I don’t mind monthly fees, but this game has already been advertised as being b2p. And this thread is intended to discuss alternative methods of funding outside of just buying the game. If you have any ideas outside of server rentals and cash-shops, please share them 
!
Your quote is emotionally powerful and touches on some very serious themes but I still don’t see it as a proper argument. The first sentence mentions that people play games, among other reasons, to escape the general inequality of life. Yet your second to last sentence says that whether or not people can afford the items is irrelevant. I’d argue that the latter is completely contradictory to the former. If the general inequality of life, i.e. financial status of players, is a major contributing factor to the reason people play games (to escape from their financial status compared to other individuals) then it is quite relevant.
Regardless of the contradiction that I believe is present, I’m going to pick out what I think the two main sub-arguments are and address each as separate arguments.
[quote=“Vastar, post:233, topic:619”]When your wallet becomes an increasingly powerful tool, when options are made available that allow you to stand out even more some people see this as a violation of the sanctuary they’re already paying to escape to.
[/quote]
My interpretation of the above: Adding items from a cash-shop breaks the reality of the imagined world.
Backing tiers already have access to exclusive tools/weapons, titles, beacon sizes (game-breaking), etc. No one is complaining about these. With 4800 wearable pieces available at 1.0 on top of a variety of races and appearance customizations, it’s unlikely people are going to have difficulty standing out in the way they’d like. If anything, adding additional options can be argued to increase the realism of games. And if someone truly feels like a cash-shop violates their sanctuary, they should likely seek professional help immediately. I say this not as a joke, but with 100% seriousness. If the addition of a cash-shop harms someone emotionally or mentally, they should seek assistance. I’d argue that model/armor skins or vanity items could easily be interpreted as an addition to the game’s imagined world. Humans are an adaptive species and adding in new content to an imagined world should be readily acceptable to most people if the idea of adding extra content is (otherwise any game with any expansion ever would be considered as a violation of the sanctuary the game provides to people trying to escape reality).
One could even argue that adding cash-shop items enhances the realism of the imagined world. For example, the costumes, pets, mounts, etc. sold in ESO. I could easily argue that giving myself a cat that is only obtainable through “crowns” (the ESO currency) is because of some role-play details that deepen my immersion in the game and increase the joy I gain from playing it. Likewise, the wedding costumes, which are used in weddings between players, can also further enhance both immersion and satisfaction. What’s more sacramental than a nice marriage eh?
And here again is the “I need money to buy cash-shop items I want” argument. It’s completely true, cash-shop items require cash. But as I already pointed out, backer tiers already offer increased benefit and both increased game-breaking and non-game-breaking rewards go to people with a higher level backing tier. In the case of the tools and weapons, you’re gaining something additional and exclusive to only those tiers. How is this any different from gaining additional wearables for funds? Why is your argument against a cash-shop and not against backing tiers and rewards in general?
Anyone who wants to play a video game like Boundless while entirely rejecting the reality of money has already failed themselves. Because Boundless is not f2p, it’s b2p. In other words, you need to have money to even access the game. So rejecting real-world money because you’re playing in an imagined world isn’t 100% possible to begin with. So if we focus instead on the “riding on the coattails of money” to mean that those with coattails belong to a tailcoat, which is a garment historically worn by the wealthy, we get back into the argument that people with more money in the real-world can afford things that others may not be able to afford. Which is good and all. Except that Boundless has currency. And that fact that people with a higher amount of money can buy more things than people with a lower amount of money can doesn’t go away. It’s valid in both the real and imagined worlds. But Boundless still lets you leave behind any real-world class systems so roles can be totally reversed. Someone could run a completely success and dominating mining company in-game with employees and shops in different cities and everything and yet not be as well off in real-life. That’s part of the game and seems like it more than lets someone escape their real-world financial status.
Exactly what @Havok40k just said. Maintaining is NOT what we want. We want funds to allow for enhancements in terms of performance and content!
And don’t forget that not just devs get paid here. It takes a village to make this baby. They also have a QAer and some artists/animators on their team, they have to pay for their office and power bills, etc.
