Micro transactions? Love it? Hate it?

[cazador]

In game items at the EA Store

Drop the subscription to like 4.99 a month and add in micro transactions for pretty much everything minus a few items..hell even make it FTP with restrictions (All SA Content,Housing,Certain Dungeons)

Why do I have to farm and grind non stop to get an item?
..well now that may sound selfish or downright lazy but what's the difference between me spending 9.99 at the EA store for a slither, or buying it at a third party site, or hell even buying gold for a parsley .20-.25 cents a mil and buying it..no matter which way you look at things, this game has ways to buy things for RL money. So WHYYY is EA not capitalizing on the MILLIONS they have lost on income over the past 8-9 years??? Put the "dupers, scripters, or whoever out of buisness..lets clean it up! And at the same time make some damn money to pour back into the game!

Crowd source/fund don't be frickin idiots!

You have a vocal community here who is more the likely willing to shell out cash to get "revamps,updates,new content"

It would not be hard to put an ad up on kickstarter that says
Goal: $200,000
Dungeon revamp (wherever)
New artifacts
With a tier system to give people bonuses on donating..

See it's win/win you see how much of the community wants it and if you reach your goal you throw some money at a few new programmers to work on a temp basis to create what you advertise..or you scrap the idea and lose very little

You spend 0$ for the most part and you satisfy "YOUR PAYING CUSTOMERS"

..or keep running things how they are and watch the population slowly dwindle till it's too late..either way whatever

 

[weins201]

we KNOW FTP is off the table so cen we just remove this post as it is a pathetic waste of mental resources, and a horse that has been keicked punched punded scratches rolled to death.

 

[Ron Silverbeard]

Its boring!
Back playing...

 

[Uvtha]

In theory, and occasional execution, love um. In general practice hate um.

No pay to win though. That's bad use of RMT, and basically spoils the game.

Cool looks, or privileges or whatever, but people need to be on even ground when it comes to the actual content.

 

[cdavbar]

Why do I have to farm and grind non stop to get an item?
..well now that may sound selfish or downright lazy but what's the difference between me spending 9.99 at the EA store for a slither, or buying it at a third party site,

Yes, lets sell Slithers for 9.99 ARE YOU &%^$*&# NUTS? Lets DEVALUE the hard work of those that do spend hours trying to get these items in game and make our hard work pointless just becuase your lazy and want to buy every damn item cheaper then the ill advised RMT sites, BTW, RMT sites sell it for 69.99, at least they have brains enough not to underprice it so bad to underct/value the work of honest players.

 

[cazador]

Yes, lets sell Slithers for 9.99 ARE YOU &%^$*&# NUTS? Lets DEVALUE the hard work of those that do spend hours trying to get these items in game and make our hard work pointless just becuase your lazy and want to buy every damn item cheaper then the ill advised RMT sites, BTW, RMT sites sell it for 69.99, at least they have brains enough not to underprice it so bad to underct/value the work of honest players.

I wasn't being literal with pricing by any means..I was using it as a hypothetical point ..my god you people amaze me sometimes

It doesn't matter it EA sold it for..$9.99-$99.99 the point is simply to take the RMT away, or atleast Hurt them

And btw they could care less about undercutting honest players it's about price ranging to where they think people will buy it..

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

I have no problem with aesthetic/deco items being sold via micro-transactions. Not a big fan of ingame content or items necessary to advance in the game being sold via micro-transactions, especially for a pay-to-play game.

Under the systems I have used:

UO: I've never used the UO Store to purchase anything other than an expansion upgrade. I don't mind things like housing theme packs or other deco items, but I'm NOT a fan of the crafting enhancers being sold via these methods. I'm not specifically against character X-fers being sold either, however I've always been against being able to x-shard items in the process.

LotRO: At the base, the need to "purchase" the ability to access content after you get done with the Bree content annoyed me, however they at least gave you the option of grinding up the "points" to buy the content if you so desired instead of paying money, or you could open the monthly account to get the content access and get a monthly allotment of points to spend on other add-ons mainly more deco-based items. Unfortunately, the WoW-clone gameplay got stale rather quickly.

D3: Never had a single issue with the RMAH, I think it was the right step for the game. However, adding in multiple uber-grinds for Account Bound items ruined the game for me (that's the short version, won't go into the long version here). Glad I got out before this week's Publish if anyone caught the big news there. I would also say that an argument could be made that ingame gold should have not been allowed on the RMAH and that it should have been items/resources only.

Path of Exile: Probably one of the better setups in my opinion for a FTP game. It has a micro-store, but all of those items are 100% deco such as "electric spiders" replacing the normal electric bolts graphics for certain spells/skills or changing the color of skill effects and so on. Completely unnecessary to play or complete the game and offers no advantage ingame. Game is currently on hold in my book waiting for them to expand past Act 3 and continue cleaning up some of the graphics and animations.

Micro-transactions aren't necessarily bad or good, it just depends on how they are used to support the game. Unfortunately, I think UO's current issues are bigger than micro-transactions or a Kickstarter (which as stated in previous threads would run against the grain since UO is an EA product and Kickstarter is mainly for "indie" products).

Also I am firmly against ANY game company selling ingame currency through a micro-store.

 

[cdavbar]

And btw they could care less about undercutting honest players it's about price ranging to where they think people will buy it..

What are you smoking, if the majority of what is sold is duped as has been claimed by many, why wouldnt they sell it for 10-15$ where you know that MANY MANY MANY more people would be buying it up? Why because they do have some compassion for the hard working players. RMT site price points are set to give them the edge over EA but still allow us players who work hard to retain some (maybe not all) value in our items.

 

[Mapper]

I like the kickstarter idea. They probably fear it shows exactly how many are willing to pay for a booster though. Data they haven't ever released.

I couldn't even begin to guess it, but if it makes for grim reading I'd rather not know about it.

 

[Uvtha]

I like the kickstarter idea. They probably fear it shows exactly how many are willing to pay for a booster though. Data they haven't ever released.

I couldn't even begin to guess it, but if it makes for grim reading I'd rather not know about it.

Ugh I don't. People need to stop suggesting UO use kickstarter. EA doesn't need money to add updates to an already existing game, and a SUBSCRIPTION game no less.

We all "crowd source" this game every month. Asking us to pay more so that the game gets developed is nonsense.

 

[Dag Nabbit]

Some games are alright for the micro transactions,but I am not so sure that it would work in UO. If that system was introduced,then the developers would have to add A LOT of new items that would interest us enough that we would buy them. Is that doable at this time? Not likely if it is true that UO is only supported by six developers.

 

[Wenchkin]

I don't mind EA adding to the list of items they have in the Origin store, but I'm not keen on effectively giving players the "play to win" stuff - buying items they could get in game does make you question your sanity in taking time to obtain and not just purchasing said item. We've had enough of that sort of nonsense added to UO already.

Desirable items are good - cute deco, items which aren't shifting the game balance for those who don't have them. We probably don't have a large enough team to fill the store with a stack of items at once, but gradually adding to it works too. It keeps people visiting the site to see what's new too - while they're there they may be tempted to buy other stuff.

I don't believe EA are able to close down the 3rd party sites and block them selling gold and items, and players are still buying from them. So if we can't get rid of those transactions, EA may as well move in on the market. But what I'd suggest is rather than sell the items themselves, EA should just sell gold and allow players to sell their unwanted gold in exchange for game time. Perhaps limit the sold gold quantity so it's only selling gold that has been sold to EA. So the gold itself also has to be acquired in game before it can be traded. It's possible for players to buy and sell gold now and use it to pay for game time and upgrades, but none of it is secure. I'd be quite happy to pay over the odds a bit so I could use gold to pay my game time safely. And it would ensure that all player game time was paid for by someone, so may soothe the worries of the anti-F2P crowd. It's not a perfect system, but I don't think such a thing exists It just seems daft that all these trades go on under the counter when EA could put a dent in the RL$ sites simply offering their own clean sales.

I'd be ok with F2P if the items in the store are merely desirable and not affecting game balance, that's possible too. There are good F2P games as well as the bad ones. I'd also support reducing the subscription or just offering a week-long subscription option. The week thing is handy for me because I never have a full month when I can play that regularly, but a week would be fine. And it also makes the £/$ amount smaller and easier to justify if you suddenly find you aren't able to play like you planned lol.

I'm not supportive of crowd sourcing though. They're EA for goodness sakes, a new start-up is one thing but this funding of big businesses, celebs and those who should know better is silly. It's just a way to avoid having to pay a share of the profits to normal investors by getting them to crowd fund. If they want additional funding, there is the option of selling more RL goods with the UO branding/graphics on them. Takes very little time to take an image and get it on a stack of items. Plenty of sites offer to handle production and shipping. Players have been screaming to buy RL UO items for years, this is another thing that the team could do releasing a single design every few months or so, but sticking it onto lots of different items. Raises money without cheesy videos and public begging

Wenchy

 

[WootSauce]

Ugh I don't. People need to stop suggesting UO use kickstarter. EA doesn't need money to add updates to an already existing game, and a SUBSCRIPTION game no less.

We all "crowd source" this game every month. Asking us to pay more so that the game gets developed is nonsense.

I agree with this, but will flip the coin here, so to speak. If they released the "refinement" system as a micro transaction / add on, how many would have thrown money at that? I am guessing very few, and I think that is where some of the frustration kicks in for the subscriber base.

I think the problem more or less lies on using their limited resources on what the player base would actually find valuable. And determining that is a significant challenge, when some simply want to grow prettier flowers and some want to revert the game mechanics back 14 years.

 

[Uvtha]

I agree with this, but will flip the coin here, so to speak. If they released the "refinement" system as a micro transaction / add on, how many would have thrown money at that? I am guessing very few, and I think that is where some of the frustration kicks in for the subscriber base.

I think the problem more or less lies on using their limited resources on what the player base would actually find valuable. And determining that is a significant challenge, when some simply want to grow prettier flowers and some want to revert the game mechanics back 14 years.

Thats game design for you I guess. There will never be a consensus as to what players want, and even if there was the players don't always or even usually have good ideas, worth investing time and effort into.

I don't know that refinements is good example. The idea of the system if fine, they just chose a terrible method of implementing it.

 

[Tanivar]

I think the problem more or less lies on using their limited resources on what the player base would actually find valuable. And determining that is a significant challenge, when some simply want to grow prettier flowers and some want to revert the game mechanics back 14 years.

Trying to provide for the various niche markets is something EA should put some thought into. Those groups of players probably add up to a fair number of players in total and making them happy means they will be less likely to leave. They have said the older code is gone so they lose that pre:Ren niche to the free-shards, but there are still the rares , artifact, deco, fishers, pirates, pirate hunters, and other groups they can work to make happy.

Add more for the players into Fishing, make pirate hunting a lot less expensive since the cost of the first broadside is more than the loot you wind up with, and then there is the cost of ship repairs. Make the cannon loading faster, if the character is carrying the powder, cannonball, and fuse, make loading a one click process. Make it possible to move the loot containers to your ships hold with a single click, shifting all that stuff at 300 stone a trip is irritatingly tedious. I bought the silly booster for both main accounts and it was clearly not intended to be much fun, just way to time consuming.

 

[DJAd]

I'd be happy to be able to purchase crafting resources from the Origin store. Its to much of a grind to farm them in game.

Has anyone actually ever farmed all the regs for a suit themselves?

 

[MissEcho]

I'd be happy to be able to purchase crafting resources from the Origin store. Its to much of a grind to farm them in game.

Has anyone actually ever farmed all the regs for a suit themselves?

I make all my suits from stuff I have obtained myself. Never purchased ANYTHING off a gold seller (either gold or items), never used cheats and I am arguably one of the richest people on my shard.

Micro transactions totally suck as you end up paying more than you would for a subscription based game, especially as they generally sell stuff that people 'need' to compete or progress. Take a look at all the people who on a daily basis get rooked by those facebook game micro transactions. Start off as 'nice but not necessary' but always end up morphing into 'have to have' or you can't compete.

UO already has it with those tools to enhance, means that people with the money are the only ones who get the advantage of not destroying bits of armor, those who can't afford it need to spend hours and hours more time to achieve the same thing IF they are lucky. Any more items like that and I would consider closing my accounts for good as you should be able to play this game 'fully' with no disadvantage as a subscription based game.

 

[Lady Storm]

Cazador dear this is a dead subject.
If you read Yahoo news WoW just posted a 3 month loss of 1.3 or so million players that quit....
Yes the F2P is a major reason many have pointed out. There are many more reasons these companys flourish and go boom. A lot of f2p game providers are in a bind... as games are loosing players.
In all honesty they are not mentioning the games are fly by nights that last a short term in the lime light and then get axed or put to the back of the list on most sites.
Read up on one company Zynga.
You will see exactly what I am talking about.
Many of us are still under a money crunch...
Now I gently ask a mod to lock it up....

 

[Wenchkin]

Cazador dear this is a dead subject.
If you read Yahoo news WoW just posted a 3 month loss of 1.3 or so million players that quit....
Yes the F2P is a major reason many have pointed out. There are many more reasons these companys flourish and go boom. A lot of f2p game providers are in a bind... as games are loosing players.
In all honesty they are not mentioning the games are fly by nights that last a short term in the lime light and then get axed or put to the back of the list on most sites.
Read up on one company Zynga.
You will see exactly what I am talking about.
Many of us are still under a money crunch...
Now I gently ask a mod to lock it up....

When we have a community and dev team that is shrinking, it's natural that players are going to discuss possible solutions. You may not like some of them, but if that's the case then avoiding the thread is your best option.

Game subscriptions vary, F2Ps vary and some combine the two. The results from individual companies is just that. It's their result. Someone with a different model and community can do better or worse, adapt and shift the balance. Every business needs to move with the times and adapt if they aren't going to be left behind. EA is a business, if UO slips below a certain point then it's in trouble. I don't believe the existing model is enough to prevent further decline for UO. It certainly isn't growing our community or dev team

There are good value games that are well balanced and priced thoughtfully. They might not make the big headlines, but gamers have options if they look around a little. Like everything, if you are used to budgeting yourself strictly, it's surprising how far you can make money go. And fun too.

There are painless options for EA to get more income out of the UO player community. Even if they just sold more RL items with artwork in their shop, it would help. I would love some of that stuff. More deco items for UO in the store wouldn't hurt either. Make one of the holiday gifts something decorative in the store while in game players get other gifts free. Weekly subscriptions on the same sort of price level would just add convenience for some of us. There are many options out there which aren't going to hurt the existing community. F2P can be done well, and work too.

Wenchy

 

[Tanivar]

I think EA currently has new accounts have access up to UO:ML. They could just have F2P accounts be limited to UO:AoS. This would give access to most of the game world and perhaps leave F2P players wanting more, which would require a subscription. The code to limit players to the latest expansion they paid for has been there from the start of UO so it should be easy to do.

 

[yars]

I'd be happy to be able to purchase crafting resources from the Origin store. Its to much of a grind to farm them in game.

Has anyone actually ever farmed all the regs for a suit themselves?

ive farmed quite a bit, sold quite a bit too.

 

[Nexus]

When we have a community and dev team that is shrinking, it's natural that players are going to discuss possible solutions. You may not like some of them, but if that's the case then avoiding the thread is your best option.

Game subscriptions vary, F2Ps vary and some combine the two. The results from individual companies is just that. It's their result. Someone with a different model and community can do better or worse, adapt and shift the balance. Every business needs to move with the times and adapt if they aren't going to be left behind. EA is a business, if UO slips below a certain point then it's in trouble. I don't believe the existing model is enough to prevent further decline for UO. It certainly isn't growing our community or dev team

There are good value games that are well balanced and priced thoughtfully. They might not make the big headlines, but gamers have options if they look around a little. Like everything, if you are used to budgeting yourself strictly, it's surprising how far you can make money go. And fun too.

There are painless options for EA to get more income out of the UO player community. Even if they just sold more RL items with artwork in their shop, it would help. I would love some of that stuff. More deco items for UO in the store wouldn't hurt either. Make one of the holiday gifts something decorative in the store while in game players get other gifts free. Weekly subscriptions on the same sort of price level would just add convenience for some of us. There are many options out there which aren't going to hurt the existing community. F2P can be done well, and work too.

Wenchy

I have to agree with you here. While a F2P or Hybrid model might not work for everyone it might not hurt either. I will say this though, at this point I'm not exactly sure how helpful it would be UO's brand recognition is high, but it's almost always been in the context of "I remember playing that". We also have an entirely new generation of gamers coming up, most of them have never heard of UO. Trust me on this one, I spend alot of time with late-teens/early 20's individuals almost none of them have heard of UO until I mention it. They can name almost every classic console game, they know the MMO's from the past 10 years or so, but UO is off their generational radar for the majority of them. Going to any other business model without a healthy investment in advertising, and I don't mean the industry rags (when was the last time you saw a young person actually reading for fun?), may not be something EA is willing to consider simply out of a risk vs reward concern.