maybe some extra creative blocks (still skins IMO), and as much as it hurts me to even mention it maybe some extra plots, extra coins, or something. I also like your idea of putting portal fuel behind gleam club somewhat granted that would greatly increase the amount of portals in the world and IIRC that was a real issue/concern.
Lots of options though and I do hope nothing that is purchasable gives a massive gameplay benefit to someone not wanting to spend a whole lot. I am pretty sure that may still happen … but as you say it’s Pay 2 Play or more Pay 2 Be More Special (for lack of a better term).
Appreciate the civil reply.
Some of these things can and should be separated from Gleam Club.
- Bling pack type stuff. This can be added as a cubit or cash level perk. There are channels to add it as both.
Beacon Level Sign Pack
- Offers emoji and colored text perks on signs in beacons owned by this player
- Purchased with Cubits periodically (month/year/etc)
- Developer + channel partner (Steam/PSN) revenue
Planet Level Sign Pack:
- Offers emoji and colored text to any signs placed on a given planet.
- Purchased with cash IRL (as planet fuel) periodically (month/year/etc)
- Token/item added to planet like planet fuel (can be donated)
- Developer revenue.
Other items can follow.
Character Customization type stuff is a separate item/issue. Tint kits vs. unlimited color changes. Emojis in chat. Character emotes. Colored text also, in any chat system that’s to come.
Character-level and Account-level packages are available
- Periodic purchase (monthly/yearly/etc…)
- Developer and platform partner revenue (purchased with cubits)
Next we have plot bonuses. Not important to the guy shipping out that just doesn’t want his (or her) base to vanish.
Purchasable Plot Bonuses
One time purchases available
- More Drama for your Boundless Dollar!
- One time revenue, lifetime maintenance costs!
- Stop it Moon Moon
Hmmm, maybe not 
Subscription/ One Time Plot Bonuses
- Grow your base or next build in a hurry
- Grind off your deficit over time (system already exists I think)
- Developer and platform partner revenue (purchased with cubits)
All good things, all separate from the super important matter of beacon fuel. And each individual channels for expansion and impact across what is likely to be an increasingly comparted universe.
Allowing “a la carte” purchasing in this area might actually enhance revenue, more than just lumping it all together does. Especially as people look for ways to increase recognition and engagement with more privately and/or group funded spaces and services connected to the overall universe.
A much larger boundless that functions anything like today’s boundless at a technical level is going to need more (not less) networks, hubs, and other infrastructure than we need today.
At the end of the day, it’s a hobby based experience for me and so all very casual. I have moods and “days” like anyone and frankly I’m turning into a grumpy old man - IRL and thus also online. But I don’t often feel the need to make explanations or certainly excuses for much of anything here.
I try to be polite, usually. I work to stay correct where that term even applies, and remember where that term can’t be applied (correctly )
Then I have silly days or tired days too but hey, I’m not a “professional” here. I don’t actually mean to be tedious. It’s just what happens 
EDIT: Oh carp I left off Portal Packs.
This is very desirable, and very hurtful. Cash or cubits for portal fuel …
This is like, 150% a separate issue from beacon fuel please let’s have it unrelated to gleam club. Or at least, to whatever evolves if they could/would separate that from the current vision of “Gleam Club”.
The redesign to these models was to support the additions of objects like we see. I don’t know if it did go to clothes items or not for the body but I do think so. I agree that paints work for now… I know they wanted to bring the other character models in but it required a full revamp of them to fit the stuff we have.
Are you saying per month? Right now I pay about $60/year in gleam club fees now.
Nope never said per month. My comment was in reference to same GC already in place. So if max got you 180 days then be the same thing, 180 days.
1 Like
Ah, okay, thanks for the clarification.
I was about to say, I’ll stick to my diapers then. LOL!
1 Like
Monty has stated possibly making Gleam Club. A subscription
I think anyone that’s levelled past lv1000 should be given a rift suit of armour for supporting the game haha 
2 Likes
My vote has always been cosmetic only.
No p2w. I don’t even like gleam club.
Cosmetics can be a big moneymaker. I’ve spent non trivial amounts of money on COD and Overwatch skins.
3 Likes
So here’s a thought you wanna save the game and make it a success then look at Minecraft. I mean there’s tons to buy if you want it, there’s a subscription for your own realm, and its only $8 a month (which is nice) but that’s only to allow people to be on if your not.
Here’s the biggest thing Boundless never did MARKETING…I mean you gotta advertise and do fun events and stuff with your game to make it worth people’s time. Why make it P2W when you can do events to earn something and keep that player interested in continuing GC.
Marketing will only go so far when half of the game is missing, you will only attract players for the short term, then they quit once they reach the end game which is missing and otherwise do not have long term plans that can be fulfilled with what the game already offers.
I feel the game needs at least its original content fully added, Titans and whatever else was on their website, then market the game.
3 Likes
I don’t really support any of those, I only really want cosmetics added to gleam club. Maybe 1 free rental planet along with gleam club?
Maybe the armor from alpha would be good, just like Ratchel’s suggestion
A tool to spawn meteors would also be pretty nice, but have it only be able to used maybe about 5 times a month, so it can’t be used to grief.
Also, add the stuff that was in the trailer! some people were completely drawn in by the trailer and give them what they came for!
1 Like
that price range would bury the game permanently. I don’t see raising that price as a wise decision in any way shape or form. You get players like myself and Razaryn you’re essentially asking me to now spend $100 every 6 months. Until there is an INSANE amount more content to this game, if they introduced a pay increase like that I promise I’d have nothing more to do with this game. Do I have the money to cover it? sure. Is it worth that even if it means losing all the progress I’ve spent all these years on? not even one slight bit.
not even with all those additional features you listed would it be worth that kind of a price tag. I think their price ranges sit in a terrific spot but the opening of F2P which Monty also mentioned would open up a much larger base of people who would be more interested in paying for something like GC if they didn’t have a price point to enter the game.
Please don’t suggest raising prices until there is an insane overhaul to the game and the current offered content.
5 Likes
You’re just blissfully unaware of people who have spent money on just purchasing cubits- I’ve known more than a few people that have done so. I’ve known some that have done so not even that long ago. I’d also not even begin to list that as a primary mode of monetization when i don’t think i could list a player that i know that doesn’t use GC, while it may be smaller amounts of money it is most widely accepted as a necessary purchase to most of the community. I think simply improving on the things offered by GC makes it even more of a clear choice for new players to want to sign up for.
also I’ve had the suggestion directly to James in the past and was met very firmly with, no. and for good reason, he was super correct that players like myself would figure out how to abuse the ever loving heck out of that system and would break the hunt mechanics. best to just leave that one as is.
3 Likes