Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

[Column] General: How Founder’s Packs Can Do Better

2»

Comments

  • RazeeksterRazeekster Solon, MEPosts: 2,201Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Tbau

    Please stop comparing what Trion is doing with SOE and EQ Next, its NOT the same.

    Trion is trying to get people to pay to play a LOCALIZATION of a game they are NOT developing nor have real control of.

    This is exactly why I don't support it at all. It's an obvious cash grab, period. Founder's packs are cash grabs in general in my opinion, and to those who say that "those who spend $150 are more likely to test the game better" that is load of horse poo.

     

    People throw money at games all the time without a care. Once the newest shiny game comes out they are all over it, and it doesn't prove that they are going to be a better tester than a F2P player in the least so this argument isn't valid. No, what people do is what one person already described:

     

    They get in early discover how to be the best and gain an advantage over those who aren't willing to shell out a ridiculous amount of money to "alpha test" (and it is utterly laughable that they are even giving AA an alpha test, considering all that needed to be done was localization) the game.

     

    In my eye founder packs are one of the worst things that is happening in the MMO industry right now and you will never see me buying a founder pack. Especially not for a game that has already been released in most of the world.

    Smile

  • People seem to not understand what localization means, and what it means to do it.  I'm just going to simply state I bought the $150 founder pack for AA, and I consider it a good deal.
  • RhoklawRhoklaw Ft. Bliss, TXPosts: 3,498Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Cervani
    People seem to not understand what localization means, and what it means to do it.  I'm just going to simply state I bought the $150 founder pack for AA, and I consider it a good deal.

    It's because it is a good deal because the game is leagues beyond any other MMO out right now. Black Desert may be the only game in development that comes close to being better than AA. Most people whining about the price are probably the same idiots who wasted $80 on ESO and are now regretting it.

    image

  • RolleZRolleZ FalkenbergPosts: 37Member Uncommon
    Calling complete games for Alpha? Confuses the consumers and destroying the meaning of early game testing.
  • JorendoJorendo EdePosts: 263Member

    Aren't these founder packs just like the early access games you see everywhere? I mean it's more of a game industry path we have entered these days. If i look at the new releases on steam i get very annoyed with most games being in early access. In the beginning i was like "yeah awesome, we get to support the devs, follow how the game is being made, etc" but everyone seems to do it. Granted there are some titles I'm interested in and willing to support like Divinity Original Sin. But i notice i get tired of everyone doing it and how slow some companies are in actually doing anything about the game. I know very well that making a game costs time, but sometimes you see companies who don't release anything new for over half a year and when you invested money in that it starts to worry you as they keep saying "this and that will be added soon"  and i can see how some would abuse the system to get more money out of the early backers. Not every company is that honest and we know there are many crooks in the game industry even though they will deliver the game eventually.

     

    There are people who say that someone who pay's 150 euro would be a more serious beta tester then someone who tests it for free. I don't agree with that. That is like saying that someone who bought the collectors edition and gained a longer early access is a bigger fan of a game. There are plenty of people who have no interest in testing a game during beta and just want to be the first to play so they buy themselves into the beta. And maybe someone who is really willing to help out, report bugs and exploits just doesn't have that kind of money to buy themselves into a alpha/beta position.

     

    But let's not kid ourselves. I think atleast 80% of the people who beta test don't look for bugs and only play to have a taste of the game. And that is okay cause unlike what many people seem to think most beta's are stress tests anyway. Seeing how the servers hold up with many players being online at the same time. Or see if bugs pop up when there are so many people around. They got closed beta's and proffesional beta testers to actively hunt for bugs. If they had to depend on those who get a invite to play the beta they wouldn't get much feedback to improve before launch...although it would explain why certain games come out in a poor state as they are right now.

    Also as tester it can feel like they don't listen to you. I mean i try to report the bugs i encounter and report things that just don't work well. But the beta of Final Fantasy 14 has left a very bad taste in my mouth where Square Enix just didn't care to listen to the beta testers, and we all know how that game went into the history books before they remade it again. But they aren't the only ones, just feels at times you aren't listened when you notice major bugs in the released game while you reported that one during the beta and saw others reporting it as well on the forums.

  • Sector13Sector13 New Providence, PAPosts: 687Member
    People are paying $150 to play a game a little over a month before those who pay $50 to play a game a couple months before people who play for free for a failing game that is already 2 years old ... You will never see that in another genre of gaming. 
  • ComanComan Hattem, AKPosts: 2,035Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Sector13
    People are paying $150 to play a game a little over a month before those who pay $50 to play a game a couple months before people who play for free for a failing game that is already 2 years old ... You will never see that in another genre of gaming. 

    No indeed they never will do such thing anywhere else...

    At least if you ignore kickstarter that is :/. Poeple pay a lot more for nothing more then a promise and pretty looking art-style. I mean at least 10 times more. When you pay $150 now you at least have seen the game itself.

  • drtack1drtack1 jacksonville, FLPosts: 253Member

    I dont get whats taking so long on Trions end. In the RU version they can already type slash commands such as "/cry" or "/scissors" in English into the chat and the emote happens. When the developers created AA they definately developed it with the goal in mind to open AA in other markets as well so they implemented different tools within the game to help Devs from other regions easily adapt it. 

    Maybe the conspiracy theory is right and they are keeping it from the population to hold that carrot up and say hey look what we have but you cant have it unless you pay 150 dollars!!!!! Or you can pay 50 now and get limited beta access.....and beta wont be out for another few months so how bout when you get your next paycheck throw another 40 dollars to bump up the founders.....and then after a few other weeks check you can throw another 50 at us cause you want to play so damn bad!!!!! Finally you can play!

  • ComanComan Hattem, AKPosts: 2,035Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by drtack1

    Maybe the conspiracy theory is right and they are keeping it from the population to hold that carrot up and say hey look what we have but you cant have it unless you pay 150 dollars!!!

    I do not think it's carrot stick at all. While I really do not believe they need the poeple to alpha or beta test (they pay poeple for that stuff). They are still needed. This is a good way to introduce a bigger and bigger audience to the game, while earning some money doing it. This is simply to test the server in my opinion and maybe the few new mechanics that might break if a bigger audience makes use of them. 

  • NildenNilden null, NBPosts: 1,284Member Uncommon

    There's a big difference between early access/indies and kickstarter where they use the money to make the game and triple A studios doing the same thing but taking advantage of people with no patience by selling incomplete products for more money while saying players will help build the game. I feel like they are just monopolizing on the "GIVE IT TO ME NOW!!!!" people.

    The whole thing smells like a week old sandwich to me yet some people are just eating it up.

    Here's an idea to make founders packs better: How about not selling alpha and beta and actually using them to test the game instead of as a selling point.

    I mean alpha might as well be release if you fork over $150 smackers. Pretty depressing trend for the entire gaming industry if you ask me.

    How to post links.

    "classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
    Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer

  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Elmira, ONPosts: 2,499Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Tbau

    Please stop comparing what Trion is doing with SOE and EQ Next, its NOT the same.

    Trion is trying to get people to pay to play a LOCALIZATION of a game they are NOT developing nor have real control of.

    So, basically what you're saying is that XL Games just said, "Hey Trion! Here! We'll give you this game and you can sell it in North America... for free!!!" 

     

    Nope, doesn't happen like that. There are massive amounts of money floating in the ether. Trion doesn't simply pocket the money. So, 1) Trion is definitely going to be trying to make back whatever they shelled out for the licensing deal, and; 2) XL Games is most definitely getting a cut of any of the sales of Founders Packs in North America. 

     

    Based on the fact that XL Games nearly closed shop following the release of ArchAge in Korea, if the game is good, it deserves support. If the company is good, why would you want it to go out of business? 

     

    As far as the money itself goes, don't forget that your physical money basically buys you in-game currency, plus digital items, etc. So it's actually, usually, a better value than just buying the game off the shelf. Firefall was a great example of this. Spend $20 and you get $20 in-game cash plus a permanent XP boost. Spend $100, get $120 in-game cash, plus a mount, plus a 15% permanent XP boost, plus a 10% XP boost for you squad. I mean, damn! How could you not buy it? 

     

    For me, I think founders packs are great, and it will allow companies to continue developing and experimenting with free to play games. However, the value needs to be there, too. I just don't think it's there wit ArchAge, for me anyway. I'd almost always want to see the digital currency at least at par with what I'm spending, plus bonuses. It doesn't happen often, but when it does, and the game looks good, I'll definitely buy in. 

    Crazkanuk

    ----------------
    Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
    Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
    Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
    Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
    Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
    ----------------

  • BraindomeBraindome Posts: 769Member Uncommon

    Great article and indeed it's a good compromise and this suggestion along with giving the consumer their monies worth in-game (i.e. credits) as well as other benefits in no way hurts the company as they are getting players in the game and invested.

    This high cost of entry is just bad business and reeks of desperation.

  • rodarinrodarin camarillo, CAPosts: 576Member Uncommon

    Its all semantics.

     

    A person who spent 80 bucks on ESO and doesnt buy a sub is going to get FAR FAR less for their 80 vucks than someone who paid 150 for AA. Now AA is free to play, but with a cash shop mot people wont be playing for free.

     

    The 150 also offers two very easilly justified items, the 3 month sub/patron status which is 38.97 if they follow the Rift pricing, and the 75 bucks worth of in store credits. So right there 114 dollars of it is accounted for.

     

    So then all you need to do it try and figure out if the other stuff is worth 36 bucks. Which I am sure most people would think it is. 

     

     

  • HerbPipesHerbPipes plattsburgh, NYPosts: 1Member
    I 100% disagree with the practice of charging people for unfinished games. When you are in the beta you should have the mindset of a tester.  I feel like the new practice is changing people's mindsets into that of a consumer.  Which is giving us lower quality games at release.  i also think developers are less worried about fixing bugs in their games when money is already coming in.   
  • socalsk8trsocalsk8tr bakersfield, CAPosts: 65Member

    Founders packs can't do better unless they offer more to the players and I do mean substancially more and or become totally free. Dev's nowadays want to charge ridiculous prices just to try their games "founders packs" as they like to call them a thing started cause of kickstarter I feel imho is a plague upon gaming and is all too frequent in recent online games.

     

    We should still be able to rent a full game and try it and all features available in it before we commit to a full purchase price of the game. This is why f2p is becoming more and more popular with its own drawbacks for each individual game.

     

    Gamers have let themselves be run over time and time again by dev and publishing companies and they will continue to do so, with such a saturated market its all to easy to move on. Quality games are near non existant though for the most part in my opinion now though. It has been a long long while since I've felt that addictive presence to a game where I couldn't restrain myself from logging off to shutting it down. AA's founders pack buy in to be able to try the game is the latest bit of disgust I've felt for the market. 

     

    How many actual (Alpha) invites went out to those subscribed to trions dev process of the game and that had been following the game waiting for its western release well before trion was on board to publish it in NA (Free of charge)?

     

    I know I'd been following the game for quite some time now and have waited patiently for it to come to this side of the globe however seeing this type of nonsense with a 150$ buy in to try the game is a huge turn off for me. 

     
     
    BTW do they stand by a full refund of the game if your not satisfied with it? if they were to do that and no I don't mean giving me some sort of trion internet credits they need to cut me a check or reverse the payments on a bankcard or whatever method of payment. 
     
    To charge that kind of money you better damn well stand behind your product and believe in it it and if you can't have faith in that you need to offer your consumer some sort of safety net that makes them more comfortable with the purchase. 
     
  • MurlockDanceMurlockDance ParisPosts: 1,223Member

    I just don't think that beta and alpha testing should be linked to a founder's pack to be honest. Testing to help devs find bugs, exploits, etc. is one thing. Demoing a game is another. Alpha and beta tests should be free to get into, especially for the open beta phase where the devs want to stress test their game and servers. Linking it through exclusive means like founders' packs is paradoxical in this case. If it is linked to a head start where it is in fact a few days before the official release, that is also another thing.

    If they want to link founders' packs with ingame goodies, extra cash shop currency, and other stuff, then ok.

    Playing MUDs and MMOs since 1994.

    image
  • MurlockDanceMurlockDance ParisPosts: 1,223Member
    Originally posted by nilden

    There's a big difference between early access/indies and kickstarter where they use the money to make the game and triple A studios doing the same thing but taking advantage of people with no patience by selling incomplete products for more money while saying players will help build the game. I feel like they are just monopolizing on the "GIVE IT TO ME NOW!!!!" people.

    The whole thing smells like a week old sandwich to me yet some people are just eating it up.

    Here's an idea to make founders packs better: How about not selling alpha and beta and actually using them to test the game instead of as a selling point.

    I mean alpha might as well be release if you fork over $150 smackers. Pretty depressing trend for the entire gaming industry if you ask me.

     

    You said this much better than I just did. Kudos!

    Playing MUDs and MMOs since 1994.

    image
2»
Sign In or Register to comment.