Armoury; Commander Micro-transactions.

Whew, off topic but, creating quite a few threads at once is crazy. I went to bed last night and when I woke up- 15 notes... I was very surprised.

Anyway, to the topic at hand: I still cannot fathom how people believe that creating micro-transactions (let alone DLC) takes absolutely no effort. Yes, because modeling a 1000+ tri model with crazy detail is just so incredibly simple and is not worth anything- as someone said they believe they're making something that is "valueless" have a value but I just... The work put into creating that model is meaningless to you? Oh and DLC is even worse... as I've seen someone say it had some work put into it, well of course, DLC can be magnificent and just as engaging as the base game- DLC takes work; as does the micro-transactions Uber plans to create.

Sorry but it feels quite wrong to hear people completely forget that someone had to work for something to be made, it's not valueless, not to the person who spent hours- days- weeks creating something, be it a micro-transaction awesome looking commanders or a couple hour long DLC.

If you don't want to buy a commander- don't... It's a simple as that, Uber, a company that nearly died in financial problems, wants to make a quick buck and doesn't mind working on a model for it and doesn't pound on you to buy "exclusive currency", and there's something tainting about that? Just ignore it and play the game.

I found the problem! You vastly undervalue the work of the Artists! And as an Artist myself creating my own KS Custom Commander it's almost insulting that you think teh process is that simple.

Also it's not really fair to slam Micro-Transactions just because the idea is being used improperly by others. Especially given we don't know many specifics of what Uber plans yet so it's not really fair to say it's bad when you just don't know yet.

Extra Credits has some episodes on the Topic of Micro-transactions that might give you a bit more context on how it can be a perfectly valid system for both the Players and Devs, you should check them out.

Mike

EXACTLY, completely agree! So many people here must not understand how much time and effort it takes to create the models, let alone some game's DLC.

Arguing like that you could sell every unit seperately because they all took time and effort to make.
Just because I dont want to pay extra for a commander doesnt mean i dont appreciate the work that was put into it, it just means that the payment for said work should be included in the 60 euros that i paid for the game upfront.

Why should it be included if it was created after the game was released?

Mike

Key difference there: The units have a direct affect on the gameplay, and if you make the base units (Not cosmetic versions) micro-transaction only, then it becomes pay to win. Commanders are cosmetic only and there is no difference between one com and another.

Were you ever told "You will get every com that we ever make"? No. You've gotten what you were told you'd get, and Uber has no obligation to give you anything more than that.

Well so many people have said they take no effort and are just a quick way to make greedy money. I'm not saying that every unit should be sold separately (In fact this wouldn't happen as it'd change gameplay, unless it's a skin-pack of some sort.) I've paid 290$ and am completely fine with paying extra if I feel I want something special because I like it. I don't feel cheated, like they threw this together in two minutes and just want to take my money, work and time and effort are put in and work, time, and effort should be rewarded- at least to some extent. Uber needs to make money and micro-transactions don't have any effect on gameplay and therefore if you don't want them, don't buy them- it's as simple as that.

Sorry for double post but you quoted me as saying that when I hadn't!

Well yeah that comparison wasnt well thought through.
But on the other point, im pretty sure that uber stated on several occasions that they will continue to add content for free. And i dont realy see why custom commanders should be an exception.

Did they ever specifically say that all content would be free? Or that all Commanders would specifically be Free?

Mike

Uber has said that they will release content for free but they didn't say that they will release everything they make for free. They have a right to monetize new additions as they choose; if they decide to make commanders have microtransactions then I have no problem with it. It's infinitely better than making microtransactions for gameplay things and if I don't want the com, I don't have to buy it.

Well that's the thing, I'm sure there will be both: free commanders given out on some updates for everyone, and then some commanders put onto the store to make some money. I can even imagine a whole mod community where players make commanders and put them up onto the market when given permission by Uber similar to Tf2's system of skins for weapons, hats, clothes, etc...

Edit: I love how all three of us responded at just about the same time; to the same post.

Microtransactions are a business model. Being an artist is entirely an other thing, Mike. Beside, contemporary artists now a day do every kind of bs, just walk into an art gallery. Are you sure you want to be one of them?

Said that, the in-game marketplace in PA has been confirmed and it will allow creators of Mods and additional content to sell their work, or (as I assume) to offer it for free if so they will prefer.

I expect Uber to offer additional content via their very marketplace as well, and as far as we will not be asked to pay for what we paid it already, I don't see why we should complain about.

Uber already confirmed that additional content will not affect the game play. In short, it will not be anything like pay4win.

That's dangerously stereotypical, yes there are people like that, but I don't think wanting to be fairly compensated for one's work means they're trying to screw consumers over.

Mike

Personally i don't see the harm in adding in micro transactions for something that has purely an aesthetic effect on the game and no effect on game play, e.g. guildwars 2 uses it and it seems to be highly successful with out adding in a pay to win element. or League of legends with skins. Just as long as the prices aren't too extreme i think it would be a great way to keep a cash flow coming in which can then be used to keep funding further development on the game.
to sum it up. As we all know different looking commanders are purely aesthetic, and i wouldn't mind spending a few £ every now and then to get an awesome looking commander to stand out of the crowd with. (I mean we already have a decent range of models to choose from, i picked my favorite ages ago and haven't changed once lol)

@KNight iv followed a bit of your development for your own personal commander and some of the reskins your playing around with for the basic units, and i can only see that it takes a surprising amount of work just to get a basic shitty model to work correctly with the right skeleton with out glitching like a fucker ect. So i see nothing wrong with earning for what looks like surprisingly difficult work to get right and still look awesome

Putting up great effort to make something doesnt automatically make it valueable or usefull. Effort is not linked to value.

But as I said, selling purely cosmetic stuff is fine for me and fine for Uber if the really find people paying for that.
Selling mods, especially ones that improve UI or other game functions that allow players to be more efficient than those without these mods is essentially pay2win.
Not thats a great loss for PA, but if that really should happen, Im out.

I'm assuming you're referring to all this stuff, which I just want to clarify shouldn't really be seen as re-skins, rather they are a selection of new units.

Mike

Except effort IS linked to value, especially when it has to do with art. Art being beautiful for example is just subjective to people opinions but art isn't valued by how nice it looks it's also valued by how much time is put into it as time = money. I even have an example: one of the first questions someone will ask you when you finish a picture is "How long did it take" why do they ask this? Because if a drawing took you months to finish that's worth a whole lot more than something you did in five minutes, heads up- modeling is art.

That's......awkward. It's not like there is a set guideline to time-based value and there are plenty of things that don't really take a lot of time but are still "valuable".

Value is always Subjective to everyone and there are a lot of Circumstances at work that can't be easily surmised.

Things get even trickier with DIGITAL things because the difference between making 1 of something and 1000 of something is non-existant/negligible. So yeah a Commander might "Cost" 2000$(ARBITRARY NUMBER) but that is only a one time cost, it can sold theoretically an infinite amount of times for little/no addition cost. This means pricing for stuff like this can be fairly tricky because you need to account for not only the cost of creation but also how much penetration you'll get and how many sales will actually be made. I think a lot of people get latched onto this idea and thing that because there is no "production cost" for quantity it should therefore always be cheap, and to a point I do agree with that thought but there is a lot more at work too. If a product never breaks even then you still have a loss despite the lack of "production cost" and it's hard to know exactly what will sell and how much when dealing with something as subjective as visual appeal and an "incomplete" consumer demographic. Also yes I am aware there are already a lot of people supporting PA via KS, Pre-Orders and Steam Early Access but until the game is release and has some "history" it's not really fair to expect perfect predictions.

There are certainly options for dealing with the issues of breaking even and what not, none of them perfect thought.

For example, going back to the 2000$ Commander(ARBITRARY NUMBER), imagine if it costs 5$(ARBITRARY NUMBER) until it 'broke even', then after that point it only costs like 2.50$(ARBITRARY NUMBER) or 3$(ARBITRARY NUMBER). This way "fewer" purchases would be required for the Commander to break even and after that point it would be cheaper for everyone else. The catch here thought is dealing with the idea of potentially reducing the value of the initial purchases(this will be a problem for some but not others) especially if there is no difference between the 2 versions and if there are you have other potential issues to deal with as well like we have already experienced with the Delta/Invictus scenario as a potential outcome.

All in all we need to keep in mind that it is a very complex issue overall and need to be careful about making sweeping statements and trying to be as specific as possible.

Mike