Topic

A different approach to furniture upgrades - "Credit Value"

First, the idea.  Then, my reasoning.  Please note that while I use SDB examples throughout, this idea is intended for all furniture types.

The Idea:

Instead of the current system, it might work well to make it so spending credits on a furniture item gives that item a "credit value" which allows the owner to apply any style which is worth that number of credits or less.  For example, an SDB could be a "10 credit" SDB which would allow the user to apply any of the eight 10-credit styles available now, or one could spend 25 credits (total) on it to make it upgradable to any of the currently available styles (with the Firebog style limited to subscribers, of course).  A 10-credit SDB could be upgraded to a 25 credit SDB by spending 15 more credits on it.

The credit value would be specific to the item, of course, so if you wanted 10 fully versatile SDBs you would need to spend 250 credits to get them all up to that 25 credit maximum level.

In a way, you could think of this as being like recycling for clothing, but at a 100% recycle value.

My Reasoning:

Right now, the furniture upgrade situation is problematic.  Since credits cost real money, there's a big disincentive to applying more than one upgrade to a single piece of furniture (since you can't actually use more than one at a time) and I, for one, have avoided credit upgrades because I just don't know what styles I'll eventually want and I am loath to spend money on something I won't use.

In theory, the furniture auctions could sort all that out because if I upgrade something and don't like it I could sell it and buy one I really want on the auctions, but that process still seems too hit or miss for my liking.

The biggest drawback that I can see to my proposed approach is that it might mean less credits spent on furniture, because of course people could spend a maximum credit value once and then have all the styles for that item forever.  However, it could work the other way; people like me who are hesitant to "lock into" a style for credits would be much more willing to spend if they knew that they would still have a fair bit of flexibility later on, and also that they could switch to a more expensive style without spending the whole credit amount again (just paying the upgrade differential).

In my own case, I could easily see myself upgrading most of my SDBs to 15 credits to get my beloved Granite style again, if I knew that I'd be able to switch some of them to Mahogany or Simple Black as I updated my wallpapers and optimized the appearance of the SDB to match the item within.  For now I have stuck to the free options because I know from the test period that Granite doesn't work for everything and I don't want to spend credits on those upgrades when I know I will probably want to change some sooner rather than later.  (SDBs are especially bad in that selling an old one and buying a new one with a different style would also require transferring all the contents--a daunting task in some cases!  But most of this reasoning applies just as well to the other furniture types.)

This might also dramatically simplify the auction situation; instead of needing to list all the styles available to a single piece of furniture, the furniture would now be listed as a "10-credit" or "15-credit" SDB.  (A nice bonus would be to have some way for a purchaser to easily see which styles are available for the credit value of the item in question, and the code for this would be simpler as well since it wouldn't need to look at the specific item beyond getting its credit value.)

Finally, this would make the "subscriber-only" styles more meaningful; anyone could buy a 25-credit SDB, but only a subscriber could apply the Firebog style to it.  (This could be a drawback, too; there may be a big benefit in subscribers being able to apply styles to furniture and then selling at a premium.  I think the benefit outweighs the drawback, but YMMV.)

Thoughts?  Comments?  Improvements to the basic idea?

Posted 7 months ago by Don Monkey Subscriber! | Permalink

Replies

  • I like this idea! One thing that's been keeping me from just buying a big subscription and going on a spending spree has been a nagging voice in the back of my mind going "What if they release something later that I like better? What if they make a cool new wallpaper that doesn't match what I bought? What if I get bored of the look and want to change things up?" Plus it'd make auctions on furniture a lot easier.
    Posted 7 months ago by Kalmiopsis Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I hate to be so gauche as to bump my own thread, but I really think this idea should get some more eyeballs on it...

    Please feel free to reply telling me I'm an idiot for bumping myself.  It'll save me from having to do it again. ;-)
    Posted 7 months ago by Don Monkey Subscriber! | Permalink
  • You're an idiot ;)
    Posted 7 months ago by Liza Throttlebottom Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I love your idea but it seems an unlikely thing for TS to do: it cuts down on profit. Not to say that profit is their only motive, but let's be realistic. It's a business, after all.
    Posted 7 months ago by Kip Konner Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Kip: you could be right, but I tried to address that specifically in my post (and Kalmiopsis added weight to it); it is possible that it would increase profit by making people more willing to spend credits.

    Remember that the only way the current system could make MORE profit for TS is if people spend credits more than once on a single piece of furniture, applying multiple credit-costing styles even though only one can be used at a time.  How many people will do this?  (How many have done it already?)  If this isn't happening, then TS would not be losing any money by switching to my proposed idea.

    My proposed system could increase TS's profits by a) making it more appealing for people to spend more credits on items that have already been upgraded (instead of sticking with the original 10-credit upgrade they could spend 5 or more additional credits and get a whole range of new options) and b) by encouraging spending from people like me and Kalmiopsis who have been holding off, not wanting to lock into something or waiting to see if better stuff is coming.

    If I was convinced that the idea would cut into TS's profit, I would never have bothered to post it in the first place; TS is a business and they need to make money and I don't have any problem with that.  I honestly think that this idea is a win-win proposition--more versatility for players as well as an increase in profit for TS.  After all, I'm thinking of going from my Moly subscription down to Tin next month because I like my subscriber benefits but don't really need the bonus credits.  Maybe I'm in the minority, and most people will happily spend credits multiple times on a single item, but I have my doubts.  But TS can easily check to see how often people actually purchase multiple upgrades for a single item to find out if this idea has any merit.

    ETA: Some more thought made me realize that TS might make more money from the current system even if people only spend credits on an item once if they are willing to stop using the existing item and spend credits on another item to replace it.  (i.e. someone applies a 10-credit upgrade then decides later they want a 15-credit upgrade, so sells the 10-credit item via auction and applies the 15-credit style to a new item; under my system this would have cost TS 10 credits because the player would have been able to spend 5 credits to update the item instead of spending 15 credits on a whole separate item.)

    If there is a thriving business in people spending credits on items and then selling those items to people who don't have credits, or putting the upgraded items into storage and replacing them with other upgraded items, then this would be another case where TS could lose money on my idea.

    Anyway, this all goes to show that I don't have all the answers.  But I still think there is a chance that TS could earn something extra with this idea. :-)
    Posted 7 months ago by Don Monkey Subscriber! | Permalink