Cash Shop, Micro-transactions etc.

[Tennessee88]

What I really wish would happen is that we could have Captains on our Quarterdecks and customize the uniform (within historical reason). 

[Long Beard]

What I really wish would happen is that we could have Captains on our Quarterdecks and customize the uniform (within historical reason). 

 

That would indeed be excellent. I love that in Assassins Creed Black Flag, that you see yourself and your fully animated crew even in its equivalent of open world,

 

I would argue that niche games such as this one, no matter how polished and content filled, will almost always benefit from another source of revenue. NA is most certainly a niche game, almost exceptionally so. And while I might think to donate every now and then, the amount of cache I would spend on pennants, figureheads, ship skins, premium ships, etc. would be in a far greater amount and would certainly encourage a more steady stream of capital for further development. 

 

Yep, same here. Donations are one thing, but not really the same as getting a little something for your cash.

[Hyperion74]

I want a bumper sticker on the transom that says...WE BRAKE FOR NO ONE

[Stix]

Take my money please!

[horrid]

Hello. New player loving what it is so far.

Saw this post and had to weigh in here. Like many of you I have played nearly every mmo out there. I have see the transition from the monthly sub being dominate to the cash shop being more so today.

I would tend to agree adding decals to a shop in order to support the devs but this game cannot have premium ships of any kind due to the fact of losing a ship and that drives a player driven mmo economy like na has.

If you allow premium ships even with the same attributes but prettier as someone mentioned what do they do when they use up the 5 durability? Certainly the person buying the premium ship would expect not losing the ability to use the ship again. They used real money for it. However you cannot just let them click it again in the cash shop to start durability loss over. That would allow for that player to circumvent a primary economy driven aspect of this game which is player loss.

Now I'm not sure if that story makes sense or not I hole it does because that idea has ruined many mmos out there with a player driven economy but allowed whales to circumvent the player loss part.

That to me is p2w in its purest.

Just my 2 cents.

[rapier7]

Pay to win is a mobile game scourge that I never want to see infest a real desktop game, but I don't think there would be anything wrong with purchasing "commissions" (rank) or existing ships. All of this is achievable in game if you play long enough and it would be good for the casual, older gamer who has more money to burn but a lot less time to play. For "fairness" purposes, I'd limit both the ranks and ships available for purchase.

 

For example, a casual gamer (and history buff) will probably never get to sail a fully crewed Constitution, but if he's willing to burn (hypothetical prices) 40 dollars on a Flag Captain's commission and 10 bucks on an exceptional Constitution, he can have it right now.

[horrid]

I do see what you are saying there and agree about pay to win being a scourge.  However I don't agree with the assessment of purchasing "commissions" or existing ships. That is pay to win honestly in its purest form.

 

How so? In a game like NA that is going to rely on a player driven economy to keep players interested in the long run, you allow "whales", the old causal gamer history buff you speak of, to again circumvent the greatest most important aspect of this game and that is Player Loss tied to the player driven economy. With out this game turns into another cash shop pay to win cesspool.

 

"O I just lost my last durability on my Conny <or whatever ship>. No worries I bought it from the cash shop, it has free dura I don't have to put gold down on the player driven economy to get "back into the game".

 

See where im going with this?

[Long Beard]

For example, a casual gamer (and history buff) will probably never get to sail a fully crewed Constitution, but if he's willing to burn (hypothetical prices) 40 dollars on a Flag Captain's commission and 10 bucks on an exceptional Constitution, he can have it right now.

 

Which is really a giant slap in the face to everyone who's invested the time.  OFC the credit card warrior will not be nearly as skilled, but still, if you could just buy ranks and ships, the majority would probably do it.

[Sea Nettle]

This has nothing at all to do with caring about the game or the devs. Purely a push to have money as a carrot and stick over the devs heads as they have made it clear they are not in this for money and they aren't catering to select ideas. When you can't claim your idea will bring money or ruin you have no power at all over the devs. Good on them for being keen enough to not let the vocals determine the direction of the game.

 

If you want to donate then do so, don't ask for anything in return for your money if your generosity doesn't have manipulation behind it.

 

To the OP, it's not your concern to be honest but as obvious the 40 dollar price tag they have on each copy. This isn't a free to play shit game. It comes at a premium price in alpha and quite frankly this post is a troll.

 

It's a troll because you are suggesting people who paid 40 dollars for their copy should now be told to spend more. That's borderline fraud in the United States. Especially considering there was no mention of additional costs on the purchase page. It's called bait and switch. We buy the game for 40 dollars, then the game is changed to become a micro-transaction or pay-wall system.

 

If that is the end goal, whether these posts are shill posts or manipulative people trying to build a forum rep, then I want a refund. I'm starting to question it seriously as the term trolling is thrown around quite readily yet an obvious troll as this is never touched.

Edited March 15, 2016 by Sea Nettle

[Ruthless4u]

At some point it becomes about money in some shape or form. At the end of the day it comes down to leaving the lights on, unless the devs are filthy rich then putting food on your families table, roof over their heads and clothes on their back will matter at some point.

[Sea Nettle]

At some point it becomes about money in some shape or form. At the end of the day it comes down to leaving the lights on, unless the devs are filthy rich then putting food on your families table, roof over their heads and clothes on their back will matter at some point.

 

It was about money when they collected 40 dollars a pop. And in the future they'll collect 40 more or whatever the price may be at the time. This isn't a f2p game nor can you be certain the devs need the cash. Some people are wealthy and do things out of hobby.

Edited March 15, 2016 by Sea Nettle

[Ruthless4u]

It was about money when they collected 40 dollars a pop. And in the future they'll collect 40 more or whatever the price may be at the time. This isn't a f2p game nor can you be certain the devs need the cash. Some people are wealthy and do things out of hobby.

Hence why I said unless they are filthy rich.

[Vaz]

Guys remember this:

 

First of all we would like all to switch the mental model and change the angle. Premium ships is the way to make the game faster and support the developer.  

Premium ships will fund 3d modeling and new features.

If you personally just want to buy the game for the lowest possible price its fine. But there are a lot of people who want to donate and reward us for doing a beautiful game and premium ships and their life time insurance is our gift for their support. 

 

answering your question

Exceptional crafted ships will be better - sometimes a lot better performance wise

Premium ships will always be beautiful

 

 

It's from: http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/4668-open-world-prototype-rules-of-engagement-ship-loss-and-spawning/

 

Sure premium ships might hurt the player driven economy a bit, remember though that the premium ships will not be as good as most of the player crafted ships will eventually end up being once the race for blueprints is over, and crafters make ships depending on demand.

Edited March 16, 2016 by Vaz

[Long Beard]

This has nothing at all to do with caring about the game or the devs. Purely a push to have money as a carrot and stick over the devs heads as they have made it clear they are not in this for money and they aren't catering to select ideas. When you can't claim your idea will bring money or ruin you have no power at all over the devs. Good on them for being keen enough to not let the vocals determine the direction of the game.

 

If you want to donate then do so, don't ask for anything in return for your money if your generosity doesn't have manipulation behind it.

 

To the OP, it's not your concern to be honest but as obvious the 40 dollar price tag they have on each copy. This isn't a free to play shit game. It comes at a premium price in alpha and quite frankly this post is a troll.

 

It's a troll because you are suggesting people who paid 40 dollars for their copy should now be told to spend more. That's borderline fraud in the United States. Especially considering there was no mention of additional costs on the purchase page. It's called bait and switch. We buy the game for 40 dollars, then the game is changed to become a micro-transaction or pay-wall system.

 

If that is the end goal, whether these posts are shill posts or manipulative people trying to build a forum rep, then I want a refund. I'm starting to question it seriously as the term trolling is thrown around quite readily yet an obvious troll as this is never touched.

Wow easy there tiger. Go re-read my post and put the claws away. What's with all the forum rep and tolling accusations?

Firstly, and I'm not sure how you pulled this from my post, but I'm not suggesting anyone should pay for anything, I was asking, quite legitimately if there was any past info on whether a cash shop was likely or not.

I'm interested to know if there will be cosmetic things added to the game that we can buy for RL money or not. I stand by my statement that I have no problems buying cosmetic items if I feel my money is being put to good use.  The very purpose of a cash shop is to generate revenue, there's simply no other reason for them to exist.  If the devs are so rich that they have no interested or need for further development revenue, then so be it, THAT is not my concern, in fact, to be more specific, I have NO concern, rather an interest in whether customization will be something we buy, or something included for free. Either way, I don't care, but I would love to see some customisation and if that means providing needed revenue for future development, then I'm happy with that.

Incidentally, you pay $40 for early access. The pricing format / strategy upon release could very well change as it has in many other early access games. To quote steams early access statement

 

 

 

Pricing of individual games may change over time

Some developers will start by offering a discount for buying early while others will charge a premium, depending on their goals and the level of commitment and feedback they desire from Early Access customers.

So untie your knickers matey. They seem to be unnecessarily in a twist.

 

[sacapus]

Items I would buy;

 

Customized Flags

Customized Crew Uniforms

Customized Sails

Unique Ship (Skin) - Based on stock ship abilities (No additional strength, speed or module slot than the ships already present in game). I'll loved to sail the Bounty as a Trader, it can be based on the Trader Cutter attribute.

[Sea Nettle]

Wow easy there tiger. Go re-read my post and put the claws away. What's with all the forum rep and tolling accusations?

Firstly, and I'm not sure how you pulled this from my post, but I'm not suggesting anyone should pay for anything, I was asking, quite legitimately if there was any past info on whether a cash shop was likely or not.

I'm interested to know if there will be cosmetic things added to the game that we can buy for RL money or not. I stand by my statement that I have no problems buying cosmetic items if I feel my money is being put to good use.  The very purpose of a cash shop is to generate revenue, there's simply no other reason for them to exist.  If the devs are so rich that they have no interested or need for further development revenue, then so be it, THAT is not my concern, in fact, to be more specific, I have NO concern, rather an interest in whether customization will be something we buy, or something included for free. Either way, I don't care, but I would love to see some customisation and if that means providing needed revenue for future development, then I'm happy with that.

Incidentally, you pay $40 for early access. The pricing format / strategy upon release could very well change as it has in many other early access games. To quote steams early access statement

 

So untie your knickers matey. They seem to be unnecessarily in a twist.

 

No, sorry, pricing changes do not include selling one a license to the game then after accepting the money restricting access to that license through a paywall system. Nice try twisting that.

 

Price changes mean what is sold for 40 could be 20 later or reverse.

 

Those are Steam policies. And the company will follow the policies or won't be selling on Steam. They aren't going to get away with scamming Steams customers.

 

Steams customers have hundreds of game purchases in their library one game company brings what? A few dollars per sale. Try it and watch what happens.

 

There is a very big reason if your game requires a subscription or has in game purchases its to be posted on the store information.

 

This whole early access rhetoric that keeps being regurgitated as a catchall excuse to be able to do whatever they see fit is absolute bunk.

Edited March 19, 2016 by Sea Nettle

[Long Beard]

No idea on where you're getting these 'facts' but I've read the steam early access guidelines in detail and nowhere does it state a developer can't change it's pricing structure on release, nor does it state they cannot add micro-transactions. In fact I know of a few early access games that added a cash shop after release. The 1st point is irrelevant because no one is discussing changing pricing structure. We're talking about adding items above and beyond the initial base price in the future.

When you buy an early access game you're buying the base game. Post release DLC, future content, and micro transactions are not included. The developer may decide to include these for free, but they absolutely don't have to, and many don't.

I'll give you just one example that I can think of. Elite dangerous. Early access, £49.99. The Horizon's expansion that came out post release was not available to early access participants and cost an additional £49.99

Finally, in case you're in any doubt, I'm not trying to 'twist' anything.
 

[Sea Nettle]

Selling an expansion pack is not the same as altering the base license content to be locked behind a micro-transaction. That's called fraud. Just the same as they can not sell you a license to the game this month for 40 dollars then after you purchase it require you to pay 40 dollars every month for its continual use without having informed you before the purchase. But by all means keep asserting rhetoric that the devs have unlimited discretion to take money now and then demand more for the same later. You'll see how fast you rack up thousands of negative reviews and the game goes on the poo-list.

 

That's the beautiful thing about Steam. When you piss off the player base they have a direct means of letting every single one of your customers know precisely how they were treated in depth and with links to everything one needs. Believe me, i'm saving copies of these threads shilling for additional costs to be added without prior notice and will include them should I ever need to.

 

Selling someone a game for a premium cost and then changing the game to require more purchases to be competitive is fraud at its heart but also big ole' FU to the players who supported the game financially. No one is arguing against cosmetics to support the devs and such. But we are arguing against selling a competitive advantage after baiting people in with a flat purchase price. There will be consequences should it occur.

Edited March 19, 2016 by Sea Nettle

[Long Beard]

Selling an expansion pack is not the same as altering the base license content to be locked behind a micro-transaction. That's called fraud. Just the same as they can not sell you a license to the game this month for 40 dollars then after you purchase it require you to pay 40 dollars every month for its continual use without having informed you before the purchase. But by all means keep asserting rhetoric that the devs have unlimited discretion to take money now and then demand more for the same later. You'll see how fast you rack up thousands of negative reviews and the game goes on the poo-list.

Sorry matey you seem to be arguing with yourself about something completely different to what everyone else is talking about in here.

No one has said anything about devs charging a price for early access, then making early access players pay an additional fee for the SAME game.

Before replying to a thread in anger and throwing trolling and forum rep accusations around, take some time to process the actual content of the thread. This thread is CLEARLY about paying for 'EXTRA' items in 'ADDITION' to the base game.

 

Since you're fighting your own mini battle here, I'll respectfully bow out and let you try and win it. Good luck.

[Sea Nettle]

Sorry matey you seem to be arguing with yourself about something completely different to what everyone else is talking about in here.

No one has said anything about devs charging a price for early access, then making early access players pay an additional fee for the SAME game.

Before replying to a thread in anger and throwing trolling and forum rep accusations around, take some time to process the actual content of the thread. This thread is CLEARLY about paying for 'EXTRA' items in 'ADDITION' to the base game.

 

Since you're fighting your own mini battle here, I'll respectfully bow out and let you try and win it. Good luck.

 

Selling someone a game for a premium cost and then changing the game to require more purchases to be competitive is fraud at its heart but also big ole' FU to the players who supported the game financially. No one is arguing against cosmetics to support the devs and such. But we are arguing against selling a competitive advantage after baiting people in with a flat purchase price. There will be consequences should it occur.

[Long Beard]

Well firstly, I disagree with you with the fraud part. Plenty games have later gone on to introduce a cash shop that sell 'Pay to Win' items. It's not fraud because players still have the choice as to whether to buy the items or not. Unethical maybe but not fraud. I'm not really interested in discussing this because that's not what this thread was about.

 

Now on to your other point. If you take the time to read through my replies in this thread you'll see I've specifically said that I don't support paying for items that give a competitive advantage. In fact I even went on to reference a game I loved, that I stopped playing in protest because it was exclusively pay to win.

 

There's at least one person who said they did support Pay to Win, so why you singled me out for your badly aimed flame thrower is beyond me. 

Seriously matey, I've no desire to discuss this further with you. You've jumped in aggressively on a thread you clearly only half read. It seems in the end, by your last post you agree with me. Nothing more to say here.

[Justme]

Selling someone a game for a premium cost and then changing the game to require more purchases to be competitive is fraud at its heart but also big ole' FU to the players who supported the game financially. No one is arguing against cosmetics to support the devs and such. But we are arguing against selling a competitive advantage after baiting people in with a flat purchase price. There will be consequences should it occur.

You must really hate COD then.

[Captain]

Selling someone a game for a premium cost and then changing the game to require more purchases to be competitive is fraud at its heart but also big ole' FU to the players who supported the game financially. No one is arguing against cosmetics to support the devs and such. But we are arguing against selling a competitive advantage after baiting people in with a flat purchase price. There will be consequences should it occur.

 

and those consequences will be a whole sea of salt water, like to the ocean, but originating only from the eyes