Announcements
Join the ongoing conversation on Discord: https://discord.gg/w6Tpkp2
To purchase your copy of the City of Titans Launcher, visit our store at https://store.missingworldsmedia.com/ A purchase of $50 or more will give you a link to download the Launcher for Windows or Mac based machines.
As Tannim222 has pointed out, this is all hypothetical and theoretical at this point. We're not deciding the fate of the game in this thread. That said, the knock on this sort of thing, from the beginning, I think, was not so much that it was Pay to Win (though to some that is a major sticking point) nor was it anything to do with farming, but rather that the part where the game asks for IGC or Stars or whatever to let you do the TF becomes an intrusive immersion-breaker to the player. You get so far into the process of trying to star t a TF only to have the game harsh your roleplaying with a "Pay Up!" message somewhere in there. That has been my understanding of the problem, or the biggest problem, with monetizing TFs via the "turnstile" approach as Tannim222 put it.
That said, I don't know whether or not players who found the one thing intrusive and immersion breaking would level the same complaints about the timer bypass. I think that remains to be seen.
Also, not for nothing, the longer the TF is, the less it needs a cooldown timer. I doubt anyone needed the game to FORCE them not to do two Dr. Quarterfield TFs in a row, ever. Of course, I think we've learned by now that 45-90 min is the sweet spot for TF time-to-completion numbers in general. Assuming you could bang through one of the shortest ones in like 20 min, a cooldown timer makes sense, as those would be the most likely to be farmed.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
I recall the COX devs saying how surprised they were that people preferred to finish a TF in a single session. Originally, they'd envisioned a TF spanning several days, with people doing a few missions, logging off, then returning in a day or two to continue.
I think the people who play a game like this that don't pay for subscriptions when subs are available probably fall into two categories:
1. People who aren't as intellectually invested as the rest of us, i.e. casual players
2. People who ARE just as invested as subscribers, but can't pay a sub either because they can't afford it or can't access the credit card at all.
People in category 1 will likely never want to pay for bypasses.
People in category 2 cannot pay money for the Stars to do a bypass BY THEMSELVES, but then they COULD lean on their SG mates, friends, etc to help them out. Also, they could grind for IGC enough to buy Stars on the AH and get them that way. I think in this system, assuming the subscribers don't really need to buy bypasses for themselves, the game should probably require the non-subs to buy their bypasses with Stars instead of just letting non-subs ride free on the coattails of the subscribers, because if you allow that, then nobody needs to buy any bypasses anyway, in all likelihood. This way, the non-subs actually need the Stars for something and will have a reason to trade IGC to get Stars.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
There needs to be middle ground where ALL players (paying or Not) could gather/join in to do slightly harder missions outside of the regular Story Arcs for that character.
TF's fit the bill.
Now... if CoT had Incarnate missions that lay a step above TF's... you could charge for that. Paying members only have access to that level. 1st Class (Incarnate) versus Economy Class (TF's).
Lore can have only certain heroes/villains take a test of sorts (like they do for NASA) and those that PASS (paid in this case) can go offworld or wherever. and be part of those few elite forces (to fit the lore).
Some dedicated fans of CoX played almost entirely solo. The guy that ran my SG was like that. So TFs were basically optional. Even if you did really want a few synthetic HamioS, you could still buy them off the auction house instead of trying to grind Statesman TFs for them. People did that. So I'm saying that even if ALL TFs are timer-gated, then one per day, maximum, is not a huge problem for many people. Now, if there is a Katie Hannon-esque TF in there, THAT one probably needs to be timer-gated, if anything, then you might get people to buy bypasses to it. Whether it has to be one bypass per team or per player is another question, and the answer probably depends on how much they cost.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
This has been quite the lively discussion since I last chimed in. It took me about two hours to get caught up. I think the bypass timer token is not a viable tool, today. That is something that will have to be decided post launch if people are interested in having that type of token, if a content timer lockout is even an issue. That's a couple of big "ifs" that will be up to the content team and business teams near/after launch. I don't think it's something that will substantially hurt the games economy as much as some think nor do I think it's going to be the hot ticket item that others believe. It will probably be something in the middle. I think if lockouts are a thing then some people will carry one or two just in case but the tokens wont see heavy usage, nor become a mandatory item.
For me personally and I suspect for a lot of people this is a not something that they would be terribly interested in. I think in my whole time with COH I would only run the same content repeatedly, in a single day, if A) we failed the first time (3 defenders, a pair of controllers, a blaster, and scrapper do not, an AV killer, make. Sometimes...) or I was just hanging out and got invited to a PUG ITF and got invited again later. These events happened once or twice a year while I played. And I played frequently for a long time. I'm not the "rule" but I don't think I am an exception either.
I think there is a strong market for social items like specialty e-motes "money bombs" "fun boxes" My guild in GW2 frequently uses these in gathering areas. I thought the suggestion to be able to buy temporary and permanent aspects of the city is an amazing idea. It worked for the Kickstarter. I personally spent a great deal of money to leave my mark on the city in the form of a badge. There is no reason it can not work moving forward. In my own machinations as MMO builder, I believe that such items would be a substantial source of income. A non-instanced SG base in the city that anyone could see and access, that can be rented for stars and decorated with a SG' banner and other decorations would be a hugely valuable asset for MWM. SGs would value the prestige and exposure such a location would provide them. There could easily be dozens of these locations across the city with the largest or most in demand locations easily drawing a substantial monthly "rent" of triple digits. Which seems like a lot initially, but if your SG has 50 members and each donates a few dollars in stars then it's easy to see where an SG could rack up the hundreds needed to rent at such a price. Even if your SG has a few members (like mine in Guildwars) playing smartly and compiling a war chest over time you could still splurge on a N-I SG base for a month or two out of the year. Some checks would have to be put in place to ensure that SG stars aren't abused and misused and that members are fully aware of what giving stars to an SG means. Not insurmountable and not terribly complex.
I wouldn't underestimate the team's ability to crank out new costume items each month either. I suspect initially there will be a lot of items going up for sale as costume design will be a key segment of the store as the game gets started. I think MWM is designing their game to streamline and expedite this feature in particular because it will be such a valuable section of the shop.
Finally, It's very important to remember that the Star shop is not a candle store or a board game shop. It's going to be a Superstore (pun intended). A big box (in your screen) that is going to sell groceries, candles, clothes, bicycles, paint, hardware, plants, and some sick looking fish that glow under a black light. And if I had my way, Real Estate and advertising.
Second Chance: https://store.missingworldsmedia.com/CityOfTitans/SecondChance/
Dev Tracker: http://cityoftitans.com/forum/fixing-dev-digest
Dev Comments: https://cityoftitans.com/forum/dev-comments
In response to Mendicant, I think that was probably the main idea behind the timer cooldown scheme proposed (you'd have to ask Tannim222 to be sure though, and I don't speak for him).
To be honest, I think the main problems people have with any of this type of stuff are these:
1. People hear "Free to Play" and immediately expect that means "You get to play for free without any restrictions and you get the same exact deal as everyone else, on a level playing field." when in fact the deal is not really like that, so this leads to disappointment, INEVITABLY, somewhere.
2. When people decide to play a game, they want the whole game, not just the Lite (TM) version or some "Junior Membership" for the poor sobs who can't afford the Real Thing (TM). Playing such Lite versions of games makes people feel unwanted, or second class and as such they get a bad vibe and leave.
3. People who basically love the game and want to support it but cannot pay due to not having a credit card are afraid they'll get shut out of the "good stuff" somehow.
4. People are against anything asking them for money, ever. I personally believe this has nothing to do with immersion or role playing, despite what anyone says on a questionnaire. I think that people just hate it when the game says "Sorry, most of the game is free, but THIS thing you have to pay for. Pay now y/n?"
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
Hey, here's a novel idea (warning: monetization scheme incoming....):
Remember how arcade games of the 1980s-90s used to be coin-operated, where you'd put in quarters (and later dollars) to play the game until you died or whatever?
What if CoT charged for every time you logged on, like 50 cents per login? I'm not talking about making people pay more every time the toon gets defeated like in an arcade game, but just every time you log in, you get charged $0.50 to whatever credit card you used to establish your account? That could get the company like $5-$15 per month per person, right? Would people rage against that? You might have to put in a "safety logout timer" just to prevent people from being logged in permanently or for more than say, 20 straight hours. It could be argued that staying logged into a game that long is unhealthy, etc anyway.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
My immediate thought was 'what happens if you disconnect due to a power flicker, you have to pay again to log back in?' My next thought was 'Then make it pay once per day, rather than per login'.
I think I'd be quite mad at that when I was in game and got DCed due to server load or something like that.
(insert pithy comment here)
Yes, getting disconnected is clearly an issue, but there has to be an equitable solution to it that's workable. For one thing, you could just limit it to 1-2 login fees per day, maximum, then let people log in and out as much as they want after that, with the "fee reset time" being a thing that the customer can choose when they make their account, then change later, but change it no more than one per month or something.
This "log in fee" scheme does not harsh anyone's immersion, isn't tantamount to gambling like lockboxes are, does not require anyone to sign up for months of subscribed time up front (although I would still offer that), and isn't even remotely close to anything that could be construed as "Pay to Win". Despite those advantages, I suspect that many people will STILL be against it, primarily because it essentially makes playing the game cost money, and those people want a totally free ride.
Personally, if the deal were "Pay $50 for the game, then $0.50 to log in once (maybe twice) every 24 hours" with no need for a sub (though still the option) I would not have a problem with that. If you're playing constantly, it's costing you a whole $0.50 per day, big deal. For that matter, maybe a $1 log in price is a more appropriate price point, I don't know. And maybe the subscribers just get unlimited logings while subscribed, which ends up amounting to a better deal if you're actively playing a lot.
Edit: And of course, these fees could also be paid for with Stars, which themselves could be acquired off the auction house, potentially. So when you go to log in, you log in from a front end screen that allows you to manage your account and/or Buy Stars if you need to. In fact you should probably just make people log in from the Starmart, so you can advertise new stuff to them at that time. Kind of like how casinos make you check in to the hotel part from the casino area.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
Radiac, essentially dismissing critique and concerns about monetization methods with "they just want it for free" isn't really fair. I sure it is much more an issue of not wanting to feel like you are being nickeld and dimed, or just being viewed as a wallet to extract money from. I want MWM to create an environment where I am happy to spend money since I would have the feeling that the money is "well spent".
I fully admit that there will be people who would want everything completely free but those would most likely be a small portion of those who are against certain monetization methods.
As for having a "login fee" I just feel that too many will feel nickeld and dimed from this, in that that they payed upfront for a game and then have to pay extra (even if it's such a small amount) to just log in.
The following is all my opinion. When I write "You see, it's like this" I mean that "In my opinion, I think think it's like this." etc. This is all my own gut instinct and best guesses given my personal experiences and beliefs about human nature.
1. The argument that goes "I should not have to actually pay money for anything if I don't want to, but I should still get basically everything I want." is one I disagree with on several fronts. I don't believe anyone can actually believe they're going to be able to wrestle the pricetag gun away fromt he store owner like that, ever.
2. The up-front purchase of the game isn't going to keep the lights on and the servers running 24/7 three year after the game rolls out. Something else has to do that, or else you can kiss the game goodbye.
3. All forms of monetization are basically asking you for money. This nickel-and-diming people claim they're averse to is really a symptom of the fact that what they're REALLY averse to is paying any money at all for anything they deem desirable enough that they feel like they would not want to have to do without it to play the game. In other words, those people just plain don't want to pay any kind of ongoing fees to keep the game up and running at all, period. See point 2 above for how that affects the game overall.
4. All kinds of other things in life do monetize in small increments to make the purchases feel less painful one at a time. Vending Machines, ATM machines that charge ATM fees, laundromats, casinos, etc and they're all financially viable. If you charge people a nickel here and a dime there, they complain about the nickel and diming, if you charge them one big upfront subscription free for a 12 month subscriptiomn, they say they don;t want to have to spend that much money all at once. There's no magical monetization scheme that get's around that and still makes you money enough to have a game in year 5, that I know of.
5. In my opinion, those kind of purchases that have been thrown around as "okay to charge money for" by some on these forums are all things that the people approving them for sale know they don't really need. It won't sustain a game, given the amount of competition and the overall not-as-popular-as-fantasy, especially in Asia, superhero niche market this game is in, not by itself. That's why I would expect that when people start seeing the numbers and doing the math, they're going to decide they have to resort to something else, and so far the lockboxes are the least unpalatable thing people seem to be willing to accept. So this login fee concept is not seen, by me, as an alternative to "free", but rather as an alternative to the lockboxes, which I believe are inevitable after the initial sales of the game taper off and the long-term monies dry up. Inevitable in the sense that they will show up eventually unless something else replaces them as a money stream in some other repeat-business-enabling way.
6. As I envision it, you'd fire up client software and it gives you a front end screen that has the Starmart and the forums (probably, or a link to them). In there, there's a thing indicating how many Stars you currently have, and a button you push to log into the game world, which assumes you know you need at least 50 Stars to do it, or else it's greyed out. Anyone who plays the game will know this and people will most likely keep a supply of Stars handy for such. Then you can also buy them for cash when needed and/or buy Stars for IGC on the auction house when you want to. Depending on going rates, it may be possible to grind for enough IGC to support your logins with that alone. I don't feel like this would make me feel nickel-and-dimed to death. For one thing, when I I logged on, I did so knowing that I needed to have enough Starts to get into the game, and for another I'm not constantly buying Stars a few at a time, but rather buying them $10 to $20 worth at a time (possibly for a bulk rate discount) then using them up as I play.
7. People who have money to burn and want to get geared up quickly can buy extra Stars and drop them on the AH for IGC to get themselves better Augments and Refinements. This will cause more money to be spent by the high-rollers while the grinders grind for the IGC to get those Stars to play or buy stuff with. So basically the rich are directly subsidizing the poor.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
I don't agree, what is more, monetization statistics don't agree either. Many games, including free to play games do make money from their average user. Some games may even see their average user purchase nearly as much as their whales, it is a matter of having a highly disproprotionate average to whale user playing the game and the types of services / options for purchase on the game. There is a lot of variables here, but in general, this is what is starting to be found out.
Games that provide a way to pay for improved forms of game play (see subscriptions for MMOs) are showing to have strong earnings still.
Your assertation that a majority of players just play free games and want everything for free is actually more of an opinion. Analyzing the actual available data shows that games that are free to play are in a way of "fishing" to use the venacular, are casting their net wide catching lots of small fish and hopefully several big ones. That is in short, the more people you have playing your game, the more likely it is they will pay for something.
Now it should go without saying, the more fun your game is for your intended audience, and the type of audience determines how much of a possible audience you will have access to, thus increasing the possible number of people willing to pay for the game. It is the reason for making the game free to play, to attract as many players as possible.
What you will find (or what I have found) through many hours of digging through forums of many games, from personal experience, and from reading through many, many reviews of games with a cash shop is many games that have their cash shop incentives intrude on the game play itself (from the constant reminder that you're locked out of areas, large portions of players cut off from one another, loot boxes, etc..) are viewed negatively. And this isn't entirely because players get upset over wanting everything to be free, most seem to understand their going into a game for free and that not there will be things to pay for in the game in some manner. It seems it is more of a matter when the game experience itself is impeded to such a degree that the game itself can end up feeling 'less than a full experience'.
Note the quotes. It isn't that the entirey of the game should be accessible, or that everthing should be free and therefore the game studo have no method of recouping and covering costs and eventually profiting. It seems to be a matter of that even if there are things you could buy within the game, the difference being that the game experience itself 'feels' complete to the player who plays for free, while they still have the knowledge the 'more is out there'. Now once the game studio's cash shopping methods intrudes on the game play experence itself, once the free player ends up feeling like a 'second class citizen', if the player views this in a negative light, the chance of them paying out may actually decrease, because their experience thus far has been negative. They don't have much incentive to pay for more access because the subconcious mental note is that the game isn't fun. Then when the game has populare reviewers writing articles or posting review videos about the game and mention these intrusive cash shop methods negatively, even if the game is fun, there will be common phrases like "as long as your willing to put up with X" or "as long as you ignore the fact that...", or "despite..." and the following statements end up over-all postive, what will tend to stand out in the minds of the readers / viewers is the negative.
This is where you will find the reasoning behind the negative statements of forum posters against cash shops. Though I'm sure there are a few who 'want everything at 0 cost' most are upset over the implementation of the cash shop model, not necessarily that there were things to buy from the game itself for an improved experience. Once recent metric that game out is that those who do pay into games pay for exactly that: an improved experience. What this means changes according to the type of game, but the underlying connotation is that the person who paid was already having a positive experience and wanted more of that.
Now as to the idea of pay-per-play-log in, if you go back to on-line gaming history far enough, you'll fine yourself looking at the old MUDs. At one point, there were MUD communities that actually had charges by the minute and charges by the hour. This was due to the dial-up costs of accessing the servers at the time. Even after the dial-up costs started to fade out to the internet fee becoming monthly, MMOs started coming out that also had a monthly fee (subscription). And those old MUDs that still held onto their old business model of charge by the hour / minute faded away altegether, while MUDs that adapted still exist to this day.
So, in a sense, we've already had the pay up front to play via on-line experience. And outside of internet cafes for gaming which already charge by the hour for their use, you won't find any games that charge the player in such a manner anymore. And a pay per log in or for a timed duration of play (which is what the old per hour fee was), doesn't appear to be a viable method of monetization for on-line gaming anymore. I'm willing to bet that a fair number of internet cafes in the western market weren't sustainable because of the negative view this type of business model has in the west.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
So is everyone else, unless they state it as a fact. You don't need to defend your ideas "to the death", just leave you opinion and what you think is best and we'll leave ours. Then MWM chooses what they think is best for the game.
I haven't seen anyone actually make that argument, but please point it out. If you draw the parallell where we are against specific monetization methods because we think it will generate too much negativity in the community and thus wants everything for free then you're dead wrong. We're only against that specific monetization method, not monetization in general.
And as far as I have seen here everyone recognizes that. The big question is how to do it without making your players feel like you're just trying to get money from them, and from what I have seen effectively everything is fine by you. Which makes me think that you are one of those outliers that can safely (or rather should be) be ignored when it come to this specific subject.
You don't seem to understand how "nickel and dimed" is used in this regard since you seem to be using the straight up text book definition. It's much closer to the informal one of "harass (someone) by charging for many trivial items or services" (harass would be highly subjective in this case). It's not so much about the individual prices but more about the each individual item that you explicitly charge for, especially if players deem some of those as part of the base game (like the ability to log in). Personally I'm (and I'm sure most other people are) not averse to paying for stuff, as long as I get the feeling that they see me as a customer and not as just a bag of money that they need to "empty" asap before I inevitably leave.
To try and come up with an example. Take a grocery store and instead of raising prices a lot to cover all other costs (like salaries, insurance, taxes and so on) they make you pay for using baskets/carts, entering individual aisles, utilixing manned areas (like deli counter), and just asking employees. Even if the total cost would be significantly lower compared to "normal" groceries it would give a much more negative feeling since it gives the feeling of being "nickel and dimed".
How something feels to the customer is a HUUUUUGE part if it is successful as a monetization scheme, take the [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxfkWZPAUg4] JCPenney experiment[/url].
Most of those examples are "extras" or alternative ways to gain something.
I can go into a store instead of using a vending machine, they also don't charge an initial fee so I can use them in the first place.
Depending on my home I may have the possibility to just buy a washer and drier instead of using laundromats. In this case it would be an "either or" situation, either a high initial cost (purchase) or a much smaller per usage cost.
I can go into my banks office instead of using an ATM. Sure, most of them are placed in places where it would highly impractical and/or time consuming to get to the banks office but the option exists.
Not sure what in casinos you are referring to but I can only assume the gambling part as you're not using hotels in general, but expecting that gambling in that way would only be for a single fixed fee would just be ridiculous.
Also to pull in arcades that you initially used as a basis, none that I know of has a fee that would be directly equivalent to the purchase cost of CoT.
If it really is an alternative to lockboxes then I would rather have lockboxes, even if it's done in the way CO does it. I am sure that having to pay to play (so to speak), even such a small fee once a "play-day", would be seen much more negatively than lockboxes. The thing with lockboxes is that you can implement them in a non-intrusive way, login fees can't really be non-intrusive.
That is a very bad assumption to do, at least if it is not 100% crystal clear at the time of initial purchase that this fee exists. But even then I'd assume there are other reasons for that button to be grayed out, like maintenance, so it still has to be made expressively clear why they can't get into the game at that specific time. Also, shoving the cash shop into ones face before they've even started the actual game has a high chance of elicit a higher negative reaction compared to shoving it into your face once you loaded a character.
But then a significant portion of the "poor players" time is most likely (at least initially) focused on getting enough Stars for their next day/session thus making them feel it more like a job to be able to keep playing rather than entertainment. Add that in point 6 you said that it only [b]may[/b] be possible to grind for the Stars in-game and you may very well be locking out a significant part of your player base. If I had to spend initial time, even as little as 20-30 mins, to make sure that I could play the next time I wanted to then I would look somewhere else for my entertainment.
To make it clear, this is not about getting it all for free but making sure that when someone pays for something that they feel it was worth the cost and thus be happy to pay more in the future. I am sure that a significant amount of players would not get that feeling from a login fee.
I have no big disagreement with Tannim222 or blacke4dawn vis a vis the most recent posts in this thread. Personally I just find it frustrating that we keep circling back to the lockboxes. That said, they seem to be the least disagreeable thing overall to the players in question, according to word I hear and research cited. Having not played a lot of MMOs other than CoX, I have to ask, how is paying for keys to unlock lockboxes NOT seen as intrusive nickel and diming? Also, those lockboxes contain items like rare and very rare Augments and Refinements, right? Low probability, I know, but that's the intended idea, to get good loot that way, is it not? How is that not "Pay to Win"? And don't those games that have such lockboxes make you pay for an expansion once in a while so as to be able to do the hot new content that gets you to the new maximum level and gets you the "good" item lockboxes? That does divide the playerbase and is an intrusive "gotcha" that harshes the experience for the people who didn't pay for the expansion, right? It sounds like the worst of all possible worlds to me, given what people say they like and don't like about different monetization ideas.
Also, I have my doubts that the CoT audience will ever be large enough to take advantage of the "casting a wide net" effect as Tannim222 described. For one thing, this isn't a fantasy game, for another, it's not the ONLY superhero MMO out there, for another, it's not affiliated with the Marvel or DC comic/movie/TV franchises, which would be a big draw if it were, but it's not. Lastly, the upfront price of $50-$60 to buy the game is, as far as I can tell, going to happen, so you lose the "truly free to play" people right there. I personally think the up front buy price is a good thing, because it funds the company in the short term so they can hire people, etc, and it allows the devs to use the ban hammer on undesirable behavior, like excessive spamming and trolling etc. So if that price tag is a given, it has to be accepted that you're doing it knowing that you lose some possible "fish" in the process, but you still do it because it allows you to more easily filter out the "sharks" etc.
Last point, what if you made the game subscription-only at roll out, then after like 4 months you added in an alternative for people who don't want to pay for a whole month, like a $1 per day "mini sub", which you could also pay with Stars instead of cash? You're not advertising as "this game is FREE!!! to play" you're framing the deal as "Look, we're a subscription-based game, so if you want to play, you have to pay a sub, that's how it is." and then for those people who bought the game and let their initial sub lapse, you have this other "dollar a day" option. For the person who knows they can only play one day a week, this is basically a $4/month subscription, which saves them a ton of money. At that point you might even find people doing the math on their own and deciding to pay for like 10 strategically chosen days of play per month instead of paying $15 for the whole month. And again, depending on the cash/Stars/IGC conversion rates you might find people, in some cases, are able to grind and play for free.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
No lock-boxes. My super-hero will not be carrying a backpack, so he won't have any Inventory spaces to put lock-boxes in.
Be Well!
Fireheart
To be fair, CoH's [url=http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Super_Pack]Super Packs[/url] are a form of lockbox which doesn't require any form of personal inventory.
@Radiac.
From my experience with lockboxes the intrusiveness depends highly upon how the system is actually implemented. CO is very intrusive due to the high drop rate and that you must buy keys to unlock. Rift is kinda intrusive due to the much lower drop rate (compared to CO) and because they also drop keys for some of them. CoH did have a "lockbox system" system in their Super Packs but that one was non-intrusive since you only "saw" it when you actually opened the cash shop (and possibly initial load-in screen but don't remember that).
Sure, I admit that lockboxes has to have something unique in them for them to be appealing to buy/open/use but those items don't have to be better than anything else you can get in-game, which is the main point of Pay-to-Win.
As for payed-for expansions. That's not an artifact of the lockbox system but rather a general one from releasing an expansion that raises the level cap and thus doing a "reset" on end-game progression and stemming possible power creep. Think about it, WoW still makes you pay for expansions even though it's sub-based game. Sure it has included lots of micro-trans things as well to bump up revenue but payed-for expansions are not related to lockboxes.
And actual data and statistical analysis trumps opinion every time.
As much as I hate CO's lockboxes, I didn't really mind CoX's SuperPacks. Mainly because they were completely unobtrusive. I did purchase some of them in order to get the costume pieces, but unlike CO, I didn't have hundreds of lockboxes cluttering up the place, all needing keys to open.
On the subject of lock boxes. They aren't inherently bad and you can change the contents slightly to make them much more appealing. IE instead of supplying a specific costume piece like a Red Hat(common) or a Glorious Shinning Helm of Great Luck +2(rare) you provide something simpler. A token. Each lock box would have a chance to drop a token that you can then trade for any piece for sale in the store. This way a player can still buy lock boxes for a chance to get a token without having to deal with the massively reduced odds of getting a rare item or getting yet another Red Hat. Ideally a lock box would then be a cheaper possible alternative to buying an expensive set. A whole costume set of 5 pieces might cost a 1000 stars but 5 lock boxes only costs 500. In those lock boxes you get 3 costume tokens which you can trade for 3 of pieces from any set. Which would be quite important for our particular player base who might like the top and gloves but hate the boots or want to layer a different jacket and on and on. You could apply the same things for any enhancements in the store or generally any time a player might not want a random selection but a specific item.
On the Pay-per-play subject. The rates quoted so far are too high or the implementation is incomplete. At $1 per day in or $0.50 per 12hour you are looking at an equivalent or $30 per month. Which would make COT the most expensive MMO, probably ever. That is not going to fly during the initial advertising/reviews. Obviously the counter argument is that not everyone plays everyday or they wouldn't play in the morning and evening etc etc. But that is not the way people would think about it. They would see a review where someone did the same math and be immediately turned off. You can play with the numbers but that "cost per month" figure is going to be the one people think about most, because that is something that they can easily compare to other games.
A better method would be to charge 1$ (my preference is less) a day and then after 15 purchases (15dollars in this case) the rest of the month is 'free.' for casual players it's cheaper and it's no more expensive than a traditional tripleA MMO. That said, I think the goal here is to recreate a tripleA experience but I think it'll be a pretty hard to convince the internet that a group of part timers at a brand new studio created a tripleA title on their first go and that it deserves a tripleA price. Keeping in mind what actually comes out and what actually happens are completely irrelevant to the internet at large. More realistically that monthly price, if we are pursuing a pay-to-play scheme needs to be under 10 and leaning more towards 5/month. Especially since they do plan on having a cash shop.
On the subject it would be interesting to see if they could pull off a 'pay what you want' subscription. True the vast majority would not pay anything or pay a penny. But there would be a decent base of people paying 5 10 and 15 a month. You could set it up like a Patreon. Pay what you want and get more rewards (stars and titles) for each tier the more you donate.
At the end of the day, I think the pay-to-play is a bit of a non-starter. I stick by my guns in the last post. It's just too early to have a insightful conversation about what should be in the store when we don't know what will be in the game and what will be desirable.
Second Chance: https://store.missingworldsmedia.com/CityOfTitans/SecondChance/
Dev Tracker: http://cityoftitans.com/forum/fixing-dev-digest
Dev Comments: https://cityoftitans.com/forum/dev-comments
It boils down to five things Slotables, Temporary Powers, Consumables, Costumier Parts, and Effects.
Even in COx the most you got from pay to win was a 15% boost to Slottables.
I think it should really be the Titanite .Store. Titanite rare crystalline material that powered the might of ancient Titans, and wondrous devices of ancient technology,
The stuff that helps build super soldiers super humans. After all this is City of Titans not City of Stars.
Stars make a better baseline currency, cause it could represent either money, or other sorts of fame..
Ingenuity is not really a good resource name, Heroes and Villains are out there robbing their opponents
of their brains. "Hi their Citizen, I am a Hero, you just jaywalked, I am sorry, now have to confiscate your brain."
and from the Villains point of view."This is robbery people, relax keep your stinking, filthy money. Just drop your
brains in the bag."
.
[CENTER][URL=http://www.nodiatis.com/personality.htm][IMG]http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/18.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/CENTER]
[URL=http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-knhgv6lgbrs/UA_riCKAHNI/AAAAAAAATxE/u-sgh23bZhc/s640/wonder_women_by_penichet-d47up0l.jpg [/IMG][/URL]
Not that this is really on topic for this thread, but I'm against the game having any kind of "Element X" like Freedom Force had that would explain away the power source behind everyone's powers neatly in one fell swoop. Let the individuals making characters decide how they got that way. It's a game, it needs at least one, probably two currencies. First, in-game currency, which most of us are calling IGC (for "In-Game Currency") for now, and I would be fine with that being permanent. IGC is what you get in the game when you accomplish things, like Influence in City of Heroes. The second currency would be the one you can buy with real money off the game's cash shop then use to buy stuff with in that cash shop, or trade to people in the game, or both. The Devs have been calling that "Stars" so much that I think it might be the final name for it at this point.
In any event, what to call the fake money was another thread from long ago.
Also, there are other things that can be paid for. Like content (and by that I mean missions to do and places to go). You sometimes have to buy expansions to be able to go to new zones in some games. A subscription an be thought of as a fee to access the game itself, which is basically paying for content.
Some Devs have mentioned on these forums in the past that people will hopefully be able to acquire most things in the game through game play, i.e. excessive grinding for the stuff you want AND ALSO through paying for that stuff, where people who don't have the time or inclination to do the grinding can just buy whatever it is they want, somehow. Since the people paying are basically subsidizing the game for those who want to grind for everything, this brings to my mind the idea of the high-rollers buying Stars to get them the stuff they want from the grinders, who are probably the ones in possession of the items and so forth that the high-rollers need. Thus there's a symbiotic relationship established whereby the rich kids help, and are helped, by the poor kids. The only caveat there is that the game itself has to make money off the process and the rich and poor kids have to EACH have something the other side wants. The poor kids probably have gotten rare and very rare items to drop through the grinding they do of content, or else they've got a lot of IGC for their efforts, and the rich kids want to trade them Stars for that (either Stars for items directly or Stars for IGC to buy items with off the auction house). Stars, remember, are bought with real money by someone and will eventually end up getting traded back to the game for something off the cash shop, eventually. The more brisk of a business the cash shop can do, the more money CoT will make and ultimately the more successful the game will be. I dare say the game company is not going to allow people to trade back Stars for cash again, unless it's for a mark-down of some kind (i.e. they sell Stars for $0.01 each and buy them back for half that, etc).
So to me, the crux of the matter is this: a grinder is most likely a person who tries to play for as little actual money as possible, either by necessity or because they're trying to "beat the system" as a personal challenge (people do). I see myself as a high-roller, the type that will try to pay for that same stuff the grinders are grinding for. So, the grinders are players _I_ personally will be trying to trade my real-money-backed Stars to so that I can get good rare and very rare items from them. We've already established these grinders are basically trying to play on the cheap as much as possible. Okay, so I gotz tha mad Stars and they, presumably wants to get some.
What reason do you envision the grinders having to want to acquire Stars from people like me?
Because if I'm playing on the high-roller, VIP subscription option with all the bells, whistles, and Stars I want, which I'm paying handsomely for (and by handsomely, I mean like $15 per month), then I'll be creating plenty of Stars at a pretty regular rate. The grinders will apparently want to acquire Stars for themselves for some reason, and I cannot, for the life of me, imagine that THOSE particular players are going to trade me a Very Rare item (or enough IGC to get one) in exchange for Stars so as to buy an "IGC party bomb" or "funny hat" with. That particular type of player, as far as I can tell, couldn't care less about such frivolous things. They're JUST interested in making their toons better and more competitively good in every way possible.
So I ask, what do grindy players want Stars for in CoT?
Presumably it has to be something that cannot be easily acquired for IGC or else they'd just use their IGC directly to get it and ignore the high-rollers and their Stars entirely. Presumably it has to be something that the subscription players (who I would argue all high-rollers are) already have and cannot give away or share with anyone for free, thus giving the Stars a reason to exist and be traded away.
That's where I'm currently stuck in this whole monetization problem. Everything I come up with is either pay to win, or nickel-and-diming, or something you cannot possibly charge money for, etc in the eyes of the other people here on these forums.
Sure, you'll sell costumes and stuff in the cash shop, to some people, sometimes. But demand for that stuff PROBABLY won't drive the sort of symbiotic commerce cycle I'm envisioning here on a day to day basis, I don't think. If it doesn't, then you're effectively trying to sell Stars to whales who have no reason for acquiring them, because none of the grinders are accepting Stars for items, and that's what we whales all really want. When that happens, the whales either stop paying money, because it's pointless, or they go away entirely, or both.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
Radiac,
Link to large flowchart: [url=http://i.imgur.com/tbmLnhU.png]So you want to make Video Games?[/url]
This is just satire. ;)
Still, it be nice to visually see where Whales and Grinders all fit into a Monetization Model. :D
Absolutely, totally, 115% agree. Having to mentally rewrite the Incarnate powers was bad enough, I absolutely do not want to have to either a) rewrite all of my characters to cram them into the 'Titanite' canon, or b) deliberately ignore everything in the game that blathers on about Titanite and how it's the source of all powers.
When I think about the symbiotic economy scheme I mentioned in my last post, it occurs to me that one way to make sure that the grinders have the rare and very rare items to sell is to make the crafting process a laborious one. That is, maybe in order to craft a Rare thingy you don't just need IGC and the right recipe and salvage, but you also have to spend time in some way to craft the item. I don't mean that this would be time spend NOT adventuring and doing missions, but maybe while you're doing that, you get progress on crafting as well. Makes little sense in the role playing aspect, but it has been done in other games. This would mean that those who spend long hours logged in and actively playing the game would be able to craft more stuff than those players who spend less time and more money. Then the high rollers would trade Stars to the grinders for items (or for IGC with which to buy items) which items the high rollers might not have the time or inclination to actually bother to produce themselves.
Once again, I think the last piece of the puzzle in this hypothetical scheme is giving the grinders a reason for wanting Stars at all. Since it's probably not getting them items, the only thing I can think of is access to content of some kind that they otherwise would not have. If that is the recurring use for Stars, then giving that sort of content access to free-to-play grinders for free as some high-roller's "plus one" in the raid team pretty much circumvents the need for Stars, doesn't it? I mean, you want the Stars to be an in-demand currency that players can always use more of and generally would always accept in exchange for good and services. For that to happen, Stars have to buy you something you want and cannot otherwise get easily without them.
It's entirely possible that the economy in CoT will be something completely different from what I'm describing here, I get that, I'm just trying to finish a design I sort of started thinking about in my head.
Edit: A friend of mine recently told me that apparently the game Clash of Clans makes like $1-1.5 MILLION dollars PER DAY in their cash shop. The game basically, as they described it to me, makes you wait an excessively long time to make stuff you want to make, then lets you pay the game off to make it go faster. I think it's a real time strategy, "build a base and then destroy the opponent's base" type of game, not sure.
What if crafting rare and very rare items had a timer or progress bar and you could pay Stars to reduce that timer or gain progress? I think this would be the analog of what clash of Clans does. Whether or not that would work, and whether or not CoT would be as apparently addictive as that game are other questions.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
It isn't the onky game that uses long timers to create items with a cash shop method of reducjng the timer. Games like clash being pvp performance centric means lends itself to the psychology of "must have it now" if the player desires to perform well against certain opponents rather than waiting it out and as a result, going up against other opponents.
You can look to games with long "craft times" with heavy pve as well, though there are both single player and co-op tyoes here. From the Infinity Blade series (tablets / mobile) to Warframe.
What is different here is the basis of this game's design is not focused on hyper-specialized builds (for pve). Therefore there is little in the way utilizing game play to play into the psychology of the "must perform better now" other than general impatience.
Pvp will tend to be closer to this as by nature if the vast amount of combat mechanics there will still be more specialized forms to build a character for ideal results. However, we also don't want to get to the point where pvp design concers have a major impact on pve design. We are doing our best to make the differences as seemless as possible.
Which basically means that it would be folly to design a crafting system that affects pve due to the design method stems from pvp centic concerns.
Quick edit.
There was one idea presented by a dev where stuff that required timers would be "long" (exact time left unspecified) where players could shorten this timer by completing puzzles. Obtainin certain badges would provide more of the "wild card" pieces of the puzzle to finish even quicker.
Apllying this to the cash shop concedp for crafting we could have normally "long" timers to craft, puzzle to reduce timer, badges being given more "wild card" pieces, and a cash shop purchase of "wild card pieces" for those who don't want to bother with the puzzling to get the badges, but want to reduce the craft timer too.
This way anyone has a methid of reducing the timer, one requires work, with badges and possibly other bonuses included with them, and those who pay their way through but don't get the badges and related bonuses.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
The puzzle idea intrigues me. I have to say I don't hate it, up front. What sort of puzzles are we talking about though? Like a jigsaw puzzle that you need specific pieces to complete?
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
Nothing has been specified as it was a concept that was briefly brought up. There was a short brain storm on several different types of puzzles which were along certain general themes.
One was like a jigsaw-tetris-like puzzle. And I'm not saying that this is happening - it is something that has to be discussed further with some actual modelling to provide a basis for the gameplay discussion. But we focused on more core systems at the moment. Non-combat related systems have been put off until we get these more core systems nailed down.
It is also not safe to assume that if this concept were applied to crafting that the crafting puzzle woukd be the same as other interaction puzzles. It could be something entirely unique with multiple applicable themes. As crafting can apply to not only power socketables, but temp powers and base items as well.
If we break the comcept down to the most basic description it would be:
1. Interactive activities require timers of varying length (most likely related to the complexity of the task and / or impact on gameplay).
2. Provide a method of decreasing the timer through player activity providing an engaging experience.
3. Provide a method to purchase Stars through which cash shop purchases can be obained to decrease timers.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
On the subject of people being willing to pay to reduce timers, I'm not sure we want to entirely discount the power of general impatience, especially among gamers. For one thing, these aren't Tibetan monks we're talking about, and for another, I myself used to routinely dump valuable items on the market in CoX to get the quicker payoff right away as opposed to playing the "long game" to get maximum return for everything. So I think it might actually work. Not to the tune of $1-1.5 million per day, because the stuff you're making isn't being destroyed in PVP by people, but still, it gives the Stars some real value to the player, I think.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
I've played some games that use a similar mechanic. My current game has incredibly long wait times for higher level upgrades. The longest I've seen so far is 5 days and 20 hours but I suspect they go longer as I am not yet max level. But I have the option to skip the wait timer by paying cash shop money. I've never paid for Cash shop currency but I did win some recently by being the best in the system, through no fault of my own (someone at the top made some poor choices and got raided repeatedly till they fell and I rose to the number 1 spot).
I think the mini game or puzzle is a nice idea, I just wonder if being able to buy extra pieces wouldn't turn it into something people would consider a buy to win. It comes down the the specific implementation. If the puzzles are difficult the pieces become a requirement. If they are easy and having access to more pieces just makes them faster then that would probably be alright. Especially if the puzzles are non-repeatable. IE you can only do one puzzle or some limit of puzzles per long task to net a set bonus to build time. Taking the example of the 5 day wait in my game. You could do a puzzle that would remove 5% of the build time or do 5 puzzles to remove 1% of the build time each, but after that 5% you would not get any more benefit.
We would also need to consider what happens if the user can fail a puzzle. Can the puzzle be failed or can they just start over and try again? Is the reward for completing a puzzle locked if the puzzle isn't successfully completed? Is the bonus piece from the cash shop lost if the puzzle is failed/restarted. Things like that could push the extra pieces into the buy to win category as people may feel that not having the pieces hurts their play opportunity. Conversely if they can be lost by failing a puzzle I could see their value to the player diminishing to a point where no one would buy them at all since there is a possibility to lose them and are thus wasted.
I would like to state that 'puzzles' and 'pieces' are generic terms used to help explain hypothetical challenges that would not be core to the game. I'm not saying that all challenges of this type would be a puzzle puzzle. At this point it's all hypothetical thoughts.
Deeper discussion on puzzles might need to move to it's own thread as I'm not sure it fits the current topic. Bonus pieces for said puzzles, if implemented, being in the StarMart seems like a reasonable idea.
Second Chance: https://store.missingworldsmedia.com/CityOfTitans/SecondChance/
Dev Tracker: http://cityoftitans.com/forum/fixing-dev-digest
Dev Comments: https://cityoftitans.com/forum/dev-comments
If I were tasked with putting together the rules for the timer/puzzle/Stars thing, I think I'd make the timers for crafting run off of not time per se but XP earned, or rather, for level capped people, XP you WOULD have earned. That way, the crafting goes a little faster as you level up and only as fast as you gain XP (or would gain it if capped). This way, people truly do need to play the game to get their crafting done, not just log off and then back on 5 days later. To be clear, I'm not talking about making people devote actual XP towards crafting INSTEAD of leveling up, I'm talking about using XP earned as a metric for how many "person hours" you've put into the game and thus how much work you've done.
This makes whales like me have to really think about spending Stars to get stuff at that point. Meanwhile, the grinders can grind for it and get there on work ethic alone of they want to. Then, for the puzzle game, whatever it is, I'd make it cut the crafting time significantly, not just 5-10%, but more like 50%. So it would be like "Solve the puzzle, and every XP you earn from now on toward completing your new item gets a force multiplier of 2x or 3x or whatever". That way someone's still got to grind a little, and the grinders will pay the whales in IGC for Stars to get puzzle pieces with, use them to complete jobs faster, and make enough stuff for themselves and their whale patrons. I think people who've done a lot of grinding for craftables ought to get badges which bring with them additional timer-reducers of some kind, so that people who want to spend a lot of time becoming efficient crafters can do so. If it allows those grinders to create a market for Stars, I say so much the better.
The puzzle can be as simple as "you need X components of various different types and amounts and rarities to make this thing the fast way, those components exist in the game as randomized salvage type drops, can be acquired and traded on the AH, for IGC, some are common, rare, etc." Then the wildcard pieces are ultra rare but they can be created by spending Stars.
Edit: Another dimension to this is whether or not you can have more than one crafting project going at any given time. Maybe if you grind for the Master Crafter badge you can do TWO in parallel, maybe subscribers can do an Augment and a Refinement in parallel while subscribed, etc.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
I like an earlier idea: stars could be spent for "care packages" that are delivered. Sometimes you need things like inspirations and other temp buffs. A temporary drone to assist you. Maybe a teleport to a "safe area"... Those would be sweet, encourage repeat buys, and a reason to have a few stars saved up for a "rainy day" even though they are nonsub currently... And, a lot of MMO's have a level cap for nonsubs, and, stars (a lot) could be used for a single character to up the level cap by something like 5 or 10 (on a 1-100+ scale) from a number such as 50 (i.e. Everquest 2) to 60...
I do hope that the maximum level for CoT isn't as low as 40. I would like to see it be scalable, with a temporary cap at say 30 or 40 initially, then, as the next set of content or new area becomes available (done), raise the level cap as is appropriate (5 or 10 levels), repeated...
There may also be additional content that may require a stars unlock for everybody, that doesn't involve a level increase if stars don't get spent 'enough', and/or a badge type reward for amassing a certain amount...
So, lots of solutions are available for the 'Stars Crisis' ... LOL
In the MMO 'Champions' to open one of those lock-boxes, and I repeat, one, you need to spend 100 zen (their cash), for a 'key' (yes, it only works once), with a sub, you get 500 zen per month. To buy the zen with RL cash it runs @ $1.00 US per 100. Basically, you would be spending $1.00 each in hopes that you get a good thing, but, there are lots of things that are useless after getting them once (i.e. costume pieces to use if you buy a second costume, costing zen (I forget the amount)).
I don't like gambling RL money for a 'chance at' items I really should be getting, IMHO, on average, as drops. It would be a different story if the 'key' opened, at a bare minimum, 10 lock-boxes, and preferably like 100...
That is why I don't think a pay-to-win set-up like that should be considered.
1) Who started the ball rolling to get all this going?
2) Who is this game being made for?
The answer to those 2 questions is obvious.
I've never played DCUO, and I have no love for lockboxes, but I do want to see CoT succeed financially, whatever that takes. Also, there probably aren't going to be Inspirations, per se, as there is a system they're working on called "Momentum, and Reserves" instead of that.
The basic idea is that as you fight and land hits etc, your Momentum bar increases. It will then decrease over time spent NOT fighting until it goes back to zero when you've been "at rest" for a while. As the Momentum decreases, the "Reserves" bar increases. The Reserves bar remains fixed (I think) until you use it for something, or maybe it decreases over a much longer time scale, I don't know. But anyway, while your momentum is at high levels, you might have powers that take advantage of it, etc. Then, when you need to do what an Inspiration would have done for you in CoX, like a quick self-heal or some needed Endo, you might be able to tap into Reserves and get that somehow.
This is not to say that different temp powers and stuff might not happen that more or less look and act like Inspirations, but they wouldn't work like Insps did in CoX, per se.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
The plan is to launch with the first 30 levels of the game and roughly half the city (don't quote me on the half the city part but its a rough estimate). Then we get to split our time between resolving all the issues that crop up during live play and finish building out levels 31-50. It may be that we will need to unlock levels 31-40 then 41-50, as in that is a possibility dependant upon a lot of factors. I'd call that a fall back plan if anything.
Also, to clarify, there aren't any definitive plans regarding monetization. I'm not on the business team, but they are aware of the pros and cons to lock-box systems. Personally, I'm not in favor of them either.
While we don't have Inpsiriations, Radiac mentioned our version is called Reserves. He described the system adequately, but to correct a bit of info: Reserves don't decay once earned. They deplete based on the amount filled and / or the amount desired to be used once they are activated. If you have full reserces and your Momentum decays nothing happens. If you have any unused Reserve space, any natural Momentum decay will go into filling your Reserves.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
One of the things that I've posited, though it is only one of many things being bandied about, is to have subscription benefits (other than, obviously, stipends of Stars) be purchasable WITH Stars.
So, if a subscribing player gets access to Extra Goodies X, Y, and Z, as well as a VIP pass to Spiffy Zone Omega, or what-have-you, but the free player doesn't, the "free" player could still buy all of those benefits with Stars.
So if we go that way, the answer to Radiac's question of why the "grinder" in his example wants Stars could be "because it lets him be a subscriber, in effect, without spending IRL cash on it."
If Grinder McGee supplies Whaleman, Orcaboy, and Scrooge McBucks with sufficient Very Rare items that their payments in Stars support his subscription, Grinder McGee, Whaleman, Orcaboy, and Scrooge McBucks are all playing as subscribers. The latter three are subsidizing Grinder's subscription, while Grinder is allowing them to get the cool items they just don't have time to grind for, themselves.
Everybody wins: the cash-"rich" players have the items they want, Grinder's got his subscription through nothing but playing the game, and MWM gets paid, all without any direct "pay-MWM-to-win" scheme that leads to item inflation.
Other plans are still being discussed; this is by no means settled. But it is one idea that's out there which answers some of Radiac's comments.
[color=#ff0000]Business Manager[/color]
[img]http://missingworldsmedia.com/images/favicon.ico[/img]
I'm delighted to see Segev chiming in here and the hear his thoughts once again.
I think Grinders are going to try to get the most "game" for the least money. If that's true, and if the symbiotic relationship Segev mentioned exists in the game, I feel like there needs to be something pretty cool that the Grinders aren't getting without the sub that the subscribers are getting and cannot trade to the Grinder, per se. All they can do is trade Stars, and then the Grinder can use those to buy a sub or the specific cool perks associated with one a la carte.
Its the specifics of what those perks actually are (or will be, or would be, hypothetically) that is the catch. So far nobody has mentioned anything specific that I would imagine Grinder guy wanting to acquire Stars to buy without someone else chiming in and demanding that THAT specific thing is off limits and should be given to everyone who buys the game without requiring a sub for it. Of course, if I were the devs, I wouldn't seriously suggest any one specific thing or set of things in that vein for this reason, I'd keep it pretty much under wraps until the game rolls out. I'm noit asking for anyone to divulge anything ahead of schedule.
I'm pretty happy with the idea of non-subs being able to buy some amount of sub time with Stars acquired off the Auction House from paying subscribers like I intend to be. Or even just buying specific perks that the sub would have. I think that sort of symbiotic relationship would be cool to have. I certainly don't think I'm going to be grinding out as many hours as some people do, and if I'm going to pay someone for gear I want, it might as well be free-to-players looking to get in on some sub time. I'd rather that than paying the game for that stuff directly (like buying rare enhancements straight off the cash shop), or relying on spammers and bots.
To attempt to peel the onion one layer deeper, this idea requires the subscriber to have, or to have access to, something(s) that the non-sub does not. Segev mentioned access to Spiffy Zone Omega, as an example. There have been complaints in the past about such "haves and have-nots" type sorting of perks between the subs and non-sub which complaints usually amount to "If the game is advertised as free to play, that should mean I get EVERYTHING, i.e. the WHOLE GAME for free after I pay the up-front cost to buy the game." and specifically when it comes to Spiffy Zone Omega, "This sort of thing is bad because it divides the player base into two groups, those who can access Spiffy Zone Omega, and those who cannot, and in doing such it divides groups of friends, etc."
The haves and have-nots problem is one of pure emotion. "Does this game love me? If it loves me, why am I not allowed in Spiffy Zone Omega? Why does THAT GUY get to have Stars, and access to Spiffy Zone Omega and I don't? Clearly the game doesn't love ME, it just wants my MONEY! Harumpf! I'm going to leave and go play a game that appreciates me for ME. *ragequit*" I'm not sure how to address that, other than for MWM to admit it's there and say "Look, we're a business. We need a steady influx of money to keep maintaining the game and making new fun stuff for players to do. If that makes us EVIL, I guess we are. Sorry. We don't intend to be evil. We just really do actually need the money, as it turns out."
As for the "Dividing the player base" issue, there are fixes to that, but apparently people hate the fix more than the problem, according to studies that I haven't read or seen, but have been alluded to by others. People apparently feel like they're constantly being hit up for money again and again when you put in a "turnstyle" type of gate of any kind on Spiffy Zone Omega, or even just the Omega3 Task Force. I think it is a way to re-unite the separate groups of players, and could be done in a way that actually allows the Whales to pay for the Grinders' entry fees, but the problem isn't that, I'm told, it's the fact that the game would then be annoying the players with constant requests for money, and players are really turned off by that and just leave.
I want to make clear that I'm all for monetization. I'm giving the "devil's advocate" side to some extent here on this post, but I personally intend to subscribe for VIP, provided it actually means I get something beyond the satisfaction that comes with having donated to a good cause. I don't expect or want the subscribers to be, essentially, making donations of their own free will which they know gains them nothing in the game itself. From the other point of view, those people who know they won't have the ability to pay a sub, or don't want to, apparently will still want (expect?) everything to be the same for them as it is for the subscriber, irrational as that sounds, and convincing them to hang around despite NOT having some stuff is an issue.
Another problem I think that goes along with all of this is the tendency for people to want to have their cake and eat it too. You get the sentiment that people only want to be charged money (in addition to buying the game) for stuff that is then permanent and lasts forever after you buy it. Costume pieces, additional character slots, additional storage space, etc. Anything that is a one time purchase with no real need to ever buy it again.
Some games, which have LARGE numbers of players playing them, might be able to survive (and maybe JUST survive) on that sort of stuff alone. If CoT get's a million buyers in the first year, then they will have gotten about fifty million dollars or so in a fairly short time. If you took a $10-20 million chunk of that and invested it in something really reliable, you might get enough interest every year to pay the whole support staff annually in perpetuity. That would be a great thing, but I don;t think it will ever happen. I doubt CoT will ever really be that big. It's a small niche to begin with, the superhero genre, and within that you have the Marvel and DC companies already in there, and despite those games being largely panned by people on these forums, and despite those games getting old as the years roll on, they're still backed by the Marvel and DC movie and comic book franchises, which are very popular. If sales of DCUO start to slide, they could cut deals with movie makers to put ads for DCUO in movie theaters as part of the previews or put ads in the back of the comics, etc. This game will not have that.
Another rant that went way too long, sorry. :)
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
Personally - and I do not speak for the company in this case - I would reply to "haves and have-nots!" and "divide the player base!" complaints by pointing out that the proposed system would enable all players - even those who play for free - to access everything. The question is whether they spend real world money to buy Stars, or participate in the market to sell things they get from game-play for Stars.
But if Grinder McGee spends not a single dime of his own money, but is selling stuff for Stars, he has access to Spiffy Zone Omega as much as Scrooge McBucks. Scrooge bought access with money. Grinder bought access with the in-game effort to get stuff that Scrooge and his ilk pay Stars to acquire.
[color=#ff0000]Business Manager[/color]
[img]http://missingworldsmedia.com/images/favicon.ico[/img]
Agreed.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
Yep, everyone has the same options. You can get access to Spiffy Zone Omega by paying for a subscription, by spending real money to buy Stars, or by selling items that you obtained via grinding for Stars.
People seem okay with that as long as the deal is that you pay once and unlock Spiffy Zone Omega forever. That does not create a repeat business market for Stars, to me, and such repeat business was the main goal of this thread originally.
What people don't like, or so I'm told, is the "turnstyle" access model where you charge people per day or per TF run to do that content. The idea being that a subscriber gets to go there and do that as often as they want while their sub is paid up and the non-sub would be locked out EXCEPT they can buy a one-day pass to Spiffy Zone Omega or a single-run ticket to the Omega3 Task Force for a FEW Stars.
The reason I like the "turnstyle" idea is that it creates a repeat business way to spend Stars, and people could even use their Stars to fund a friend's TF run or day pass here and there. This way, those who can't pay money, and don't really grind a lot for Stars could still participate.
But the knock on that is that the NPC asking you for Stars to enter the zone or do the TF is seen as greedy grab for cash on the part of the company, and an annoying immersion-breaker for the player. It both makes the non-sub feel second class and causes them to feel like they're getting nickel and dimed to death.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
Actually, that's a side of it that would be interesting to me to discuss: how would one support immersion while having zones which are "subscriber-only" or in any other way gated by Star-purchase? Even if it was just "pay once," that would still require some interaction with the "you can't go here unless you spend Stars" barrier, whatever form that took.
What form might such a barrier take? The obvious is simply "you can't go in here; you don't have a ticket," but that has its own immersion-breaking problems. Why does it take a ticket to go here (if it's not a theme park or something)? What stops the flying thief from sneaking in without paying? What stops the lawless strongman from simply shoving the barrier aside and walking through?
Obviously, the reality is that the coding of the game prevents it, just like "waist-high barriers" can be impermeable obstacles in some games.
But that's less fun than if the "barriers" can be achieved in more immersive fashion.
Some places might be separated by dimensional divides or reachable only by travelling long distances (which are soft-forbidden by requiring zoning that isn't doable overland, i.e. without special travel arrangements). The missions that make the travel available might be, themselves, Star-locked. This works for Turnstile-type barricades, because you'd have to buy your way into the mission. Though that also pushes the barrier back to "you have to pay to play this mission," which still raises the questions.
It could require certain macguffins to open them up. Such macguffins could be directly purchased in the C-store, or they might be (again) in Star-locked content. But still, what prevents you from going there without the macguffin? Any "city zone" would make no sense to be so barricaded. Of course, maybe that's the key: no Spiffy Zone (Alpha, Beta, Gamma, or whatever) could be in the city proper without being somehow very carefully isolated.
It would be interesting, though, to discuss how such barriers could be designed to be clearly "you must buy something with Stars to get through here," but not come right out and say so and certainly not create invisible, impenetrable walls that strain disbelief as to why you can't breach them.
[color=#ff0000]Business Manager[/color]
[img]http://missingworldsmedia.com/images/favicon.ico[/img]
Flavorful reasons to cordon off a zone (top of my head):
1. It's an orbiting space station/Moon Base/some other planet and you need to have a "space suit" to be able to hop aboard a spaceship/starship that can take you there, which suit can only be purchased with Stars.
2. It's a really hazardous no-man's land, like with radioactive fallout and harsh chemicals and stuff, like the area around a recent nuclear reactor meltdown maybe. Absolutely no access unless you're wearing an official "Hazmat" suit, which can only be purchased with Stars.
3. Underwater city, very far away and very deep under water. Accessible only via a specific super-fast submarine, which you can only get on if you have proper "scuba gear", purchasable only with Stars.
4. Its in a politically contested area. You have to have "proper authorization" to get in, or else the U.N. will consider your presence an act of war. The fees you have to pay for the filing of an application to get "proper authorization" can only be paid for in Stars.
5. It's a super-secret location, deep underground (maybe), only accessible via a special teleporter, which you can't use unless you have a "locator beacon", which you have to buy with Stars.
6. It's a TF that begins at a private event in a corporate headquarters building. By invitation only. You can get a really good forgery of an invitation to get you in the front door, from an NPC, but only for Stars.
7. In order to find the secret trans-dimensional entrance portal to The Crayfish Dimension, you need a special "cray-dar" that can only be bought with Stars. Entrance portal is invisible and intangible to everyone else.
I could go on.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
Sure, those a re pretty good ones but I am sure that all of those would have power sets that made it possible to circumvent the need to buy in the first place. Add in players ability for RP'ing capabilities of race and such and there would be even more capabilities to circumvent them.
Most of the things you list could be stolen from someone else who had bought it.
You can find an immersive, RP reason to justify anything if you're willing to keep giving your character more super powers and fewer scruples, but the game devs will, in all cases, have to draw the line somewhere. Since we the players are going to be allowed to write our own backstories for our characters, we get to decide what they can and can't do, and what they would or wouldn't do. That said, the game only allows you to actually do so much. You could argue that your character is supposed to be totally impervious to all harm, is all seeing and all knowing, and can shoot energy blasts capable to penetrating all forms of protection, bar none, at any distance. The game won't let you do that, for obvious reasons.
So something similar happens here. There was a complaint about charging people Stars for access to zones with no RP justification for it. So you ad in an RP justification for it, problem solved. People might immediately argue "That shouldn't apply to MY toon, because..." and then go into detail about some part of their backstory that they think trumps the Star cost in some way. Guess what, that doesn't work either. Just like calling "I get to do anything I want, cuz I made my toon THAT good." doesn't work above. You have to actually pay for a subscription or buy a widget with Stars to be allowed to go to the place or do the thing, because it's a game.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
I will state that my threshold, personally, for believable limits extends to powers you can have, but not to RP fluff. You can RP fluff your PC to be the undisputed ruler of Titan City, but that will apply only as long as you don't interact with the rest of the game. Similarly, if your only way to say "but I should be able to access that" is "My RP of my character is that he invented a teleporter that takes me there," even though you lack any of the tools the game provides for emulating that, I'm not going to call it immersion-breaking for your PC to be unable to get to Spiffy Zone Alpha.
If, however, you have a power that lets you, say, walk through walls, disappear, and fly (being much more unique than the other guys), and all that nominally keeps you out of Spiffy Zone Alpha is a wall and a guarded door, it becomes immersion-breaking that you can't disappear and fly through the wall to get there. Because you actually have in-game powers that should enable you to.
[color=#ff0000]Business Manager[/color]
[img]http://missingworldsmedia.com/images/favicon.ico[/img]
I don't personally think the REAL reason anyone dislikes turnstile gating (or any other kind of monetization) on some content is that it's non-immersive. I think they just don't like being told "You're not a subscriber so you have to pay for this right here and now or else not do it." when they want to do something. Any way you couch that discussion, they're going to hate it, they're going to resent it, and they're going to complain about it and/or stop playing.
In a more general sense, I think the basic paradox you have to get around, in a game where there are subscribers and non-subscribers, is that the subscriber has to either get something that the non-sub doesn't get, or else the non-subscriber has to deal with annoyances that the subscriber does not have to deal with.
1. If there are annoyances for the non-sub, even non-monetary ones like "non-subs can't have or access other players' liars or SG bases", they feel unappreciated and that the game just wants their money and they quit the game on you.
2. If the non-sub is simply not allowed to access the gated content because they're not subscribed, they feel excluded and "second class" and quit the game on you. Adding in a way to pay a little at a time to do a little content at a time for them only equates to an annoyance for the non-subs, so that put's us back to 1. above.
The conclusion I draw from this is that you can't really have a game that is "subscription optional" and please all of your players. It's got to be either "subscription-only", which is an old business model that can be demonstrated to be not the best way to make money. Or else you have to go with "free to play", and exist on voluntary purchases in the cash shop, which sounds great to people here and now, because we all take that to mean "I can avoid paying entirely, and let the rich suckers pay for stuff like idiots to keep the game running for all of us." Unfortunately, that's not what "free to play" ends up actually meaning. To me, it ultimately turns into "lockboxes" because those are the voluntary purchases that they try to get you to buy in those games, for the most part.
What I keep circling back to, however, is if there are going to be Stars, that is, a money-backed currency that can be traded in-game for other stuff or used in the cash shop to buy stuff, then it would behoove the devs to have at least one repeat purchase enabler for Stars, so that a player can always find a use for Stars that buys something temporary and transient which can be re-purchased and consumed again and again.
Having rampant IGC inflation is a problem, but maybe not a huge one. Having Star inflation due to people not wanting to buy anything with Stars, since they've already bought all the permanent stuff like costume unlocks and have literally run out of new stuff to buy, is totally out of the question. You CANNOT let that happen in a game, and the lockboxes are one way of ensuring that it won't.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
Interesting conclussion. I have another to offer. The reason people tend to not like subscriber or buy-in dlc content packs is that it divides the player base. Look at it this way: For the majority of the game, any player can pretty much team up with any other player (barring any factional / alignment systems). Then there is this place, or contact, or mission door that those whom you've teamed with regularly, or even just the ease of picking up a team and going suddently becomes restricted.
This is why I'm in favor of a team-pass under the team leader's access. They other team members normally wouldn't have access to said content can still play with their friends who do, those who purchased / subscribed get the unique rewards (like badges and perhaps any unique related drops, etc.). Player base doesn't get divided, players who haven't purchased may be encouraged to subscribe / purchase the dlc if they like the content and want to earn the extras related to it.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
I hope that the proliferation of Stars into the game via buying and selling stuff in the AH will mean that "pay some Stars to access this" doesn't feel like "give us money now," if people run into it in moderation. Any more than "you must have thirty tickets to do this" felt like it in CoH; it just meant going and farming more tickets. Or what-have-you.
[color=#ff0000]Business Manager[/color]
[img]http://missingworldsmedia.com/images/favicon.ico[/img]
Riding for free on the team leader's coat tails is fine for people willing to team up to do stuff, but doesn't help the soloists that don't want to team up, and cannot or do not want to pay for a whole month's sub to gain access. Ironically, allowing turnstile access for Stars solves that problem, despite it's apparent unpalatability to some of those same people, according to research I've not seen but have been informed of by some people.
And the "team leader grants free access" idea doesn't involve spending Stars at all, does it? If not, then you still need something that Stars can get spent on as a repeat business enabler, I think.
I'll once again point out that I'm personally in favor of any and all for all kinds of monetization that you'd want to try, assuming they actually work and the company remains profitable with them:
1. I can live with sub-only, like old CoH from 2006, though it limits how much money people can spend every month to just the sub itself, and in so doing is not the best for the company, I get that. Sub with cash shop is fine.
2. I can live with lockboxes, to be quite honest about it. I want this particular game to succeed so much that I'd participate in that system for the greater good of CoT. Heck I played Magic Online (the grand daddy of lockbox games) for a while, so this would not be anything new to me.
3. I can certainly live with content being monetized on a one-and-done basis, i.e. buy the upgrade and you get to go to the zone and do the content forever. I doubt that and the up-front cost to buy will be enough in the long term however.
4. I can live with turnstile payments for some premium content, like a special zone or two and a special premium TF here and there.
5. I can live with having crafting timers and then allowing people to buy those off somehow with Stars, i.e. adding in an optional crafting cost in Stars to make stuff craft faster.
But regardless of what your overall monetization scheme is, If you plan on having a real-money-backed currency, like Stars, then you are 100% required to have some form of purchase that people can always make, over and over again, to repeatedly buy some consumable thing for Stars. Respecs and costume pieces and so forth only have so much demand before they saturate and you don't need any more of them. I certainly wouldn't want the game's income to be dependent on how fast the devs can churn out new costumes and power sets and content to charge one-and-done upgrade prices for, because for subscribers like I intend to be, the Stars are just going to keep piling up, and they'll pile up faster than you can make new stuff for people like me to buy, I would expect.
So far I feel like we've identified three things that would be legit repeat business enablers for Stars: A) Lockbox keys B) turnstile fees for content (zones and TFs) and C) crafting time reducers, and everybody except me, and to some extent Segev, seems to hate all three.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
I'd actually be fine with it being set up so that non-subscribers have 3 options.
A) Pay X Stars to unlock Spiffy Zone Omega for a month. (This would put them at the same level as subscribers, who pay their monthly fee to gain access to SZO)
B) Pay Y Stars to unlock SZO for a day/a single TF run.
C) Don't pay any Stars at all and don't get access to SZO.
Well, what about the situation I've found myself in? I'm a subscriber and happy about it, but then the girlfriend says we Will go see a movie this weekend. So, we go and the movie isn't terrible, so I feel justified at the cost, but when it comes time for my Subscription to renew, I'm faced with that, or paying my cell-phone bill. The spare $20 that would have gone to my subscription just isn't available.
So, suddenly, I've become one of those horrible 'Freemium' freeloaders that 'everyone' abhors. And then my friends ask me to take my usual place in a run on Spiffy Zone Omega... What happens? I used to have access - do I still have access? Do I have to spend real money to buy Stars (presuming that I haven't stored up a pile of them), so I can buy a pass to SZO? Do I tell my friends I have a headache (for a whole month) and go hide?
What happens to all of my other Subscriber Perqs? Maybe I'll have to mug Radiac and sell his liver for enough Stars to tide me over?
Be Well!
Fireheart
I think it would be okay to have gated content that is an alternate timeline reality. There can be any number of unique ways to travel there, from red slippers to a Delorean. What is actually there could be anything. More importantly though, as an alternate timeline it would be possible to not go there and still feel like you're part of a complete universe. Better than locking players out of parts of a real world that superheroes can always find a way to traverse.
[size=14]"The illusion which exalts us is dearer to us than ten thousand truths." - Pushkin[/size]
[size=14] "One piece of flair is all I need." - Sister Silicon[/size]
Radiac, soloists not having access to the subsciber / buy-in dlc are not subject to the primary premise that such content divides the player base preventing players from easily or maintaining their current team.
Anyone who remembers the old hazard zone level gate should recall the frustrations that occurred for teams wanting to go places where side kicking made it easy to team up with others but suddenly forced a break up or skipping of said content.
While fracturing of the player base will be an inevitable part of this game (sich as being in pvp or not) I would say if we can avoid the problems other games using premium / dlc content that further subdivides its main base - those in pve, particuarly with the ability to easily team up thanks to a side kick system - we should do what we can.
This would allow players to get an idea if they like this content and could lead to encourage them to purchase it / subsribe for it so they aren't reliant on a team leader to access. Restricting unique rewards or even giving increased reward rates to those who have access may further encourage others to pay into access.
Lock boxes are generally disliked by many western gamers - they are a staple of the eastern gaming market. The common complaints revolve around the intrusive-to-immersion-breaking presence, or inventory issues (when boxes are dropped into inventory), or the gambling-like-nature of chance involved with them.
The turn-style concept leans toward issues where games are not virwed well when they have the cash shop intruding into the game world. Along with other issues that weatern gamers have with hiw they view paid access. I've already gone into details on this.
What players are more forgiving over is subscriber access and one-time purchase unlocks (purchase a la dlc). The onky issues are as stated anove regarding the divided player base.
Crafting timer reductions aren't looked on fondly when the consideration is waiting out one or multiple days on the normal timer - which is where quite a few games end up doing to strike that impatience nerve.
I'm more curious if we can use Segevs puzzle ideas for interaction timers being natively "long" but using playing a puzzle mini-game reduces the timer. There is one game that introduced a minigame to their crafting system thst is similar (though there's more to it) that seems to be well recived. Since we are looking at crafting not only for character builds but base builds too, and crafting will lean more toward multiple items, being able to reduce something like even a minute long timer (just for an example) may end up feeling long especially if the character is crafting and the crafting isn't automated (where the player starts the craft timer and goes off to other things).
Then include the "wild card pieces" for purchase to help make the timer reduction even faster. It is essentially the same idea - reduce the crafting timer, but this leans into reducing the time investment for the player since they are actively involved in the crafting process instead of having passive timers where the player sets up and goes away.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
*Radiac quickly tries to hide his liver, and other valuables* <.< >.>
The idea of gating a zone is somewhat hard to swallow, in an RP sense, if it's a newly made part of the city, that I will grant. And since new parts of the city are planned for future releases, that's a problem. Of course, you'll find it hard to roleplay the fact that you're opening up a new suburb where none existed before anyway. Why weren't we allowed to go there before? Why now? Is there going to be an immersive excuse for that for each new burb they make? If not, then you needn't bother to explain why you're charging Stars for access to it either, in my opinion.
As far as people letting their subscriptions lapse out of necessity, I understand that. I have no ill will toward anyone, even people who choose to play totally free all the time. I think in that case, your SG mates and friends would likely help you out with a few stars here and there for that month, assuming you don't have any saved up. I mean, we're talking about maybe $2 worth of Stars to get into a thing for a day or do a TF run here, not more than that, I wouldn't think. I can probably throw someone I know 10-50 cents worth of Stars to get them into the TF if I need to, and the other 0-6 people in the TF could likely do the same. Plus you might not have the Stars, per se, but you might have enough saved-up IGC that you could buy some off the auction house.
As far as alternate realities and timelines are concerned, I think that idea won't solve the problem at hand. The problem is that in order to get money, the game needs to provide something that the players want that they can charge for. Access to a zone might be worth paying for IF it can get you some cool thing, like new missions to do, a new TF to do, new badges to collect, some way of getting a new item, like a Synthetic HamiO or Warburg Nuke that you can't get anywhere else, etc. It's that sort of stuff that would draw people to the new zone, and people who are locked out would still feel locked out because of it. Also, if that's where the majority of the subscribers are spending the majority of their time currently, then the areas open to the free player still feel emptier for that reason, even if they are the "real world" and not some "fake alternate universe" that "doesn't count" in the official lore of the game universe.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
To Tannim222: The soloist might not be counted among those who got their team broken up by the content gate, but I think they're still going to want to access the new zone when there is one. New zones tend to be very popular and have new content and everyone tends to want to check them out right away as soon as they are launched, not just teamer-uppers. I think their most cost-effective option there for the soloist would be to buy a month's subscription and then go nuts, but as it has been mentioned in the past, some people simply cannot pay money to the game, period. They either don;t actually have the money, or they don't have access to the parents' credit card. So those people, many of them young kids, end up just playing X-Box instead. Now, if there were way that a kid could grind for IGC to acquire Stars on the auction house, then the only thing preventing that player from accessing the new zone, where he really does want to go, is that there is apparently no way to just pay a few Stars for limited access. It's like telling them that have to buy a month's subscription to the fruit of the month club and accept delivery of a crate of oranges when they can only afford one orange, and that's all they want to buy. I don't see this as a thing that has to involve the cash shop at all, actually. If Stars are a commodity that can be acquired in the game, then NPCs are liable to ask for them for various reasons. They're immersive, in-game, objects that the NPCs in the game acknowledge the existence of and will interact with, and players can get them, albeit probably in small quantities, without ever having to go to the cash shop. So maybe the free to play kid has to log on during the week and grind up enough IGC to buy some stars to do some of the new content on the weekend. I could see that.
I realize that there are things the devs cannot divulge, so I won't ask any dev to tell me what they think the "repeat business enabler" for Stars should be with any specifics. I just firmly believe the game needs one or more repeat business enablers for Stars (and, for that matter, IGC probably). Things that a player can always spend a Star or a few Stars on so as to keep them from piling up over time due to lack of anything desirable to spend them on. You cannot have Stars and NOT have repeat business enablers, in my opinion.
I bet you could have like 50 different "buy it once, own it forever, never have to buy another one" type things that Stars could buy, and you'd still see them pile up and eventually become valueless at some point. It's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when.
There's an old horror trope about a businessman who makes a deal with the devil and sells his soul to become the best there is at his craft. The devil invariably tricks him by making him SO good at his craft, that his wares never wear out, never need to be replaced, and as such the businessman goes bankrupt for lack of repeat business. I don't want to see MWM damn itself to that particular horrible fate voluntarily.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
The following is an excerpt from an internet article on monetization I just read. [url=http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/RaminShokrizade/20130626/194933/]Link[/url]
The article is mostly about some of the more shady, predatory practices going on in game monetization today, in my opinion, and by "today" I mean circa 2012-2013, based on the date of the article. Disclaimer: article not really about MMO games per se, but I think the lessons learned in terms of people's behavior are the same, or similar enough that they still apply here.
In the above linked article, Ramin Shokrizade writes:
"Research has shown that putting even one intermediate currency between the consumer and real money, such as a “game gem” (premium currency), makes the consumer much less adept at assessing the value of the transaction. Additional intermediary objects, what I call “layering”, makes it even harder for the brain to accurately assess the situation, especially if there is some additional stress applied."
and later goes on to write:
"Making the consumer exit the game to make a purchase gives the target's brain more time to figure out what you are up to, lowering your chances of a sale. If you can set up your game to allow “one button conversion”, such as in many iOS games, then obviously this is ideal. The same effect is seen in real world retail stores where people buying goods with cash tend to spend less than those buying with credit cards, due to the layering effect. "
So let's imagine this for an example:
Every time there's a new Spiffy Zone Omega launched, complete with it's own Omega3 Task Force, new missions, new contacts, new story lines, new villains, new factions to interact with, etc, the subscribers get unfettered access to the new zone and the non-subs do not. The way this is explained in the game is that every toon has an Identity Card or Passport or something like that, and when you're a subscriber, your papers are "Endorsed" or "Sanctioned" or you have "Security Clearance" etc. For villains, this would be the counterfeit version, but same idea. When and if you're not subscribed, your Passport is invalid or expired, or your clearance has been revoked. You can subscribe again and your paperwork is immediately re-cleared, or you can go to an NPC and pay some number of Stars to get such "Temporary Clearance" or "Security Waivers" as you might want, with different "Administrative Application Fees" for each, payable in Stars. How many hours or day's it's good for, or how many runs of the TF, etc, is subject to the price you pay. You can buy a whole month of Clearance and access to the TF for some price close to what a full month of subscription time would cost, or you can buy less to get less. But the discount you get is always for buying more. Buy in bulk, get a lot more stuff for less Stars per item, etc. You could have different amounts of time in the new zone available for different prices. You could sell 1-, 5-, 10-, and 20-packs of TF runs for different prices. You can offer an "unlimited access and TF runs for one day/week/month pass" etc, all kinds of stuff.
This, in reference to the article, puts like TWO layers of stuff between the money and the content (money--Stars--Clearance Waivers--Content). It allows you to put NPCs in the game that handle the front end of the transaction, so no need to go to the cash shop, you just have some important government-ish NPCs that handle the "Stars for Clearance Waivers" transaction and then a Security Guard at the gate of the new zone and/or a Task Force giver NPC that perform the "Waivers for content" transaction. It also allows you to have occasional sales, and even when there isn't a sale going on, you can advertise how one option is being offered at a discount as compared to another, which as I've already mentioned, works like a charm for Magic card sales.
And remember, the Stars being used to acquire the waivers or whatever can be had for IGC on the auction house, or so one expects. So not only are there two layers of currency to insulate the money from the thing it's being spent on, but the fact that you might get some or all of the Stars with IGC makes the "Exactly how much am I spending?" math practically impossible without knowing specifics about the current IGC-Star exchange rate on the market.
Based on the linked article, I think that would work.
Edit: If you want to get even more evil, you could, whenever a new zone rolls out, give every toon a special "mission tip" summoning them to the new zone to do a mission for a NPC there in order to receive some reward or another. Or maybe just giving them a mission to do in the new zone is enough, I don't know. This would be the equivalent of the casino that gives out free chips to everyone staying in the hotel as part of their complementary mint-on-pillow service.
Edit Again: You could even make the "Security Clearance Waiver" an object in the game that could be sold on the auction house for IGC. They can only be created by paying Stars, and they get destroyed when used to access stuff, but giving them an existence and making them a trade-able commodity on the AH seems fair to me.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
Having different accessibility based on your subscription status is the only way the MWM will survive. Its that simple. To better survive MWM should provide an a la carte option for anything one status gets that another does not.
[img]https://i.imgur.com/IC2ykjR.png[/img]
Sooo... you want to see each of those 3 Major Packs, be comprised of Minor Packs? :)
I hope to manage something that does this. That said, I can make no promises at this time. But...this definitely is in my hoped-for list.
Ideally, the free player will be doing things that free players can do, and will interact with the auction house at some point, and see that he can sell stuff - including IGC - for Stars. Whether he realizes Stars are the c-store currency or not, the fact that he's seen things in-game which cost Stars (to use this discussion's examples, perhaps "gated content") should make him think, "Oh, I can get Stars by selling stuff here. I'll do that; I know they're useful."
If, by some miracle, he never visits the C-store and never sees that Stars are something he can buy for cash, he may never realize that he's seeing paywall-protected content; he just sees that he needs this "Stars" currency rather than the in-game currency to access it. This could be further obscured if there is (other) content gated by IGC, come to think of it. Which would also serve, to some extent, as an IGC sink. (I literally just thought of that, so it's brainstorm-o'clock there, NOT an insight into anything being discussed anywhere.)
[color=#ff0000]Business Manager[/color]
[img]http://missingworldsmedia.com/images/favicon.ico[/img]
Thats one way to look at it. I think of it as 3 different packages with an option to pick and choose desired access. The subscriber pays a set fee to have the most access all the time, which might not include some pay to use things like costumes or special quests. The lapsed subscriber will lose some things but keep others, like currently used costumes and classes or PCC access. The free player has the basic access so maybe they don't have access to all the classes, quest, costumes or raids. Any of the packages can one time purchase access to anything. A free player who most likes to create content but will never participate in a raid could get access to PCC and not get raid access. A la carte, just like city of heroes did it but better.
Your picture is close but does not include things that even the subscriber would have to pay for. They could be as small as special outfits or as big as expansions but should never include anything that grants increased power or the game becomes pay to win.
But, if I buy something 'A la carte', then I expect to Own it, regardless of my subscription status.
If I buy the base game, I expect to be able to play everything in it, regardless of whether I maintain a subscription.
Be very careful about taking stuff away from players.
Be Well!
Fireheart
Nothing is being taken away. Its a subscription service. You want to watch HBO then you have to pay the subscription. You want to use your cell phone you have to pay your provider. A subscription game is no different.
And you do have access to the base game regardless of subscription or not because the base game is whatever MWM says it is.
I think what he is saying - if someone pays REAL MONEY (either via a sub or through the cash store) for something like a costume set - they should have access to that costume set forever. It should not "disappear" suddenly. Now - something like "In-Game Currency rent" to access your base or keep it active would be fine, as long as if the rent lapses it doesn't destroy it and you have to start over from scratch.
Okay, given that ownership of things you buy is a priority for you, then, with that in mind, you tell me what you think people like yourself would buy on a repeat business type of basis for Stars, because that ultimately is what I'm interested in finding out.
Edit: I'd also be interested to hear everyone's take on the "Security Clearance" idea I posed above. It's a long post, I know, but then we do have a lot of time to read before the game comes out still. :)
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
I don't think so. Seems clear he thinks that buying the game should automatically give you full access to all the subscription services.
I agree that things like costumes and classes should be permanent unlocks either as part of the subscription model or the a la carte model. I don't think that raids or game areas should be permanent unlocks without buying them individually. If MWM decides to make certain things only available with a subscription as an incentive for subscribing that is their choice. I also think that anything that is subscription only should be offered piecemeal to those who don't want to pay the subscription. Its a system that offers the most choice to the players while still providing a income stream to MWM.
Repeatedly buying the same thing is unlikely to be popular among players. Probably the only things that will get multiple purchases are some kind of boosts for in game things like exp or loot drops. Having to repeatedly buy access to quests or raids is likely to drive players away. For the record, I think anything purchased with the a la carte I talk about should be permanent accessible for a one time cost. Maybe a very cheap option for 1 day access as a trial period to allow players a chance to try before they buy.
The security clearance idea is fine but I don't think that being a subscriber automatically gives you access to everything new to the game. Things that take a considerable amount of effort to implement ,ie new game areas, might need a period of purchase access only to recoup the costs before it becomes included in subscriptions. Perhaps the subscribers will get discounts for all of these.
Actually, Interdictor was correct.
Be Well!
Fireheart
Um, I'll tell you exactly what I've spent 'Stars' on. Expanded Bank storage, expanded Inventory, full access to Crafting (when it was limited in non-sub), extra character slots, occasional bits of Costume, access to transportation (vehicle license), and once or twice, some IGC, so I could buy materials for Crafting.
So, the answer to your question is, basically, No 'repeat' purchases of the sort you're trying to engender. If I'm not up to paying for a Subscription, then I'm not about to pay to 'Rent' anything else - a personal Base for IGC being an exception, if the price is 'reasonable'. I will not gamble-tron with my money. I expect to know exactly what I am buying and to receive exactly what I ordered. If I pay real money, even through the virtual exchange of 'Stars', then I expect to 'own' what I purchase.
So, I won't be paying for 'tickets' to Spiffy Zone Omega. If I like the content enough, I might pay to have a permanent unlock on Spiffy Zone Omega, so that I can access it regardless of my subscription-status. Again, that's a one-time payment for Ownership.
If you check back on all of my posts in this thread, you'll find many things I would pay 'Stars' to unlock.
Be Well!
Fireheart
Generally speaking, any business that makes money on a "one-time purchase" model has so many products or so many customers that it doesn't matter when one customer buys a product; there's always more products to be bought, or at least more customers to buy the same one.
So if you want to have "buy it and own it forever," then the model needs to have a nigh-infinite expandability of "own them forever" products to be bought, so that nobody EVER has bought "everything."
[color=#ff0000]Business Manager[/color]
[img]http://missingworldsmedia.com/images/favicon.ico[/img]
So just costumes and base access, or do you mean anything you pay for. I can think of a few things you shouldn't get permanent access to for one lump sum. Thats all I am saying.
True, but an online game is one of the few arenas where nigh infitite expansion is possible. Outfits, pets, boosts, quests and so on are not super expensive to make and even a small game company can churn multiples out each month. Whats more they can be sold individually, bundled or discounted easily. They have a single cost to the developer and can be sold forever with almost no additional cost at all.
One Time payments:
- Cosmetic Items: Hats, Bongos emote, etc.. anything that Devs/Artists/etc.. don't need to touch up ever, if they don't want to.
Subscription payments:
- Anything that needs Devs/Artists/etc.. to update every so often.
Exceptions can be made, but its up the Business/Marketing department, and budgets will reflect any exceptions.
Yes, and if most of this stuff is totally optional and doesn't affect player power level (because if it did, the game would become "pay to win" and we all mostly agree that we don't want that) then you're depending on the devs to constantly roll out more new totally cosmetic stuff for the very few players interested in it to buy, while the vast majority of us just ignore it, watching our Stars pile up over time until the Star loses most of its value and we all let our subscriptions drop for lack of any reason to pay a sub anymore. That's great, you've not only damned yourself to having no repeat business from the non-subs, but you've taken away the reason subscribers were subscribing and eliminated THAT revenue stream in the process. What's worse, the devs are now spending a lot more time making new costume pieces and stuff for the whales and less time making new content or fixing bugs and solving QoL issues, because there's no money in that. Also, stores in real life that don't have a lot of repeat business as their business model tend to be HUGE or go out of business. I mean, this is essentially WalMart and Amazon we're talking about, and those two entities sell literally EVERYTHING, including some consumable stuff that is repeat business-able (WalMart sells groceries, motor oil, and detergent for example).
Having an up-front price to buy the game (which is a good thing to have, to be able to force out spammers and trolls, etc) is probably not conducive to having a playerbase in the hundreds of thousands/millions like that. Thus I don't think CoT, which is a game with an up-front cost to buy, in all likelihood, and is a superhero niche game with no affiliation to any comic book company, is ever going to have enough players that the small fraction of the playerbase that actually buys cosmetic stuff will actually be enough to sustain the game. I also don't think a superhero niche game is ever going to have enough different stuff to fill a store with such that you get Wal-Mart like business where people are constantly coming back and finding a new thing they want to buy on a regular basis like that. And let's not forget, even the "permanent" stuff Wal-Mart sells still wears out over longer periods of time, like shoes and car tires, or gets replaced by better technology, like TVs. I'm not an accountant or an economist, but it has yet to be demonstrated to me that that could actually happen with a game like CoT. And even if it does make you enough money to sustain the game, in the short term, there are still going to be a lot of players generating a lot of Stars every month and not really using them for anything, which, as I described above, basically causes everyone to stop paying money at some point. Not a matter of if, a matter of when. At some point, even a loyal subber like me looks around and says "Wellp, I've got this huge pile of unused Stars in my account, so many that I could probably buy the next three years worth of stuff they roll out, so why bother buying any more Stars? I should just let my sub lapse and go free." and then when we all do that it's like "Hey, where's the revenue stream go?" and the game folds because nobody had a reason to pay any money.
As for subscribers and Spiffy Zone Omega, look, if you've been paying an OPTIONAL $10-$15 per month for a year, the extra money to get the new zone unlocked has already been paid in small doses over time, I think. I feel like the subscribers who remain subscribed during that year are the ones who actually paid for the costs of making the new content in the first place, at that point. You could make it a permanent unlock as a veteran reward for being subbed for a year or something, if you think it's warranted, but as a future subscriber, I like the idea of my paid sub giving me access to all the zones as a perk of being fully paid up for the month, and I'm willing to let that access hinge on the subscription itself, personally. So instead of charging me more money BEYOND the sub I'm paying for, I'd rather just have access while subbed and no access while not subbed (and then, for those who just want a taste or can't afford to pay at all, add in the Star-costed options as I described).
If you roll out a new zone and ask everyone to pay $10 to unlock it permanently, that's asking even MORE of the people who've been paying subscriptions all along and continue to do so. Sure it's a better deal for the non-subber if they can just buy the new zone unlock and have it forever, but I don't see where the game studio is under any obligation to offer that. Also, some non-subbers cannot or will not pay that money anyway, but might want to go to the new zone once or twice here and there, and why should they have to pay the bulk rate for something they only want a little bit of? Adding in a day pass or ticket to ride for like 50 cents worth of Stars isn't highway robbery.
Also, if you have to be subbed to get into the new zone (with small, exceptions, as described, for Stars) then once new content comes out, people who would have paid for the permanent unlock will probably still pay for a month of subscription time (or three) just to access the new zone and do everything there is to be done there, so you get that money either way. Then, a year or two later, you can make Spiffy Zone Omega free for all, when you have some new zone to roll out and take its place. That way, nobody feels like an idiot for buying "permanent" access to a zone, only to have that zone go free for all later on.
If every new expansion zone has to be unlocked by everyone permanently, then the buy-in gets higher and higher over time, making it harder to get new players to buy the game, causing fewer new players to join the game as it ages. Since our business model as described NEEDS new players to come in and buy the same permanent trinkets and costume pieces we're trying to sell everyone, this would be a really bad way to monetize. ON the one hand it requires a steady influx of new players, on the other it presents an ever-increasing cost of entry to those same new players.
I'm sorry if my views on monetization are not compatible with those of other people on these forums. I really do want the game to be successful, and not just for like a year or two before we all suck the life out of it and the devs decide it's not profitable enough to keep it going. I want to get like 10 years or more out of this game, if it's as good as I expect it to be.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
There are alternative that can be applied. Giving subscribers access to any dlc / new content packs all the time. Offer total unlock tokens as part of a loyalty rewards program for anyone who has purchased Stars at different thresholds (this includes paid subs).
First, nonsubs who cannot pay for permanent unlocks still have the potential to obtain Stars through the in game auction house. As to the idea of tickets for,one time rides has been gone over to death as to why it isn't a good idea in this market. Western players are adverse to being nickel-and-dimed, by having constant reminders that there is a cash shop in their MMO and to have a full experience, they must use the cash shop currency. While the mobile market thrives on these models, the MMO market is quite a different. If we were making a purely mobile game, I'd be more inclined to agree with you. Finally, many bloggers and reviewers of mmos are quite negative in their views of games with heavy reliance on intrusive cash shop systems. And unlike rock stars, bad press in this industry isn't "good press".
Now I too want to see this game be successful. I don't think anyone disagrees with that sentiment. Even if we disagree on the specifics.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
League of Legends has the primary thing that people spend money on be Champions. The Champions you have purchased are always available to you to play, any time you like. Every week, there are 10 Champions that are free for everybody to play; this list changes weekly. A totally free player can play the game with the free Champions. But he cannot be guaranteed a favorite Champion's presence on that list.
Netflix has a rotation, as well; shows and movies that are on it are only on it for a time before they rotate out. A few years ago, for example, Ultimate Spiderman seasons 1-2 were on it. Right now, only season 3 is. Notably, this is [u]with a subscription[/u], as they have no non-subscriber option.
Perhaps "restricted content" (Neato Mission Epsilon, for example, as opposed to Spiffy Zone Omega) would be available sometimes for free. Every week or month or fortnight or some time period, a list of certain missions are free to play for everybody. This list changes every time period. Those who buy one-off access or full ownership (for different amounts of Stars) can play them any time.
This is not incompatible with the notion of "ride-along" players who are teamed up with somebody who bought access.
(Standard disclaimer: I am just brainstorming here, not speaking for the devs.)
[color=#ff0000]Business Manager[/color]
[img]http://missingworldsmedia.com/images/favicon.ico[/img]
Yes, I constantly talk about this. I'm sorry, I'm just obsessed with it, and there's nothing else to do currently as we wait for the game to be made. Spoiler alert, here comes more of the same...
I disagree that the "pay-per-run TF " and the "pay-per-day access to a zone" (both for very small fees) cannot be done in a non-intrusive enough manner for Western MMO players. As I mentioned above, and as Shokrizade mentions, the more layers you have between the money and the thing it's buying, and the more quick and convenient you can make it to buy, without having to actually go to the cash shop at all, the less annoying it is. People are going to be aware of the auction house and able interact with it, they can go there to buy a temporary clearance waiver for IGC, or they can get Stars if those are selling at reasonable prices and then go to some NPC to get clearance waivers for Stars, etc. Maybe the same doorman NPC that won't let you into the zone will sell you the waivers you need for Stars directly and/or mention that you could possibly buy them for IGC in the AH if you'd rather do that. And then maybe you have an access console for the AH right next to the guy, like a conveniently placed ATM machine, so that you can do that transaction without having to fly away to the Wentworth's. No need to interact with the cash shop ever, no actual real money spent by the non-sub player necessarily, no making the player stop playing in order to go buy something with real money, no harshing of the player's immersion at all, and if your paying with IGC or your friends who have Stars are just giving you the paltry few that you need to do the thing, then it's not costing you any real money, not a nickel, not a dime.
Also, I still think that if your monetization scheme is going to be "purchases of stuff in the store" then you're going to have to rely on lockboxes, or something similar, ultimately. I also think content should somehow be monetized in an of itself in order to pay for development of more content. The specific stuff that actually makes money for you should always get highest priority in development. There's no reason to spend time and money to make more X when you know you aren't getting money for X and you're only actually getting people to pay money for Y. If that's the case, you should spend that effort on making more Y and/or improved versions of Y. Why do anything else? This thought process leads to games abandoning the idea of making "good new content" and causes them to just churn out more cash shop items to try to sell to people and making "lousy content".
If people aren't willing to pay for the stuff they actually want, then the game has no reason to make the stuff they want. The players' demand for everything they like about the game to be free with the initial purchase of the game causes that same stuff to ultimately not get made, BECAUSE it can't be monetized, or else it gets made poorly from lack of sufficient internal resources spent on it, and causes those same players to be disappointed and leave.
Edit: One last point, and I'm sticking to my guns on this until someone shows me hard evidence that I'm wrong: if you're going to have Stars, a currency backed by real money, I believe that requires you to have a repeat business enabler (of some kind) for Stars. If you think you can churn out enough new costumes, power sets, animations, particle effects, emotes, etc to keep up with the rate at which the Stars are being generated, then I hope you're right, but I won't believe it until I see it.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
I understand your premise, I don't agree with it. Furthermore, the latest info on MMO monetization indicates that the more successful MMOs (monetarily) maintain their support through subscriptions (for the western market). People who play on line in the western market have not given into the eastern methods of monetization very well. Just as I explained previously upthread regarding other monetization schemes in other markets, those in the west seem to lean more toward buy it once, pay for monthly access, and move away from constant smaller fees to utilize a service. It doesn't matter if we offer a way to use Stars from the ingame auction house, once you get to the point where there is a constant presence of using the Cash Shop Currency within the game world in order to continue enjoying content, it probably won't result in what you think it will. And if you do some light searching, you'll find plenty of sentiment in other games that fall in line with this. There are plenty of online games that end up with a cash shop, even free to play ones, where it turns out that the main portion of development costs are supported via a optional subscription fee.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
Hey, I'm all for subscriptions. I literally am one of those players you're referring to. I payed up front for City of Heroes and then paid a sub via the "buy a whole year and pay only $12 per month" option. But that was a game where you were required to pay a sub or you couldn't log in at all (at least until 2011). CoX died a year after it went to the "hybrid sub/nosub" model, and even then they still went for the lockboxes angle and tried to sell us SuperPacks. So if you want to go with the "old fashioned" option of sub-to-play, I'll be there. I would totally pay that sub if the deal is "pay a sub to be allowed to play the game at all".
And of course the other drawback of that system is that you can't market the game as "FREE TO PLAY!!!!!(after initial purchase)"
In the hybrid sub/nosub model, on the other hand, which can be advertised as such, you're giving subs an allotment of Stars each and every month as a perk of being a subscriber, I assume, because it's something the non-subs don't get. In that case, you need a repeat business enabler, I think, because you've got repeated generation of Stars going on and they'll pile up and lose value over time if you don't have one. And in that system, I think you need to have some "rented" right-of-access or thing that the subscriber always has while their sub is paid up, and which the non-sub doesn't have without either paying money or maybe grinding a lot for just a little bit of it, via acquired Stars from IGC trading. The thing that you're giving the subscriber for the price of the monthly sub, and not giving the non-sub, is the very thing the non-subs will want to get by acquiring Stars on the AH to buy it for themselves, whatever it is. Whatever "it" is, I feel like there will probably be a microtransaction you have to perform to get a little of "it" if you're a non-sub with a few Stars to spend. I don't see how you can possibly avoid the nickel and diming feeling there, if it's as pervasive as you say, becasue we are talking about non-subs spendign a FEW Stars at a time, since they aren't generating TONS of them terribly quickly. I mean forget content and zones and TFs, whatever nebulous thing you're using as the "sub's get it, non-subs don't, until they buy some" thing, I think that presents the same basic problem, doesn't it? Now, my personal thinking is that I think "it" should be something popular and something that players want, and something that the game should get paid for making, and I personally think content like new zones and new TFs and missions fits the bill for that, because if you're going to make new content, and you want to get paid for it and thus rewarded for making GOOD content, etc.
But if that can't happen, it can't happen. Ok. In that case, then, I think we're back to sub-only play, which I'm fine with, or lockboxes, which I wouldn't prefer but could live with.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
.
But the term free to play does not apply here. Free to play typically means (in MMO terms) that there is no cost required to down load and begin playing. This game has been stated from the start to be a buy to play with optional sub afterward. There is the idea that subs *might get* a stipend of Stars. It has not been stated to actually be so. The cash shop at this moment has only been stated to deal with anything that can be added onto the game, avoiding any pay to win schemes. This means the primary focus would be on allowing people to purchase things that can be added onto accounts by one time payment (mainly cosmetics, but other one time payments like character slots, account wide services such as expanded character inventories, and so on).
Anything other than that is purely speculation. The expectation that there will be tons of generated Stars that will sit around and be devalued is purely speculative at this point.
The point being, while the idea of repeat business enablers as a term you like to use isn't necessarily bad, I just disagree with your specifics as to how to apply them. I'm sorry if we've gotten to the point of agreeing to disagree on those specifics. But I believe I've laid out quite sound reasoning as to why such ideas as they've been stated, how they are currently applied in the western market, have not ended up working out well. I'm more in line with Dr. Tyche's take on enabling players to reduce or free up time in order to get more out of the game in whatever forms that may take over requiring constant pay outs in order just to keep playing.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
Fair enough.
If there is no stipend, then what exactly separates subscribers from non-subscribers? That is the question that needs answering at that point. I'm not asking for a specific answer to this question from anyone here and now, but it does have to be answered, and the correct answer has to be something worth $10-$15 per month, if that's your "full subscription" price point. Is it that the sub gets access to something similar to Incarnate Trials and powers like in CoX? Do subs get some kind of better or more efficient crafting/auction house interaction? Are subs the only ones that can get to the top 5-10 character levels in the game?
Whatever the divider is between subs and non-subs, from what you're telling me, selling THAT, in small quantities, for Stars, to non-subs, here and there whenever they can scrape a few Stars together, is apparently completely out of the question, based on the perception among Western players that it's going to be viewed as an attempt at nickel and diming. You're telling me that people would rather be locked out of something completely than be nickel and dimed by the thing for some small amount of it here and there when the opportunity present's itself. I find that hard to believe, because one of the things people also said they disliked about the Incarnate System in CoX was that you got completely locked out of participating in it AT ALL when you let your sub drop, with absolutely no chance of any one-time "I just want to do one Incarnate Trial, can I pay a few cents to do that just one, please?" type of option.
I think Western gamers who don't pay for subscriptions (either out of necessity, or lack of desire to pay, or the challenge for maximizing the free experience) just want everyone to be treated completely equally (no class warfare, no haves and have nots, total equality), despite the fact that some people are paying $10-15 every month and others are not, and that's the real problem. The complaints of being nickel and dimed, feeling like a second class citizen, or being annoyed by annoyances that the subscribers don't have to worry about is all window dressing for that basic issue, as I see it. They, the non-subs, want what they can't have. It's as simple as that. And that's not going to change, because in a hybrid sub/nosub game, that kind of total equality CANNOT happen, as far as I can tell, because, when it does, nobody has a reason to subscribe.
So if you're married to the hybrid sub/nosub with cash shop model, I think you're always, eventually, going to run into SOME kind of complaint that kills your business model. Those tend to be "it's Pay to win" or "it's nickel and diming me to death" or "it's constantly annoying me with non-sub annoyances" or something. I think the real root cause of the player quitting on the game in all of those cases is really that they don't like being a non-sub in a game that has subs and non-subs, because being a sub is clearly better. It's as basic as a little poor kid watching a little rich kid getting a lollipop and saying "I want a lollipop!" only to be told "No, I can't afford that." by the parent, at which point the kid, having no concept of money, starts to cry for lack of a lollipop. Unfortunately for the poor little lollipop lovers out there, the hybrid model game will inevitably have to cater to subscribers in some tangible way that the non-subs are going to resent. The non-subs can see how the other half lives, they want that for themselves, and when they find out they cannot have it, they eventually get frustrated and leave, stating whatever reason applies as the reason they're leaving. All anyone's really saying when they complain about "pay to win!" and"nickel and dime!" is "This is unfair!" and that statement, that it's unfair, is correct, and will always be correct in any hybrid sub/nosub game you try to make, I think, so they'll always end up arriving at that somehow no matter what you do.
That's my theory anyway.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
There are no easy answers to all this and it would be foolish to believe that anyone one set way will appease all people. The trick is (once having a fun and appealing game) is to make those who don't pay a sub feel as welcome as possible to play while also providing benefits to subscribers that are enticing to nonsubscribers which may encourage them to pick up a sub. I particularly like the concept of Segev's 'micro-subs' if they're are set up in such a way so that players can pick up the portion of the sub they feel more engaged with.
One idea I posited that you should recall from another thread was to have certain types of content time-gated, which tie into the bonuses that come from our challenges and achievements system. Subscribers could have no timers to worry about (or even a number of monthly allotted keys), nonsubscribers would have access within set time periods with the option to buy keys. And what is locked and unlocked may very well rotate on a seasonal basis. In that sense, it is rather like the turn-style concept you've brought up, but with some leeway within to allow continued play within given time periods. As you can see, it isn't that I entirely disagree with the idea, only that I believe it needs more fine tuning to be more...forgiving on the general player population.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
Well, I hope the people in charge of making the actual decisions have as much data and market research to go on as possible when they make those decisions.
For what it's worth, I still feel like ANY hybrid model that has subscribers and non-subscribers is going to engender jealousy and resentment in the non-subs in order to ensure that the subscribers are actually getting something that seems worth the money to them. I don't think there's actually a middle ground, sweet spot, or effective way around that, personally. I think it's an ingrained part of the human psyche that whatever's valuable enough to pay money every month for it is definitely something the non-subs are going to feel the lack of, and pretty profoundly.
I think if there were a "See and Say" for MMO players, it would go:
"The non-subscribed player says 'I paid my $50 to buy this game, now give me everything that everyone else gets or I'm outta here! (and I want my money back)'..."
and
"The subscriber says 'Why should I pony up more money each and every month? You have to convince me that I'm buying something that's worth the money, to me.'..."
Even if you break down all of the perks a sub could get into separate objects to pick and choose from, that's probably perceived as a good thing for the subscribers, who were going to pay anyway, because maybe now they get to save some money on stuff they don't want. Like if you were able to tell your cable provider that you only want certain channels and not the whole package. But the non-subscriber is still locked out of ALL that stuff and every time they bump up against those things they might want that they aren't paying for, they're going to be reminded of how second class they are and how the game wants money from them.
Maybe the simplest and easiest answer is to make the cheapest option not "free to continue playing after the initial purchase" but something like "$5 subscription just to keep playing, then you can buy more stuff if you want to be more of a high roller." in other words, a pay-to-play game with different levels of subscriptions available, but still a mandatory minimum monthly payment to keep playing. I don't know. I often think just charging like $10 per month to everybody as a mandatory sub fee is the way to go.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
As to the question of Lock-Boxes, if the rarity was set so minimum was a "Blue" or higher instead of the "Green" vendor trash that normally drops randomly, and, was set so it was appropriately powered to my current level when I open it, then it would be OK to me... Especially if the item, after seeing what it is, can be sold or traded to either a player or to a special vendor. Tradable if not "attuned/slotted". Better still, if the item in question doesn't have the effect I want, out of the options available, I can trade it for one that does, at the special vendor, level remaining the same for the item, of course, probably paying either an IGC, or, a RL cash bought special currency for the option to do so...
All too often I have seen duplicate appearance items that almost everyone has, are account-wide, and/or, "Green" vendor trash, making it a real waste of money to buy the keys, and, the keys are way overpriced for each individual use...
Again, a waste of money IMO...
Prefacing this with a comment that I do not like the concept of lock-boxes on a number of levels, but a thought regarding them:
What if they were the most overt subscriber/non-subscriber divide? Subscribers can automatically open lockboxes without any trouble. Non-subscribers can only open them with Star-purchased keys. They could always sell them, though, on the AH; presumably those who buy them are subscribers or people with lockbox keys already purchased.
I am not sure what I think of this idea, but I figured it better to let the crowd-sourced critique pick it apart than simply rely on my own ability to analyze why it's potentially flawed, and to find what if any of it has sufficient merit for refinement.
[color=#ff0000]Business Manager[/color]
[img]http://missingworldsmedia.com/images/favicon.ico[/img]
I need more information about the lockboxes in this hypothetical. Like, does other, non-lockboxes stuff still drop, or is everything you might get from mob defeats given in the form of lockboxes? If the lockbox is the only thing, then the non-sub is screwed. Now, if it's more like "normal" where salvage components and stuff still drop, but the lockboxes drop from doing Task Forces and completing mission story arcs, etc, or maybe randomly once in a while from defeating an Archvillain or Elite boss, then I'd expect them to have a certain minimum level of value to them, with no true "duds" just, maybe some less than popular Synthetic Hamios (or whatever they are). this makes the lockboxes a little rarer than you might want in the game. Like you're not dropping them all over the place for everything, just for high-end stuff, which you need to guarantee is not flooding the market for it to have value.
So like, in a game that's flooded with lockboxes, most of which contain total garbage, I as a sub would not buy or even accept any lockboxes from non-subs because the monotony of opening like 100 of them would be too great, and in any event I have enough crap anyway, in all likelihood. Presumably my stuff drops into my inventory as I defeat mobs without the lockbox being there at all, like it's pre-opened as the mob drops it and I never even see the box or need to perform an action to open it. Or if not that, then maybe I can open them in large batches in one fell swoop, thus preserving my right to go sell al box instead of opening it. Whatever's convenient.
If the lockboxes contain what would have dropped from say the Statesman TF, so definitely a random Synthetic HamiO, I wonder if the sheer number of them would be enough to raise any significant amount of money. I'd definitely buy them from non-subs (if the price is right) and then go sell the contents or use them for myself. At that point I think you have to determine what a key costs to open a box. Obviously there will be a going rate for Stars on the AH, and maybe a going rate for keys, if they can be traded as such, not to mention an average going rate for the contents of the boxes. If the game charges X dollars for Stars and Y Stars for a key, then the IGC costs of both Stars and keys would be intrinsically linked to the average perceived value of the box contents. So like, if one Star costs 1 cent and a key costs 5 Stars, then 5 Stars is worth 5 cents and 5 cents is worth whatever the average value of the contents of the box are worth in IGC. This gives you an IGC-to-real world money conversion rate that is directly linked to the cost of keys. Is my monthly sub a good buy at those prices, based on my ability to open infinite boxes, it might be. Do we want that? I don't know. As keys and Stars get purchased and then consumed, the IGC just moves from person to person. So you need an IGC sink, but that sink will be felt as a real money sink to a lot of people, because IGC could buy you stuff that has predictable real-money value now.
I also think you should probably place a limit on how many free lockboxes a sub can open in a given month. Maybe depending on the level of the subscription, maybe just a hard cap for all subs, I don't know. Not too low, mind you, but in place where just opening up everyone's stuff all day for them is not an option.
So if I'm paying a $10 per month sub, and I get, say, 100 free box opens per month (not sure what that number should be either, just a guess) and everyone not subscribed is paying for keys to get their boxes opened, at what key price is that a reasonably good but not an unfair deal for the sub? So I'm paying 10 cents per box opened IF I actually use all 100 every month (sketchy) and let's assume that keys sold cost like 11-20 cents. Are non-subs really going to pay that? Am I going to need that many box opens every month, or am I selling a lot of mine to non-subs for IGC somehow? Can I even do that?
Having this deal might also cause people to cut deals and the reneg on them. I agree to open 10 boxes for you and to give you the contents, for an IGC cost you give me up front. Then I proceed to do that and lo and behold one of them contains some extremely rare item I want. %#$% you, I'm keeping it. That could happen. People would be very angry. I think for that reason the opening of the boxes would need to kept secret to everyone but the opener, That way nobody would ever trust anyone else to open their box for them, or shouldn't, and you'd just have non-subs selling boxes for IGC or Stars and be done with it.
Having not played in a "lockbox" game has me out of my element here, I'm sorry to say.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
Any other DCUO players out there? I don't play it that often, but a couple of months ago I noticed that while subbed I could open the lock boxes, as described in Segev's hypothetical above.
Foradain, Mage of Phoenix Rising.
[url=https://cityoftitans.com/forum/foradains-character-conclave]Foradain's Character Conclave[/url]
.
Avatar courtesy of [s]Satellite9[/s] [url=https://www.instagram.com/irezoomie/]Irezoomie[/url]
In the hypothetical, since I wasn't going into much detail in my own head, I would prefer people just assume that lockboxes drop with the same rough frequency as they do in games which use them.
I think the inability to trust whether so-and-so really did open your lockbox and give you everything that was in it if you paid him IGC to do so would be the "security" to make sure that yes, if you want the lockbox content, you're spending Stars to get it. (Whether on a key or a subscription.)
A side-thought to this might be that, if "Spiffy Zone Omega" is open to all, but only those with a subscription get non-lockbox drops there, then Free Player Bob can join Subbed Player Alice in Spiffy Zone Omega, but Bob's only going to get the story content and the XP and IGC; none of the drops will be of use to him. He can give the lockboxes over to Alice, or he can buy some keys for Stars. So "Spiffy Zone Omega" winds up being a much more "waste of time" zone for Bob than for Alice, but he's not prevented from playing it.
Again, this is just brainstorming and speculation; it in no way reflects anything I know if that the devs are considering, at this time.
Also, that's interesting that DCUO is doing something similar. Anybody know how it goes there? Did lockboxes become less of an issue for the subscribers in a way that made subscriptions worth just that much more to you?
[color=#ff0000]Business Manager[/color]
[img]http://missingworldsmedia.com/images/favicon.ico[/img]
Pages