Higherho said: Another option would be, ask for donations to reach a certain goal or setup more kickstarters to further development. This method would be better.
Generally I'm pretty neutral on MTX in my games if they're strictly cosmetic. If it were used to provide some season fun stuff, it might be ok (as an additional way to get the stuff).
For example; it's Xmas time in Terminus, and there's a quest to collect ornaments. You can do quests for the individual ornaments in the game, collect them all, perhaps get a title doing this. Or, you can buy the collection, or individual ones to round out your quested collection, but you forfeit the title and obviously any experience, perception stuff, experience gained by doing this. That might sit ok with me.
But outright selling things that can't be obtained any other way, no thank you.
HemlockReaper said:Getting it from a NPC with in game currency doesn't support the continuation of the game, nor does it matter if I have all the decor items in one shot when none of that affects another's gameplay.
Like it or not, Virtual playgrounds aren’t free of upkeep cost, so I see no reason to limit items to NPC’s when they don’t affect anyone. Make them tradable in game, and whales could fund those NPC’s stock and everyone wins.
Not every single action that we take must generate money for the game - if they'll need more money to upkeep/develop a game they can use shop with regular items, ask for money from supporters that can spare it or just increase the subscription fee.
I'm surprised that you've even said that decour items doesn't affect another people gameplay - you've been on this forum long enough and witnessed multiple threads - esp regarding cosmetic items and the storms that these topics created and how many people were against the option of even allowing looking beneath a cosmetic items (at regular gear) - many people take a lot of pride in how they look and although I'm not one of them I can certainly symphatize and understand them. I feel that for people that care (and take pride) about how their character looks (like I care for my character stats and overall performance or another person for crafting) bypassing the natural order of achieving these things with how long you play is a low blow. The only way that wouldn't affect others would be if cosmetics were just skins that would only change how you perceive your own character (or your house), but it wouldn't change how it looks to others - and if that would be the case I certainly wouldn't see any problem with that.
Hegenox said:HemlockReaper said:Getting it from a NPC with in game currency doesn't support the continuation of the game, nor does it matter if I have all the decor items in one shot when none of that affects another's gameplay.
Like it or not, Virtual playgrounds aren’t free of upkeep cost, so I see no reason to limit items to NPC’s when they don’t affect anyone. Make them tradable in game, and whales could fund those NPC’s stock and everyone wins.
Not every single action that we take must generate money for the game - if they'll need more money to upkeep/develop a game they can use shop with regular items, ask for money from supporters that can spare it or just increase the subscription fee.
I'm surprised that you've even said that decour items doesn't affect another people gameplay - you've been on this forum long enough and witnessed multiple threads - esp regarding cosmetic items and the storms that these topics created and how many people were against the option of even allowing looking beneath a cosmetic items (at regular gear) - many people take a lot of pride in how they look and although I'm not one of them I can certainly symphatize and understand them. I feel that for people that care (and take pride) about how their character looks (like I care for my character stats and overall performance or another person for crafting) bypassing the natural order of achieving these things with how long you play is a low blow. The only way that wouldn't affect others would be if cosmetics were just skins that would only change how you perceive your own character (or your house), but it wouldn't change how it looks to others - and if that would be the case I certainly wouldn't see any problem with that.
To clarify, when I said decor I was referring to Home decorating items, (Player housing, and NOT player outfits) A place thats invitation only usually and not up for display as you walk through town. That’s why I say it doesn’t (or at least shouldn’t) affect other players.
HemlockReaper said:Hegenox said:HemlockReaper said:Getting it from a NPC with in game currency doesn't support the continuation of the game, nor does it matter if I have all the decor items in one shot when none of that affects another's gameplay.
Like it or not, Virtual playgrounds aren’t free of upkeep cost, so I see no reason to limit items to NPC’s when they don’t affect anyone. Make them tradable in game, and whales could fund those NPC’s stock and everyone wins.
Not every single action that we take must generate money for the game - if they'll need more money to upkeep/develop a game they can use shop with regular items, ask for money from supporters that can spare it or just increase the subscription fee.
I'm surprised that you've even said that decour items doesn't affect another people gameplay - you've been on this forum long enough and witnessed multiple threads - esp regarding cosmetic items and the storms that these topics created and how many people were against the option of even allowing looking beneath a cosmetic items (at regular gear) - many people take a lot of pride in how they look and although I'm not one of them I can certainly symphatize and understand them. I feel that for people that care (and take pride) about how their character looks (like I care for my character stats and overall performance or another person for crafting) bypassing the natural order of achieving these things with how long you play is a low blow. The only way that wouldn't affect others would be if cosmetics were just skins that would only change how you perceive your own character (or your house), but it wouldn't change how it looks to others - and if that would be the case I certainly wouldn't see any problem with that.
To clarify, when I said decor I was referring to Home decorating items, (Player housing, and NOT player outfits) A place thats invitation only usually and not up for display as you walk through town. That’s why I say it doesn’t (or at least shouldn’t) affect other players.
And why do you think the way our household looks is less important than how our character looks? You think a random stranger (or maybe not that random - lets say your kids teacher comes with a visit for whatever reason) would think better of you if he'd seen you in high quality suit inside of a shack than if you'd stay in your pyjama in your palace? And in this game reputation matters (at least that's what being advertised and said over and over again) - and how other people perceive us (and our possessions) - even visually is a part of that. Besides - lets not fool ourselves - IF cash shop with furnitures would be a thing, then there is no way they wouldn't sell cosmetic clothing as well ...
Hegenox said:HemlockReaper said:Hegenox said:HemlockReaper said:Getting it from a NPC with in game currency doesn't support the continuation of the game, nor does it matter if I have all the decor items in one shot when none of that affects another's gameplay.
Like it or not, Virtual playgrounds aren’t free of upkeep cost, so I see no reason to limit items to NPC’s when they don’t affect anyone. Make them tradable in game, and whales could fund those NPC’s stock and everyone wins.
Not every single action that we take must generate money for the game - if they'll need more money to upkeep/develop a game they can use shop with regular items, ask for money from supporters that can spare it or just increase the subscription fee.
I'm surprised that you've even said that decour items doesn't affect another people gameplay - you've been on this forum long enough and witnessed multiple threads - esp regarding cosmetic items and the storms that these topics created and how many people were against the option of even allowing looking beneath a cosmetic items (at regular gear) - many people take a lot of pride in how they look and although I'm not one of them I can certainly symphatize and understand them. I feel that for people that care (and take pride) about how their character looks (like I care for my character stats and overall performance or another person for crafting) bypassing the natural order of achieving these things with how long you play is a low blow. The only way that wouldn't affect others would be if cosmetics were just skins that would only change how you perceive your own character (or your house), but it wouldn't change how it looks to others - and if that would be the case I certainly wouldn't see any problem with that.
To clarify, when I said decor I was referring to Home decorating items, (Player housing, and NOT player outfits) A place thats invitation only usually and not up for display as you walk through town. That’s why I say it doesn’t (or at least shouldn’t) affect other players.
And why do you think the way our household looks is less important than how our character looks? You think a random stranger (or maybe not that random - lets say your kids teacher comes with a visit for whatever reason) would think better of you if he'd seen you in high quality suit inside of a shack than if you'd stay in your pyjama in your palace? And in this game reputation matters (at least that's what being advertised and said over and over again) - and how other people perceive us (and our possessions) - even visually is a part of that. Besides - lets not fool ourselves - IF cash shop with furnitures would be a thing, then there is no way they wouldn't sell cosmetic clothing as well ...
I’m not saying one is more or less important, but there is a distinction.
Clothing/Armour's would fall under the realm of an Armour smiths, maybe even a tailor, two very likely (and Common)crafting professions in MMO’s. I seriously doubt there would be any wood smiths for furniture making(Not to be confused with arrow making), Architect for Buildings schematics, Lumberjacks, stone masons, or any other non standard professions. Horizons did something like this, but its not common.
I think the whole anti-cash shop mentality shop really steams from an ideology that there’s an unfairness associated with being a credit card warrior over a Gamer. That being, time in game grants legitimacy, where as power though money is deemed ill gotten gains. A sort of elitism, and righteous patting on the back.
The problem though is were all credit card warriors and Gamers to differing degrees. The moment any one of us pays a monthly subscription to play in a virtual world, we have paid real life money for virtual goods, we will then earn more virtual goods with our time, until the next cash infusion is due to stay in virtual land with virtual goods and so on. The only distinction being everyone has paid that fee for this block of goods, while we quibble over rights to pay for other goods.
I would presume that most of us do so in order to have fun, to be entertained, and not burden our selfs with an additional 40 or more hour a week job, where grinding for fake money in a fake world seems real, while using real money seems fake.
The old adage, time is money, is true even with virtual currency, it’s just as much a privilege to have the free time to get the items you want, as it is to have the money to pay for those items.
...it’s just as much a privilege to have the free time to get the items you want, as it is to have the money to pay for those items...
I'm not sure I totally agree with this (although the logic makes some sense). Part of the reason most of us play games like this is to leave the real world where time is money. When we enter into this fantasy land things are supposed to feel different to us. When we run into players who have spent 10x as many hours as us in the game we feel like they've earned it in the game. When we run into a player that has played half as much as us but has "earned" twice as much gear we feel like they have not earned it in this fantasy world.
Hope that makes a little sense.
Ranarius said:...it’s just as much a privilege to have the free time to get the items you want, as it is to have the money to pay for those items...I'm not sure I totally agree with this (although the logic makes some sense). Part of the reason most of us play games like this is to leave the real world where time is money. When we enter into this fantasy land things are supposed to feel different to us. When we run into players who have spent 10x as many hours as us in the game we feel like they've earned it in the game. When we run into a player that has played half as much as us but has "earned" twice as much gear we feel like they have not earned it in this fantasy world.
Hope that makes a little sense.
Sorry about being the devils advokat here, but are you saying that people didn't earn it right if they did it faster then you ?
Visionary Realms is driven to fearlessly lead and advance the MMO game industry by creating profitable, long-selling, content-rich, challenging, highly social games that set new standards for immersion, quality, and vision. Our games are not just played, but rather experienced, shared and remembered.
the first thing is: the game has to be profitable. no profit, no sustainability. no sustainability, no expanding. no expanding = dead game.
playing devils advocate here:
how many would rather pay $25 a month for a sub without a cash shop OR pay $10 a month with a cash shop with 'just cosmetics' of course.
not players, but consumers would rather pay $10 a month and just have a window shop. it's not it'll interfere with gameplay.
players that want to play dress up, get to. players that want to see that game as intended, well sell an anti cosmetic item that let's player see actual gear for $25. i'd pay for it.
Visionary Realms Electric Arcs:
tailor coupons- $5 common, $10 uncommon, $15 rare, $20 epic, $25 legendary(must have item to siphon appeareance to another item). cost is per slot.
pet coupons- $1 tame critters, $5 tame common mobs, $10 tame rare mobs, $15 tame bosses, $20 tame raid bosses(must defeat monster then use coupon to turn it into a mini pet)
real gear vision coupons- $25 ezpz used for hardcore immersion players or for pvpers.
second thing is long-selling.
this model alone drives a hunt for old gear or gear that people want the appeareance of further expansions down. it's basically monetizing the xmog system of blizzard. i would call this: horizontal progression. it doesn't hinder gameplay at all, but creates divergent gameplay.
third thing is content-rich.
more things to do on the side. creates third party entrepeneurs to hoard all the cloak of the ginto mad king(best looking cloak in the game) paypal me i trade u :D one could even establish the monopoly guild to lock other players out creating a shitstorm of outcry in the community. this is mostly for pvp gameplay. ah it'll be glorious.
If VR is needing a reliable and consistent revenue stream, a cash shop is not the best means by which to get that reliable revenue. It is subject to individual whims and does not involve VR actually putting in any effort to earn that revenue. Rather, VR should seriously look at increasing the monthly subscription fee. $14.95 was the subscription fees in 1999. Just to keep up with the rate of inflation the monthly subscription fee should be no less than $23.15 now. Anything less and VR is deliberately short changing themselves.
An increased subscription rate does require VR to put effort into earning that difference. Effort in ensuring bugs are squashed quickly; that customer service is of a very high quality; that necessary adjustments to the game are made in a timely manner; that patches, updates and even expansions follow set schedules. They need to show that the extra cost is worth it..to us.
Look back at EQ1 when the StormHammer server was launched. A higher monthly subscription cost but in return you got far better customer support and service, more GM events. Players paid more and got a better experience for that additional expense.
So to hell with a cash shop, VR. Put in the work and we'll all gladly pay you well for it. You do right by us and we'll do right by you. Cash shops are not how you do that.
Vandraad said:If VR is needing a reliable and consistent revenue stream, a cash shop is not the best means by which to get that reliable revenue. It is subject to individual whims and does not involve VR actually putting in any effort to earn that revenue. Rather, VR should seriously look at increasing the monthly subscription fee. $14.95 was the subscription fees in 1999. Just to keep up with the rate of inflation the monthly subscription fee should be no less than $23.15 now. Anything less and VR is deliberately short changing themselves.
An increased subscription rate does require VR to put effort into earning that difference. Effort in ensuring bugs are squashed quickly; that customer service is of a very high quality; that necessary adjustments to the game are made in a timely manner; that patches, updates and even expansions follow set schedules. They need to show that the extra cost is worth it..to us.
Look back at EQ1 when the StormHammer server was launched. A higher monthly subscription cost but in return you got far better customer support and service, more GM events. Players paid more and got a better experience for that additional expense.
So to hell with a cash shop, VR. Put in the work and we'll all gladly pay you well for it. You do right by us and we'll do right by you. Cash shops are not how you do that.
I agree, but am concerned just increasing the sub price (which I would gladly pay if it guaranteed no cash shop) might limit the player base. Where do they stop to offset potential loss from not implenting a cash shop?
They have committed to no cash shop and I'm pretty sure they will keep their word, it just doesn't make sense for this game.
The key here is make a great game, price it right and don't be greedy. All elementss which I perceive this team is after.
And yes, to hell with a cash shop!
Sorry about being the devils advokat here, but are you saying that people didn't earn it right if they did it faster then you ?
No, that's not what I meant to say at all. All I was trying to say was that if it's not earned by playing the game then I feel like it's not earned. I'm cool with people having more available time to play than I am, or even people who play more efficiently than I do. I just want their in-game rewards to be based on in-game actions.
I could support in-game cosmetics if, for example, you could get a pumpkin head-helmet you can wear during one specific weekend at Halloween or something similar for the Christmas holidays. But only if the period is not too long. I would also be fine with getting fireworks for new years eve.
I think it was EQ2 that had a few days around Christmas they called winter holidays where there were candy stockings and that stuff all around the cities, and even though it is super immersive braking, I still thought it was great.
Please please please no transmogrification at all in Pantheon!! Just make the armor and items look cool so we won't need to transmog!
Ranarius said:...it’s just as much a privilege to have the free time to get the items you want, as it is to have the money to pay for those items...I'm not sure I totally agree with this (although the logic makes some sense). Part of the reason most of us play games like this is to leave the real world where time is money. When we enter into this fantasy land things are supposed to feel different to us. When we run into players who have spent 10x as many hours as us in the game we feel like they've earned it in the game. When we run into a player that has played half as much as us but has "earned" twice as much gear we feel like they have not earned it in this fantasy world.
Hope that makes a little sense.
It makes sense. I do understand that peoples emotions or “feelings” on any topic will have an impact on viewpoints, but I find it best for myself to check those at the door when a discussion is to be had.
On the concept of earned it by earning it in game, for the sack of discussion.
* Assuming a delay to check validity on the account (Not a gold Farmer or buyer ect)
Should all items (physical and Digital) also require digital currency (gold coin) along with real money? For example an item costing 15 dollars (real) and 3000 Gold coins (Digital)
Therek said:From the FAQ: “Visionary Realms strongly believes that the revenue model of an MMO needs to match the game’s target audience. Because of this, Pantheon will not be ‘freemium’ or have ‘cash shops’”
With all due respect, I would think you are aware of your company’s own tenets, so one can only assume this is just meant as some sort of thought experiment or to promote engagement. If the latter, you also know that whenever it is brought up, those threads tend to explode and become quite volatile, which leads to them getting locked down with some statement, like “Our policy on cash shops is clear. This thread will now be closed.” Is that the kind of engagement you really want to facilitate?
So knowing that, unless the game’s tenets are changing, I can’t see the point in this question. Cash shops are the scourge of MMOs, and for many people, a line that can’t be crossed.
This is the best arguement hands down.
It makes sense. I do understand that peoples emotions or “feelings” on any topic will have an impact on viewpoints, but I find it best for myself to check those at the door when a discussion is to be had.
I agree with you in general but not in cases where feelings are what matters. The reason I'm planning on playing this game is because of the feelings I have while playing it.