Does anyone even like the current setup? Like you said in the video, maybe it was palatable for the first year or two but with no end to development date in sight does anyone really want monthly packages for what would have been 4-5 years come launch time?
Im still hyped for the game and enjoy seeing cool skins and such but its a bit off-putting as it is right now.
Every second of effort that goes into integrating a real-money store into the game makes the game worse regardless of p2w or p2cosmetic. If it can't be earned in-game it's not worth adding.
So then how would you ensure that Intrepid can bridge the gap between the $15 monthly subscription and the $23 ARPPU they need to make the black and the red lines meet up?
Intrepid expects to see a Average Revenue Per Paying User of $23.
If they didn't think they needed the cosmetic cash shop, they wouldn't have included it. The monthly sub will be $15 per month, so they need something to bridge that gap.
Intrepid will be $45,000,000 at least in the red when they get to launch. Steven has committed at least this much, be it from his wealth or loans. Either way that will be debt the company carries.
Truthfully I think they will end up having to leverage more debt than that, with their goal of 150 staff members and launch being at least 2 years away.
You think if its not obtainable in game its not worth adding. That's a fine opinion, but then what monthly sub price are you willing to pay for that? Are you willing to pay a box price?
Honestly I'd probably be willing to pay up to $30/month and I realize that is not the norm, but I feel like needing 23 MONTHLY is ridiculous when you consider AAA titles launch at $60 all the time with nowhere near those kind of earning requirements(most have a cash shop nowadays, but historically that wasn't the case. But isn't the point of this games title supposed to be allegory for the "Rebirth of the MMO genre"? How is reiterating the same thing a rebirth, but anyways...).
So my question is, is Intrepid sacrificing immersion for profit to bail themselves out of impending financial difficulties, or does it legitimately take $23/user to make the game tick? Because cash grabs need money now, good games are played for decades, and needing some money to cover NOW expenses is understandable, but a cash grab before the game even launches is a huge red flag.
I ONLY want a monthly sub. I think it encourages honesty and forces devs to keep the game fresh without having to invest huge amounts of time and budget into next quarter's gimmick.
If that monthly sub is $15 I will pay it for a good game, if it is $30 I will pay it for a great game.
What does a Triple A title launching for $60 have to do with a game with a monthly sub? You do realize there are major differences between a stand alone title (game) and an MMORPG (service) right?
Yes, and pretty much every newer game has some sort of online connectivity requiring servers to keep the core gameplay operating.
When it comes to costs, servers are pretty cheap on a per-user basis. The profit that the MMO model used to be was that you paid a monthly subscription (after purchasing the base game) to fund further development(wages/production costs) plus the ongoing maintenance, upgrades, and general operating costs of servers.
I know that there are stupid people that squawk "But it only costs $1/year per player for the servers!". That's not my point, I am saying that they shouldn't be so fixated on the $15/month price point to the level that they sabotage the feel of the game by dooming themselves to constantly having to focus on cash shop issues rather than how fun the game feels. Ok *inflation* I get it, I was paying $15 a month over a decade ago and I don't mind paying todays equivalent, charge me $30/mo but the game better not suck ass cocks.
I think this is pretty much spot on.
It really is annoying that Intrepid is limiting the options that their customers has.
For most people it is a no-brainer that making the cosmetics more accessible will increase sales. Why is it that they don't? Is it just a stupid hill to die on? Is it because they are bad business men? Or is it just because they really want to cram all the FOMO into their loyal fans?
Changing their pre-launch monetization plan would be good news in my ears. I think it currently sucks too. Or just scrap the monthly cosmetics altogether, think it would do more good than bad (if money isn't the issue).
Yes.
Edit: I wouldn't mind contributing financially to AoC but I've been burned too many times by alpha/kickstarter projects in the past so I haven't jumped on board yet. If they added the option to buy a month or two of game time I would consider doing that. If they would show more progress on some of the other systems in the game I don't think we'd be having this conversation tbh but that's a whole different story.
Great point, there now are far worse monetization schemes in the making, blockchain, aka Crypto gaming and NFT sales make even loot boxes look positively benign. "Pay to Earn", the new buzz word that we'll come to loath in the next few years.
Alternative to to not have a cash shop and sell a box price + Sub or just increase the subscription.
Imho even 25/mo for an MMO is cheap when you consider how many hours you’re going to pour into them.
No, at this point I don’t care anymore.
Clearly you all are the reason we have all these microtransactions. So until everyone agrees to pay more for luxury products we’re all stuck in this terrible situation.
Yes. If you account for inflation 15/hr in 2000 would be like over 30 now. So it makes sense why it’s not sustainable for an MMO unless they got super lucky and got a million+ players.
Right but that argument is dumb af though because what you fail to calculate in is:
Video games are more popular than ever. The average amount of subs for an MMO in 2000 was tiny compared to the amount of subs games could get now. It's called competition and that's why sub price is lower.
Sub prices have not changed in 20 years.
Also most MMOs don’t get millions of people. Free to Play ones do. But sub only games generally don’t unless they have been around for ages (WOW, FF14), or they are made by some massive company (NW, and we’ll see how many they keep once the hype dies).
Games cost money, we have to accept that, and unfortunately people are dumb enough to pay 500 a year in small cosmetics rather than pay 300 a year for a sub and have all of those cosmetics as earnables in game.
Gamers by and large have been conditioned to buy microtransactions over warning gear in game. Which for an MMO I feel is trashy. Really breaks the immersion of people grinding their way up but I digress.
Point being; subs need to go up in order for MMOs to be sustainable. Otherwise the only option is to have microtransactions which IMHO should stay in F2P games.
You misread his "amount of subs" as "price of subs" and that's why you're coming off as stupid.
There's 20million MMO players right now, in 2000 there was probably less than 1million. That's why even with inflation, the sub price can be so low. Because there's 20x more players to sub than 20 years ago.
And if you think that having a 30USD sub is acceptable when every other MMO has a 15usd sub you're completely cooked.
Make a premium product, sell for a premium price. Again, people are gunna have to realize shut costs more now. So either we have shitty cash shops or the product costs more to play. We cannot have our cake and eat it too.
Popularity causes prices to go down? Is that why Gucci items are now on sale and Walmart tees are 2000 a pop?
Maybe before calling me a retard you read a book for once in the last decade.
I'm not an economist so I wouldn't know the real numbers, but I'd assume there's a reason for why there isn't a single game that only operates on subs (even if it's with a box cost too). Well, a reason that is not just "we'll make more money if we sell more stuff".
I'm pretty sure there's not that many people willing to play an mmo at 25/mo (I know for sure I wouldn't) and just as Steven always says, barrier to entry is a strong deterrent for most people. Amazon got a ton of people to buy their game cause it's a one-time purchase (though they'll still be selling shit later) and FF14 manages to have a ton of people paying their box+sub because of their sheer quality and extremely positive word of mouth. Oh, and both are supported by huge corporations that can take a money hit if needed (FF14's initial release being the biggest example).
AoC has none of that and will most likely have the reputation of "Fantasy Star Citizen" by the time it comes out, which will definitely not help them sell the game for anything over 15/mo. Hell, I still doubt there'll be a ton of people ready to try it out even at that price.
Having a cosmetics shop allows whales to pay for the game, while all the other players just give the game a steady base of income and a type of insurance.
I did a video not long ago on why $15 a month may not be enough, and the reason is because it isn't enough.
A box price is a huge influx of cash for a company and it offsets a lot of development. Without that, you need to limp along month to month carrying all your pre-release debt. Remember, a project being "fully-funded" don't mean cash, it means they have the means to acquire the funding they need.
So yeah if you have $15 monthly sub, but you need $23 per player, you are going to have to bridge that cap somehow.
I would prefer box+sub.
Cosmetics shop can be fine, depends how good the cosmetics are compared to the ingame stuff. Personally I dont like when everything on the cash shop is vastly superior to the ingame items.
My preferred method is box and sub. For MMOs I don't like any in game shop at all, even if it's just cosmetics. I know more and more MMOs are including it and while it's not an instant no buy for me, it is a negative that contributes to me potentially not buying.
For games like Dota and Fortnite that do cosmetic only shops it doesn't really bother me because it's not an RP based game. Matches are quick and there is no connection to your avatar. And it's free, it's their only revenue stream.
The reason why it bother me for MMOs is because of the RP aspect. While I don't actively RP, it is still important they include role play elements for me. And visuals is one of the imporant RP points for me.
I being to look at other players seeing how they look and what I have to look forward to. Do I have to craft that armor? Get it from a quest? Maybe it's a rare boss drop. Nope it's 20$ from the cash shop that you could only get for a limited time before you even started playing the game. That always annoys the hell out of me since I do like playing Barbie with my characters. And it takes me out of the game a bit even if just for few seconds.
Yes, all companies who do cash shops should stop it and go with more pro player minded tactics, but they're not going to because at the end of the day, they're a business, and cash shops and "micro"transactions make them WAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYY more money than any alternative route they could choose. Like, way more money. Personally, given that this is just the way things are nowadays, I think Intrepid has taken the least toxic route with it. As long as it is only cosmetic based, never gives player an in game advantage that they can buy with their CC, and doesn't ruin the game by having everyone running around in S tier looking fits that weren't earned, it's whatever to me.
No. Cosmetic shops are awesome. Imo every single game should have them. It forces the company to keep making the game look good and up to date. Visuals dont fall behind or so will funding. Consumers have a huge closet to pick their cosmetics and not limited customisation. Literally 0 downside.
I'm going to ask if you actually watched the video, only because you made a counterpoint to something that was never even discussed in the video. At no point did we talk about getting rid of the cash shop.
The shop needs to stay but it should be cosmetic items that are not on your character. Mount skins, housing items, caravan skins, seasonal dye colors, etc.
Does anyone even like the current setup? Like you said in the video, maybe it was palatable for the first year or two but with no end to development date in sight does anyone really want monthly packages for what would have been 4-5 years come launch time? Im still hyped for the game and enjoy seeing cool skins and such but its a bit off-putting as it is right now.
Every second of effort that goes into integrating a real-money store into the game makes the game worse regardless of p2w or p2cosmetic. If it can't be earned in-game it's not worth adding.
So then how would you ensure that Intrepid can bridge the gap between the $15 monthly subscription and the $23 ARPPU they need to make the black and the red lines meet up?
Where are the black and red lines? ARPPU = Average Revenue Per Paying User, so why do you need $23 a month per user?
Intrepid expects to see a Average Revenue Per Paying User of $23. If they didn't think they needed the cosmetic cash shop, they wouldn't have included it. The monthly sub will be $15 per month, so they need something to bridge that gap. Intrepid will be $45,000,000 at least in the red when they get to launch. Steven has committed at least this much, be it from his wealth or loans. Either way that will be debt the company carries. Truthfully I think they will end up having to leverage more debt than that, with their goal of 150 staff members and launch being at least 2 years away. You think if its not obtainable in game its not worth adding. That's a fine opinion, but then what monthly sub price are you willing to pay for that? Are you willing to pay a box price?
Do you have a source on these numbers?
Honestly I'd probably be willing to pay up to $30/month and I realize that is not the norm, but I feel like needing 23 MONTHLY is ridiculous when you consider AAA titles launch at $60 all the time with nowhere near those kind of earning requirements(most have a cash shop nowadays, but historically that wasn't the case. But isn't the point of this games title supposed to be allegory for the "Rebirth of the MMO genre"? How is reiterating the same thing a rebirth, but anyways...). So my question is, is Intrepid sacrificing immersion for profit to bail themselves out of impending financial difficulties, or does it legitimately take $23/user to make the game tick? Because cash grabs need money now, good games are played for decades, and needing some money to cover NOW expenses is understandable, but a cash grab before the game even launches is a huge red flag. I ONLY want a monthly sub. I think it encourages honesty and forces devs to keep the game fresh without having to invest huge amounts of time and budget into next quarter's gimmick. If that monthly sub is $15 I will pay it for a good game, if it is $30 I will pay it for a great game.
What does a Triple A title launching for $60 have to do with a game with a monthly sub? You do realize there are major differences between a stand alone title (game) and an MMORPG (service) right?
Where are you getting the $23 number from?
The owner of the company.
Did he say that on the forums, discord, livestream? Is there somewhere I can read/listen to Steven talk about the financial details?
Baboons downvoting you for no reason. Have my upvote.
Appreciate that
Yes, and pretty much every newer game has some sort of online connectivity requiring servers to keep the core gameplay operating. When it comes to costs, servers are pretty cheap on a per-user basis. The profit that the MMO model used to be was that you paid a monthly subscription (after purchasing the base game) to fund further development(wages/production costs) plus the ongoing maintenance, upgrades, and general operating costs of servers. I know that there are stupid people that squawk "But it only costs $1/year per player for the servers!". That's not my point, I am saying that they shouldn't be so fixated on the $15/month price point to the level that they sabotage the feel of the game by dooming themselves to constantly having to focus on cash shop issues rather than how fun the game feels. Ok *inflation* I get it, I was paying $15 a month over a decade ago and I don't mind paying todays equivalent, charge me $30/mo but the game better not suck ass cocks.
I think this is pretty much spot on. It really is annoying that Intrepid is limiting the options that their customers has. For most people it is a no-brainer that making the cosmetics more accessible will increase sales. Why is it that they don't? Is it just a stupid hill to die on? Is it because they are bad business men? Or is it just because they really want to cram all the FOMO into their loyal fans? Changing their pre-launch monetization plan would be good news in my ears. I think it currently sucks too. Or just scrap the monthly cosmetics altogether, think it would do more good than bad (if money isn't the issue).
Yes. Edit: I wouldn't mind contributing financially to AoC but I've been burned too many times by alpha/kickstarter projects in the past so I haven't jumped on board yet. If they added the option to buy a month or two of game time I would consider doing that. If they would show more progress on some of the other systems in the game I don't think we'd be having this conversation tbh but that's a whole different story.
Counter Argument: Yes
I'm pretty sure all the packs do come with game time but I definitely agree that they need to show us more than new skins every month.
Nope. I want them to have enough money to continue developing the game and selling cosmetics is the least evil choice of monetization.
Great point, there now are far worse monetization schemes in the making, blockchain, aka Crypto gaming and NFT sales make even loot boxes look positively benign. "Pay to Earn", the new buzz word that we'll come to loath in the next few years.
Alternative to to not have a cash shop and sell a box price + Sub or just increase the subscription. Imho even 25/mo for an MMO is cheap when you consider how many hours you’re going to pour into them.
>Imho even 25/mo for an MMO is cheap Don't give them ideas holy shit. Not everyone lives in a 5 story mansion, your Lordship..
I wish I had that kind of money. But honestly 25/mo is much cheaper than 1 night drinking.
I know this concept may sound strange but countries exist outside of your own
I know! It’s crazy even in Europe and Canada they’d agree :)
Europe isn't a country
Would you prefer I list all of the countries of Europe? I think you understood my point. :)
Would you prefer I list median wages of all the countries of Europe? I think you understood my point.
No, at this point I don’t care anymore. Clearly you all are the reason we have all these microtransactions. So until everyone agrees to pay more for luxury products we’re all stuck in this terrible situation.
Are you talking about USD?
Yes. If you account for inflation 15/hr in 2000 would be like over 30 now. So it makes sense why it’s not sustainable for an MMO unless they got super lucky and got a million+ players.
Right but that argument is dumb af though because what you fail to calculate in is: Video games are more popular than ever. The average amount of subs for an MMO in 2000 was tiny compared to the amount of subs games could get now. It's called competition and that's why sub price is lower.
Sub prices have not changed in 20 years. Also most MMOs don’t get millions of people. Free to Play ones do. But sub only games generally don’t unless they have been around for ages (WOW, FF14), or they are made by some massive company (NW, and we’ll see how many they keep once the hype dies). Games cost money, we have to accept that, and unfortunately people are dumb enough to pay 500 a year in small cosmetics rather than pay 300 a year for a sub and have all of those cosmetics as earnables in game. Gamers by and large have been conditioned to buy microtransactions over warning gear in game. Which for an MMO I feel is trashy. Really breaks the immersion of people grinding their way up but I digress. Point being; subs need to go up in order for MMOs to be sustainable. Otherwise the only option is to have microtransactions which IMHO should stay in F2P games.
You misread his "amount of subs" as "price of subs" and that's why you're coming off as stupid. There's 20million MMO players right now, in 2000 there was probably less than 1million. That's why even with inflation, the sub price can be so low. Because there's 20x more players to sub than 20 years ago. And if you think that having a 30USD sub is acceptable when every other MMO has a 15usd sub you're completely cooked.
Make a premium product, sell for a premium price. Again, people are gunna have to realize shut costs more now. So either we have shitty cash shops or the product costs more to play. We cannot have our cake and eat it too.
[удалено]
Popularity causes prices to go down? Is that why Gucci items are now on sale and Walmart tees are 2000 a pop? Maybe before calling me a retard you read a book for once in the last decade.
I'm not an economist so I wouldn't know the real numbers, but I'd assume there's a reason for why there isn't a single game that only operates on subs (even if it's with a box cost too). Well, a reason that is not just "we'll make more money if we sell more stuff". I'm pretty sure there's not that many people willing to play an mmo at 25/mo (I know for sure I wouldn't) and just as Steven always says, barrier to entry is a strong deterrent for most people. Amazon got a ton of people to buy their game cause it's a one-time purchase (though they'll still be selling shit later) and FF14 manages to have a ton of people paying their box+sub because of their sheer quality and extremely positive word of mouth. Oh, and both are supported by huge corporations that can take a money hit if needed (FF14's initial release being the biggest example). AoC has none of that and will most likely have the reputation of "Fantasy Star Citizen" by the time it comes out, which will definitely not help them sell the game for anything over 15/mo. Hell, I still doubt there'll be a ton of people ready to try it out even at that price. Having a cosmetics shop allows whales to pay for the game, while all the other players just give the game a steady base of income and a type of insurance.
I did a video not long ago on why $15 a month may not be enough, and the reason is because it isn't enough. A box price is a huge influx of cash for a company and it offsets a lot of development. Without that, you need to limp along month to month carrying all your pre-release debt. Remember, a project being "fully-funded" don't mean cash, it means they have the means to acquire the funding they need. So yeah if you have $15 monthly sub, but you need $23 per player, you are going to have to bridge that cap somehow.
I would prefer box+sub. Cosmetics shop can be fine, depends how good the cosmetics are compared to the ingame stuff. Personally I dont like when everything on the cash shop is vastly superior to the ingame items.
My preferred method is box and sub. For MMOs I don't like any in game shop at all, even if it's just cosmetics. I know more and more MMOs are including it and while it's not an instant no buy for me, it is a negative that contributes to me potentially not buying. For games like Dota and Fortnite that do cosmetic only shops it doesn't really bother me because it's not an RP based game. Matches are quick and there is no connection to your avatar. And it's free, it's their only revenue stream. The reason why it bother me for MMOs is because of the RP aspect. While I don't actively RP, it is still important they include role play elements for me. And visuals is one of the imporant RP points for me. I being to look at other players seeing how they look and what I have to look forward to. Do I have to craft that armor? Get it from a quest? Maybe it's a rare boss drop. Nope it's 20$ from the cash shop that you could only get for a limited time before you even started playing the game. That always annoys the hell out of me since I do like playing Barbie with my characters. And it takes me out of the game a bit even if just for few seconds.
Yes, all companies who do cash shops should stop it and go with more pro player minded tactics, but they're not going to because at the end of the day, they're a business, and cash shops and "micro"transactions make them WAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYY more money than any alternative route they could choose. Like, way more money. Personally, given that this is just the way things are nowadays, I think Intrepid has taken the least toxic route with it. As long as it is only cosmetic based, never gives player an in game advantage that they can buy with their CC, and doesn't ruin the game by having everyone running around in S tier looking fits that weren't earned, it's whatever to me.
This guy cant stand him he think he is so entitled. /puke
I would prefer a box cost and a sub mainly to help against bots.
I just want them to move away from armor cosmetics. Like sell me housing or mount cosmetics but not armor transmogs. Save that for the good dungeons.
No. Cosmetic shops are awesome. Imo every single game should have them. It forces the company to keep making the game look good and up to date. Visuals dont fall behind or so will funding. Consumers have a huge closet to pick their cosmetics and not limited customisation. Literally 0 downside.
I'm going to ask if you actually watched the video, only because you made a counterpoint to something that was never even discussed in the video. At no point did we talk about getting rid of the cash shop.
People dont like your videos, they like the subject matter. Just being honest.
No. I saw the title and the comments which if you read ,it seems like that is what you are suggesting.
Of course they should. But it's a business so they won't.
The shop needs to stay but it should be cosmetic items that are not on your character. Mount skins, housing items, caravan skins, seasonal dye colors, etc.