So we will take the higher of those two values (which is 2x higher than the lower one)
To reach the low end of your 50,000 to 500,000 Q would have to hit 2.5 times more expensive and to hit the high side it would have to be 25 times more.
Now I have no idea how much the exchange rate was when each of those games started so I really can't even draw on that to estimate the value.
Oh for people who don't know you can buy Zen for 100 per $1 US
0
ambisinisterrMember, Neverwinter ModeratorPosts: 10,462Community Moderator
edited February 2013
And whatare some of the Zen Package Costs? I can't access that until I get to a certain level in a PWE game -.-
zentrasiMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Hero UsersPosts: 3Arc User
edited February 2013
If they had marketed this as more of a kickstarter, you know, spend some to support the final development of the game then I don't think it would be a big an issue as it's become. Blatantly selling access to Beta is not good way to start a game community.
And whatare some of the Zen Package Costs? I can't access that until I get to a certain level in a PWE game -.-
No package deals as far as I can tell, just a straight $1 US to 100 Zen
Oh or where you asking how much Zen things cost in the game?
0
ambisinisterrMember, Neverwinter ModeratorPosts: 10,462Community Moderator
edited February 2013
Yet this is pretty much common practice now-adays.
People are willing to pay *shrugs* I won't say whether I think it is right or wrong but in much regards this also is simple economics. People are not only willing but want to...and frankly have been begging to do so since the day I joined the forums.
However beyond that Cryptic has assured not only the general public but the Forum Moderators as well that they are not selling Closed Beta Access. They are only selling the in game content and perks and giving Beta Access as a bonus and that's excellent marketing when you think about it. The Beta Keys are likely the most desired part of the Founders Packs and without a doubt most people wouldn't have purchased a Founders Pack without the inclusion of Beta Access. Sadly the prices are pretty steep whether or not you feel they are overpriced which leads people to the assumption that they are selling Beta Access rather than content.
I assure you they're not, but at this point there is absolutely no way to prove it to anybody.
ambisinisterrMember, Neverwinter ModeratorPosts: 10,462Community Moderator
edited February 2013
Haha, that makes things very simple then Keirken.
STO: 9100 D / Dollar
CO: 19400 Q / Dollar
This would put Astral Diamonds as 5.5x as expensive as D and 11.5x as expensive as Q based on the 1670 AD / Dollar figure.
Again, as a new game demand will be far higher than in the other games so this really doesn't seem too obscene to me.
Thanks for the information Keirken, it was exactly what I needed
If they had marketed this as more of a kickstarter, you know, spend some to support the final development of the game then I don't think it would be a big an issue as it's become. Blatantly selling access to Beta is not good way to start a game community.
That difference is just semantics. It still would be no difference. With kickstarter you would have to pay to get the access and paying is paying. It is a fine way to start a game and common in the new F2P model that many games are using now. Many F2P games are including beta access as one thing you get in their "Founders" packages now.
0
providenttMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 0Arc User
edited February 2013
Even B2P or subscription games do it. It's a common thing now and really no big deal. Cool thing about it is that it's completely optional. You lose nothing for not playing the beta, nor are you entitled to play it for free. If you don't want a founder's pack that's absolutely cool, you probably have more sense than the rest of us. Doesn't mean it's a terrible thing to have though.
Thing is, even if it was a required purchase to play the game, that would make it a B2P game which is still a great consumer-friendly payment model.
0
ambisinisterrMember, Neverwinter ModeratorPosts: 10,462Community Moderator
edited February 2013
Well the difference is semantics, as you can see, because so many people skip the important part that you are paying for the Standard Founders Pack without Beta Access.
Most of the unhappiness I read about the packs stems from people either not reading that the Beta Keys are free add-ons (to increase sales of course) or not believing the packs are truly worth what they state.
Frankly I don't believe they could sell the packs and not get complaints so I just shrug it off and encourage users to not take it personally. Not that I don't care but at the end of the day everybody has the right to an opinion so if they want to believe Cryptic is lieing about the Beta Access not being part of the sale then I simply relay the information I have and leave it up to them to decide.
Frankly I don't believe they could sell the packs and not get complaints
I don't think they could do anything and not get complaints If Cryptic announced tomorrow that they were changing the model of the game to completely free they were refunding everyones Founders pack money and they would not charge for anything ever again. People would complain that if they do that there will be no new content or something raging their voices to the sky about it. Or they would complain that they had to pay for an internet connection to play the game and that meant that it wasn't actually free to play. Or that they had to upgrade their computer because it wasn't fast enough so that means it isn't free to play. It is the nature of people to complain and to warp facts to support their opinion
0
providenttMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 0Arc User
If Cryptic announced tomorrow that they were changing the model of the game to completely free they were refunding everyones Founders pack money and they would not charge for anything ever again. People would complain that if they do that there will be no new content or something
Referring to me I'm guessing? There's a significant difference between raging/complaining and asking for opinions about a legitimate concern. Without questioning the status-quo nothing will improve. The trick is taking on information instead of dismissing it, and voicing your issue in a proper way instead of predicting the downfall of the game.
Referring to me I'm guessing? There's a significant difference between raging/complaining and asking for opinions about a legitimate concern. Without questioning the status-quo nothing will improve. The trick is taking on information instead of dismissing it, and voicing your issue in a proper way instead of predicting the downfall of the game.
Dude I never mentioned anyone by name and if you feel that it was about you I am sorry and perhaps you should think about that. I had human beings in mind when I wrote it not specific people.
0
providenttMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 0Arc User
Dude I never mentioned anyone by name and if you feel that it was about you I am sorry and perhaps you should think about that. I had human beings in mind when I wrote it not specific people.
If it wasn't then I'm sorry. Kinda felt like a poke at my thread from the other day.
But yeah both our points still remain regarding some people out there.
I don't think they could do anything and not get complaints If Cryptic announced tomorrow that they were changing the model of the game to completely free they were refunding everyones Founders pack money and they would not charge for anything ever again. People would complain that if they do that there will be no new content or something raging their voices to the sky about it. Or they would complain that they had to pay for an internet connection to play the game and that meant that it wasn't actually free to play. Or that they had to upgrade their computer because it wasn't fast enough so that means it isn't free to play. It is the nature of people to complain and to warp facts to support their opinion
You forgot they would complain yesterday was Tuesday when they DEMANDED it be Friday!
I dont have problems to spend lots of money into my hobby/games. But i have a problem to spend 200 Euro on a company which only makes promises and disappointed in the past, even if i am a huge fan of D&D.
Where are the moderate starter packages, lets say for the prize of a standard video game? 60 Euro? 200 Euro is just ridicilous - you really must be kidding. There are so few information about the game, if the price wouldnt prevent me buying the game - the lacking information does.
Too many bad experiences in the past - also with Cryptic! I will never again buy a game before release - even more not for 200 Euro.
0
drwarpeffectMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 71Arc User
edited February 2013
Paid access for beta may be the new model for online games BUT:
1) Just because it is industry practice does not necessarily make it good for consumers, eg it used to be industry practice in the oil business to set monopoly pricing
2) Just because it is industry practice does not necessarily make it good even for the companies involved, American steel manufacturers refused to update their equipment because of the high cost, this allowed Japanese steel to supplant them
3) When an industry changes how they operate to "increase their efficiency, ie profitability," they often get unintended bad consequences for themselves, eg American corporations began making it a common practice to do layoffs to increase the short-term bottom line which led American workers to cease seeing themselves as one-company employees and greatly increase employee turnover which hurts profitability. In other words, when corporations showed no loyalty to their workers, the workers stop showing nearly as much company loyalty.
In reference to item 3 above, the pay to beta test has already caused two new problems for game companies in the betas I have participated in or tracked. One, players feel that the company owes them more since they have paid to participate (something I would agree with). Two, there is much less real testing by participants since anyone is given the opportunity if they pay. How would you like to have heart surgery from anyone willing to pay $1000 for a license?
0
castagyreMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 4Arc User
edited February 2013
I don't think these beta weekends are about us testing anything anyways. It's about them slagging their systems to see what they can handle while gauging how popular the game will be so they can finalize everything for launch. 3 or 4 days a few times over a couple of months is not enough time for most of us to really test anything. They have other, real testers for that.
Remembering Hanlon's Razor can save one a lot on aspirines.
0
drwarpeffectMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 71Arc User
edited February 2013
castagyre: excellent post. So now beta must just mean "we will take your money which at minimum is what complete games used to cost, you get to play our incomplete game." A strange change of meaning for a perfectly adequate term that used to have a very important meaning. I particularly love how the beta application rates your chances of getting in the beta without letting you know the highest rating goes to "I do not know anything about testing at all but my Mom will pay $60 so I will be out of her hair this weekend and two other weekends."
So we will take the higher of those two values (which is 2x higher than the lower one)
To reach the low end of your 50,000 to 500,000 Q would have to hit 2.5 times more expensive and to hit the high side it would have to be 25 times more.
I was converting to $1 with those final two numbers (or 100 Zen). That's where those caps came from.
im sure we will have a lot of free beta keys, mmorpg.com and others. Maybe they will work for first weekend even
0
drwarpeffectMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 71Arc User
edited February 2013
The company released a tentative schedule that indicated only founders could get in the first weekend. Someone linked to it in this (or some other thread).
Paid access for beta may be the new model for online games BUT:
1) Just because it is industry practice does not necessarily make it good for consumers, eg it used to be industry practice in the oil business to set monopoly pricing
2) Just because it is industry practice does not necessarily make it good even for the companies involved, American steel manufacturers refused to update their equipment because of the high cost, this allowed Japanese steel to supplant them
3) When an industry changes how they operate to "increase their efficiency, ie profitability," they often get unintended bad consequences for themselves, eg American corporations began making it a common practice to do layoffs to increase the short-term bottom line which led American workers to cease seeing themselves as one-company employees and greatly increase employee turnover which hurts profitability. In other words, when corporations showed no loyalty to their workers, the workers stop showing nearly as much company loyalty.
In reference to item 3 above, the pay to beta test has already caused two new problems for game companies in the betas I have participated in or tracked. One, players feel that the company owes them more since they have paid to participate (something I would agree with). Two, there is much less real testing by participants since anyone is given the opportunity if they pay. How would you like to have heart surgery from anyone willing to pay $1000 for a license?
Pretty much all of this^
Also, a lot of this stuff wasn't "industry practice" until very recently and just because "others are doing it" doesn't make it right or the best practice. Game companies didn't used to sell beta access till people started pre-ordering hyped up games like GW2 in advance and they decided to give them beta access to keep them happy till the game was ready, so people started suddenly pre-ordering en masse to just to play an unfinished game (since unfortunately that's how the instant gratification mentality of most gamers tends to work). So other game companies figured "Hey, if they're willing to pay up just for beta access..."
But GW2 at least was just $60 for an entire game, or something like $150 for collectors edition with limited edition action figure. Now we're suddenly talking $200 for purely digital items that are less than the value or development cost (by FAAAAARRRR) than an entire game, a limited game currency that can only be spent on select items we have no way of knowing we may actually want and whose value is impossible to determine, and no monthly stipend. And unlike an action figure have "0" production costs and no collection value. They're just a string of data that the user doesn't even get to keep, but only get access to once the game launched (and for as long as its still running).
____________________________
0
xaralleiMember, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 101Arc User
edited February 2013
Yeah, I have to say it's way overpriced. If there was a monthly stipend...maybe I'd get it. Maybe. Even then I'm not sure. But as it is now, it's not worth the price tag (even though it has the cat that I want).
0
iamtruthseekerMember, Moonstars, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
Where are the moderate starter packages, lets say for the prize of a standard video game? 60 Euro? 200 Euro is just ridicilous - you really must be kidding. There are so few information about the game, if the price wouldnt prevent me buying the game - the lacking information does.
I don't think these beta weekends are about us testing anything anyways. It's about them slagging their systems to see what they can handle while gauging how popular the game will be so they can finalize everything for launch. 3 or 4 days a few times over a couple of months is not enough time for most of us to really test anything. They have other, real testers for that.
Nope, see the another thread where people complain if they can't play all classes. It's testing. Not alpha testing, but testing none the less.
Only thing I would like to say, I think it would have been better to offer extra incentive(s) with the packs, something along the lines ( depending on the Pack purchased )
Hero's Pack: A piece of Artwork that is signed by the artist, or some quality collectors item. With access to a pre, pre-launch of beta to play with selected Devs of the game.
Something along those lines,
Heck I Paid only $120.00 for my Collectors Edition Witcher 2 and I got lots of extra stuff with that, I wasen't disappointed at all with that purchase, and that is the most I ever paid for a PC title.
And all though I could never see it happening, if CDPR folded tomorrow, I would still have the Witcher Titles to play.
yea i keep hearing its tesing none the less, but from what i understand alpha is still going on between the weekend betas so to me that says they are the testers, im just gonna play, i will give feedback where needed
0
xmyfinalsinxMember, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
edited February 2013
The Main Concern I have here is purely Cosmetic. Taking a look at the shown Menzoberranzan Renegade they are much lighter skinned and have blond hair unlike the drows we've been shown before. Are these skin and hair colors available to regular drow as well?
In betas where I was invited to play for free, I do the best I can to report glitches and also offer positive feedback if I thought something was very well done.
In betas, where I've paid for the privilege to play it? Yeah, probably just gonna play.
SHADOW - A secret cabal for those who thirst for wealth and power. Check out SHADOW on YouTube!
Comments
STO 91 D to 1 Zen
CO 194 Q to 1 Zen
So we will take the higher of those two values (which is 2x higher than the lower one)
To reach the low end of your 50,000 to 500,000 Q would have to hit 2.5 times more expensive and to hit the high side it would have to be 25 times more.
Now I have no idea how much the exchange rate was when each of those games started so I really can't even draw on that to estimate the value.
Oh for people who don't know you can buy Zen for 100 per $1 US
No package deals as far as I can tell, just a straight $1 US to 100 Zen
Oh or where you asking how much Zen things cost in the game?
People are willing to pay *shrugs* I won't say whether I think it is right or wrong but in much regards this also is simple economics. People are not only willing but want to...and frankly have been begging to do so since the day I joined the forums.
However beyond that Cryptic has assured not only the general public but the Forum Moderators as well that they are not selling Closed Beta Access. They are only selling the in game content and perks and giving Beta Access as a bonus and that's excellent marketing when you think about it. The Beta Keys are likely the most desired part of the Founders Packs and without a doubt most people wouldn't have purchased a Founders Pack without the inclusion of Beta Access. Sadly the prices are pretty steep whether or not you feel they are overpriced which leads people to the assumption that they are selling Beta Access rather than content.
I assure you they're not, but at this point there is absolutely no way to prove it to anybody.
STO: 9100 D / Dollar
CO: 19400 Q / Dollar
This would put Astral Diamonds as 5.5x as expensive as D and 11.5x as expensive as Q based on the 1670 AD / Dollar figure.
Again, as a new game demand will be far higher than in the other games so this really doesn't seem too obscene to me.
Thanks for the information Keirken, it was exactly what I needed
That difference is just semantics. It still would be no difference. With kickstarter you would have to pay to get the access and paying is paying. It is a fine way to start a game and common in the new F2P model that many games are using now. Many F2P games are including beta access as one thing you get in their "Founders" packages now.
Thing is, even if it was a required purchase to play the game, that would make it a B2P game which is still a great consumer-friendly payment model.
Most of the unhappiness I read about the packs stems from people either not reading that the Beta Keys are free add-ons (to increase sales of course) or not believing the packs are truly worth what they state.
Frankly I don't believe they could sell the packs and not get complaints so I just shrug it off and encourage users to not take it personally. Not that I don't care but at the end of the day everybody has the right to an opinion so if they want to believe Cryptic is lieing about the Beta Access not being part of the sale then I simply relay the information I have and leave it up to them to decide.
I don't think they could do anything and not get complaints
Referring to me I'm guessing? There's a significant difference between raging/complaining and asking for opinions about a legitimate concern. Without questioning the status-quo nothing will improve. The trick is taking on information instead of dismissing it, and voicing your issue in a proper way instead of predicting the downfall of the game.
Dude I never mentioned anyone by name and if you feel that it was about you I am sorry and perhaps you should think about that. I had human beings in mind when I wrote it not specific people.
If it wasn't then I'm sorry. Kinda felt like a poke at my thread from the other day.
But yeah both our points still remain regarding some people out there.
BTW I would actually rather a B2P model too would be easier on my wallet in the long run.
You forgot they would complain yesterday was Tuesday when they DEMANDED it be Friday!
Where are the moderate starter packages, lets say for the prize of a standard video game? 60 Euro? 200 Euro is just ridicilous - you really must be kidding. There are so few information about the game, if the price wouldnt prevent me buying the game - the lacking information does.
Too many bad experiences in the past - also with Cryptic! I will never again buy a game before release - even more not for 200 Euro.
1) Just because it is industry practice does not necessarily make it good for consumers, eg it used to be industry practice in the oil business to set monopoly pricing
2) Just because it is industry practice does not necessarily make it good even for the companies involved, American steel manufacturers refused to update their equipment because of the high cost, this allowed Japanese steel to supplant them
3) When an industry changes how they operate to "increase their efficiency, ie profitability," they often get unintended bad consequences for themselves, eg American corporations began making it a common practice to do layoffs to increase the short-term bottom line which led American workers to cease seeing themselves as one-company employees and greatly increase employee turnover which hurts profitability. In other words, when corporations showed no loyalty to their workers, the workers stop showing nearly as much company loyalty.
In reference to item 3 above, the pay to beta test has already caused two new problems for game companies in the betas I have participated in or tracked. One, players feel that the company owes them more since they have paid to participate (something I would agree with). Two, there is much less real testing by participants since anyone is given the opportunity if they pay. How would you like to have heart surgery from anyone willing to pay $1000 for a license?
I was converting to $1 with those final two numbers (or 100 Zen). That's where those caps came from.
Just showing how absurd the 'retail value' was.
Pretty much all of this^
Also, a lot of this stuff wasn't "industry practice" until very recently and just because "others are doing it" doesn't make it right or the best practice. Game companies didn't used to sell beta access till people started pre-ordering hyped up games like GW2 in advance and they decided to give them beta access to keep them happy till the game was ready, so people started suddenly pre-ordering en masse to just to play an unfinished game (since unfortunately that's how the instant gratification mentality of most gamers tends to work). So other game companies figured "Hey, if they're willing to pay up just for beta access..."
But GW2 at least was just $60 for an entire game, or something like $150 for collectors edition with limited edition action figure. Now we're suddenly talking $200 for purely digital items that are less than the value or development cost (by FAAAAARRRR) than an entire game, a limited game currency that can only be spent on select items we have no way of knowing we may actually want and whose value is impossible to determine, and no monthly stipend. And unlike an action figure have "0" production costs and no collection value. They're just a string of data that the user doesn't even get to keep, but only get access to once the game launched (and for as long as its still running).
Buy the guardian pack for 60 US.
Nope, see the another thread where people complain if they can't play all classes. It's testing. Not alpha testing, but testing none the less.
WOW!!! This thread has been popular.
Only thing I would like to say, I think it would have been better to offer extra incentive(s) with the packs, something along the lines ( depending on the Pack purchased )
Hero's Pack: A piece of Artwork that is signed by the artist, or some quality collectors item. With access to a pre, pre-launch of beta to play with selected Devs of the game.
Something along those lines,
Heck I Paid only $120.00 for my Collectors Edition Witcher 2 and I got lots of extra stuff with that, I wasen't disappointed at all with that purchase, and that is the most I ever paid for a PC title.
And all though I could never see it happening, if CDPR folded tomorrow, I would still have the Witcher Titles to play.
All in The Eyes of The Beholder I guess.
Cheers! All
Guardian Pack :
" May The Wind be Always At Your Back "
In betas, where I've paid for the privilege to play it? Yeah, probably just gonna play.
Check out SHADOW on YouTube!