Higher Tier Funding Ideas
-
I personally hate crafting outfits. I always feel like a prey animal in a sea of wolves because I can't wear the correct armor to protect myself and fight back accordingly. It's probably the biggest thing I don't like about Albion. However, I like additional resources returned but would rather see it through leveling as you gather resources naturally over time. The more you gather, the better you get at extracting more resources.
-
Even worse, some defensive abilities of Albion gatherer gear can lock you out of escape portals!
-
@Althalus said in Higher Tier Funding Ideas:
they have already mentioned in the post that they wont be doing any more stretch goals and I'm okay with that... we don't this turning into another star citizen or chronicles of elyria with feature creep...
But they also said, that they will reconcider adding stretch goals later in beta.
-
This post is deleted!
-
@Meiki
most expansions just separate the community. and you'll eventually get expansion creep similar to what WoW has.@Althalus
as previously mentioned, stretch goals doesn't have to happen at release, they can state 'after release'.
-
@Meiki said in Higher Tier Funding Ideas:
Or they could also go with expansions depending on sales and success once the main game is released
True. Larger expansions are good way to collect more funds, but will definitely need dedicated and/or large playerbase to work out.
Steadily releasing new content and updates with smaller patches is of course working system too, and actually better option when there is a danger that fair portion of playerbase won't buy it and will stop playing.
-
I'll point back to Path of Exile releasing free content, which doesn't separate the population and is maintained by a great cash shop and supporter packs.
-
@Jetah That is one way do it, but not the only right one. It depends of the game and what suits the best for that specific game. Also expansion does not automatically mean dividing community, especially in cases where expansions are waited and everybody will buy it anyway.. for example WoW, FF14, ESO..
-
This post is deleted!
-
@Tuoni said in Higher Tier Funding Ideas:
@Jetah That is one way do it, but not the only right one. It depends of the game and what suits the best for that specific game. Also expansion does not automatically mean dividing community, especially in cases where expansions are waited and everybody will buy it anyway.. for example WoW, FF14, ESO..
WoW expansions do split the community! i had to buy a few of them to catch up a while back, thankfully they've changed that system. I can't speak for FF14 or ESO but I imagine it splits the community too unless you buy the expansion (which is sort of a pay wall). reaching I know.
Free expansions is best and have it supported by a great cash shop. it's the best way to do it.
-
@Jetah If whole community (or almost all) buys the expansion, then it is weird to speak of splitting community. If we think of WoW for example, the idea is to introduce so big content update/expansion, that it will give players 1 to 2 years totally new things to do. So you can kind of think that as a totally new game, which makes sense you need to buy it before you can play it.
Games which introduces just small patches with some fixes and one/few new features, are ofc better add without any additional prices.
-
but then you have the late people which would have to try the demo/trial then decide if buying the game and expansions is worth the upfront cash. A problem WoW had was it'd cost 200$ to buy all the expansions to play the game. Now they've decided to exclude the newest expansion and give the rest away.
if the game has a cash shop then it should carry the financials of the game. if the cash shop isn't doing well then the problem lies within that.
Warframe and Path of Exile have expansions without charging for them. Fractured can do the same. Overwatch releases 3-4 heroes and maps a year and doesn't charge for them. That's 3 examples of the system working.
-
@Jetah said in Higher Tier Funding Ideas:
but then you have the late people which would have to try the demo/trial then decide if buying the game and expansions is worth the upfront cash. A problem WoW had was it'd cost 200$ to buy all the expansions to play the game.
At which point you needed to buy the newest and previous expansions with 200$??? You always got the starter pack/battlechest with real bargain when new expansion was released.
Now they've decided to exclude the newest expansion and give the rest away.
True.
-
It was around Warlords they decided to include all expansions into the subscription price. Prior to Warlords, you had to buy all previous expansions.
The Burning Crusade, Wrath of the Lich King, Cataclysm, and Mists of Pandaria, had to be purchased before you could play Warlords. Sometime during Warlords they combined BC through Mist into the subscription. It was ~50$ per expansion so 200$ before Warlords was factored in; sales aside.
-
@Jetah I guess you are making these up from your mind.. You never have to pay full pricess from previous expansions, not even close. Before legion for example, you could buy the battlechest 5.0 package, which cost 20$. This contained Vanilla, TBC, WotLK, Cata, MoP, WoD and 1 month subs. So you needed just to buy Legion with normal price on top of that, which was around 50$ the cheapest version. Last year Blizzard removed this battlechest box from sale and you needed only buy the BfA expansion. So that 200$ was more like 70$.
-
This post is deleted!
-
in 2013 the battlechest included vanillia, BC and Wrath. That means you had to buy Cataclysm and Mist. Sometime during Warlords Blizzard merged all expansions into the base subscription.
in 2011 this post
Of course, that cost can be deceptive. If you’re just getting into WoW your first year cost will be $239.88 ($30 for the battlechest, WotLK, and Cataclysm).
I've also read that Blizzard never made a 5.0 BC but other companies were marketing it as such to imply it included 5 expansions (or 4 and vanilla).
The first 5 expansions had to be purchased separably. It was during the 5th, the lowest population of WoW, that Blizzard combined them into the battlechest and/or decided to include them all into the subscription price. I remember wanting to play at Legion release and thought I needed to buy WoD but I didn't because it was included.
-
@Jetah c'mon man! Did you even red the article you linked? That price is the total fee of a year inclueding subs, so the cost of game itself and expansions have been about 60$.
"First is the cost of WoW if you only pay the subscription fee. That would come to $179.88 a year if you pay the monthly $14.99."
There has been different versions of the battlechests and with time Blizzard has add more of the old expansions in it (starting from Vanilla + TBC). You have never needed to buy the old versions even close for full price when new expansion has released. Those old ones have always been real bargains regardless those are in battlechest or not. You never needed invest over 100$ to start playing, mostly you needed about 70$. There might been short window when you needed to pay about 85$ in time of MoP (Battlechest 20$, Cata 15$ and MoP 50$).
-
@Tuoni said in Higher Tier Funding Ideas:
@Jetah c'mon man! Did you even red the article you linked? That price is the total fee of a year inclueding subs, so the cost of game itself and expansions have been about 60$.
"First is the cost of WoW if you only pay the subscription fee. That would come to $179.88 a year if you pay the monthly $14.99."
There has been different versions of the battlechests and with time Blizzard has add more of the old expansions in it (starting from Vanilla + TBC). You have never needed to buy the old versions even close for full price when new expansion has released. Those old ones have always been real bargains regardless those are in battlechest or not. You never needed invest over 100$ to start playing, mostly you needed about 70$. There might been short window when you needed to pay about 85$ in time of MoP (Battlechest 20$, Cata 15$ and MoP 50$).
i had to pay for every expansion up to the one before warlords. there was no skip option until warlords. this is experience i speak of. TODAY is different and YOU DONT need to buy all previous expansions LIKE YOU USE TO.
-
@Jetah Yes you needed to buy the previous expansions and the original game. No-one has claimed anything else! The point is, that even so, you got all the previous expansion for bargain and you never needed to invest 200$ (not even close) to start playing the game. So please stop spreading false information as a fact and protect your argument without enough knowledge.
