Posts made by Phaethonas

@jetah said in VIP system : What do you think ?:

@phaethonas

i'm not saying it isn't wanted, but i'm saying many sub only games have had to stop it or close down. they opted for the free or hybrid option instead. that tells me even though people were willing to pay they didn't actually do it for a prolonged period.

I will say again that the transition did not happen because the model is/was not viable. The model is viable and numerous successful games have proven that. There are more successful games that have/had sub than f2p or b2p. There is literally only one good, non-p2w, f2p game, PoE. As for b2p, the one that comes on top of my mind, probably not the only one, is GW2. The transition happened because EA and similar publishers and developers are greedy. Heavy monetized f2p games will generate more revenue than sub2play games, and on top of that, they don't even need to be good. They can be a pile of turds, that only a handful of whales likes, and the game can stay afloat.

i don't consider a cosmetic cash shop milking customers.

Neither do I, this is why I am excepting it. That was apparent when I was talking about "heavy monetized f2p games", and I was not talking about the purely cosmetic cash shop, because right afterwards I included it as acceptable for Fractured. Specifically, Fractured should be buy2play, with buy2play expansions and the cosmetic cash shop may or may not be there, I don't care..

they may want it but they clearly will leave it just as quickly as the polls, post, questionnaires and comments fade away.

I see no evidence on that, assuming a good game. Sure, SWTOR subs left it en masse, cause SWTOR was a mess and had no content. But blaming the payment model and not the lack of content would be a mistake in that case.

SWTOR proved the game being good wasn't enough

SWTOR wasn't and isn't good.

At launch it had only one raid/operation and one warzone/instanced pvp map!!

The devs were out of touch. They expected that people would be re-rolling in order to play the other classes/stories. SWTOR is as much of a WoW clone as possible and the devs expected that the players would just re-roll a character! That was stupid.

Let alone a number of things, ranging from lacking basic functionalities that every theme-park MMO must have (e.g. group finder, AH etc) that SWTOR lacked. I can understand an "old school", sandbox/open world game to lack those (e.g. Pantheon and Camelot Unchained will follow that paradigm), but when you are making a WoW clone theme-park, you need to have those. And then comes the terrible, terrible engine!

As someone who has played SWTOR for ~3+ years, I can only laugh at SWTOR being good.

And then, EA/Bioware instead of fighting for the game, they decided to go f2p/hybrid. With 2.0 (the Dread expansion) the game was getting better and better, but they also had revert to f2p/hybrid which created a paradox, which I have mentioned before. They were making money from the cash shop and not the content. Eventually, this lead them at releasing new content rarely, all the while every month they would release new cosmetic items!! Which is logical, because new gameplay content was/is not generating revenue, all the while new cosmetic content is generating revenue.

So, yeah, if your game is a pile of turds, sub2play is not the way to go.

@fibs said

None of which matters the slightest bit, because I'll catch up.

On my time, not yours.

Even if that were true, that doesn't make it any less pay2win.

Is it true though? Will you be able to catch up?

You tried to make a point earlier (at another thread I think) which included a graph. Despite the graph being wrong on many levels, it assumed a cap. What cap is that now? As we are talking about knowledge points the cap is about either them, or their usage.

For example, as far as we know there will be no cap at knowledge points. From the little that we know so far, we can assume that there will be a finite, but large, number of knowledge points. We also know though that, these knowledge points will be difficult to be accumulated or even impossible at times! For example, I am a demon and I can't enter an Arboreus dungeon. Inside the Arboreus dungeon though, there are things to discover that give you knowledge points! As such I am immediately locked out from those knowledge points.

So, this means that although a finite number, accumulating knowledge points won't be easy and it may be even impossible to cap. It is more than likely that the addition of new content, even the smallest one, will also add new knowledge points. This means that either capping knowledge points will be impossible (e.g. I am locked out from some, as explained above) or there will be a constant effort to accumulate more, something which will resemble a soft cap. Practically though, there will be no hard cap.

As such, your point that you will "catch up" is moot.

Now, there the ways knowledge points are being used. There will be two ways to use them.

1. At the talent tree

2. At ability learning.

Although the talent tree can be capped at 50, the abilities, practically, won't be able to be capped.

So, once more we see that "catching up" will either be extremely, extremely difficult, if not literally impossible.

And then there is the whole unknown part, of not knowing how much of a boost the VIP membership gives. It is one thing to assume a +10% boost at learning time (e.g.instead of requiring 10 hours you require 9) and it is quite another to generate knowledge points out of thin air. In that case you may end up with gaining +10% Knowledge Points, which means that if a deer gives you 1 KP, you get 1.1 KP. Then you add 9 more animals, and I (the person with no VIP) will have accumulated 10 points (1 per animal), whereas you will have accumulated 1.1x10 = 11 points. Oops, here pops a free KP out of thin air.

How, can you defend something to which you know so little about?

I suppose you can revert that question and ask me how I can attack something to which I know so little about, but I know two things that you completely choose to ignore;

1. Past knowledge at how such systems have been or will be implemented at other games.

2. The fact that the VIP needs to be enticing, otherwise it defeats its purpose.

Gaining 1.1 KPs instead of 1 KP is barely enticing (and despite that, still p2w!), gaining a 10% increase at the time required, probably, not so much. Let alone not in line with how the knowledge system is being described!

Okay. Where's the part where they win?

Oh yes, the argument; "you can't win in an MMO". Heard that before.

Nor do I need to mock you, since you also make a fool of yourself just fine - but I'm still going to do it

The only one who made a fool of him/herself is you, with that graph. Good try, but a failure. Lastly, reverting to ad hominem attacks proves that you have no real arguments.

@jetah said i

are those games out yet? can i download camelot unchained, dual universe or ashes right now and pay a sub to play them? or are these games still in development?
i remember swtor, wildstar, eso and others that started as a mandatory sub, yet look where they are. so clearly it isn't working. we look to the past to predict the future. now of those 3 you mentioned, I can see CU being the one that survives and IF it does then it'll the second MMO in 5 years that has debuted as a sub and maintained it.

First of all, all three are a huge success at kickstarter. This means that sub2play did not deterrent people from backing them. As a matter of fact, players were asking for sub2play to come back for quite some time. Just go at any MMO site/venue and see what is the preferred payment model when the players are asked to fill a questionnaire or poll. There is no doubt that the players want the sub2play model. There is no doubt that the sub2play model can create a stable income for the game, if the game is good.

Will either of these three games that I mentioned succeed? That remains to be seen. In my opinion Dual Universe will fail because it incorporates RMT to its mandatory subscription model, which means that this RMT will have pay2win potential because DU has a player driven economy. And that brings a question, again, about Fracture's VIP system. Will there be a VIP in-game token tradeable in-game, or will the VIP be un-tradeable in-game? Cause if it is the former then the VIP will be even more pay2win. I asked that from the first go and I still don't have an answer. Ashes of Creation will not only fail, but it won't even launch. My guess is that late this year (2018) to early next year the game will cease development. Camelot Unchained will launch, will deliver, but whether it will appeal to enough people remains to be seen. Regardless, none of the aforementioned games will fail because of the subscription.

As for the games you mentioned that started as sub2play and ended being hybrids, buy2play, f2p or whatever, I will say once more. It was not the gamers that asked for the change and the payment model was not the problem. All three were half-baked products in one way or the other. THAT WAS THEIR PROBLEM. SWTOR for example lacked content up to ~one year after launch. It started with the best launch ever, and it started bleeding subscribers immediately. If it wasn't a half baked product, the subs would have stayed. Then EA (a greedy publisher) decided to make the game f2p/sub2play hybrid with most revenue being generated by the cosmetic cash shop. And it worked, it still works. SWTOR is still making money, and as a matter of fact it is making more money now than it used to when it had all those subscribers, at launch. As I said three comments ago, f2p is the best payment model if you want to milk your customers/gamers. That doesn't make it the best payment model in general. Most of the time, the product delivered by f2p games are either crappy, pay2win or both.

So to sum things up;

1. Sub2play has delivered many great games in the past and not just one, which is the best case scenario for f2p and b2p models (PoE and GW2 respectively).

That said, in my opinion b2p has much much much more potential than f2p (that has no potential whatsoever). This is why from the very start I said that Fractured should revert to a pure buy2play model, with the initial product costing $30-60 and every biyearly expansion $30. The pure cosmetic cash shop can stay, I wouldn't mind that. Anything else, like convenience cash shop (e.g. NPC carpenters), aside character slots, server transfers and the like, should not be included. The VIP sub is also cancerous, especially as described.

1. While the sub2play model is the best when it comes at delivering a great game, it is not enough by itself. This means that bad sub2play games existed, exist and will exist.

2. While the sub2play model is the best when it comes at delivering a great game, it is not the best model when the dev company/publisher wants to generate revenue. The best way to do that (as proven by so many years of examples) is to release a half baked bullcrap, heavy monetized f2p game.

If you want such games, sure, you have the right to support such games. I won't though.

1. The majority of MMO players prefer the sub2play model, as proven by posts, polls, questionnaires, comments at MMO sites/venues.

@kellewic said in Kickstarter Update - Pledge Packs:

@phaethonas said in Kickstarter Update - Pledge Packs:

@fibs said in Kickstarter Update - Pledge Packs:

@phaethonas said in Kickstarter Update - Pledge Packs:

[various complaints about VIP]

Knowledge Points are effectively experience points, but boosting XP gain is not pay to win, because in any game it does not increase the power ceiling, and in this one it doesn't increase power at all. Your character does not become "stronger" from gaining Knowledge Points, except for a short duration from the very start of the game when you don't have enough skills to fill out your build. Fractured is a game of lateral development, remember.

You may get to the top faster with VIP, but it is the exact same top. You will not disproportionately "win" against a non-paying player whose character is as equal to yours as possible without VIP, ergo you are not paying to win, ergo it is not pay to win.

So, if the level cap is 50 and I reach it at day one, but instead you require 5 months to reach it, that is not pay2win to you?! OK!

By this logic buying into alpha/beta is p2w since you gain game experience before others who don't pay and therefore accomplish more of the game faster. Even if you gain knowledge points at the same rate, knowing how to do so means you'll gain them faster due to buying in early, which gives an advantage by paying.

Note: I'm still on the fence of VIP and can see both sides for it and against it.

Depends on what you mean. If you mean that the alpha/beta tester will have gained more XP, knowledge points and so on, then I will say only one word; "wipe".

IF you mean that I will know the game better, then a) such experience will not be accumulated at early stages (e.g. alpha) and b) assuming that at beta (2) the game will be tested in its entirety, then yes, that would give the tester some advantage as well, but this will be no different than the advantage the player has that was at launch whereas I wasn't at launch.

@kralith

First of all, PoE does not have a player driven economy. That is important about the whole thing about the bags and such.

Secondly, if a company wants "steady income" they can go with pure sub2play. Easy, honest, it works and in the long term it costs less. Which is a good thing for the player and may be a bad thing for the dev company if they want to make a cash grab.

@fibs said in Kickstarter Update - Pledge Packs:

@phaethonas said in Kickstarter Update - Pledge Packs:

Nope, as long as it's the same level 50 and you being level 50 does not directly stop me from progressing towards level 50.

You missed the point didn't you?

The point is that you will need more time to reach where I am, and in that time I will have done things like; being the first to clear a raid (special achievement unlock), have made more money, have better gear and so on.

Also, as detailed at another message/reply to you, you have misconceptions about the knowledge system.

Do you know you don't need to get every single skill? You only need to get the specific ones for your core build, which will take like a week or two, and then you're done. Everything after that is an optional luxury.

An optional luxury that as detailed by @Logain is not so "optional"

You (Prometheus) mentioned yourself in your Q&A that a person with one build could dominate a person with a different (counter) build of same player skill. So having access to these builds can make or break a fight for somebody.

Regardless, there is a misconception about "pay2win". Pay2win, at MMOs, is not limited at who wins at a 1vs1. Pay2win at MMOs, means that a player or a group of players, gain(s) an advantage, over another player, or group, just because someone opened his wallet.

Yes, I know you think every possible thing a cash shop could offer that people would actually buy is p2w, but thanks for stating it outright.

It is not a matter of what I think, or what you think. It is a matter of reality.

So, a player with more knowledge points than me, is a more versatile player.

In between play sessions, yes.

During one play session, no.

Explained above.

[GvG]

Won't be affected; a competitive guild will already have a large variety of player roles even if each player only has that one build available.

Oh really? Let me put it another way then. An otherwise non competitive guild will have become competitive because their members paid.

A competitive guild won't need pay2win mechanics, but non-competitive guilds will use the pay2win mechanics and achieve the status of the competitive guild, in this example, versatility.

@jetah said in Kickstarter Update - Pledge Packs:

spell gfx (different styles of a fireball)
spell shading gfx (offering green, blue, black, purple)

... could become p2w by Phaethonas's phobic definition because different effects will have consequences on visibility and player recognition

There is no need to put words into my mouth, I am quite open about my views, thank you very much.

@vastargian said in Kickstarter Update - Pledge Packs:

@phaethonas 2 character slots are plenty. One to run group, and one for solo. Then the ability to purchase more if wanted. I myself have bad ADD and had the max number of characters when I played WoW. I was constantly deleting weaker characters to make new ones that I wouldn't even fully develop...

Two characters are "plenty" for you and the way you want to play the game.

Some may want to have one demon, one bestie and one human. They won't be able to, unless they pay for one additional character slot. When the game revolves around the three different races, that lock you to a different gameplay, then three is the bare minimum.

@jetah said in VIP system : What do you think ?:

@phaethonas
we know subs use to work. now it's a tacked on "optional" item that usually doesn't offer much unless it's a paywall, see swtor. subs were abandoned because people wouldn't pay the monthly fee (i'd venture a guess those that paid the sub became adults with jobs and family, whose children start to play game). publishers found out they could have a higher revenue with a cash shop, see LoL. if subs worked then every game would be sub only.

Subscription games work. Period. If devs that want/ed to milk their players have abandonded the model, this has nothing to do with the fact that is a working model. Unlike the f2p model. There were a ton of good subscription games, there is only one f2p game that may be considered good; PoE.

Your explanation that people don't like sub games anymore is also false. Not only the most successful MMO (WoW) is sub2play, not only sub2play is making a come back (Camelot Unchained, Dual Universe, Ashes of Creation), which means that the people want that payment model, but more importantly the change took place not because the players wanted "free" games, but rather because f2p monetized games generate more revenue.

Yes, if you measure the "success" of a game by how much money it is making, then f2p is the best model. As a rule though, the f2p model creates circumstances that will make a game awful. E.g. most likely it will be pay2win.

Alternative business models (to pure sub2play and buy2play) have been tried and have failed miserably at creating a good game. The dev company and the publisher may be making a ton of money, but their game isn't good. SWTOR and BDO are two such examples.

Literally, the only exception is PoE and that (PoE being "good") is debatable for a number of reasons. I am not talking about pay2win here. PoE is not pay2win. But a good game? That is debatable.

GW2, the only other exception of a successful cosmetic cash shop, is buy2play and it was sub2play.

So, pure sub2play and pure buy2play are the only payment models that have really worked. Everything else has failed miserably.

@fibs said in VIP system : What do you think ?:

@phaethonas said in VIP system : What do you think ?:

With enough time played a player without VIP will always be behind an active VIP player.

Um, no, they won't. The non-boosted player will begin catching up once the boosted player hits the power ceiling (which is very low in Fractured) and then they will end up equal.

Here's a chart to help you visualize this:

First of all, you can't make a graph like that, because we don't know yet how faster the knowledge points are being gained with the VIP. As a matter of fact, we don't even know how fast knowledge points are being accumulated, under "normal" circumstances.

So, you making this graph is pure nonsense and misinformation. You just want to "impress" people with graphs, basically.

Furthermore, you lack knowledge of the knowledge system (pun unintended).

For example; Although the Talent points cap to 50, the Knowledge points do not and there is no 1:1 association between them.

Whereas in classic MMORPGs you gain a new Talent Point once in a while when leveling up, in Fractured you’re free to choose when to obtain one by spending a fixed amount of your Knowledge Points.

So, each talent point may require 10 knowledge points, or some talent points may require 2 knowledge points, others 4 and some others 10.

Furthermore, the knowledge points are being used for another reason as well.

So you finally have your ability Ready To Study. To start the learning process, all you need are:

A sufficient amount of Knowledge Points.
A blank tome of the appropriate School of Magic or Fighting.

So, to sum things up. Knowledge points are being used for; a) to be converted into talent points. Then these talent points are consumed and used in the talent tree. b) knowledge points are used at the learning procedure with which you unlock new abilities, as well.

Even if we assume that your graph was correct, it isn't, your graph takes into consideration only a) and not b).

So, do tell me again that the VIP will not be pay2win.

related source

@fibs said in Kickstarter Update - Pledge Packs:

@phaethonas said in Kickstarter Update - Pledge Packs:

[various complaints about VIP]

Knowledge Points are effectively experience points, but boosting XP gain is not pay to win, because in any game it does not increase the power ceiling, and in this one it doesn't increase power at all. Your character does not become "stronger" from gaining Knowledge Points, except for a short duration from the very start of the game when you don't have enough skills to fill out your build. Fractured is a game of lateral development, remember.

Learning Slots are merely how many skills you can train at a time. Again, increasing these is not pay to win because they do not increase the power ceiling and in this game they don't increase power at all.

You may get to the top faster with VIP, but it is the exact same top. You will not disproportionately "win" against a non-paying player whose character is as equal to yours as possible without VIP, ergo you are not paying to win, ergo it is not pay to win.

So, if the level cap is 50 and I reach it at day one, but instead you require 5 months to reach it, that is not pay2win to you?! OK!

Furthermore, unlike a hard cap (used in games like WoW and SWTOR), Fractured, for all intents and purposes, will not have a cap. In order to gain all these knowledge points you will need A LOT of time. And by the time 1-10% of the population is about to reach the cap? An expansion most likely will be delivered, offering more things to be learned, and as such the knowledge point cap will rise.

Regardless, there is a misconception about "pay2win". Pay2win, at MMOs, is not limited at who wins at a 1vs1. Pay2win at MMOs, means that a player or a group of players, gain(s) an advantage, over another player, or group, just because someone opened his wallet.

This is why the "minute" and "innocent", "non-p2w", items sold at BDO's cash shop, that were supposed to offer just "quality of life" to the players, ARE PAY2WIN.

So, a player with more knowledge points than me, is a more versatile player. He/she can assume more roles, can hybridize, can experiment, can make mistakes etc. I can't. At a 1vs1, this may not matter. But Fractured is not a game revolving around 1vs1, is it? It is an open world, sandbox game, with a player driven economy. These games revolve around groups, and huge groups at that. Groups that most of the times are above the guild level, at the level of alliances between guilds. At that context, the guild with more versatile players and with versatile players that are more versatile than others, will win in a GvG.

@jetah said in Kickstarter Update - Pledge Packs:

@specter said in Kickstarter Update - Pledge Packs:

2 character slots.

so 3 worlds and only 2 base character slots =/

Good point! Three slots should be the minimum

@jetah said in VIP system : What do you think ?:

@phaethonas

businesses will always take income from 1 source and divert to another. same way many employees take their sole job income to buy houses, cars, boats, games, PC, consoles, etc. GGG has released good content the past 5 years with their sole income from their cash shop (their crowdfunding aside).

gonna tag @Randy0Marsh for this part: problem with pure subscription is that only 1 game in the last 5 years has maintained that. all other games that wanted pure sub have switch to f2p with cash shop or hybrid.

i don't see a problem with a sole income from the cash shop. Look over the cosmetics PoE offers. look on the forums at the titles displayed and you'll see that people are purchasing those supporter packs. I even spent about $1k with them!

The problem with what you are suggesting is that there is only one game that has done the cosmetic cash shop right, PoE. Maybe add GW2 there as well, but a) it used to have a subscription, b) it is buy2play and not f2p and c) it is debatable if it has done the payment model right.

The good thing with the subscription is that we know that it works. And on top of that we know now that, f2p and b2p games are heavily more monetized than subscription games used to be. Even WoW, which uses a heavy subscription monetized paradigm (initial box price, subscription and box price at the expansions), is less monetized than most f2p/b2p MMOs (e.g. SWTOR, BDO etc). The fact that subscription was abandoned by companies that wanted to milk their customers, does not mean that subscription doesn't work. Subscription works. Period.

If you have a good game, the sub model won't affect your game. If you have a bad game, the sub model won't affect your game. f2p and b2p models can kill an otherwise good game. It is not 100% certain that they will, but there is high chance that they will. And "less monetized" the payment model at first glance (like f2p = 0%) the more monetized it is in reality, with "optional" items being sold at the cash shop, but which in reality are very much needed, otherwise you are left behind. Hence p2w.

That said, I will say once more, that for Fractured the pure buy2play model is the best. You buy for $30-60 the initial game and biyearly you buy for ~$30 the expansions. And that is the end of it. If the devs want to add a purely cosmetic cash shop, that is acceptable as well.

Things like, carptenter NPCs, wagons, mules and mounts purchased at the cash shop, "optional" VIP subscriptions and the like, are just things devised to milk the players.

@specter said in Kickstarter Update - Pledge Packs:

@miffi

Also, I havent looked through everyone elses answers, but ho many character slots will be given in the base game?

2 character slots.

I will agree that 2 character slots are not enough, but I wouldn't mind even 1, in order to make the character slots, sold at the cash shop, enticing, and ditch the VIP system.

@jetah said in VIP system : What do you think ?:

@benseine

@phaethonas said in VIP system : What do you think ?:

The best solutions are; a) sub2play, b) buy2play with additional expansions being buy2play as well. Additionally, have the cosmetic cash shop if you must. Don't try complex things which you will try to balance in multiple ways.

path of exile is free to play, doesn't have vip and still does great with their cash shop. they offer supporter packs that include portrait, various armor/weapon skins, portal skins and store currency. the higher packs provide all previous tier packs (similar to kickstarter) and additional goods like hoodies, t-shirts, maps, skill tree poster, etc. if you own any of the physical you get a store credit. this has been working great for GGG (developers of Path of Exile) for 5 years.

what I like about PoE's supporter packs is it doesn't affect gameplay at all! This is what i'd like for Fractured.

I tried PoE I didn't like it, because of the whole mouse control thing, an issue I may have to deal with Fractured as well. Maybe all that takes is some getting used to it, who knows.

In any case, I am not an expert at PoE, but from the little I can gather I'd say that their cash shop isn't p2w and I haven't seen anyone claiming otherwise. That doesn't mean though that every game's cosmetic cash shop will be as successful as PoE's. First of all PoE's cash shop apparently is very successful because it can keep the game afloat despite the game having no other revenue! Secondly, as I have said before, it is a little dangerous to have one content generating income (e.g. cosmetic cash shop) and the dev team to be mindful enough to use the said income for other content that does not generate income (e.g. pve raids and dungeons). Sure, PoE has done it (from what I can gather) but to your PoE I counter SWTOR. SWTOR (which I have played extensively) after a while was generating income from the cosmetic cash shop. The devs were producing new cosmetic cash shop items regularly, but pve content? Not so much, and by that I mean that they were generating below the absolute minimum. It wasn't zero, but it was <1.

As such, I would be very worried for a game that is f2p/b2p (once) and all its revenue would be generated by the cosmetic cash shop.

Can it be done? Apparently so, because there is the example of PoE. Is it certain that it will be done? No! Something possible is not a certainty.

It will be easier for everyone to go with either of the two options I presented;

1. Pure Subscription

2. Buy2play the basic game and buy2play every other major expansion, that will be coming biyearly or so. Even if we assume a price tag of $60, paying every two years $60 for the/a game you like isn't much. Even more so, assuming that the said price tag can be much lower. The GW2 expansions cost ~$30, Fractured is suggested that may have a similar price tag (according to the kickstarter pledges), and of course the cosmetic cash shop can be there to cover any additional expenses.

All things considered, I think that the latter model suits Fractured the best.

Other options are possible, some will lead to pay2win (like the one currently proposed with the optional VIP), others will not (see the PoE paradigm), but all in all, I personally think, that Fractured should have a strictly buy2play model.

@kralith said in VIP system : What do you think ?:

I don't see, where @Prometheus was decribing, how much an additional Learning Slot and more Knowledge gains will influence the game and the time you will save.
Maybe it is just a small plus, more like "You can save 5 minutes per day".
As long he not explained us, we can't say if its good or not or if it scratches on a p2w or not.

For me such small additions are okay, as long they not really count for the game.
We got in Salem Shopitems, per example a better baking table or a better planting pot.
In the case of Baking table, it had just some slots more than the ingame one, we talk about a difference between 8 and 12 slots for dough. It sounds much, buuut if you really had a need for producing dough, you was counting more in hundreds instead of tens. So one Table with 4 slots more did not count in the whole.
Same with Planting pot, they reduced the time for growing in a half, sounds much.... buuut to create a really effective output you needed hundreds of Planting pots. One shop planting pot not really counted at all.

So it is always up to the Devs, to balance the small additions you will get by a VIP, so that they don't have a huge advantage and never an advantage thats count as p2w.

A 50% increase/decrease is huge!

And sure, if you can buy only one "Table"/"Pot" from the cash shop, then the increase/decrease may (probably will) be mitigated by the fact that in order to have a meaningful output you need 10 "Tables"/"Pots". So, I will have 10x8 = 80 table slots and you will have 9x8+12= 84 table slots, which means that you have a 108.75% output aka +8.75%.

The problem though is that no-one stops you from buying more than 1 table/pot. In which case, your output will be solely dependent at your wallet. If the game has a player driven economy, then that means, pay2win.

The VIP membership though, won't work like the "Tables"/"Pots" . The "Table"/"Pots" are having a parallel effect, whereas the VIP will have a serial effect (see serial vs parallel). As such, if the output potential of one VIP membership is "5 minutes per day" then the pay2win potential is there, but is not much. Buying more VIPs will grant you more months of it (will be added serially) and will not give you 5 more minutes (which would be a parallel effect).

That though would defeat the purpose, don't you think?

Sure, I have voted for the fourth option (Without learning slot and knowledge pts gain) but let's be sincere shall we? The VIP needs to be enticing, if it isn't, it won't be bought. If it won't be bought, then the devs won't be making money they were hoping that they would, which will bring the game to a financial problem. This is why it is better to either; a) ditch VIP altogether or b) ditch the buy2play business model and convert to pure sub2play.

Anything else, will be more or less pay2win, will be less or more enticing, and this and that, and maybe, and.....

Keep things simple, people. Keep things simple.

The best solutions are; a) sub2play, b) buy2play with additional expansions being buy2play as well. Additionally, have the cosmetic cash shop if you must. Don't try complex things which you will try to balance in multiple ways.

@zwiterion said in VIP system : What do you think ?:

What we know : VIP membership includes bonuses such as additional Learning Slots, increased Knowledge Point gains, discounts on Store items and unique cosmetic rewards for accumulated VIP time. It's only time savers and cosmetic stuff - we're not selling power there!

Now some people think its p2w other dont.

It is not a matter of perspective. It is a matter of reality. Either something gives an advantage (in which case it is pay2win) or it does not.

The principal concern is probably the additional learning slot and the increased knowledge point gain. Depending on how it's done and how much of a boost it give it could either be a big advantage early game or just a slight time booster. I think that we should remember that in the end with enough time played a player without vip can still acquire the same lvl of power than a vip player.

With enough time played a player without VIP will always be behind an active VIP player. In order for the non-VIP player to catch up, you need the VIP player to be inactive, or if you want to be 100% accurate, the ratio "VIP's activity/non-VIP activity" to be a very small number, maybe even <1.

If the Vip system remain the same, a suggestion a could make to make it less pay to win would be to enable player to buy directly form the shop (not a trade with a player) the vip status with in-game currency. That way someone who want to go the easy way could use real money to buy it and a player who want the status and play a lot the game could still be vip without using real money.

What do you think about that ?

As far as I know this has never happened before. When sub tokens are offered to players for in-game currency, this is being done within player trading. In that case of course the system becomes more pay2win, if the game has a player driven economy, like Fractured has. Now, if something like what you describe does happen, it will "dilute" the pay2win potential of the VIP membership.

@finland said in VIP system : What do you think ?:

@zwiterion as I said many times:

The VIP sub could be fair if they remove those 2 things:

1. additional Learning Slots
2. increased Knowledge Point gains

OK people, nothing to see here! Please disperse quietly. It is just that Finland and I share for the first time an opinion. And that speaks volumes, doesn't it @Prometheus?

That said, personally, I wouldn't be against removing the VIP altogether, or ditch the b2p payment model and go full pay2play (subscription). After all, I am on the record saying that sub games are better than b2p games.

The point is, either way, to provide equal footing.

@kralith said in Will Fractured cost money?:

@phaethonas said in Will Fractured cost money?:

@nelchael said in Will Fractured cost money?:

According to new information from the Kickstarter announcement, there will be an optional 10€/month VIP sub.

I hope you are trolling

Why he should troll? You see the price in the Kickstarter News.

Also it should be still said, the VIP is not recommended to play the game.
You will be able to do all things without a VIP!

Yes, I noticed that, unfortunatelly, he/she is not trolling

@prometheus said in Kickstarter Update - Pledge Packs:

• VIP membership includes bonuses such as additional Learning Slots, increased Knowledge Point gains, discounts on Store items and unique cosmetic rewards for accumulated VIP time. It's only time savers and cosmetic stuff - we're not selling power there!

Excuse me, but what?????

How are you not selling power? Knowledge is power. Like, literally, for your game.

I am in favor of subscription, I am on the record on that, but not optional subscription, if it gives power. Sure, a VIP membership that gives discounts and unique cosmetic rewards, won't be p2w, as long as it won't be possible to be traded in-game.

And that brings the question; Will it be possible to be traded in-game for in-game items?

Is there anything missing

Yes, explanations as to what "VIP membership" is and what the "Carpenter NPC" does.

Speaking of, the "Carpenter NPC" needs to go as well.

Your game will have a player driven economy. This means that anything that will give a boost at quality of life (such as the carpenter), in exchange for real money, will be pay2win.

See it this way. I don't pay for the carpenter, and I will have to deal with the decay issue "normally". Whether this is doing a quest to recruit a carpenter, buy the carpenter with in-game gold, do the repairs myself, etc, etc. Regardless, I will have either less time to play other parts of the game, that will give me power (e.g. exploring and acquiring knowledge points), or I will have less in-game gold, which will mean that I will have to buy 1 axe and not 1 axe and 1 shield.

In the long term, mechanics/features like that, became pay2win, especially if these will be found at the cash shop as well. If they are limited to the kickstarter campaign, their pay2win potential will be minimized by the fact that they will be rare. It will be there though, don't fool yourselves.

And this becomes absolutely clear when you offer the "Lifetime free Carpenter NPC contract". For 375 euro, someone can just skip a mechanic/feature of the game, which is designed as time and in-game gold sink.

Similarly, the

Construction Plan for an exclusive “Founder Cottage”
Construction Plan for an exclusive “Founder Villa”
Construction Plan for an exclusive “Founder Palace”
Construction Plan for an exclusive “Founder Manor”
Construction Plan for an exclusive “Founder Castle”

These need an explanation as well. Generally, you offer things which you are not explaining what they are. We (forum lurkers) have questions about them, imagine people who will learn about your game now.

1 additional character slot

Explain people, explain. How many slots will we have for free? It is one thing to have 10 for free and quite another to have only 1. Also, will character slots be available at the cash shop?

1 set of Crafting Stations to be placed and used in your plot of land

cough pay2win cough

Your game will have a player driven economy. Depending how easy it is to make/acquire these crafting stations, this item can be turned into pay2win. Also it depends at how the crafting station works. For example, does the crafting station produce an item while "un-manned", or is it required to be "manned"? If the crafting station does not require to be manned in order to produce an item, then I can totally imagine a whale, buying 10 ARTISAN packs, paying 750 euro and getting 10 crafting stations! Voila, right from the beggining the whale will have a great advantage, at becoming rich(er). And as your game will have a player driven economy; rich = powerful. The rich (in-game) person will be able to buy gear with stats easier than the poor (in-game) person. If you link somehow fake money to real money, then you will also get; The rich(er) (real life) person will be able to buy gear with stats (advantage/power), easier than the poor(er) (real life) person. And that is the definition of pay2win.

1 Mule mount plus a Wagon to carry heavy materials

sigh

Your game will have a player driven economy, stop giving people things that will make them richer. You are gifting power for real money. That is called pay2win.

Do you think prices are fair? If not, how would you change them?

They are absolutely fair.

What pack would you be interested in?

I am not sure I am interested in the game anymore! I hate pay2win(ish) games.

Is there anything missing you’d like to see – or perhaps something you think is “too much”?

I am not seeing anything missing. I consider the pay2win elements "too much".

Do you think Foundation Points should be included as reward?

Yes, although they should not be given excessively. For example, they should range from 500 to 5000 (x2.5 of the ambassador weekly drawing) the most. Also, if someone buys three packs (one that gives 5k and two that give 1k), he/she should get only 5k points. Each person should be awarded once.

@nelchael said in Will Fractured cost money?:

According to new information from the Kickstarter announcement, there will be an optional 10€/month VIP sub.

I hope you are trolling