Topic

a paid stuff payscale

here's a payscale i'd like. i'm basing it kind of off what i'm willing to pay for iphone applications, since that's the closest to micro-transactions i get right now.

$10-$15 : extra special avatar - wild and crazy unique avatar packages. be a robot. be a dinosaur. be whatever race uncle friendly is. concepts that stretch the concept of "humanoid" just a little bit. different body type so normal clothes wouldn't work on these avatars. thus, they'd have their own special clothing sets. you'd get a basic clothing set for free [3 or 4] with the avatar, but could buy new outfits for 5 bucks a pop [like formalwear or biker clothes]. there might be some things that these avatars might not be able to do anatomically that "normal" avatars can do [like climb certain things, swim etc. etc.] burt the extra special avatars would have unique, compensatory abilities.

$5 : merely special avatar - a slightly different head and texture on the basic frame. here we'd have orcs, werewolves, cat people, deer people, devils and assorted other humanoid races. "normal" outfits would fit on these avatars just fine, though i think it'd be cool if some of these avatars had tails which might work with some outfits and not others. these creatures could have some unique abilities, animations, jumps, skills etc.

$0 : standard avatars - humans and pointy eared humans

$0 : basic clothing

$1 : an article of awesome clothing

$5 : a matched set of awesome clothing

$0 : basic decorative item for a house.

$1 : cool decorative item for a house

$5 : set of matched decorative items for a house

$25 - $50 : a house [depends on style, size, location]

Posted 2 years ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink

Replies

  • there's also a range of items that could probably be priced between 2 to 10 dollars.

    like setting up a grendaline teleport stone someplace. maybe you could collect tolls on it for currants. $5 per location it can transport to. that sort of thing.
    Posted 2 years ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink
  • all items paid or not paid should be the same if they help you just different design. Like a special avatar shouldn´t go faster than a normal one. It should just look cooler. And furniture should be the same just nicer. Just make paid fancier stuff. Or you could get people to pay for houses but they can also buy it with currants.. Lots of money from impatient people
    Posted 2 years ago by Alex Subscriber! | Permalink
  • This all sounds fair enough to me, like Lolzerz said, lots of money from impatient people.
    Posted 2 years ago by Nanookie Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Lolzerz - i pretty much agree with that. collecting money from impatient people is good, but provide options for people to "work for" game enhancing instead of paying directly. like you should be able to buy a house with currants too, i don't think that's crazy, so long as it takes a considerable amount of in-game effort to accomplish.

    there should be cool looking stuff that you *have* to pay for tho. not because it is better than free stuff, just because it is unique looking.

    i think where i differ with you is in special avatars not being able to do special things. i think they should be able to do special things. on the other hand, i think that the "normal" avatars should be able to do special things too.

    what i mean is that there could be balance between normal and special avatar abilities. normal, free avatars could sort of be good at everything. but you might have, say, a special "mole man" avatar who is really, really good at mining, but is also slower at walking/running around than normal avatars, and doesn't have all the clothing options that normal avatars do.

    that's just my personal preference tho, since i think it would be cool to have a bit more wild diversity in terms of PCs.
    Posted 2 years ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink
  • or maybe it is not a "mole man avatar" but a "mole man suit".

    "uncle friendly suit"

    "robot suit"

    wearing a suit grants you special abilities but you also incur some weaknesses. it is still "you" underneath and it looks like a costume [like the hammer bros. suit in super mario bros. 3] but it changes your appearance a lot more than 'clothes' do.

    "merely special" avatars could still exist but have no special abilities, just special appearance [werewolves, werecat, devils, deer people] .. but there would be matching items that could grant them abilities .. tho normal avatars could also use them.

    like a cheetah-girl could buy matching cheetah-shoes to look cool and run fast, but a normal human avatar could also buy the cheetah shoes to run fast [though maybe not look as cool coz of the mis-matching].
    Posted 2 years ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I think the point Lolzerz may have been making (and if not, I'm going to make it) is that it shouldn't be possible to buy your way into special status in the game. It shouldn't be possible to gain a big leg up on others (for some value of "leg up") just because one has a pile o' cash one is willing to shell out, which is larger than the piles o' cash of others. Buy something cool looking for your house or avatar? For sure! But one shouldn't be able to acquire unique powers just because one pays cash for it rather than works for it in-game. IMNSHO.
    Posted 2 years ago by Eleanor Rigby Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I object to anything at all that alters gameplay based on finance. I don't have any problem with someone paying to look good (providing there is a large enough range of free choice), but I dislike the idea of gaining any advantages purely because you are willing to pay for it, even if there are disadvantages. Just because a miner suit makes you slower, that doesn't mean you should be able to mine faster. Anyway, what is to stop a person from just taking the suit off when they aren't mining.

    If it is purely visual, fine, but otherwise I would oppose this implementation. I do, therefore, oppose the purchase of houses with money. Decorating a house, fine, but the actual purchase should require you to work at collecting currants. I hate playing games where the people with cash are advantaged. It spoils it for those willing to put in the graft.
    Posted 2 years ago by TGDT Subscriber! | Permalink
  • "Anyway, what is to stop a person from just taking the suit off when they aren't mining."

    well if it is a suit you could just buy it with currants instead of money or something.

    at some point though, the developers need to get paid. "putting in the graft" won't put food on the table for the people actually, you know, building this whole thing.
    Posted 2 years ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I don't think you should be able to purchase a playing advantage in the game either--that's not to say that valuable objects can't be bought or sold but your character should have the requisite learning/experience in order to make use of the object, whether you bought it with currants or money.
    Posted 2 years ago by Nanookie Subscriber! | Permalink
  • FWIW, we've always planned around the principle that you can't buy any direct advantage in the game with cash money[1], only aesthetic variation and probably some additional content.

    [Before the footnote, a reminder about the confidentiality we're hoping to keep until we're ready to move in to an open beta (still several months away) and a request that you do not disclose plans we're discussing here, not least because we are still just discussing them.]

    [1] "Direct" is the key word here:
    (a) there will almost certainly be some purchasable mini-games and some of those will give in-game rewards for good play or perhaps unlock new skills which are unobtainable in any other way.

    In the first case, this is just getting the same kinds of rewards you would get for playing "the big game" by playing some other mini-game. So it is really a matter of purchasing some additional variety in how you spend your game time (with the same net result in terms of game mechanics).

    In the latter case, these would novelty skills or at least skills which are at the periphery of the game's economy/ecology, so again it is a matter of variety of activity/experience: there would be no real advantage to having them in the sense of being able to get further ahead than you would without them.

    (b) We are also planning to experiment with allowing players to buy advertising in-game, but only for in-game things (and all ads would be reviewed/moderated): if you, e.g., start a new group/religion/cult, open a store, write a manifesto, or come up with a goal that requires co-operation from a large number of other players, you can buy billboard space in busy transit hubs to promote it.

    This could result in some in-game advantage since if you can buy people's attention you can probably work it towards some end that results in currants or items or influence. But … I still really like this idea :)
    Posted 2 years ago by stoot barfield Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I like the in-game advertising for in-game things. I like that it requires a lot of ingenuity on the buyer's part to turn it into advantage.

    Of course, I also like the way KoL handles this, where most of the advantages or things you can buy are available second-hand, so you can afford them through some effort in-game, even if you never spend real money.
    Posted 2 years ago by Merrylegs Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Off-topic aside: stoot said "the big game". That made me smile (and those with GNE experience will likely smile also.)
    Posted 2 years ago by Eleanor Rigby Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I really like the idea of the player advertising, if used right i imagine it could make you endless amounts of currants. I have to say though that i think things like this hinges on you being able to buy most things for currents (and real money of course) even if the prices are ridiculously high.

    I am however sure that you will be able to strike a great balance between micro transactions and in game economy and it would be really interesting to see how something like that would develop in a game because i'm sure it will take on a life of it's own.
    Posted 2 years ago by Logrus Subscriber! | Permalink