The Founder's Packs Anxiety Thread

drwarpeffect

Some would claim this is just a matter of opinion, but I argue otherwise below.

Before I list the argument please know that I have been a D&D fan for a very long time. I have also been a computer gaming fan since the beginning and have spent very large amounts of money on computer gaming including MMOs. Last, I can afford to pay the $200 many times over just out of my computer gaming budget.

The argument:

1. The old subscription model that was very successful for games like EQ and WoW has in more recent years failed for games like Secret World, SWTOR, and LOTRO.
2. The newer model has been F2P, although there has been considerable flux as to how to best balance income with having a sufficient number of players overall.
3. A major problem has been to avoid making paying to play essential for having a sufficiently positive play experience as those unwilling or unable to pay have left the game without a sufficiently large enough player base. I.E., the game should be F2P not free to be overly gimped. This aspect is magnified many times over if the game allows PvP.
4. Item 3. implies that the game experience that does not cost anything cannot very overly much from the paid experience. This is why most agree that what can be purchased must be limited, with disagreement in what those limitations should be. Purely aesthetic options are usually uncontroversial at one end of the spectrum with over-powered pay-only equipment, or pay-only content, considered as most problematic at the other.
5. This brings us to the $200 founder's pack. There are two possibilities as concerns value for this pack. Either one indicates trouble.
(A) The pack is worth $200, or even the $549 advertised as its true value. This means that those with the pack will be experiencing the game at a level over $500 better than those who are doing strictly play for free. Most players would not find such a gimped experience worthwhile for any sort of long-term play experience.
(B) The pack is not worth even $200 (let alone over $500). The play experience then between those with and without the pack would then be of sufficiently similar nature so as not to pose a problem as in 5A. The trouble is the company is selling something claimed to be worth over $500 that is not even worth $200. This kind of over-grasping for money has already led several other F2P games to failure.
6. To see a current example of this kind of problem as seen in item 5. (although the jury is still out on eventual success or failure) is mechwarrior online's implementation of Founders' Packs. A main benefit of those packs in the two more expensive options was to get mechs that earned credits 25% faster (ala World of Tanks). Yet, as soon as open beta started they began selling "hero" mechs that gave a 30% boost. Something original purchasers of the Founders' packs were not told would be available later.

For those that want to argue it is ok to sell something at whatever price the market will bear, that is only half true. Buyers are certainly free to pay whatever they want. Sellers have to be more careful. There is an implicit claim in making a sale that you are providing adequate value for what you are selling. For online game companies trying the F2P model, the danger is even more pronounced. Make the pay to play component of your game too superior to the free play then you run a very real risk of alienating too many players. This means that there is a very real limit on how much you can sell that improves gameplay in line with high pricing as the free and pay to play experiences can only be so different before it threatens the ability of the game to be a success.

I was really looking forward to this game and had not had any significant concerns until I saw the $200 Founder's pack offer. I am now concerned about whether the balance between F2P and pay to play will be viable for this game.

fruitvendor12

I had no problem paying an equivalent amount for the lifetime sub to STO. I think PWE/Cryptic have done a fine job balancing FTP with paid items, and they are still refining (for example there seems a shift to account bind on pickup vs character bind). Paid items are always a few points less than than end game award items in STO. So I don't think at this time pay to win is something you need to worry about.

vitriks2

"Make the the two packs with price 5 and 10$ and you get millions of players whiling to support the game. Make the the price 200$ and you get few subscribers and thousands of raging players."

syberghost

It's a sign of the evolution of F2P from a post-launch retrofit to a purposeful decision. It's an experiment in recouping development and marketing costs at launch like a P2P game, but via a voluntary model.

It's not a sign F2P is failing; it's a sign it's here to stay.

fruitvendor12

syberghost wrote: »

It's not a sign F2P is failing; it's a sign it's here to stay.

Exactly. I was making the same point to Raph Koster in 1998+ and never got anywhere. The sub model is actually the death spiral to be avoided... f2p with micros give a company every incentive to enlarge the franchise.

drwarpeffect

syber, I was not arguing that F2P is a failing model, I was arguing that this pricing model would be a failed implementation of F2P if the overpricing becomes the manner this game operates. Consider the following two scenarios:

I. (Current Neverwinter approach) 1% pay for $200 packages and their like and have a $549 better experience (+ future purchases) than the 75% that do not pay anything. The other 24% pay some lesser amount to play. Total max player base 400,000, game dies after 2 years.

II. (Smaller max founders purchase price) 8% pay for $99 packages and their like and have a modestly better experience than the 62% that do not pay anything (since prices are lower, more are willing to pay something). The other 30% pay some lesser amount to play. Total max player base 2,000,000, game dies after 6 years.

Which scenario represents the most profit? Clearly the second. Now how pricing affects total play depends on a great many variables, but my point is that historical data would indicate that the high delta between what a $200 (value $549) package provides and free to play will most likely not be sustainable. That is what my post is about, not whether F2P in general is a failing model. World of Tanks illustrates F2P can succeed.

lanessar13

drwarpeffect wrote: »

6. To see a current example of this kind of problem as seen in item 5. (although the jury is still out on eventual success or failure) is mechwarrior online's implementation of Founders' Packs. A main benefit of those packs in the two more expensive options was to get mechs that earned credits 25% faster (ala World of Tanks). Yet, as soon as open beta started they began selling "hero" mechs that gave a 30% boost. Something original purchasers of the Founders' packs were not told would be available later.

I'm not sure if you actually played MWO, or you just listened to forum rants. The founder's program was very successful - getting them a net gain of 5.4 million (if those reports are to be believed).

However, the benefits you listed are slightly off:

a) Founder's Mechs also gave a 25% XP boost on top of the 25% Cbill boost. Hero mechs only gave 30% Cbill boost.
b) The Founder's pack true value (premium time, credits, mechbays and cost of mechs) was close to $300 if you bought "normal" versions of the mechs. For $120. It would cost you $280-300 if you purchased enough credits right now, and got weight-class appropriate hero mechs instead of founder's mechs.

Don't get me wrong; I am not playing the game currently and feel it needs a LOT more to be fun to play. However, value was there and still is there. Whether you like the game or not is a personal matter.

fruitvendor12

There is no way anonymous players will alleviate your concerns. Suffice to say, in other venues, it is working and the companies involved are constantly refining their approach to the marketplace. Your scenarios are just that, your personal thought experiments. You may not be wrong in the coming years. But you are overwrought looking left to right, let alone back over your shoulder.

syberghost

What you're forgetting is, unlike a P2P MMO, the packs aren't a barrier to entry. In a P2P MMO, if you think the $60 pack is overpriced, you don't play; in this game, you just walk right in the door. Plus, there are no printing and shipping costs associated with them, so they're nearly pure profit, excepting the cost of developing the stuff in them. Smaller sales figures on them than the preorder boxes for a P2P MMO can still equal or exceed the profits of those boxes.

deathssickle

If it had been $100 mix an match pack I would have bought it(ex choose spider mount and dire wolf get special lvl60 chest, but only get 125,000 Astral Diamonds etc(meeting somewhere in the middle on what you get, for each big thing from the $200 pack you would have to match with an item from $60 or $20 pack if you understand what Im saying.))

fruitvendor12

syberghost wrote: »

What you're forgetting is, unlike a P2P MMO, the packs aren't a barrier to entry. In a P2P MMO, if you think the $60 pack is overpriced, you don't play; in this game, you just walk right in the door. Plus, there are no printing and shipping costs associated with them, so they're nearly pure profit, excepting the cost of developing the stuff in them. Smaller sales figures on them than the preorder boxes for a P2P MMO can still equal or exceed the profits of those boxes.

S/He is not concerned with cost to entry. He's concerned it is pay to win. Any old school paper and pencil player, with nominal MMO experience, is probably not going to get it until they've seen the proof over time.

drwarpeffect

lanessar- I did and still do play MWO but the Founder's program only grossed the 5.4 million. The net is unknown as there were substantial refunds given. My entire group got full refunds of our Founders' purchases and one of them was told that there would be a delay in processing of the funds due to the high volume of refunds being given.

fruit- yes in other venues it is working although it has also failed. I am simply claiming the pricing of the $200 pack is more likely to indicate an overpriced implementation that will fail.

syber- not forgetting that at all. My point is that you will more likely make MORE money by having less of a price/performance delta among your players. I would rather average $7 from 2 million players for 6 years than average $11 from 400,000 for 2 years.

fruitvendor12

drwarpeffect wrote: »

fruit- yes in other venues it is working although it has also failed.

That is incorrect at least with regards to STO.

PWE's last quarter's revenue loss has been cited commonly with no context. They are building out using unprecedented revenues from micros. They are forsaking short term profits for long term market penetration. Think Amazon.

I guess to rephrase it: when a company rolls out quarter after quarter of confident new content... they are ahead of the game. They are expanding. Their individual developers are able to make incremental improvements without worry from their managers. This has defined STO for the last year at least.

A defensive company tries to create new subs. It focuses on "cutting costs", e.g. a death spiral.

lanessar13

drwarpeffect wrote: »

lanessar- I did and still do play MWO but the Founder's program only grossed the 5.4 million. The net is unknown as there were substantial refunds given. My entire group got full refunds of our Founders' purchases and one of them was told that there would be a delay in processing of the funds due to the high volume of refunds being given.

Grossed, correct. I'm pretty sure they still managed a pretty penny - 1.4 million in refunds still leaves 4 million.

dequixotic

The only elements in the pack that give any non-cosmetic benefit are the mounts and the chest with a special rare item. Other than that the items are purely cosmetic. The dev team has made it clear that they will not make a play to win game. Play to win drives away customers and money and it doesn't work as a long term strategy. Without a subscription model and without a box to sell the game, the only things they can offer are beta-related or cosmetic related. If they didn't do either overall, the game wouldn't be sustainable and wouldn't draw a profit. If they didn't have them in the packs it would be harder to recoup costs before launch. Whether the packs are the right price is hard to say, but judging by the number of people with blue titles there is a definite market for it.

syi

what makes me sad is that they did not offer a lifetime for this like they did for startrek and champions... lol caught it myself

drwarpeffect

dequixotic- The cheapest pack has:

- A Large Health Stone
- 10,000 XP booster
- 5 Scroll of Raise Dead
- 5 Portable Altars
- 10 Identify Scrolls
- 25 pack of skill consumables

These are not cosmetic. Also, my original argument is that either the pack is worth at least $200 (or the claimed $549) or its not. The important perception here is whether the people that DID NOT buy it feel it provides a large advantage or not. Those that did buy it are likely to feel it was worth it, at least initially, since they did, after all, buy it. But if the mount, companion, and xp boosts etc. are viewed as the lion's share of value then free to players may feel the game is simply free to be gimped. Are purely cosmetic changes worth $549 as PWE claimed for the top pack? Most people would think not. Would a good number of people pay $200 to have a significant, non-cosmetic, advantage over other players, i think the evidence from other games is that they clearly would. I would say all the blue titles on here reflect that more than anything else.

shapeywhelm

at least with the lifetime options in cryptics other games, you at least get 500 zen a month as an added bonus, not here.

alairanfennec

That is because those prior Cryptic games had existing subscription fees and the Lifetime offers were created in that time. So the monthly stipend is a part of the subscription now.

This game will have no subscription fees, at all. So they can't really offer a Lifetime Subscription.

adamantium1

There is no reason they couldn't give a lifetime account with this game meaning all new species and classes and other new content is already paid for. I have bought two lifetime accounts one was Champions online which i still play. The other was Lotr online which i played for a year and a half. Champions online had me playing longer but certainly played it more casually then Lotr online.

ysil6969

I was looking through the packs thinking, I wouldn't mind paying a box price for this game and getting some goodies. 200 bucks seems way to much to pay for a game, but I was planning on taking the 60 dollar guardian pack. Reading through it though, it sucks. No bag expansion? The starter pack gets a bag expansion. No +1 to ac amulet? Starter pack gets that too.

Instead we get a robe of useless items... why the hell would anyone want to spawn junk on the ground? You guys need to beef up the guardian, because at the moment it's not a real big sell.

perdidur

Yeah I think the Starter Pack is actually a better deal but then I don't really care for thr Armored Horse or Dire Wolf. The Guardian Pack really needs the +1 AC Amulet and Bag expansion.

ysil6969

Yeah, the top advertised items are all just kind of flare. I'd trade in the mask and horse for a bag expansion and amulet any day.

deathssickle

I agree that it would be nice to have those, but I actually like everything in it(the mask and robe are a joke guys I have bought(and found joke items in other MMOs))

prophetdark

Well in all honesty. The only really solid thing is the Bag of Holding.

The amulet of Protection is only +1 AC and you only get one period per account.

I think the Mastercraft Item and access to the beta weekends is a bit better. Not to mention a third character slot.

I am also very interested in find out what we will be able to get with the 125k in Astral diamonds.

dequixotic

drwarpeffect wrote: »

dequixotic- The cheapest pack has:

- A Large Health Stone
- 10,000 XP booster
- 5 Scroll of Raise Dead
- 5 Portable Altars
- 10 Identify Scrolls
- 25 pack of skill consumables

These are not cosmetic. Also, my original argument is that either the pack is worth at least $200 (or the claimed $549) or its not. The important perception here is whether the people that DID NOT buy it feel it provides a large advantage or not. Those that did buy it are likely to feel it was worth it, at least initially, since they did, after all, buy it. But if the mount, companion, and xp boosts etc. are viewed as the lion's share of value then free to players may feel the game is simply free to be gimped. Are purely cosmetic changes worth $549 as PWE claimed for the top pack? Most people would think not. Would a good number of people pay $200 to have a significant, non-cosmetic, advantage over other players, i think the evidence from other games is that they clearly would. I would say all the blue titles on here reflect that more than anything else.

Didn't see the convenience items when I first looked at the options. Eh, if it's perceived to give an unfair advantage then that's an issue. I got similar rewards from P2P MMOs for being a veteran subscriber or getting a collectors pack. LOTRO gives a similar "starter" pack and those goes a step further and let's people buy stat upgrades which I hope is not present here. It's a fine line to ride between an advantage and a benefit. I think you might be confused on where the listed value is coming from though. It's not the convenience items that you'll be able to purchase from the store, it's the exclusivity of the cosmetic items that boosts the "estimated" value. A mount, clothes, a race background, and a companion aren't worth more than $30-$40 to most people, but exclusive cosmetics or an exclusive beta is worth much more. Is it wrong for developers to exploit that virtual scarcity? I don't know.

What would you put in a F2P "founder" pack instead?

macabrivs

Im wondering.... some time ago we had a discussion about AC in foruns, by then it was said neverwinter online wont have AC or other defences. Did the mechanism of the game change ?

I wont probably get an answer because of NAD ... just wondering....

pilf3r

prophetdark wrote: »

Well in all honesty. The only really solid thing is the Bag of Holding.

The amulet of Protection is only +1 AC and you only get one period per account.

I think the Mastercraft Item and access to the beta weekends is a bit better. Not to mention a third character slot.

I am also very interested in find out what we will be able to get with the 125k in Astral diamonds.

I was planning on getting the guardian pack but then they removed the access to the vip section of the tavern from it and so I now feel it is not worth the price without that account unlock.

mokah

I would have appreciated a Foundry Only founders pack that offered some sort of usage of it to see how things work, even if it was a limited sort of thing. If such a thing existed, I would have probably done that.

aragoh

I have no problem with founders pack items in this game personally. Until we get to dive into beta and see what functions the game world offers there is no telling if you can talk to npc's and for a small fee of in game currency get the same functionality of some or all the items you can buy off the cash shop.

Things like this can only benefit a game in my opinion by offering some of the more lazy among us to spend small amounts of money on instant solutions to problems that the more frugal of us have the option of spending in game time on such items instead. I believe that this free to play system will be nowhere near as bad as some of the other companies that have taken their failed pay to play games and tried to convert them into free to play or freemium as some like to call them. Sony and Turbine come to mind immediately. Everyone should really just calm down and wait to see before freaking out.

jaffrojones

ysil6969 wrote: »

I was looking through the packs thinking, I wouldn't mind paying a box price for this game and getting some goodies. 200 bucks seems way to much to pay for a game, but I was planning on taking the 60 dollar guardian pack. Reading through it though, it sucks. No bag expansion? The starter pack gets a bag expansion. No +1 to ac amulet? Starter pack gets that too.

Instead we get a robe of useless items... why the hell would anyone want to spawn junk on the ground? You guys need to beef up the guardian, because at the moment it's not a real big sell.

From what I understand, the Greycloak's Legacy is the replacement for the +1 amulet. It will have that on it.