Free to Play question

[Vendetta7]

Hello CP!

First of all, I want to thank you for attempting this monumental task.  SR has by far been my favorite PnP game ever on the market - and I've been gaming since 1979 in fourth grade.

I would however, like to cut right to a question that, frankly, will determine whether or not I even continue looking at the game.  It's regarding the Free to Play model:

Q: In the "Item mall" you will undoubtedly utilize - will you be selling items that have game altering stats (such as weapons, armor, etc...), or will you be selling vanity items only?  Basically; will you be promoting the parasitic business model of "pay to win" that has infected so many other games on the market or do you plan on keeping the playing field even by rewarding players based on actual gameplay?

I do appreciate your time and absolutely wish you the very best in this endeavor,

 - V7

[primetide]

This question has been aslked a few times already and we had lengthy discussions about it. My stance is that: Of course we sell stuff you can get for in-game money. Why would a Shadowrunner NOT buy his equipment - and if he can get his hands at it, why wouldn't he by better equipment than anybody else.
As you have to earn money though missions this is not an issue I beleive.
Now some items you also need contacts, reputation etc. for and some you can buy but need skills to use (magic equipment, softs, drones spring to mind).
Now, if we allow people to downward exchange real money for in-game money, they can afford those items easier than a player who does not pay. The trick in my mind is to make sure they don't just power buy their way into winning. Thus many items require reputation to even get your hands on - and this has to be earned. Other require skills - and they have to be gained. Both happens by playing.
Also "better" items do not mean the super-duper weapon, but just: better than average for THAT power level. They could also mean: Higher durability, less chance of misfire etc. not automatically more damage.

So all in all: This is not a black and white question: We want to motivate players to pay- in essence they will be allowed to exchange a limited amount of money for a limited amount of time they do not need to invest. The trick is to make it easier for people to reach a similar level of power, not to outbuy others
Why is thisn fair in my mind? Because some people can afford to put in work and time (stundents may have more than a fully employed single father with three kids), some can afford to put in money and less time - and both should have equal chances.

And lastly we are also thinking about offering freemium as well - so you pay for content progression instead of items, essentiually buying into continued play.

[Vendetta7]

   Thank you for answering my question.  I spent two hours on the site last night reading many threads and the wall of text that has become the monumental Q and A; although obviously an extremely wealthy source of information (of which I honestly appreciated), it simply numbed me after a while due to the sheer volume.  Hats off to the guy that did it, but if the answer to this question was there I apologize for not seeing it.

   Regarding the topic; first, I wasn't speaking about in-game money (which should be "NuYen") - only real money used for in-game stat altering purposes.  I understand the points you are trying to make - however I'm going to play devil�s advocate.  I know it won't change your position - that's not what I'm trying to do and only a simpleton would think that his whining would alter the course of an entire company�s decision once it has been put in motion.  I'm just going to give you my point of view on the subject that, like your opinion, is immune to persuasion from opposing commentary:

   As a father of two, a retired Navy veteran, now with a full time civilian job while being a full time student at the Art Institute of Atlanta - I am more than familiar with time constraints and limitations.  This is why no-one can bait me with that argument and my response to people who say they can't handle it is simply "Man Up."

   All hobbies require personal time investment to become skilled in or be rewarded for efforts invested.  If you don't have the time to balance out your responsibilities or you lack any form of basic time management skills - you get a new hobby.  Money has never been, nor ever will be a valid replacement for practical application.

   Race car drivers do not tell the officials "Hey, I don't have the time to do the entire race so I need to buy a lap or two from you.  No, no - it's fair; they have time, I have money.  What's the big deal?"

   If a stat altering item costs one single penny, and after purchasing it I am facing off against someone who did not purchase that item, I just paid to alter the odds � therefore by the very nature of the transaction itself and stat altering item, I have paid to win.  No matter how little, that's the bottom line.

   I understand the necessity to have an item mall for a company that has decided to follow a �F2P� business model though.  From a business standpoint - it's not just a "profit" issue like so many other people try to naively simplify the subject into.  Rather, it is bottom line survival.  It is a necessity in today's gaming market.  For every retail game out now, there is another one being offered as a "F2P" alternative.  Marketing alone attributes to a minimum of 35% and upwards of production cost - and people don't even consider the costs associated with providing a fat network pipeline.  It's simply not feasible to do this with a 100% free product and maintain company survivability.

   Regardless, no matter the bells and whistles, rhetorical smoke and mirrors, and 'philosophical debates' - it really is a black and white question once you cut through all of the conjecture and I appreciate you taking the time to answer it.  It's just a question not easily answered due to the balance of trying to maintain the product, net a profit, and satisfy players with a rich enough environment that they gloss over some of the shortcomings that invariably always manifests within perpetual gaming products.  It's a tough order to meet.  Businesses do not come into fruition nor operate for free out the kindness of their hearts - anyone who thinks so will continue to be frustrated that they never seem to advance themselves beyond employee level and wonder why their employers say they don't have the understanding necessary to grasp the needs a business requires to drive it forward.

   I'll be maintaining my "Astral Sentry" presence on this product as it develops.  I think you have some basic good ideas on how to at least somewhat �balance� the item mall stat purchases.  It is simply way too early for anyone to make a judgment call either way, so I am interested in how this will fare and will continue to update our Clan accordingly.

   Again, thank you for your time,

 - V7

www(.)archangelsgaming(.)com

[primetide]

Thank you for the well worded and thoughtful reply - we are in fact not totally immune to arguments, which is why I mentioned freemium as anotheroption to monetize - especially for those who are willing to pay, but do want equal footing for all based on merit.
I think it is indeed a question of balancing, but it of course it is also a question of preferences- some poeple mind more than others. Let's finish the discourse for now, as we are indeed far from the point where either position can be argued in relation to the game and just say, that we are acutely aware of the position which seems to be strong among SR fans (and has also been strong amongts JAO fans) and as long as we are making enough money another way  I have little emotional attachment to F2P

[Vendetta7]

Understood and will comply.  Consider me to be on your cheerleading squad to the rest of the gen pop out there for now.

I would be able to promote this a lot better with a fan site kit... <ahem>   

[primetide]

let us get our own site and sr domain running first, then we will see about the kit

[Vendetta7]

lol.

kk. 

[primetide]

oh and kudos for the job plus stduies- I am teaching university on the side of running cliffhanger with my partner and have to kids...and I barely get around to playing games anymore - other than what my kids want me to play, that is

[Vendetta7]

   Thank you.  I appreciate that.  It is quite challenging - so like you said 'playing' games have become more and more 'lean'.  I am changing the industry I am involved in altogether by leaving the field I am experienced in (Naval Structural Engineering and Damage Control) to a field that I have much more of an interest and passion in now - Video Games.

   However, if I went straight for a video game development degree I would be competing against 22 to 26 year olds upon completion and it's simply rather foolish for me to think I would be able to get a toe hold in the industry with that kind of employment 'liability.'

   So my trick is to finish my Web Development and Interactive Media degree, giving me a source of income while simultaneously providing me some solid core skills to continue honing for video game production.

   There ya go - my play by play five year model.  =)

[tajlund]

Great info.  Hey Vendetta, familiar gaming history.  I started gaming in 1980 in 4th grade.  Air Force Disabled Vet here.

[Vendetta7]

/salute!

/ready.... to!

[Supplantsalot]

World of Tanks (WoT) has a system which encourages premium membership by offering additional experience.  This could be quite an incentive if you design it into the karma system in this game.  It might work sufficiently well enough to circumvent any need to sell premium ingame items.  Everybody is happy.  The other thing WoT do is limit teams to 2 players unless the team creator is a premium player.  This may also be an effective strategy.

I have a feeling that CP underestimates the level of worldwide interest in the game.  Look at the number of posts for SR as opposed to Jagged Alliance, and consider that SR is younger.  The underlying interest in SR is huge, and there are no decent modern games filling the void in the genre excepting the Mass Effect series (which made squillions).  I've been googling "Shadowrun MMO" for years, nay decades in the hope that something would get off the ground.  That sort of loyalty translates easily into money in premium memberships, and I think an estimate of 20pc paying players is considerably understated (if the price is not unreasonable), especially in early days when the main membership will be people who have played the P&P game.

Please excuse my rant.

[Vendetta7]

I have a feeling that CP underestimates the level of worldwide interest in the game.  Look at the number of posts for SR as opposed to Jagged Alliance, and consider that SR is younger.  The underlying interest in SR is huge, and there are no decent modern games filling the void in the genre excepting the Mass Effect series (which made squillions).  I've been googling "Shadowrun MMO" for years, nay decades in the hope that something would get off the ground.  That sort of loyalty translates easily into money in premium memberships, and I think an estimate of 20pc paying players is considerably understated (if the price is not unreasonable), especially in early days when the main membership will be people who have played the P&P game.

Please excuse my rant.

First off, don't worry about "rants."  This is what forums are for and only jerks will berate someone for having an opinion and expressing it (bearing in mind that the rant still follows basic accepted social behavioral protocols).

Second, I totally agree with your assertation regarding the consumer base and their interest in Shadowrun.  There are an a$$-ton of us that have been pining for a SR MMO worthy to bear the IP moniker.  However, Shadowrun (cyberpunk, group PnP experience) and Mass Effect (Hard Sci-Fi, single player experience) are not nearly the same "genre" and therefore is ineffective as a comparison.  In my opinion, there is and never has been a true "Cyberpunk" game on the market save perhaps "Neocron."  Many have been advertised as being "Cyberpunk," but if anyone knows what the novel "Neuromancer" by "William Gibson" is (who happens to be the defacto accepted father of the "cyberpunk" genre), then they know that none of these games are what true cyberpunk is.  A perfect example of a game that makes me laugh at their ridiculously false advertisement of being "cyberpunk" is "Fallen Earth."

Third, I just need to clarify something here.

Jagged Alliance was a computer game that, as far as I can tell or remember, never had a previous version / parent product.  Anything "Jagged Alliance" was seen by the consumer base in 1999 when it was first produced.

Shadowrun on the other hand was produced literally 10 years prior, in 1989.  Almost exactly 1 year after I had joined the Navy - I therefore remember it very, very well.  It was the first thing that took me out of boring "seen-one-seen-them-all" dungeons and dropped me into a world that was "Blade Runner with Orcs."

In fact, what a lot of people don't realize, is that there was even an art book produced in 1988 and was actually released before even the 1st edition rule book.  It was almost like a campaign primer for the game.

Yes, I have it.  It's in storage in the basement, but if any of you CP guys want a screen shot I'll dig it out and provide it.

Lastly, regarding WoT:

World of Tanks (WoT) has a system which encourages premium membership by offering additional experience.  This could be quite an incentive if you design it into the karma system in this game.  It might work sufficiently well enough to circumvent any need to sell premium in-game items.  Everybody is happy.  The other thing WoT do is limit teams to 2 players unless the team creator is a premium player.  This may also be an effective strategy.

"...limit teams to 2 players unless the team creator is a premium player..."

So what your saying is... people pay money for an in game advantage over those who don't?

This sounds oddly familiar to what I was posting above...

[Supplantsalot]

Ah yeah, fair point re JA player base.

I should clarify the WoT thing, I made a hash of it before.  Your team is a company of 15 tanks.  Within that company you have platoons.  You cannot make a platoon (inside the company) of more than 2 players unless you are paid up.  IE you can play with one friend, but the remainder of your company is randomly chosen.  You aren't therefore at an advantage over your opponent who has the same number of tanks in his company as you, although there may be tactical advantages where platoon mates work together more effectively with platoon comms. 

My personal objection (albeit not a strong objection) is to unavailable content.  If I want to take my mate along to a mission (but he hasn't paid his membership) etc.  Or if the last item in the set I'm collecting is a premium item (that just feels like I'm being scammed) 

The reason it's not a strong objection is that I've decided before this thing is even in alpha that I'll be paying for it.  Well, assuming I still get to pay the mortgage and feed the kids anyway.

[Decivre]

I can see where Vendetta7 is coming from. An endemic problem in other MMOs is the fact that there are plenty of items that are unattainable in-game without purchase with real money, and those things have the potential for shutting free players out of the full experience. I know of plenty of games where free players have a banking limit, lower level cap, character restrictions and other such things that put playing the game you want to play out of your reach... short of forking over cash. As an example, I remember primetide referencing that players might only be able to play such character types as free spirits and AI if they pay for it. I'm not fond of that model.

I actually rather like your reference to a comparative between effort and money... those who have the willingness to put forth the effort should be capable of everything that people with money can do. Make AIs a character type that can be unlocked in a difficult mission. Make those purchaseable weapons into hidden easter eggs that you can find if you know where to put the C4. There are plenty of ways to make these things accessible to both the pay-for and free-play crowd.