Idea to make (top) pledge packs bit more attractive
-
Guess we all know this is community funded through pledge packs (and some bits through currency/pets etc.). While the latest change to them made the lower packs incredible value and very likely made lot of people buy (or upgrade from Adept), at the same time, it took away from higher packs. Even if you disagree about top packs dropping value for the price (mainly when the sale ends), boosting the sales can never hurt right? So heres the idea.
What are the three things people love the most? VIP/Premium time (
), Premium currency ( ) and skins. To minimize the work needed for the change, the "founder chests" from Foundation could be used.Legend - 1 Bronze Founder chest
Champion - 1 Silver Founder chest
Eternal - 1 Bronze and Silver Founder chest (alternatively 1 Gold which I assume will eventually come with next foundation level expansion?)Adds some nice convincing fluff to the pledges, people universally like skins, keeping it to just 1 (or 2?) chests will keep the Foundation progression very valuable to do.
In case this was already proposed...oh well, ignore this.
-
eternal already has lifetime VIP, iirc. there isn't much more you can get that'll top that.
-
I just want my new pledge pack!
But life time VIP is already pretty sweet m8.
-
I think the OPs main premise is that Skins are a great motivator, as one of the top things all players want, without too much cost to a developer to award...
Sadly, I find the OP's statement false. I know a ton of players who don't care one wit about skins. like anything else out there, Skins are a nitch perk, and thus will only appeal to nitch audience members, and, it so happens, most of the nitch market that would spend extra on skins are also the kind who would already have spent on the highest end packs possible. Its almost a prestige thing, you want the best nitch items, skins, cosmetics, forum titles, etc... so adding new skins to what's already there will hardly add to the overall appeal to the regular backer.
As it stands now, the game itself is already more funded than they expected. Yes, they are still selling founder packs, yes, they are even putting on sales, they are a business, and every extra cent helps, but selling the highest end founder packs are not really a major priority anymore for them, I would guess. When you set out tiered backing systems as a kickstarter type crowdfunded project, you set out a few almost nothing very low tier sets, for those who can barely afford to invest but would like to join the kickstarter campaign to say they did something as a backer, you also set out a couple of Really High end backing tiers, usually with very limited total amounts of packages available. These you try to give every possible bell and whistle you can add, some of which might even be really out there, but you also set these tier prices up to really high out there levels...but then you don't really worry about those pledge tiers anymore. It's the tiers in the middle that are the bread and butter of a crowdfunded project. You don't want to add more incentive the absolute top tiers anymore, those were set as impulse buys in the first place, and rarely expected to be bought much after the fact. Your true operating capital is coming from all the tiers in the middle, the ones hopefully set out with reasonable rewards/perks and a doable price point for most backers to meet as a one time thing.
Fractured is kind of different in that they give the ability to upgrade your package after the kickstart is overwith, and they have made some higher tiers that really do matter, and aren't just about impulse buying, but the absolute top tier ones are still expected to keep their value because of their rarity. They aren't going to reincentivize them too much more now. Now they want to sell the mid-level packs, and then hope those get gradually upgraded to the mid-high level packs, while the lofty ultimate packs stay lofty as a golden goal few achieve.
-
@GamerSeuss yes, i think Isometric mmos dont follow the ''fashions is the endgame'' rule.
We know people like fashion. Swtor sells a lot of fashion. FFXIV sells more. Even WoW can fill the shopping with cosmetics and Eso have the entire endgame with fashion (like GW2).
But isometric mmorpgs dont have enough immersion to hold the ''fashion wars''.
-
But they with Furniture ! Yard decor and house expansions for more room, build ons so to speak.
-
First...I dont understand this dedication to keep everything static and oppose any (even small positive) change and a possibility of more money to the devs.
"As it stands now, the game itself is already more funded than they expected." That is probably not exactly true if you use basic math and publicly known information (~26months since KS, 2,5k € average italian salary and 8(+2) devs with no publicly declared outside funding from investors) and thats not counting other smaller expenses. Most KS games ive been part of, or been following without paying, continue selling, similar, packs after KS too (AoC, CoE, KC:D, Pantheon, Crowfall..).
I feel like you all focused too much on the "top" in the title and . Is it just to use only Eternal as an argument?
. Seuss, I have to disagree, I know more than enough people who care about skins, I know more than enough people who grind to get skins, Hell, just look at battlepasses, there are millions upon millions of people who spend money to grind for skins, thats not even bringing up cosmetic lootcrates (
). Even Fractured own KS has most (50+%) in above Recruit tiers that give "useless" extra goodies which by Vollmonds statement noone wants in isometric games. If noone wants them in isometrics, why would there be rather extensive list of cosmetics in Albion Online (which is probably the most popular isometric MMO today? Not sure. Definitely popular tho)Since you all here years before release, youre likely seasoned MMO players...as such you should know MMOs rarely survive just on game sales alone, which slow down considerably as time goes on, and main moneysource becomes VIP and cosmetics. Which just happens to be present in Fractured store too (3/4 of the store) and is bound to expand overtime as any other game store.
Even just by looking at all my referals, I can see most people who do the quests pursue the levels with pets/skins/mounts (and stop there and let daily points do the rest), same story when talking to guildies.
TLDR: Why resist a positive change that doesnt hurt you, would make buyers more satisfied and would help with funding.
PS: My idea is meant to change not just Eternal, but Legend and Champion too, which are more "mid tier" packs considering Legend sits at 90€.
-
Personally.. I am very attached to my skin. I can't imagine walking around each day without it. I'd feel.. kinda... um.... exposed... I suppose without it?
In regards to the packs.. I really don't see why they need to do anything with the packs anyhow... yes, they are having a sale right now... all companies have sales... it should be expected even though for some reason people seem to be taking this differently than anything else in life and complaining that they bought it at full price... (face palm). Packs really aren't meant to be changed. The change that they did to the two packs they did change were very minor and only done so that they could allow more people to play without having to giving out so many thousands of keys each time. (which they probably still will)..
With that said.... even though I do not support "changing" packages... I do support "adding" more packages, which will more than likely only affect the entry into the Beta phase now at a lower cost than the alphas but with an equal or greater price of the actual game when being sold at release.
-
@LonelyCookie I definitely agree with with your top assertion. I do think there is a decent bit of pushback in the community at times, sometimes healthy sometimes perhaps overly protective. Ideas are good! Obviously it IS important to question a lot of things just to protect the devs. Scope creep is a scary concern. So it would be easy for wilder ideas to demand to much of an already strapped team. I definitely think it is worthwhile to continue to explore incentives for monitization.
Maybe in Beta they could put out some skin opportunities only available to current backers of a certain level, of even just at a dyna discount for upper tier backers, idk.. just total spitball idea
-
I'm not saying the devs won't ever need money, that would be ludicris in the extreme!
I am saying that they specifically posted how much they had made recently and stated it was far and above what they had expected to make. That they were well ahead of any of their reasonable expectations...this means they have comfortable breathing room, and thus they can focus on trying to put out the game people backed in the first place, and not try to bend over backwards to change the game for those who came afterwards in order to drum up additional capital.
We know, once the game goes live, there will be cost-creep in the whole structure of the game, it is inevitable in today's game market. What people don't need to do, however, is push for adjusting packages and throwing out even more sales, when the devs have stated right now they are in a comfortable place, and can relax on that front, still (as people can clearly see, offering a sale incentive) but instead, focus on working full tilt on the game itself.
yes, Skins ARE a big motivator for SOME of the MMO community. Your premise implied it was more close to ALL, or at least the PRIMARY or the BIGGEST motivator, and it's not. It is an extra that can be added to a game cosmetically, thus not paying to win, which is a major RED FLAG for a lot of us. We want to avoid as much as possible getting a pay to win system going, even knowing eventually there will be some paid for elements that will actually have more than a cosmetic affect on the game, it always happens.
