“I really enjoyed how it was stated they would include ‘quality of life’ items like ‘LeVEl BOOsTS AnD TRadE SkILl BOoSTs’ but nothing that affects competitive aspects of the game…??!?! Why u do dis Amazon? I was flattered when they drew inspiration from some of my designs… but honestly…who tf made the decision!!? I just want some new blood in the genre ffs.”
“In a buy to play game, companies already have your money and their interest in retaining the user is diminished to a degree (of course they still wish to retain the user, but when that user leaves they aren’t dropping their sub and b2p games can consider the next revenue event aka an expansion etc, as an opportunity to win back the user).
“On the shop side; I cannot express my opinion on this any stronger; Like many in the gaming community I have experienced great games die because the company introduced pay 2 advantage. Whether that advantage is a winning one or a ‘quality of life’ one. It undermines the content, the playerbase’s efforts, the core gameplay loops and lessens the sense of reward a player feels when they ACHIEVE something.
“Cosmetics imo can supply additional revenues in a respectful way SO LONG as there are in-game achievable visuals that match and EXCEED the ornate/complexities of what’s offered in the cosmetic shop AND purchased cosmetics aren’t tradable. That is key. And I know we have taken our own flack for our preorder system, of which I have tried my best to engage and explain how our packages work, and how our cosmetics offered are used in variants to actually help build our world. Furthermore, cosmetics must be actual SKINS. Meaning, the player must first achieve the actual mount or building or armor in game, and THEN can apply the skin they purchased.”
Content retrieved from: https://massivelyop.com/2021/05/17/ashes-of-creation-boss-criticizes-new-worlds-business-model-argues-for-subs-and-cosmetic-shops/.