test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Player Proposed Business Plan to Provide Revenue via the Foundry and meet Player Need
vandignesca
Member Posts: 162 Arc User
To Whom It May Concern,
I’ve been thinking about the Foundry and what Cryptic should do and what we should expect regarding its function and maintenance in the context of f2p.
What I’ve come up with is a proposed business and action plan for the next few modules going forward on how they could improve the foundry, and also make money, and satisfy some player requests. I realize this may be a bit of a long post, but I hope folks read it, and even if my plan won’t work out, maybe it will spark an idea in a developer, or manager, or another player to propose something. Please forgive the length of this post; I have thought about this a long time, and want to get everything I’ve come up with across.
First off, I have come to the conclusion that it is unreasonable to ask that the Foundry be maintained as desired completely free of a revenue stream. It costs money from a server and general maintenance perspective, and it also costs, and will cost developer time if changes do occur. So what I propose is a plan of action that combines free improvements to the Foundry that designers and players might want (at least I want them) and also allows for revenue to be made.
I think free changes and improvements to the Foundry should include bug fixes, minor quality of life improvements/features, and content that due to the current situation of the game’s module releases, feels wrong to charge players for.
First, I will list a brief summary of what changes I would like to see both short- and long-term and then go into further reasoning/clarification.
Free changes:
General bugfixing/small quality of life improvements.
Easy-to-implement feature improvements or changes.
Encounters, art, sound, sets, zones, dungeons from quests or instances, and objects etc. that have not been included in the Foundry yet but which would be thematically appropriate for content from launch through module 4. I think it would seem unfair to charge players retroactively for module content. In addition, we have received scattershot updates, if you will, related to all of these modules already so to charge for what’s missing seems disingenuous.
Paid changes:
Major features improvements that took up lots of development time. The recent discussion on how to implement dragons into the Foundry could perhaps be an example of this.
Encounters, art, sound, sets, zones, dungeons from quests or instances, and objects etc. from Module 5 going forward.
About Pricing:
Now, I have only been here in this community for almost half a year now, so I have not seen everything that has come to this game since launch, but I have seen that many people have said that they simply would not pay anything for improvements to the Foundry. I understand the impulse to not want one’s creativity to be hampered by a cost, but I think this is an unfair, yes unfair and unreasonable expectation to have, given that one’s ability to create will be enhanced by the hard work of others. That being said, I think it is ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL that the pricing for Foundry items be fair, and not feel exploitative which I feel some of the things in the zen store are (such as 6k zen for a green artifact). I have come up with my own pricing scheme which I feel is fairly low but also significant enough to provide some revenue to Cryptic/PWE.
It should be understood that Foundry content cannot be seen by management as fluff like mounts/companions etc. for which they can charge heavily to make revenue. Ideally, I hope this would provide a small but stable revenue stream for Cryptic/PWE from Foundry authors that ideally would in the end be similar to an optional subscription, but the players would not be renting services, we would be owning stuff permanently.
I have come up with the following pricing system for Foundry content which I think is fair given the amount of work it would involve.
With each module, a number of asset packs would be released containing Foundry content relevant to a previous (not current) module’s content. This would keep official content from being challenged by Foundry authors, and it also seems more realistic from a developer burden perspective. I would not expect Foundry content to stay current to current official releases.
The Asset Packs:
Art Pack: Contains new zone maps relevant to the module, set pieces, new art objects etc. that players can place in their Foundry. Price: 400-500 zen depending on actual number of assets.
Sound and Animations Pack: Relevant sounds, emotes, music, and emotes that characters could perform in a Foundry. Price: 300-400 zen depending on amount included.
Encounters and Costumes Pack: New mob encounters and any relevant costumes related to that module. Price: 300-400 zen depending on number of encounters and costumes.
Now, you may have noticed I skipped over new features. Features are tricky because they can require more dev time, and as such they do cost money. However, I think it would seem in poor taste to charge separately in a module’s asset packs for a feature. What I propose is a way for any new major features (such as dragon bosses
) to be unlocked for an account once it has purchased any one of the 3 related asset packs. That way there’s still a sense of getting stuff along with the feature, but it would also provide revenue and money for all the work that went into making that feature.
If this proves popular, this would provide a recurring 1k-1.3k zen sink for Foundry enthusiasts everytime a new module came around, which would hopefully generate enough regular revenue for Cryptic/PWE to think this is worthwhile. From a player/consumer perspective, this would be $10-$15 each module that I would pay if I wanted to keep my Foundry as up-to-date as possible. I think this is fair.
In addition, I want to discuss the timing of this. I recognize that we are on the brink of another module release, and there’s probably a fair amount of stuff in the pipeline that can’t be moved in the event some of these ideas are picked up. I also think it’s fair to argue that Cryptic shouldn’t keep the Foundry updates current to the module they release with…otherwise it’s kind of unfair to the wonderful paid developers who put in all their hard work into the main game’s story. It could also cut into revenue that might be related to the current module release. Therefore, I propose a system of staggered releases and updates going forward that, if they are implemented according to my timeline, for example, would see Rise of Tiamat Foundry content release with Module 8.
This is my proposed timeline for Foundry updates/improvements.
Module 6: First half of the basic Foundry bug squashing quest. Fix the simple bugs that are present or implement the simple quality of life improvements players have requested. I’m not going to link to them here. There are soooo many. Eldarth has a great list, but it should not be assumed it is comprehensive. If you don’t want to look, announce if you plan to do this, and have us generate some issues fresh to give to the devs.
Module 7: Second half the bug fixing/small feature improvement requests implemented. Release of any missing complementary art/sound/encounters that are germane to the content from launch game to module 4, ToD.
Module 8: Release of Rise of Tiamat asset packs.
Module 9: Release of Module 6 asset packs.
And so on……
I do not assume my plan is foolproof, but I hope it provides a fair compromise between player demand and revenue expectations and developer time. Thank you for your time fellow players/foundry authors, and developers of this fun game. I wish you all good luck
Sincerely,
Vandignesca
I’ve been thinking about the Foundry and what Cryptic should do and what we should expect regarding its function and maintenance in the context of f2p.
What I’ve come up with is a proposed business and action plan for the next few modules going forward on how they could improve the foundry, and also make money, and satisfy some player requests. I realize this may be a bit of a long post, but I hope folks read it, and even if my plan won’t work out, maybe it will spark an idea in a developer, or manager, or another player to propose something. Please forgive the length of this post; I have thought about this a long time, and want to get everything I’ve come up with across.
First off, I have come to the conclusion that it is unreasonable to ask that the Foundry be maintained as desired completely free of a revenue stream. It costs money from a server and general maintenance perspective, and it also costs, and will cost developer time if changes do occur. So what I propose is a plan of action that combines free improvements to the Foundry that designers and players might want (at least I want them) and also allows for revenue to be made.
I think free changes and improvements to the Foundry should include bug fixes, minor quality of life improvements/features, and content that due to the current situation of the game’s module releases, feels wrong to charge players for.
First, I will list a brief summary of what changes I would like to see both short- and long-term and then go into further reasoning/clarification.
Free changes:
General bugfixing/small quality of life improvements.
Easy-to-implement feature improvements or changes.
Encounters, art, sound, sets, zones, dungeons from quests or instances, and objects etc. that have not been included in the Foundry yet but which would be thematically appropriate for content from launch through module 4. I think it would seem unfair to charge players retroactively for module content. In addition, we have received scattershot updates, if you will, related to all of these modules already so to charge for what’s missing seems disingenuous.
Paid changes:
Major features improvements that took up lots of development time. The recent discussion on how to implement dragons into the Foundry could perhaps be an example of this.
Encounters, art, sound, sets, zones, dungeons from quests or instances, and objects etc. from Module 5 going forward.
About Pricing:
Now, I have only been here in this community for almost half a year now, so I have not seen everything that has come to this game since launch, but I have seen that many people have said that they simply would not pay anything for improvements to the Foundry. I understand the impulse to not want one’s creativity to be hampered by a cost, but I think this is an unfair, yes unfair and unreasonable expectation to have, given that one’s ability to create will be enhanced by the hard work of others. That being said, I think it is ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL that the pricing for Foundry items be fair, and not feel exploitative which I feel some of the things in the zen store are (such as 6k zen for a green artifact). I have come up with my own pricing scheme which I feel is fairly low but also significant enough to provide some revenue to Cryptic/PWE.
It should be understood that Foundry content cannot be seen by management as fluff like mounts/companions etc. for which they can charge heavily to make revenue. Ideally, I hope this would provide a small but stable revenue stream for Cryptic/PWE from Foundry authors that ideally would in the end be similar to an optional subscription, but the players would not be renting services, we would be owning stuff permanently.
I have come up with the following pricing system for Foundry content which I think is fair given the amount of work it would involve.
With each module, a number of asset packs would be released containing Foundry content relevant to a previous (not current) module’s content. This would keep official content from being challenged by Foundry authors, and it also seems more realistic from a developer burden perspective. I would not expect Foundry content to stay current to current official releases.
The Asset Packs:
Art Pack: Contains new zone maps relevant to the module, set pieces, new art objects etc. that players can place in their Foundry. Price: 400-500 zen depending on actual number of assets.
Sound and Animations Pack: Relevant sounds, emotes, music, and emotes that characters could perform in a Foundry. Price: 300-400 zen depending on amount included.
Encounters and Costumes Pack: New mob encounters and any relevant costumes related to that module. Price: 300-400 zen depending on number of encounters and costumes.
Now, you may have noticed I skipped over new features. Features are tricky because they can require more dev time, and as such they do cost money. However, I think it would seem in poor taste to charge separately in a module’s asset packs for a feature. What I propose is a way for any new major features (such as dragon bosses
) to be unlocked for an account once it has purchased any one of the 3 related asset packs. That way there’s still a sense of getting stuff along with the feature, but it would also provide revenue and money for all the work that went into making that feature.If this proves popular, this would provide a recurring 1k-1.3k zen sink for Foundry enthusiasts everytime a new module came around, which would hopefully generate enough regular revenue for Cryptic/PWE to think this is worthwhile. From a player/consumer perspective, this would be $10-$15 each module that I would pay if I wanted to keep my Foundry as up-to-date as possible. I think this is fair.
In addition, I want to discuss the timing of this. I recognize that we are on the brink of another module release, and there’s probably a fair amount of stuff in the pipeline that can’t be moved in the event some of these ideas are picked up. I also think it’s fair to argue that Cryptic shouldn’t keep the Foundry updates current to the module they release with…otherwise it’s kind of unfair to the wonderful paid developers who put in all their hard work into the main game’s story. It could also cut into revenue that might be related to the current module release. Therefore, I propose a system of staggered releases and updates going forward that, if they are implemented according to my timeline, for example, would see Rise of Tiamat Foundry content release with Module 8.
This is my proposed timeline for Foundry updates/improvements.
Module 6: First half of the basic Foundry bug squashing quest. Fix the simple bugs that are present or implement the simple quality of life improvements players have requested. I’m not going to link to them here. There are soooo many. Eldarth has a great list, but it should not be assumed it is comprehensive. If you don’t want to look, announce if you plan to do this, and have us generate some issues fresh to give to the devs.
Module 7: Second half the bug fixing/small feature improvement requests implemented. Release of any missing complementary art/sound/encounters that are germane to the content from launch game to module 4, ToD.
Module 8: Release of Rise of Tiamat asset packs.
Module 9: Release of Module 6 asset packs.
And so on……
I do not assume my plan is foolproof, but I hope it provides a fair compromise between player demand and revenue expectations and developer time. Thank you for your time fellow players/foundry authors, and developers of this fun game. I wish you all good luck
Sincerely,
Vandignesca
Love yourself, and focus on the rest of the madness of life later.
Post edited by vandignesca on
0
Comments
Of course as we've been told by the recent reddit ama, 'the metrics just aren't there' for foundry development.
The Devs workload is determined by people higher up the food chain (probably the Marketing dept.) as well as WotC release dates.
I just wish they'd have ONE Dev dedicated to fixing the QoL issues. Also, putting better drops in the Foundry quests and dropping Rhix's daily to 2 foundries instead of 2 would do a lot in getting more players, myself included.
I think the community just has to accept that in order for work to be done, we have to pay for stuff. If it creates multiple classes of Foundry authors...so be it. That's part of life....those who want work done pay others to do it or do it themselves...I think the Foundry stuff we pay for SHOULD be desirable to bring in revenue so we can keep it updated and improved. It SHOULD make people want to play the Foundries that have those things, and it SHOULD make Foundry authors want to buy them. But it SHOULD also be fairly priced and not be a large constant expense, which is why I propose a small offer of new content to coincide with each module launch. I think this consciousness that everything an artist does should be free just has to be left behind in this case because our ability as artists is directly related to the hard work of other people, who deserve to be paid for that work.
We aren't in a private studio writing in a notebook with only our pen and paper doing the work, our work affects others. I know some Foundry authors just want to be able to work freely within the context of this being a f2p game and create stuff they want, and I do sympathize, I could be considered just barely middle class in real life...I would have to budget for this content myself, not just buy it casually. The community just has to realize that this program doesn't exist in a vacuum. For it to improve our ability to make wonderful works of art, other folks will have to work on it, and it is fair for them to ask payment. I think different classes is just something we have to accept, and I don't necessarily see it as a bad thing, it might drive desire to purchase these items, which would bring in the revenue PWE/Cryptic wants.
Soo much this ^^^ and especially this ^^^
You want to charge authors for the free labor they are creating for unlimited new content?
ABSOLUTELY not. I know if this happens, I, and many, many, many other authors will be gone in a heartbeat.
Encounter Matrix | Advanced Foundry Topics
This statement should clue you in... on how much you are slighting the work of foundry authors.
There are many authors who are releasing their HARD WORK for no payout whatsoever. Yes, it is a combination of hard work from both cryptic and foundry authors. But cryptic is ALREADY making money from those art assets, because they are getting used in the game world content that the zen store should be generating revenue for.
If anything, integrating zen store interaction with the foundry is the way forward. Having the current week's zen store sale items also have a chance to drop as temporary rewards in daily eligible final chests would be amazingly effective. If a player can run around with a temporary Yeth Hound mount for a few playtime hours, they will be more inclined to actually go buy one. The marketing team would then have metrics to measure the efficacy of the foundry on zen store sales... and thus have a way to allocate hours for continued foundry dev time.
Foundry coins could be used to outright buy temporary versions of zen store items. There are many ways that cryptic could establish a better zen store footprint using the foundry!
The foundry itself does not NEED to be monetized. The marketing team and dev team should be working together to discover ways to generate interest in zen store content using the foundry, which would also make playing foundries more desirable.
As far as advertising goes....I am actually opposed to that idea. I play and make Foundries for fun adventures and for immersion in an environment or story. To deal with advertisements or things that remind me to buy in the store would turn me away from the Foundry. I don't want commercialism in the story itself, but I don't think it's wrong to pay for the computer that wrote it, the paper its typed on, and the ink on the page.
I want you to think about the above quote from your post. Cryptic is already making money from the stuff they have ALREADY created. We are asking for NEW CREATIONS, new work. Why is it so wrong for them to ask for money for NEW WORK.
P.S.-Just so you know Essenti...I'm a Foundry author myself. I've made Foundries, deleted some, submitted one for the official contest. I like using the tools and I want them to improve, but I know that for that to happen someone else will have to devote their time and energy and money to get that to happen. If other Foundry authors feel slighted, I'm sorry, but I just think you are wrong and have bad expectations regarding what is possible and what will work.
What you propose is a potential avenue for getting the foundry more attention from the devs. But, I feel ashamed for you that you are so zealously opposed to exploring options that utilize the financial model that cryptic has ALREADY based their ENTIRE free to play model upon...
Utilizing this logic, then the devs should stop creating anything at all for this game, since the zen store and its advertising is THE way that this game brings in revenue.
I'm not zealousy opposing your way to monetize the Foundry, I'm just listing my objections to it. It's possible a compromise might exist there.
As for the rest of your post-can we focus on your last quote of me and what you said? "the zen store and its advertising is THE way that this game brings in revenue." First of all, my proposal uses the Zen store. It is the direct purchase of new goods from the store that I believe will generate revenue. Secondly, nothing in the Zen store was made without developer work either. It didn't just appear. In this way, my idea is actually more consistent with their business model than yours I believe because in-game advertising is actually relatively rare as far as normal gameplay goes. Those mounts in the Zen store, require animators to hook up the meshes and get the skeletons working right. It requires sound engineers to make the "neighs" or whatever is appropriate for the mount being used. Artists make the texture. These same people also make the free content that we see in the game world. So it could be understood that the "fluff" of the zen store currently pays for the free dungeons and gameworld. That is the revenue stream for official content as it is today. Foundry updates and improvements is an additional workload on top of whatever free stuff they would release for live story/dungeon gameplay. Thus, in my opinion, it does follow that it deserves a revenue stream of its own in the zen store. Thus, my idea about Foundry content packs after some upfront bugfixing and general improvements I think we deserve due to the game's current development stage.
I sincerely believe my suggestion is really fair if you think about it. I just hope the community understands....
I also disagree that the player base would be drawn to Foundry content with "the good, special content." The majority of the player base does not understand the Foundry, has no interest in understanding it, and flat out doesn't care. The difference between a regular and premium quest would be lost on most. They will one star masterpieces because they got bad loot, after ignoring the warning that authors don't control that. Farm quests that took a half hour to make are on the Best List. The incentive to buy the special tools and content is not as powerful as you might think, and having it would have slim to no effect on the popularity of a quest in the long run.
The alternative being proposed is the put the Foundry content itself - 100% of it - to work generating interest in their merchandise. It's a solution that lends itself to the big picture. Instead of frustrating a fraction of the player base, entice and encourage them as a whole: Draw players to the Foundry content with improved Foundry hour/Rhix Daily rewards/unique rewards. Populate the Foundry reward tables with temp items, coupons - anything they can think of that might draw customers. Grant authors access to models based on items from the store and lock boxes. Heck, put ads about weekly sales on my load screen. The all important step 3: measure the effectiveness of the advertising to justify future expenses.
I recognize that many problems in the Foundry such as the reward structure preclude much of the player base from using it. It would be my hope, as I outlined vaguely I suppose in my plan that prior to the monetizing, general bugfixing AND quality of life improvements such as proper rewards would take place to make the Foundry an attractive part of Neverwinter. I would hope this would be advertised and it would get player interest in the Foundry building enough such that people would want to play them and authors would want to create them.
I have not suggested otherwise at any point in my posts. I fully recognize that there is a lot of work that goes in to developing content. I find it offensive that you are talking down to me about this as if I could not possibly be aware of it.
I have thought about it. I am also thinking about the fact that cryptic stated that they would never monetize the foundry itself, they would never make authors pay money to create free content for them. My primary concern is that currently cryptic has no way of justifying development time on the foundry.
Right now, the foundry needs better rewards to make it desirable to the player base AND some way for cryptic to measure the efficacy of the foundry to bring in revenue. The idea that I mentioned (which is not mine, it was originally suggested by another player) could achieve both of these goals.
My point about paid Foundry content stands - I think you're overestimating the potential gain, or underestimating the production cost for this paid content. I am extremely skeptical that they would earn back their investment. When you look at the target customer, you're talking about the Neverwinter community, minus the people who don't publish foundries, minus the authors unwilling to pay for content, minus the authors who are okay with it, but unable to justify the price point, minus the people who can afford it, but just aren't making a Foundry with a dragon (for example) right now.
mrthebozer-I understand your point, they do have tons of ways of measuring metrics and stuff, but that stuff comes after the fact, and my idea comes from looking at a vast history of threads made about this subject and realizing that despite how many times advertising has been brought up, no ground has been made on the issue. (Yes, I did look at threads about this btw, but I wanted this one to be my discussion of my idea primarily, which is why I'm active right now, I didn't want to just leave this on page 37 of another thread.) I see a year and a half really, of discussion about Foundry money-making opportunities, a fair few which have brought up advertising, but I have seen no movement on that front. Here is what hypothetically I am imagining might be going on, and why I am trying a route previously unfavored by the community:
(The following is hypothetical and pure speculation on my part; I am in no way associated with any people who work on this game or its affiliates)
-Producer/Community Manager/Dev etc. goes to meeting with superiors to discuss roadmap of the game's development.
-He/She announces communities' desire to see Foundry improved.
-Boss brings up money issue, "How can we do this while making money? We're a company, we can't do it for free."
-Idea is brought up to use the Foundry as an advertising mechanism.
-Concern is brought up that:
*revenue gains from that are speculative association, not direct investment. To find out if it is profitable, do we want to spend the additional money after the fact of looking through Foundry usage data and seeing if there is a correlative jump in zen store purchases by an account post-Foundry gameplay?
*immersion-breaking? Possibly drives people away?
*If discount tokens drop etc....will it actually cause a drop in revenue as people will hold out for these drops to spend money instead of spur of the moment?
*If we make it too good, will it drive people from the main game our devs are making?
I think the answers to those questions have likely been: We're not sure how much money it will bring on/Maybe, hard to tell/Seems a distinct possibility/Perhaps.
All of those responses are negative responses when it comes to revenue gain, which is why I think nothing has been done up to this point.
My proposal provides direct, clear return on investment (if my prices are too low, maybe make them higher even, but I don't think it should be more than $20 per module).
It could be seen as immersion breaking by those who can't or won't pay for content that would assist them in that aspect of their Foundry...true...I admit this is a negative, but I think it's necessary to move forward.
Apart from those in the community who would leave because they don't like this, I don't think it would decrease Zen store revenue. Keep in mind on the current course, some are leaving due to the dearth of Foundry updates as well. I have considered this myself a number of times...so they may lose folks either way.
My delayed schedule will keep current live work relevant.
The haves/have nots is not something we should avoid at all cost. I don't view it as a positive or a negative, it's simply a representation of the fact that not everyone is equal and can afford everything they want in life, and I think the community needs to accept that and not prevent those who do have from getting something they are willing to pay for. I suppose it could be said I should just accept what the community wants with the Foundry and move on, but to be fair, nobody has really received anything have they? With this, if it generates some income and some people use it, some people will get something. The very notion of a store involves the notion that some people will be able to or choose to purchase goods and some won't. The haves/have not divide exists with those who cannot buy mounts/companions either in the zen store or in game, don't have time to run dungeons for gear etc. I am not suggesting it is a matter of just making those folks work harder....I don't want that...but I think they need to realize that some things simply may not be within their realm of possible purchases, and to just let them go, enjoy what they have, but let others who want more and can afford more get more.
I see the argument that more up-to-date Foundries will get more runs and in this case it could be viewed as a side effect that those left behind are left with diminished audiences, tip revenues, achievements etc. as a result of others buying this stuff. I do think this is likely to happen in some cases. I understand there are those who play this game completely free or with minimal cash input and that this roadplan may leave them with an out-of-date Foundry. I think this is just a sad, inevitable fact of life that some people are more lucky or have more opportunities than others. There are some things I have wanted to do in life but could not due to the money I have. I can't afford to save up for a downpayment on a house right now so I rent, and as a result of not getting that money right away, I will be denied the opportunity others who have the money right now have in picking out their place to live. When/if I ever reach that point to afford a house, it's possible that the market may leave me with slimmer pickings. I don't have a solution to this...I just see the road ahead as either holding back everyone and getting nothing, or holding back those who simply can't right now and getting something. Bug fixes and small quality of life improvements are under my requested free updates, and even those who don't pay a dime would get those at least. Right now, we don't even have a planned bugfix schedule for the Foundry.
You're right, the audience right now might be small that they wouldn't receive a ton of money. I hope the community changes its mind on some of these things and that audience will grow to provide them with a nice boost to revenue. Even if the revenue is small however, it would be nice to get some small things, even bugfixes with the promise of profit, rather than nothing.
Very few businesses take risks these days...I just don't see us getting much of anything unless we spend money too. In the end, maybe they would have to charge us for something first like the Tiamat pack later on to see how it goes. I can accept that, but bug fixes should immediately follow.
It's a terrible idea to monetize Foundry such that people have to PAY to help the game out.
But the thing is, PW is clearly utterly incapable of understanding the value of diffuse benefits like Foundry. They don't see anything that doesn't have a price tag directly tied to it as valuable or worth developing. They've been like that since the game released, and there is no indication that's ever going to change.
So at this point, our only choice is 'Foundry, which gets nothing but a cursory nudge from time to time' and 'an obnoxious monetizing that makes us pay for the privilege of making their game more salable.'
The second option stinks, but at this point, it's that or Foundry never goes anywhere.
Wicks and Things: NW-DI4FMZRR4 : The Fenwick merchant family has lost a caravan! Can you help?
Beggar's Hollow: NW-DR6YG4J2L : Someone, or something, has stolen away many of the Fenwicks' children! Can you find out what happened to them?
Into the Fen Wood: NW-DL89DRG7B : Enter the heart of the forest. Can you discover the secret of the Fen Wood?
And this is the elephant in the room that we've been spraining our necks to try and argue our points around: no movement is happening. On any front. All theories on how they can overhaul the system to make the Foundry draw revenue share one thing: an initial investment of time, money, and effort to make it happen. And it sounds like PWE is having none of it. It may be that someone, be it Cryptic, WoTC, the players, or all three, has to do a better job of going to bat for the Foundry and successfully sell the idea. It may be that no amount of persuasion will work. But before ANYTHING can be done, PWE has to decide that it's worth doing. While facing the reality that the Foundry is not the quickest and easiest way to take people's money, no matter what you do.
As mrthebozer already asked, how is charging the fraction of a fraction of the player-base going to generate enough revenue to sustain foundry development?
It simply will not, and ultimately, may do more harm than good for the foundry. If the marketing team sees terribly low returns for direct sales, this could establish enough justification to discontinue improving the foundry completely.
Yes, the foundry needs to show that it can make the company money. How to show that it can make money is what we should be discussing. Blindly holding on to a weak idea because the system requires change, does not make this change a viable route forward. Charging authors for content expansions is not going to generate enough revenue to get us there, not even close.
How is that even possible?
Wicks and Things: NW-DI4FMZRR4 : The Fenwick merchant family has lost a caravan! Can you help?
Beggar's Hollow: NW-DR6YG4J2L : Someone, or something, has stolen away many of the Fenwicks' children! Can you find out what happened to them?
Into the Fen Wood: NW-DL89DRG7B : Enter the heart of the forest. Can you discover the secret of the Fen Wood?
I think discussing how the Foundry can make money is exactly what I am doing. I see now that there is simply a philosophical divide in the community and myself, so far at least that sees monetizing foundry updates to provide content as a bad thing...I really don't see it as a bad thing or some poor compromise...I see it as a fair exchange through and through, and a good thing. I'm just saying I support this, and I believe it is the best option to improve the Foundry. I just wish people felt the way I do I guess, because I believe part of the problem is that the community simply doesn't want to spend money, period, when I feel it should spend money, period...and I'm not a business owner, manager, or employed in anything resembling management. This is my opinion as a peon consumer. I don't think we have a right to expect any work done on our front apart from bug fixes perhaps without paying for it. If it leaves some behind, I say so be it...I don't think that's a negative. I don't think it's good necessarily, but more of a neutral event. People are left behind...what can you do...if you have no money to make them happy anyway? It is not the business' obligation to provide for those who don't give it money. I see that perhaps it may indeed earn less money if what has so far been the opinion against me. I just think that is tragic, truely tragic....
If you had asked me right after the game released, I would have strongly disagreed with monetizing Foundry.
Wicks and Things: NW-DI4FMZRR4 : The Fenwick merchant family has lost a caravan! Can you help?
Beggar's Hollow: NW-DR6YG4J2L : Someone, or something, has stolen away many of the Fenwicks' children! Can you find out what happened to them?
Into the Fen Wood: NW-DL89DRG7B : Enter the heart of the forest. Can you discover the secret of the Fen Wood?
Additionally and for the record, I am not against spending money because of some weird predilection for collecting it and putting it under my mattress >.>
Let us put aside the idea that it's cool to charge people to generate content for you (please paint my house for free with this white paint I mixed up, but you need to give me 20 dollars for the paint...)
What I and others have been trying to get across to you is that the direction you are looking for revenue will not suffice. It will not sustain development in the foundry, and might actually kill it. The big bucks that PWE is looking for is those juicy incremental zen store sales from the much much much larger player-base. Even if 1000 authors paid 10 dollars for an asset pack (which is asking a lot in number of authors), that onetime 10k dollars (ignoring transaction fees) will not provide much in the way of dev time...
However, if the foundry can show that it brings in x% improved microtransactions per month from the zen store, that is potentially thousands of dollars continuously being generated month to month... which would equate to someone's salary for the year... and thus actually sustain continued foundry development.
Now of course they can't charge Z or AD to play a foundry but maybe add a second chest at the end that can be opened with a key that can be bought for Z/AD could work. Of course the chest would have to contain something both useful (so the key is worth it) but no game breaking. Maybe BoP/BoA equipment or fashion or other things that don't impact game mechanics.
I find your paint analogy inexact. Think of the Foundry author's as a home buy or renter. Upper management is the bank or seller. The home is a fix-er-upper. The seller just happens to be the owner of a hardware store that has its employees make tools. The seller decides we can buy his/her property for nothing, but what we have to pay for is the work of his toolshaper's, from which he/she derives their revenue. I think this is fair. The content we will be providing for ourselves will be our own vision, our own creation, not a pre-made home. You ought to pay someone in this transaction something-either the homeowner/seller (as in make the game buy to play, which obviously won't happen) or the toolshapers, who are providing you the means to design your own creation on a free property lot.
You are correct in that if only a few authors will buy the packs then revenue will be slim...I just don't see any other way to get anything done. People from the company have basically said that unless they can clearly earn money from it, they won't bother upgrading it.
Part of the problem is the ratio of actual authors to users, part of the problem is the reward system keeping people way, and I do think part of the problem is this artist-sense of entitlement that creating stuff should be a free experience. I humbly think that anytime someone does something for you, they have a right to ask for payment, and coding tools for us to use is work, even if it's for their game. Ultimately, I think the biggest obstacle is the community. People have to accept that in order to play with fun toys, you might have to pay for them if another person made them. I'm not trying to be condescending in tone, just blunt, because I don't think people agree with or realize that. Revenue would go up if people actually paid for what another person has earned. Though I'm sure this might prove unpopular (I'm not fully endorsing it, just throwing it out there) one solution for limited author revenue is to just make a basic module pack with everything in it, for say $25. In order to both create or play with stuff from that Foundry Module pack, you'd have to buy it, both the player and the creator. Sort of like buying tickets to a museum. I think obviously for this to even be possible Foundry rewards would have to be substantially better than they are now.
One final option, which I find acceptable, but I'm sure others would find distasteful, would be to literally microtransaction everything apart from small quality of life changes and bug fixes. New mob type encounter, $1.99. New village theme set $1.99. etc. This might generate more revenue than general packs. Again, I just am trying to find a way to give them money so they will improve their product. I simply disagree with the opinions presented so far and think mine are fairer and better. I'm saying that lightheartedly internally, not condescendingly. I just disagree. I'd said my piece. At least we can all (I dearly hope) agree that it would be nice to improve the Foundry
Bugfixing, I think, should be free, let me just say that. The bugs in the product as it is currently featured, should be fixed regardless of whether or not it gets future features. It is the honorable thing to do to fix a product that you sell that has issues with it. New features, however, are fair to charge for.
At any rate, if you want authors to get on board with your brilliant idea to fix the foundry, perhaps trying to insult authors about their artist-entitled mindset is not the best way to get us to agree with you.
And it's clear to me that PW just doesn't value Foundry much. So while we KNOW it benefits them, well, brick wall.
So you could also see it a different way, really -- the reward of Foundry authorship is in making stuff. And if you view that as its own little game, then buying extra 'stuff' actually makes sense.
Wicks and Things: NW-DI4FMZRR4 : The Fenwick merchant family has lost a caravan! Can you help?
Beggar's Hollow: NW-DR6YG4J2L : Someone, or something, has stolen away many of the Fenwicks' children! Can you find out what happened to them?
Into the Fen Wood: NW-DL89DRG7B : Enter the heart of the forest. Can you discover the secret of the Fen Wood?
But that's not the case, we're creating content for a PWI game, and we're doing it for free. I don't think we should get charged to create free content for others to play a game that's made by a company. That's like a publisher asking you to do some illustrations to put in his magazine, charge you for it and tell you that your prize is free publicity.
Besides, as others have already said, we are very few authors, aiming at us to obtain some revenue won't really work well.
If they add both more rewards to those playing foundries and a way to obtain money from them they can get much more revenue.