Forums » General Pantheon Discussion

The P2P system of Pantheon.

This topic has been closed.
    • 1618 posts
    January 6, 2017 5:34 PM PST

    Brigadine said:

    Draslin said:

    I would gladly pay a higher subscription fee for some 'luxury' features - nothing game balance tipping, but some convenience and vanity items, provided that we have a committment that Visionary Realms is putting ALL of that upcharge directly into new content development for Pantheon (something many of us got burned on when putting money into EQNext only to see it wasted on H1Z1).

    I'm not a kid borrowing mom's credit card to sub anymore.  Is $15/mo even sustainable for devs anymore?  Inflation alone has already made that something closer to $9/mo since 1999.  I think it's time for the market to stop trying to match Blizzard's unrealistic pricing and instead focus on delivering value for the money, even if that means it costs a little more.

    As to 'buying the box', I agree that it should never be free to play with people who have purchased the box.  I'm fine with expansions including previous expansions, but there should always be a price to get into the game.  Without it, the power of disciplinary action / account locks and bans is taken off the table - and this is an incredibly effective deterrent to awful behavior.

     

    Thats not how inflation works bro. Its all proportal. The cost in 1999 and price of $15 is proportionally the same as the cost in 2017 and the price of $15. The value of the dollar moves with the cost equally(in theory).

     

    Another way to put it. Lets say due to inflation the cost of manufacture in dollars has gone up by 25%. The inflation of the dollar whitch casued inflation of manufacture cost is also 25% BECAUSE it is the same thing.

    inflation of 25% = the cost inflated by 25%= the $15 is equal due to the $15 being equally impacted by the 25%.

     

    I know ratios of 1:1 are hard.

    Uh, I think you need to reread about inflation. That is not how it works.

    Here is a basic primer for you. http://smallbusiness.chron.com/inflation-effect-purchasing-power-money-696.html

     

    • 8 posts
    January 6, 2017 5:49 PM PST

    Beefcake said:

    Brigadine said:

    Draslin said:

    I would gladly pay a higher subscription fee for some 'luxury' features - nothing game balance tipping, but some convenience and vanity items, provided that we have a committment that Visionary Realms is putting ALL of that upcharge directly into new content development for Pantheon (something many of us got burned on when putting money into EQNext only to see it wasted on H1Z1).

    I'm not a kid borrowing mom's credit card to sub anymore.  Is $15/mo even sustainable for devs anymore?  Inflation alone has already made that something closer to $9/mo since 1999.  I think it's time for the market to stop trying to match Blizzard's unrealistic pricing and instead focus on delivering value for the money, even if that means it costs a little more.

    As to 'buying the box', I agree that it should never be free to play with people who have purchased the box.  I'm fine with expansions including previous expansions, but there should always be a price to get into the game.  Without it, the power of disciplinary action / account locks and bans is taken off the table - and this is an incredibly effective deterrent to awful behavior.

     

    Thats not how inflation works bro. Its all proportal. The cost in 1999 and price of $15 is proportionally the same as the cost in 2017 and the price of $15. The value of the dollar moves with the cost equally(in theory).

     

    Another way to put it. Lets say due to inflation the cost of manufacture in dollars has gone up by 25%. The inflation of the dollar whitch casued inflation of manufacture cost is also 25% BECAUSE it is the same thing.

    inflation of 25% = the cost inflated by 25%= the $15 is equal due to the $15 being equally impacted by the 25%.

     

    I know ratios of 1:1 are hard.

    Uh, I think you need to reread about inflation. That is not how it works.

    Here is a basic primer for you. http://smallbusiness.chron.com/inflation-effect-purchasing-power-money-696.html

     

    That article is about goods price inflation, totally ignores currency inflation.

    • 470 posts
    January 6, 2017 5:49 PM PST

    (Quote block train wreck)

    These quote blocks tend to be confusing in how they appear once it gets to be more than 1, but I think your car analogy was meant for the other guy. I was simply explaining how some games offered a free limited trial but still charged for the base game client if you wanted the full version to play beyond what the trial allows . In that I was simply saying that Pantheon will likely do something similar by allowing that free trial to a point and then requiring you to purchase the full client and subscribe after to access the rest of the content. (Play 10 levels free or buy the game and continue on to 50 sort of thing).

    I am admitedly not a big EVE Online player but more of an observer. I was simply referring to all the buz around their changes announced back in August. (https://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/introducing-clone-states-and-the-future-of-access-to-eve-online/) You seem to be up more on that than I so I'll defer to your comments on how it works.


    This post was edited by Kratuk at January 6, 2017 5:56 PM PST
    • 1618 posts
    January 6, 2017 5:51 PM PST

    Brigadine said:

    Beefcake said:

    Brigadine said:

    Draslin said:

    I would gladly pay a higher subscription fee for some 'luxury' features - nothing game balance tipping, but some convenience and vanity items, provided that we have a committment that Visionary Realms is putting ALL of that upcharge directly into new content development for Pantheon (something many of us got burned on when putting money into EQNext only to see it wasted on H1Z1).

    I'm not a kid borrowing mom's credit card to sub anymore.  Is $15/mo even sustainable for devs anymore?  Inflation alone has already made that something closer to $9/mo since 1999.  I think it's time for the market to stop trying to match Blizzard's unrealistic pricing and instead focus on delivering value for the money, even if that means it costs a little more.

    As to 'buying the box', I agree that it should never be free to play with people who have purchased the box.  I'm fine with expansions including previous expansions, but there should always be a price to get into the game.  Without it, the power of disciplinary action / account locks and bans is taken off the table - and this is an incredibly effective deterrent to awful behavior.

     

    Thats not how inflation works bro. Its all proportal. The cost in 1999 and price of $15 is proportionally the same as the cost in 2017 and the price of $15. The value of the dollar moves with the cost equally(in theory).

     

    Another way to put it. Lets say due to inflation the cost of manufacture in dollars has gone up by 25%. The inflation of the dollar whitch casued inflation of manufacture cost is also 25% BECAUSE it is the same thing.

    inflation of 25% = the cost inflated by 25%= the $15 is equal due to the $15 being equally impacted by the 25%.

     

    I know ratios of 1:1 are hard.

    Uh, I think you need to reread about inflation. That is not how it works.

    Here is a basic primer for you. http://smallbusiness.chron.com/inflation-effect-purchasing-power-money-696.html

     

    That article is about goods price inflation, totally ignores currency inflation.

    The only inflation that matter is purchasing power. Anything else is strictly academic.

    • 8 posts
    January 6, 2017 5:58 PM PST

    Kratuk said:

    Brigadine said:

    Eve Online is not free to play. You can only really access 10% of the skills in the game whitch really is the content. As somone who has played eve on and off for the last 5 years eve is a very stange creature that cant really be compared to any other MMO without it being a comparision of potato to car. The best way to put what eve is doing is an unlimited trial.

    If the game stopped requiring purchace of the software that is not a 'sale', that is free and that is wrong. Per the anology of "Anyways, what does it matter if someone pays less a month or two later. Do you get pissed off and feel screwed when you bought car and next month it was on sale? Or buy a shirt and see it in sale a week later? That's how the world works."

    Please tell me the last time you baught a car and everyone after you got it for free?

    These quote blocks tend to be confusing in how they appear once it gets to be more than 1, but I think your car analogy was meant for the other guy. I was simply explaining how some games offered a free limited trial but still charged for the base game client if you wanted the full version to play beyond what the trial allows (I think we were agreeing anyway). In that I was simply saying that Pantheon will likely do something similar by allowing that free trial to a point and then requiring you to purchase the full client and subscribe after to access the rest of the content. (Play 10 levels free or buy the game and continue on to 50 sort of thing).

    I am admitedly not a big EVE Online player but more of an observer. I was simply referring to all the buz around their changes announced back in August. (https://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/introducing-clone-states-and-the-future-of-access-to-eve-online/) You seem to be up more on that than I so I'll defer to your comments on how it works.

    Yeah that was for the other guy. That devblog really doesnt give a true feel of it. I havent read it in a while but are the skills listed on it? If yes, that skill list is about 10% of the skills in the game. It is not possible to go above or keep anything above that without subbing. Hince why I call it an unlimited trial not F2P.

    • 3016 posts
    January 6, 2017 6:40 PM PST

     Inflation?  *crosses eyes*  I just play the game man...:D  Algebra tables or any other math tables need to stay where they belong..somewhere else.   I can get behind.."trial play to level tenish"  Buy game if you like it.   Free month after purchase,   $15.00 a month ever after unless you buy 3 months at a time (cheaper than one month at a time..or buy for 12 months at reduced rate) there are deals like that.    Simple, easy to figure out...no brain strain. :P

    Or don't and go back to free to play.   Not my cup of tea, but to each their own. :)


    This post was edited by CanadinaXegony at January 6, 2017 6:42 PM PST
    • 160 posts
    January 12, 2017 10:36 PM PST

    I think I'm going to pay the $10,000 Pledge just so I can design a raid with the devs.  I'll call it "The Cash Shop", and fill it with the most treacherous gold farming bots you've ever seen.

     

    Totally worth it.

    • 9115 posts
    January 13, 2017 1:03 AM PST

    corpserunner said:

    I think I'm going to pay the $10,000 Pledge just so I can design a raid with the devs.  I'll call it "The Cash Shop", and fill it with the most treacherous gold farming bots you've ever seen.

     

    Totally worth it.

    Even though you say it in jest, we have the final say on raid/dungeon designs and that would never happen lol ;)

    • 3237 posts
    October 12, 2017 1:05 PM PDT

    Gnog said: Down with Krono. If you introduce tradeable krono, you make the game pay-to-win. Want the best tradeable gear? Buy Kronos, trade them in game for game currency, and buy the best stuff on the market. The outcome is really not that different from a cash shop. The mechanism is just a bit more indirect.

    Agreed.  I really hope that Kronos is considered a micro-transaction and that a similar system will never be adopted in Pantheon.  It's 100% P2W.  I think Kronos is even worse than a cash shop because it allows you to buy anything/everything that would otherwise be purchased with gold.  You want that epic weapon?  Surely there is a guild that will sell you a slot in their raid for 10k gold.  You want power leveled?  There will be plenty of players who will work for X amount of gold per hour.  You want to level up a crafter?  Rather than farming for materials or participating in the "player driven economy" you just pull out your credit card and buy everything in bulk.


    This post was edited by oneADseven at October 12, 2017 1:29 PM PDT
    • 1785 posts
    October 12, 2017 1:32 PM PDT

    I have a different view point, both as a longtime eve player (they pioneered the concept of tradable game time) and just based on playing lots of games.

    First.. Allowing players to buy game time credits for real money, and sell/trade those items to other players for in-game cash, is the single most effective method I have seen in any game to stop gold sellers, bots, and all the other bad stuff that we hate. It takes away their demand so utterly that they just vanish from the game. On that basis alone I think it is worth considering. Another Plus is that the money all goes back to the developer to fund the game. Not some shell company in Asia. Finally a nice thing about it is that it provides a good barometer for how much money is floating around in the game, and you can use the prices to easily chart inflationary trends which is important for adjusting the flow of money into the game in order to ensure that new players can participate in the game economy.

    Second, any game where everything is tradable will eventually lead to a situation where players can buy their way in to top level gear, and people will feel like this is unfair or that the people buying the stuff didn't earn it. Pantheon can prevent this from becoming too extreme simply by insuring that some things can't be bought. Or, that the ingredients to craft them can't be purchased but must be obtained the hard way. That helps keep the best items meaningful.

    My 2gp (not adjusted for inflation)

    • 1921 posts
    October 12, 2017 1:58 PM PDT

    Just as long as there is no cash shop and nothing remotely similar to EQ's Krono, I will be happy to pay a very high subscription fee.

    Add a cash shop or Krono, and I'm out.  I'll just go back to EQ1 if I want to deal with that insanity.

    • 3237 posts
    October 12, 2017 2:09 PM PDT

    How is it the single most effective way to stop gold sellers?  If you allow Kronos, instead of there being a shell company in Asia responsible for gold-selling, anybody/everybody can do it.  Gold selling essentially becomes embraced as a part of game culture rather than being frowned upon.  The thing I hate about RMT is people using their wallet to progress in the game rather than earning it the hard way.  Kronos doesen't stop that.  The only reason it reduces the demand of "chinese gold sellers" is because they are replaced with the general population.  I don't look down on a chinese gold seller any more than I do an American or British one.  Don't get me wrong, I understand that there are certain incentives associated with a system like kronos.  That being said, I would happily pay an extra premium to play on a server that doesen't allow it.  It's for the same exact reasons that I despise cash shops.  The idea of someone spending real money to advance in the game makes the entire world/server experience feel compromised.

    • 21 posts
    October 12, 2017 2:32 PM PDT

    I'm totally for a subscription and pay for expansions. It's the best all around system. I hope a cash shop is never added.

    • 281 posts
    October 12, 2017 2:37 PM PDT

    Sevens said:

    Crazzie said:

    Sevens said:

    I love the sub model, with buyable xpacs

    as long as there is NO cash shop, I know VRI has said there will be none but if revenue falls short I know its always an options in the back of their minds

     

     

    Well cash shops are a great thing, in many ways. If you restrict the user from exploiting the system.

    So if i added real life money to my account and wanted to purchase non P2W items within the game to deck out my in game house, guild hall, or even basic things i could.

     ...

     

     

    Dont care about plat farmers abusing the cash shop, dont care about how apperance Items can be turned off so I cant see them...Cant care for ANY reason or excuse anyone can bring up to justify a cash shop..It hurts the game, period. You want items for your house? Put in recipies so carpenters can make them. You want fancy dress clothes for the kings big ball, put in a pattern so the tailors can make them. Anything ever added to the game should be given to the PLAYERS to create and not stuck in the shop to double dip on a sub based game. No, cash shops are in no way shape or form good, they are soul sucking, game killing worthless cash grabs and nothing more.



    I think this is a rather extreme take on this.  I'm not really a fan of cash shops and they are often abused.  But selling some cosmetic items and even some XP potions (weaker and shorter duration than anything that can be gotten in game) isn't the MMO equivalent of Hilter.  I'll be just fine without a cash shop at all, but stating that all cash shops are "in no way shape or form good, they are soul sucking, game killing worthless cash grabs and nothing more" is a tad hyperbolic.

     

    As for the game model, pay for game, pay for expansions monthly subscriptions works for me.

    I'd not be opposed to experimentation with optional hourly pro-rated subscriptions for those that don't have the time to put in many hours but have to pay the same as the rest of us.  I.e., can only play 5hours a month and $1 an hour is a more fair payment plan for them.  (Or whatever is a fair number for this.  I pulled the amounts from my ...)


    This post was edited by DragonFist at October 12, 2017 2:43 PM PDT
    • 1785 posts
    October 12, 2017 5:26 PM PDT

    oneADseven said:

    How is it the single most effective way to stop gold sellers?  If you allow Kronos, instead of there being a shell company in Asia responsible for gold-selling, anybody/everybody can do it.  Gold selling essentially becomes embraced as a part of game culture rather than being frowned upon.  The thing I hate about RMT is people using their wallet to progress in the game rather than earning it the hard way.  Kronos doesen't stop that.  The only reason it reduces the demand of "chinese gold sellers" is because they are replaced with the general population.  I don't look down on a chinese gold seller any more than I do an American or British one.  Don't get me wrong, I understand that there are certain incentives associated with a system like kronos.  That being said, I would happily pay an extra premium to play on a server that doesen't allow it.  It's for the same exact reasons that I despise cash shops.  The idea of someone spending real money to advance in the game makes the entire world/server experience feel compromised.

    Responding cynically, I'd say that people are going to do it anyway - I much prefer the money they spend goes back into developing the game, rather than people's pockets :)  There are real-world parallels where governments have to consider whether it's more cost-effective to prohibit something and try to enforce that prohibition, or legalize it, regulate it, and tax it to generate revenue.  (I'm not going to be any more specific than that because I don't want to start a debate that has nothing to do with PRF :) )

    Responding more cynically - Part of my job in the past has involved dealing with the effects of data breaches, malicious software, and identity theft and supporting the businesses and people impacted by these things.  In the MMO space, there are dozens of public examples of people becoming victims of identity theft by using an "external" gold seller.  On the publisher side, the "gold selling" industry often uses fraudulent practices to open the myriad number of accounts that they use to farm the money and hawk their wares, and this presents a very real financial drain for those publishers and developers.  For every story that gets reported there are hundreds that don't, for various reasons.  So ignoring any potential financial benefit, allowing in-game trading of game time for in-game currency helps to protect both the game's players as well as the game's publisher/developer from financial harm.

    One final point I'll make is that in a game-time-trading system, all the money comes from other real players, who (in theory) are earning that money in legitimate ways, rather than running bots to farm it up.

    All that said - I totally understand your viewpoint and even agree to an extent.  I'm really not a fan of allowing people to buy their way in and I'm not the sort of player who would do that myself.  In EVE, I only ever purchased PLEX from other players to use as christmas/birthday gifts for my friends and corp members, as an example.  However.. I guess after all these years of playing games the realist in me has overcome the idealist in me.  I'd rather play a game where the ability to buy in-game money is regulated and safe, and profits go to the devs, than play a game where I'm constantly having to add people spamming poorly hidden website addresses to my ignore list, or report groups of bots while I'm trying to enjoy it.

    I realize this is a contentious topic and it's unlikely we will ever all agree but hopefully that explains where I'm coming from :)

     

    • 114 posts
    October 12, 2017 6:43 PM PDT

    Rachael said:

    Sevens said:

    Dont care about plat farmers abusing the cash shop, dont care about how apperance Items can be turned off so I cant see them...Cant care for ANY reason or excuse anyone can bring up to justify a cash shop..It hurts the game, period. You want items for your house? Put in recipies so carpenters can make them. You want fancy dress clothes for the kings big ball, put in a pattern so the tailors can make them. Anything ever added to the game should be given to the PLAYERS to create and not stuck in the shop to double dip on a sub based game. No, cash shops are in no way shape or form good, they are soul sucking, game killing worthless cash grabs and nothing more.

    I couldn't agree with this more, everything in game should be obtainable in game through exploration, looting, or crafting :)

     

    I remember the time period where EQ2 moved in a cash shop.  December forget the year during the holiday events.  Standard boiler plate of "cosmetics".  Now you got xp potions, the paintings the faction vendors had stopped and paintings appeared in the cash shop.  mounts with run speed, flying speed, harvesting nodes (resource) speed.  It doesn't end. 

    I'm with you about purchasing items from crafters (players) or it's a drop from a zone or dungeon.

     

    • 3016 posts
    October 12, 2017 7:02 PM PDT

    Kronos doesn't fix anything at all...kronos currently dominates the trade scene on Agnarr..its still RMT.    It disgusted me as a matter of fact.    So I started saying you want me to buy from you...plat only or NO SALE.    A krono costs $17.99 real money. Why on earth would I beggar myself to buy pixels in a game?   Why on earth do other people do it?   Beats me.  Some people charging 3 and 4 kronos for an item that is farmable with a group.   Its out of hand, and I DON'T EVER WANT TO SEE THAT IN PANTHEON...ever.  Saddens me that EQ has been reduced to barely concealed RMT.

     

    Cana

    • 3237 posts
    October 12, 2017 7:19 PM PDT

    Yeah I totally understand where you are coming from Neph.  Personally I don't really have any sympathy for people who get caught up in issues related to participating in RMT.  As far as I am concerned that's just a tough lesson learned and hopefully it will convince them (and others) that they shouldn't get involved in activities that are against the rules.  VR has been taking a "no-tolerance" stance when it comes to NDA breach discussions and I think they should do the same thing for RMT.  I get that it can be draining or whatever but the best policy, in my opinion, would be to emphasize that RMT is not something that will be allowed in Pantheon.  Warn people of the dangers (identity theft, getting scammed, etc) and let them know if they find themselves in a sticky situation, they are on their own.  If they get caught by VR their account will be banned.  No pity, no excuses.  From what I can remember in my early gaming days ... RMT was out of sight and out of mind.  You didn't even talk about RMT because you didn't want your name associated with it.

    I personally do not buy into the mentality of "it will happen anyway."  I don't care.  Shady stuff happens all the time and I would like to have the peace of mind that it's frowned upon and that something is actively being done about it.  I understand it's a long, trying war ... but stay tough.  Definitely don't give in.  If it were up to me I would be setting people up with bait GM's.  The people buying gold are just as bad as those who are selling it and when enough people get hit with the ban stick word will get around.  People will know it's not safe.  Pay to win is a trash mechanic and no matter how someone spins it, how many bows they wrap around it, or how much the turd gets polished ... it's literal dog dookey for an immersive world built on risk vs reward.


    This post was edited by oneADseven at October 12, 2017 7:23 PM PDT
    • 844 posts
    October 15, 2017 1:50 PM PDT

    Wow lots of posts here. Frankly did not read many.

    Too many newbie gamers here, applying their logic of modern MMOs to one being designed by the originator of MMO's.

    Even WOW ripped off everything it could from EQ1, and made a carebear nerfed version of EQ1 with cartoon characters.

     

    EQ1 (and Vanguard) Subscription and paid expansion model, works fine. No cashshop, no Kronos and so forth.

    if Pantheon follows the mold created from EQ1 and Vanguard (and the same guys that created those games are making Pantheon), the best gear in game will be Bind on Pickup, not tradable, not sellable and generally will ONLY come from the most elite raiding targets.

    So no amount of gold farming will buy you best in class gear. That gear will be rare and highly prized.

    So P2W problem solved.

     

    What I do not fully understand, how is Pantheon going to cost $15/month in 20xx to play, and EQ1 in 2000 cost $15/m?

    And why can't cable tv use the same business model?

    • 323 posts
    October 15, 2017 4:51 PM PDT

    zewtastic said:

    What I do not fully understand, how is Pantheon going to cost $15/month in 20xx to play, and EQ1 in 2000 cost $15/m?

    And why can't cable tv use the same business model?

    Yeah, I don't really get the tentative $15 price either. I guess they'll do their numbers and maybe change that, but I agree it's surprising to think we're paying the same subscription today as in 1999. I'd really rather see VR just go for it and charge more in subscription fees to offset the lack of microtransactions. I tend to think that if VR just tells us that $20 or $25/mo. is the cost of a non-p2w game, then the people who value that (which I gather is a large segment of the audience here) will pay it. 

    • 1281 posts
    October 15, 2017 5:22 PM PDT

    $15 a month is just considered the norm now days. EQ didn't raise price to $15 a month until 2005 from $12.99. If I remember correctly, it launched at $9.99 a month.

    Also, check out this thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/truegaming/comments/2ba1h0/how_did_mmos_settle_on_15mo_as_the_standard_price/

    $9.99 in 1999 is the equivilent of $14.94 in September 2017.

    https://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=9.99&year1=199903&year2=201709


    This post was edited by bigdogchris at October 15, 2017 5:24 PM PDT
    • 1860 posts
    October 15, 2017 5:25 PM PDT

    As much as most of us don't want a cash shop in any form.  I want to remind everyone of VRs stance: 

    zewtastic said:

    I love this idea, especially as a cash shop option.

    As long as a tight control is put on naming. meaning only lists you are allowed to choose from or submit your name for validation.

    Rattenmann said:

    Sorry to burst your bubble,... but  we will have no cash shop.

    /sarcasm on

    sad, isn't it?

    /sarcasm off

    Kilsin said:

    There is a possibility for a cash shop/game store mate, it just would never sell any items that gave an advantage over another player and would not stock any pay to win items, we may, for extra revenue, sell fluff lore friendly items, vanity items, rename vouchers etc. but we have no intention of ruining our game, its economy or any crafting/adventuring spheres by selling advantages to anyone, if we even decide to have a cash shop/store.

    I just wanted to clear that up, we are completely against any advantages but are open for suggestions to sell lore friendly fluff/cosmetic items for extra revenue, as Zew said, but we will need more than a ~$15 sub to keep the bills paid and the game supported for years to come, man! :)

     

    There may be cash shop for things like lore items, rename vouchers etc. 

    I'm leery that any cash shop always has the tendancy to creep into having the types of items that are in that gray area.  Like potions or anything similar...or, at what point does having a certain color of armor become more optimal in pvp depending on your location?  Very minor thing that creep into the grey area that might give one player an advantage, no matter how small, if you pay extra money.


    This post was edited by philo at October 15, 2017 5:31 PM PDT
    • 323 posts
    October 15, 2017 5:34 PM PDT

    bigdogchris said:

    $15 a month is just considered the norm now days. EQ didn't raise price to $15 a month until 2005 from $12.99. If I remember correctly, it launched at $9.99 a month.

    Also, check out this thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/truegaming/comments/2ba1h0/how_did_mmos_settle_on_15mo_as_the_standard_price/

    $9.99 in 1999 is the equivilent of $14.94 in September 2017.

    https://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=9.99&year1=199903&year2=201709

    That's informative, so thanks for posting it, although the top post in the thread you linked is literally the late-night ramblings of a drunk person, according to the poster him/herself.  :)  But, and correct me if I'm wrong, none of this is really an argument to stay at $15 for a new title released in 2017, unless you're saying the norm is evidence that the market will not bear a higher price, which isn't confirmable by the status quo. I would also expect there could be a premium over $15 because there will not be microtransactions to provide additional income. 

    • 323 posts
    October 15, 2017 5:36 PM PDT

    philo said:

    As much as most of us don't want a cash shop in any form.  I want to remind everyone of VRs stance: 

    zewtastic said:

    I love this idea, especially as a cash shop option.

    As long as a tight control is put on naming. meaning only lists you are allowed to choose from or submit your name for validation.

    Rattenmann said:

    Sorry to burst your bubble,... but  we will have no cash shop.

    /sarcasm on

    sad, isn't it?

    /sarcasm off

    Kilsin said:

    There is a possibility for a cash shop/game store mate, it just would never sell any items that gave an advantage over another player and would not stock any pay to win items, we may, for extra revenue, sell fluff lore friendly items, vanity items, rename vouchers etc. but we have no intention of ruining our game, its economy or any crafting/adventuring spheres by selling advantages to anyone, if we even decide to have a cash shop/store.

    I just wanted to clear that up, we are completely against any advantages but are open for suggestions to sell lore friendly fluff/cosmetic items for extra revenue, as Zew said, but we will need more than a ~$15 sub to keep the bills paid and the game supported for years to come, man! :)

     

    There may be cash shop for things like lore items, rename vouchers etc. 

    I'm leery that any cash shop always has the tendancy to creep into having the types of items that are in that gray area.  Like potions or anything similar...or, at what point does having a certain color of armor become more optimal in pvp depending on your location?  Very minor thing that creep into the grey area that might give one player an advantage, no matter how small, if you pay extra money.

    Are you sure that was Kilsin's/VR's most recent post on the topic of cash shops?  I was under the impression that VR had taken a more recent position that more definitively ruled out cash shops, even for 'fluff' items. 

    • 1860 posts
    October 15, 2017 5:41 PM PDT

    Gnog said:

    philo said:

    As much as most of us don't want a cash shop in any form.  I want to remind everyone of VRs stance: 

    zewtastic said:

    I love this idea, especially as a cash shop option.

    As long as a tight control is put on naming. meaning only lists you are allowed to choose from or submit your name for validation.

    Rattenmann said:

    Sorry to burst your bubble,... but  we will have no cash shop.

    /sarcasm on

    sad, isn't it?

    /sarcasm off

    Kilsin said:

    There is a possibility for a cash shop/game store mate, it just would never sell any items that gave an advantage over another player and would not stock any pay to win items, we may, for extra revenue, sell fluff lore friendly items, vanity items, rename vouchers etc. but we have no intention of ruining our game, its economy or any crafting/adventuring spheres by selling advantages to anyone, if we even decide to have a cash shop/store.

    I just wanted to clear that up, we are completely against any advantages but are open for suggestions to sell lore friendly fluff/cosmetic items for extra revenue, as Zew said, but we will need more than a ~$15 sub to keep the bills paid and the game supported for years to come, man! :)

     

    There may be cash shop for things like lore items, rename vouchers etc. 

    I'm leery that any cash shop always has the tendancy to creep into having the types of items that are in that gray area.  Like potions or anything similar...or, at what point does having a certain color of armor become more optimal in pvp depending on your location?  Very minor thing that creep into the grey area that might give one player an advantage, no matter how small, if you pay extra money.

    Are you sure that was Kilsin's/VR's most recent post on the topic of cash shops?  I was under the impression that VR had taken a more recent position that more definitively ruled out cash shops, even for 'fluff' items. 

    I'm not sure.  That is a quote from 2016.  Maybe someone can find a more recent stance on the subject...if there is one?  Or maybe Kils can correct us, but that is the only official stance I remember.  Sure they have always talked about not being "pay to win", but that doesn't address cash shops for other things.  The above statement addresses that.  I'd like to be wrong... :)