Long term game funding

[Heurazio]

Two days not able to read nor write and there are like 100 new posts … let’s start from the top and i hope i don’t miss something

@Clexarews

can you guys explain why you’re against non-game breaking, non-aesthetic progression items? So far I’ve just seen “I don’t like it” but that doesn’t show me why.

I totally agree with @Vastar:

@Vastar

I think I just miss ‘the good old times’ where buying a game meant that you got all the content and awesome extras had to be unlocked and not bought.

If i buy a game, i like to be able to get ALL the content without extra purchase. If you like to say “But @Heurazio you are Chieftain and you already got ‘extras’ that can’t be acquired through gaming, this is ‘unfair’ too” i’d like to say that i’m chieftain because i like to support the devs and not because of the extras (just for the protocol).

@Clexarews

You don’t consider exp boosts to be game-breaking? Interesting, I’d consider them to be quite game-breaking.

XP boosts are a lazy short cut and therefore i don’t like them (like @Thorbjorn42gbf said). If you don’t have the time or patience to play you should not be allowed to have a high level! As i said before:

@Heurazio

Everything you have should be acquired through “work”

@Havok40k

What if you could buy cash shop items with in-game currency as well as real cash? Obviously, it would be considerably higher cost with in-game currency.

This is somthing Arena.Net tried with GW2. In my opinion they failed terrible. You can’t buy “gems” (the ingame equivalent to real-money) with normal ingame currency (gold) because the conversion factor is ridiculous high. For the price of a color pack with 3 random colors (in a set) you can get a complete T3 culture armor (the last time i entered the game … quite a while ago)

@Vastar

That´s why I hope that their rented world model (+ potential account services) are enough to maintain the servers and pay the ~20 developers.

that’s something that was already answered. It’s not about “keep it running” it’s about adding new content and keep the development running. therefore i’m sure the things you mentioned are not enough to pay for new content. that’s why i favor a subscribtion model.

@Havok40k

The longer a player plays, the more the game costs, leading to subscriber exhaustion and dropped subscriptions. In order to keep players coming back, devs have to keep making new content with steadily decreasing subscriptions. The only option for devs to maintain a similar revenue with fewer subscriptions is to either raise subscription costs or reduce server costs. As server performance drops, more subscribers leave, and the cycle continues.

I don’t agree completely with you. Most of the people out there have absolutely NO problems with paying 9€ / month for netflix and not using it enough (I’m watching netflix 5h per month … if i buy the Movie / Series it would be less expensive [which i do a lot too]). I think we (as people) are used to the monthly fee model and i wouldn’t care for a eg. 5€ / month fee for a game (or even higher eg. 12€ / month) if it ensure development and new content on a regular basis. The problem why there are subscriber exhaustion is not the subscription itself but the feeling it’s not worth the price. If the game is worth the price and there is frequently fresh content i’m sure there won’t be subscriber exhaustion.

@Clexarews

One could even argue that adding cash-shop items enhances the realism of the imagined world.

That post … took me some time to understand it and i’m not totally sure i get it but i can’t agree with your argumentation. You are talking about realism but it’s not realistic to get a ‘benefit’ (or vanity or what word you like to use) if you spend real money. In our world (the regular universe) you can’t get a “boost” from outside the universe because we simply can’t access it. therefore adding money to the game and getting benefits from it is like trying to add something to the universe which does not really exists (eg. gold from lead or the holly grail). The universe (or the game) is (or in the case of the game SHOULD) be sealed to other dimensions

@Clexarews

Actually, even though that’s a joke it’s a pretty solid idea that’s been discussed before. Not so much the Lester sock puppets but Boundless products to use in the real world. I know people have already offered money for one of the pink Oort Online wristbands and people have asked for shirts and stuff in the past. Not saying I’d rather see this instead of skins/vanity items. Personally I’d preferably see both (which is what many games do).

Yes, i already asked for their art-works but i never got a real answer

@Heurazio

I really like the look of the artworks and i would love to buy some of them (maybe as collection or trio or something like that). could you imagine to sell them separately (apart from the backer-tiers) as merchandise or for people who like too support you without the need of a “huge” investment ?

@james: this sounds interesting. I’m waiting for the update and the survey. I really appreciate that you are interested in this discussion and open minded to suggestions.

@Clexarews

I’m going by slots, not models. So 150, with 2 variations for each one = 300. With tints (16 colors so far) = 4800. 4800 total items for slots.

I don’t really count “color tints” as wearable pieces nor as realy variation of an item. ATM (AFAIK) it’s not clear if you are able to recolor an item or if you need to produce it with the color.

[Vastar]

@Clexarews

Half or so of your quote is about immersion and then you say a cashshop rarely has influence on immersion.

I wouldn´t interpret my quote as something about immersion but rather about keeping a distinct border between the “in game” and your wallet. ( You can also “escape reality” with a game that has 0 immersion)

@Clexarews

But in a game like Boundless, people are different from the get-go. This is due to racial differences, progression differences, etc

But this are differences made by choices ingame, not by the choice of how much money you want to spend extra.

@Clexarews

With tints (16 colors so far) = 4800.

Following that logic:
If car brand x produces a new car and sells it in 10 different colours you´d say that they are selling 10 different cars?

[Havok40k]

@Heurazio

The problem why there are subscriber exhaustion is not the subscription itself but the feeling it’s not worth the price. If the game is worth the price and there is frequently fresh content i’m sure there won’t be subscriber exhaustion.

This is exactly why your example of subscription fees to Netflix is a bad example. Netflix, as we all know is constantly getting new content very frequently. A game however typically averages 1-2 years between expansions and large content updates. If Netflix was static and only got new content once every year or two, you would certainly see subscriber exhaustion.

Secondly, Netflix does not have to worry about the cost of developing all of that new content- just the cost of delivering it. Therefore, they do not suffer from steadily reduced revenue to produce new content.

Thirdly, Netflix makes a bulk of its income from a different kind of cash shop- by selling ad space to retailers.

If even WoW had to include extra revenue streams due to subscriber exhaustion (Millions of lost subs in just a few months after the last expansion) just to keep the game afloat then it is best to at least have something for boundless from day one.

[Heurazio]

@Havok40k

A game however typically averages 1-2 years between expansions and large content updates.

That’s why i said:

@Heurazio

If the game is worth the price and there is frequently fresh content i’m sure there won’t be subscriber exhaustion.

I totally agree with you that there would be a massive probleme if the iteration time is 1-2 years. therefore i hope new content will be released more frequently. this could be accomplished with the help of the community (player made [and dev approved] dungeons for example). Voxel games have (before any other genre/type) the unique possibility to include player made content into the game (if it’s done correct).

@Havok40k

Secondly, Netflix does not have to worry about the cost of developing all of that new content- just the cost of delivering it. Therefore, they do not suffer from steadily reduced revenue to produce new content.

That’s false. Netflix produces a lot of “Original Series” (a lot of them with huge success). In addition (EDIT) B< could be like Netflix but with player made content (dungeons, jumping-puzzles eg) instead of videos. They would accelerate the content development if they start working close with the player base.

@Havok40k

Thirdly, Netflix makes a bulk of its income from a different kind of cash shop- by selling ad space to retailers.

Never saw any “regular” ad in netflix ?! oO … Can you make this point more clear please ?

@Havok40k

Millions of lost subs in just a few months after the last expansion

That’s a common problem if you have a huge and heterogeneous player base with different interests in the game. I remember (back in the times of GW1) that player counts increased in GW1 after content releases (eg as Factions was released). I think it depends on the player base and on the content that is released. If you change huge aspects of the game you will always lose a lot of players.

@Havok40k

it is best to at least have something for boundless from day one.

You are right. There should be more than one way for B< to generate revenue. But one of the best and most predictable IMO is a subscription. Therefore it’s possible to give every player access to the same items, @devs can calculate and schedule the development and players know exactly what they need to pay in a given time frame.

My mayor argument vs. cash-shops is, that it’s hard to divide where “unlawful beneficial” starts. Some may say “skins” are benefits because skins and looks are an important aspect of an MMO for a lot of people. Others will say that boosts are a benefit and so on. There is too much space for interpretation and discussion. Hardcore-game will feel that their “work” is worthless because others achieve this in half the time with boosts which will cause “hate” or frustration (insults like “boosted noob” eg.) …

wedding wear would be one of the cash-shop items that i could accept because it’s a pure virtual with zero usability in the game expect to be used in weddings (i don’t like the idea of in-game weddings too but that’s an other point). Other fur drawings or colors would be ok too IMO. But everything that touches the game-mechanic, the progression speed or the item use (like infinite mining items from GW2) are a no-go in my opinion.

[Vastar]

@Havok40k

Netflix, as we all know is constantly getting new content very frequently. A game however typically averages 1-2 years between expansions

Dunno. WoW and GW2 had a new dungeon(tier) every ~4 months.

@Havok40k

Thirdly, Netflix makes a bulk of its income from a different kind of cash shop- by selling ad space to retailers.

Never seen a single ad on Netflix as well…

@Havok40k

Millions of lost subs in just a few months after the last expansion

This was solely because the new content was ■■■■. (imo)
If there was something like player exhaustion you´d probably be able to see that in the player numbers within the first 5 years. But there was a steady increase in player numbers during Classic, BC and WotLK (Using WoW as an example)
And after 5 years of continuous community growth the quality of the new content started to drop and so did the player numbers.

[Clexarews]

@Heurazio

i’d like to say that i’m chieftain because i like to support the devs and not because of the extras

Cool, then you wouldn’t mind shipping me the artwork, right? I’ll pay shipping costs.

@Heurazio

If i buy a game, i like to be able to get ALL the content without extra purchase.

I guess I get to welcome you to your first MMO! Expansions and additional content for additional costs are the status quo here! Say bye-bye to console (or those w/o season passes anyway) and steam games![quote=“Heurazio, post:246, topic:619”]
Most of the people out there have absolutely NO problems with paying 9€ / month for netflix and not using it enough (I’m watching netflix 5h per month … if i buy the Movie / Series it would be less expensive [which i do a lot too]).
[/quote]

I’m jealous Netflix USD: 15ish I think? Season USD: 25 or so?

Back on topic: monthly subscriptions should not be a topic in this thread. The dev team has said they want no monthly subscription required for playing.

@Heurazio

In our world (the regular universe) you can’t get a “boost” from outside the universe because we simply can’t access it.

Maybe you missed this since you didn’t take the time to read through previous posts. I was talking about skins and vanity items. It’s actually quite simple in this world to spend real money to buy paint, a new shirt, a dog…I’m against XP boosts, as you’ve already quoted me saying.[quote=“Heurazio, post:246, topic:619”]
Yes, i already asked for their art-works but i never got a real answer
[/quote]

Last I checked Chieftain rank gets signed artwork. See my first reply.[quote=“Vastar, post:247, topic:619”]
I wouldn´t interpret my quote as something about immersion but rather about keeping a distinct border between the “in game” and your wallet. ( You can also “escape reality” with a game that has 0 immersion)
[/quote]

That’s a fair point, I’ve got no counter. I guess I was merely thinking that escaping one reality leads to another reality. Is it possible to not be in a reality at any given time? A state of nothingness, if you will? I guess we’re getting pretty nihilistic and that’s probably out of scope for the thread.

@Vastar

But this are differences made by choices ingame, not by the choice of how much money you want to spend extra.

And? There’s still no such thing as a level playing field.[quote=“Vastar, post:247, topic:619”]
If car brand x produces a new car and sells it in 10 different colours you´d say that they are selling 10 different cars?
[/quote]

Different: distinct; separate.

Yes, I would. Would I say they’re different models? Different makes? No. Would I say they’re different cars? Absolutely I would. Even if they made two cars of the exact same model and color, I’d say they’re different. It’s logic.

If you have two cubes that share all of the same properties, you can say Cube(A) and Cube(B) (A has the property of being a cube, B has the property of being a cube) but you cannot say A=B so long as you have two cubes and one is being “named” A and the other is being “named” B. You can only say A=B if one cube is named “A” and the same cube is named “B” (picture this like two Velcro tags being placed on the cube at the same time. It is both A and B.). Otherwise, so long as there is more than one cube, they will always have at least one property that is different because they cannot inhabit the same physical space at the same time. So they are different because they are separate.[quote=“Heurazio, post:249, topic:619”]
Some may say “skins” are benefits because skins and looks are an important aspect of an MMO for a lot of people
[/quote]

I again offer the argument that Boundless devs seem to be working hard to make the wearables horizontal instead of vertical. The only argument I see against offering wearables or skins is that they’re exclusive, to which I say that this is the point.

@Heurazio

But everything that touches the game-mechanic, the progression speed or the item use (like infinite mining items from GW2) are a no-go in my opinion.

I think this is generally agreed upon by all participants of this conversation at this point. The question right now revolves around aesthetic and vanity items.

[Nyuudles]

I really don’t see a problem with them selling skins in the cash shop at all. And let’s not forget what james said earlier[quote=“james, post:243, topic:619”]
We’re not attempting to charge a monthly sub,
[/quote]

That doesn’t mean they won’t, but what it does mean is that he’s opening up to better options for the time being.

I really wish to hear you guys talk more about other ways of getting revenue, but you guys seem to talk a lot about the pros and cons of subscription already. There are so many good points to both sides of the argument (mostly from my experience again). I just can’t really come to any conclusion myself for B< because I haven’t experienced the core features yet to determine if it’s even worth having subscription (i’m not saying that this game isn’t worth it, i’m just saying that I don’t see a reasonable need for B< to resort to sub fees if there are better ways of getting revenue).

I think we’d all come to a better understanding or conclusion once C++ and more updates are out, but for now, I would love to talk more about other options other than subscription fees.

[Heurazio]

@Clexarews

Cool, then you wouldn’t mind shipping me the artwork, right? I’ll pay shipping costs

@Clexarews

Last I checked Chieftain rank gets signed artwork. See my first reply.

That’s the only thing why the Chieftain rank is more interesting for me than the pioneer (i combined my account with @Saint_X so we get the Chieftain instead of 2 Pioneers). Maybe you should read my link again I’m asking the @devs if it’s possible to buy “more” / “other” artworks from them (as other form of income) because i like the artwork style. I’d be willing to pay an other 50€ for eg. a triplet-collection of splitters in different bioms (gaming is art and engeneering … and this game is a lot of art too).

@Clexarews

I guess I get to welcome you to your first MMO! Expansions and additional content for additional costs are the status quo here! Say bye-bye to console (or those w/o season passes anyway) and steam games!

Expansions are legit. Never said something against them ? did i ? All i said is that i like all game content for the original purchase. I don’t like to pay for every skin again. I like THEN not NOW.

@Clexarews

I’m jealous Netflix USD: 15ish I think? Season USD: 25 or so?

You are right, B2T.

@Clexarews

Maybe you missed this since you didn’t take the time to read through previous posts. I was talking about skins and vanity items. It’s actually quite simple in this world to spend real money to buy paint, a new shirt, a dog…I’m against XP boosts, as you’ve already quoted me saying.

Maybe i’m not able to translate my thoughts correct or missed to tell something important for you.

To keep your example - You might buy paint in a store, but you can’t ask good (the mighty guy that spends “meta-money” for you [his character in this game]) to buy you ultra-paint (totally unique color that can only acquired from god-like beings) with holy might. Maybe this example is better to understand.

@Clexarews

I again offer the argument that Boundless devs seem to be working hard to make the wearables horizontal instead of vertical.

I really hope there will be a vertical component. Otherwise why should i spend time on collecting a matching set ? I’d just use the first best set. Even in the real world equipment and clothing are both vertical and horizontal at the same time. You don’t take your bathing slippers to climbing (at least i hope you don’t). There are clothes that are better (higher level) for different situations. If i go in dangerous environments (most likely a lot in B<) i’ll pick something that offers me protection. And this kind of protection should be visualized in the skin IMO.

@Nyuudles

I think we’d all come to a better understanding or conclusion once C++ and more updates are out, but for now, I would love to talk more about other options other than subscription fees.

You are right. To come back i like to offer an other idea of content creation (not income for the @devs but maybe cheaper development / design). There was already a good topic from @Havok40k where i added this idea.

@Heurazio

Voxel games have (before any other genre/type) the unique possibility to include player made content into the game (if it’s done correct).

In addition B< could be like Netflix but with player made content (dungeons, jumping-puzzles eg) instead of videos. They would accelerate the content development if they start working close with the player base.

[Clexarews]

@Heurazio

All i said is that i like all game content for the original purchase.

Expansions are game content. If you want GW2 Heart of Thorns, you must buy the game content. Otherwise you do not have all game content.

@Heurazio

To keep your example - You might buy paint in a store, but you can’t ask good (the mighty guy that spends “meta-money” for you [his character in this game]) to buy you ultra-paint (totally unique color that can only acquired from god-like beings) with holy might. Maybe this example is better to understand.

Not quite. In this case, anyone can buy the paint. It’s like going to a home improvement/hardware store and buying some fence posts and they give you your choice of 16 colors (to keep consistent with boundless) for free. You decided, eh, I’d rather have this extra 17th color that they’re going to charge me for. ANYONE can buy this 17th color, it’s not restricted whoever has some holy god-like being’s blessing. The only thing is, they have to pay for it. If they don’t want to pay for it, they don’t get it, but they have 16 other options, or even combinations of those to use for different parts of the fence.

This offering a more exclusive 17th color (or skins/vanity items) appeals to the economic idea of conspicuous consumption, which is a topic introduced by an economist/sociologist named Thorstein Veblen (who, incidentally, is an alum of my alma mater!).

@Heurazio

I really hope there will be a vertical component. Otherwise why should i spend time on collecting a matching set ?

As far as I can tell from this post from ben that few seem to have noticed, there’s going to be horizontal aesthetics, vertical stats:

@ben

In favour of this, we now have customisable wearable items AND stat wearable items.

I am not against vertical wearables AT ALL, nor am I against aesthetic progression. Just to put that out there. I’m just trying to compromise with the vision of the game while arguing for skins/vanity items. So it seems we agree on this point of wearables needing vertical progression stat wise, not just not on non-game-affecting aesthetic visuals that are offered fairly to anyone who pays for them.

[Heurazio]

@Clexarews

Expansions are game content. If you want GW2 Heart of Thorns, you must buy the game content. Otherwise you do not have all game content.

That’s correct. But at the moment there are no expansions therefore i see the game B< as “one” game and “one” thing and i think that all if it’s current content (skins, colors, dungeons, guilds …) should be accessible for everyone who bought the “Explorer” pack.

@Clexarews

Not quite. In this case, anyone can buy the paint. It’s like going to a home improvement/hardware store and buying some fence posts and they give you your choice of 16 colors (to keep consistent with boundless) for free. You decided, eh, I’d rather have this extra 17th color that they’re going to charge me for.

Not quite too. YOU (in this universe) can’t ask for that 17th color because you don’t even know it exists. The information that there is a 17th color is beyond your insight. It’s a meta information from the higher dimension (a 2d being can never understand/access 3 dimension but it’s really easy for a 3d being to understand/access 2 dimensions). Therefore, if you get that 17th color, that has been paid in another dimension (from god) is highly unrealistic.
This is the exact same in online gaming. If your character gets that 17th color that has been paid outside of his (B<) universe (with your real-money) you add something to the game that would not be possible if you are limited to the resources of the games universe and that’s why it breaks realism (which was your initial argument if i remember correct). But TBH this is going to be metaphysical and highly theoretically … i’m sure this does not helps anyone to talk about this further.

@Clexarews

I’m just trying to compromise with the vision of the game while arguing for skins/vanity items.

That’s one of the problems i see. If the skins are verticaly and all good looking skins are vanity (a lot of games did exactly this) you need to spend money. Would be better IMO if all skins can be used without paing for them but then the @devs need an other form of income.

[Clexarews]

@Heurazio

This is the exact same in online gaming. If your character gets that 17th color that has been paid outside of his (B<) universe (with your real-money) you add something to the game that would not be possible if you are limited to the resources of the games universe and that’s why it breaks realism (which was your initial argument if i remember correct).

Nah, it was my misinterpretation of Vastar’s borrowed quote. I think people who want to be immersed are typically able to easily do so. If you’re arguing all of this from the character’s perspective and I’m arguing from the player’s perspective, I agree that it’s a waste of time.[quote=“Heurazio, post:255, topic:619”]
If the skins are verticaly and all good looking skins are vanity (a lot of games did exactly this) you need to spend money.
[/quote]

Why do you need to? Why are all good looking skins vanity cash-shop items? They, of course, should offer aesthetically pleasing wearable in the game (and judging from the quality of the artwork so far, I don’t see this being an issue).

[Heurazio]

@Clexarews

I agree that it’s a waste of time.

totally

@Clexarews

They, of course, should offer aesthetically pleasing wearable in the game

I hope It’s easy to abuse this … i don’t like to say the @devs would do it but it would be possible. And because i don’t even like the idea that this could be possible, i refuse cash-shops for ingame-items completely.

[Clexarews]

Well in the spirit of Nyuudles post, what other choices would you suggest?

[Heurazio]

@Clexarews

Well in the spirit of Nyuudles post, what other choices would you suggest?

Because (apart from subscriptions) i don’t have “much better” ideas i go the other direction (see above). If you can’t find “new” ways to generate revenue, you can try to cut the development costs.

@Heurazio

You are right. To come back i like to offer an other idea of content creation (not income for the @devs but maybe cheaper development / design). There was already a good topic from @Havok40k where i added this idea.

Voxel games have (before any other genre/type) the unique possibility to include player made content into the game (if it’s done correct).
In addition B< could be like Netflix but with player made content (dungeons, jumping-puzzles eg) instead of videos. They would accelerate the content development if they start working close with the player base.

• server rent
• extra character slots
• name change

[Stretchious]

@Heurazio

f your character gets that 17th color that has been paid outside of his (B<) universe (with your real-money) you add something to the game that would not be possible if you are limited to the resources of the games universe and that’s why it breaks realism

I don’t see this has being an issue at all - it just takes a little bit of imagination to tie a “real money item” into the game lore (thus making it a part of the game) … simple example would be - you could say that your character uncovers an Oort cache, which contains a bunch of unique items. The fact that they were bought with real money is not really a problem imo. Vanity items, including armour (as long as they didn’t provide any stats) are not game breaking - especially as wearables are horizontal in B<.

If pets were a thing, this would also be a good vanity item - again, fairly easy to tie into the game world.

Seems like the conversation went on around me

@Heurazio

extra character slots

Whist the rest are good ideas (and with the server rent already being proposed by the devs as one source of additional income), I don’t agree with extra character slots. I would hope that should additional races come into the game at some point in the future, that they would be available to all, without the need to purchase additional character slots.

I’ll add to your list as I see the possible income streams :-

• Server Rentals
• Change Character Name
• Change Character Look
• Change Race (if/when more races become available in the future)
• Vanity wearables
• Vanity pets
• Building blueprints

[Heurazio]

@Stretchious

Building blueprints

this would be one of the “short-cuts” i hope not to see as buyable. Either they are “core-game-play” and usable for all and anytime (not buyable) or not in the game. IMO this is a “boost” because it accelerate building. Creativerse has blue prints as core mechanism ingame BTW.

[Nyuudles]

I’d like to see “limited edition plushie decorations” in the cash shop. If they don’t break immersion

cough mopig cough

[Stretchious]

But blueprints are just a building template, not an actual building, no?

If someone wants to build a house that they’ve seen elsewhere, they will find a way to copy it - whether by taking a few screen shots of other peoples builds or referring to a youtube video - I see no reason why the devs couldn’t earn from this by making it a purchasable item. It’s not really a boost, because the player still has to put in all the work to make the building.

Plus they would be in-game anyway… so they’re still a “shortcut” as you put it, but a player made one.

Actually, now that I’ve thought more on it, there would be nothing to stop a master builder copying the real-money blueprint and earning in-game currency from it, so maybe it’s not a viable option after all.

---

Ok, something else to add to the list - 3d printed character models in various styles/poses!

[Heurazio]

@Stretchious

I see no reason why the devs couldn’t earn from this by making it a purchasable item. It’s not really a boost, because the player still has to put in all the work to make the building.

Okay so a blue print in your definition is the “layout” and not a “self-building” construct like in “Creativerse” ?

If so this would be ok for me as long as you are limited to “copy” your own creations. Would be not so cool if someone steals my creations. Your argument with the screenshots is invalid for me because there is a huge different in having a blue print where you see every stone position and the need to “re-engineer” the complete building from screenshots where you miss details for example.

[Stretchious]

True but I guess that would be down to the complexity of the building anyway. I edited my previous post as the more I thought about the devs selling blueprints, the less of a viable option it is.