I must admit, while it’s nice getting these new maps for free, I feel a bit unclean not paying for them.
I sometimes wonder what FS’s revenue plan is, and after the backlash following their proposed paying for Shillings and the seeming move toward payed cosmetics, it made me realize that I’m probably behind the times… maybe?
I know that free content and payed cosmetics are all the rage right now, but I much prefer the supply-and-demand method because it shows what is most valued. Such as, I want to pay for maps because quality maps are a major part of my experience.
If the content is free and you can only support via cosmetics, it doesn’t really get the message across that your support through cosmetics is for the content.
The 2 DLC packs before WoM were excellent as far as I’m concerned. New maps, new weapons, challenges and progression for them. Perfect.
I’m not sure if FS plans to do those types of DLC in the future anyways and my little blurt here was unnecessary, but I just want to put forth that there are people who like that style of content delivery.
I just want the option to pay for what I think is worth paying for and for the developers to know that it is something worth focusing on.
This is a fair thought.
Now if you think fatshark is doing a good job, you can buy a hat to support them. You can kind of compare it with subscribing to someone on twitch. If for example they bring out part 2 of drachenfell maps series, and you think they did a good job, you could buy a 3 dollar hat to show your support and show them they are on the right track. Combining this with giving feedback on forums about what you like or don’t like brings across the same message as buying a dlc.
A fair thought aswell is that some are worried the ‘free dlc’ content will be lacking and they will focus too much of their time on cosmetics, but this is too early to know right now.
I think this method is gonna be better, but only time will tell. Cosmetics are always nice and can bring alot of money to the company if done right. they might not rush content anymore because they have to ‘get paid’, might also allow them to bring on more employees and bring out faster and better content. Ofcourse i know nothing about running a game company so maybe all what i’m saying is wrong and not the reason at all.
Well, you can look at my post as a preemptive. Something to keep in mind before they commit too heavily on something without considering other views.
The message I’m trying to get across is that I consider maps to be a prime piece of content.
I don’t really care for cosmetics, but if spending 10-20 bucks on that stuff whenever a new map pack comes out somehow gets the message across that I’m in support of the playable content (maps, weapons, challenges, etc.), then I’m fine with that.
IMO they can use whatever business model they want. Microtransactions has a few pitfalls, but if they are avoided it works fine. Specifically, they incentivize developing salable content and not playable content, and they can interfere with core gameplay/themes/art. If FS can avoid these problems (like Path Of Exile has, and like Guild Wars 2 has not) then it’ll be fine. Financial incentive is working against them though, which is why I always view MT’s with suspicion until proven safe.
If it’s not fine, I’m gone. It’s been a long haul through the last decade or so of FTP games and I no longer have any tolerance for corporate bull.
I’m a fan of the current business model if it brings in enough money for fatshark to keep this game alive. Why I didn’t like the old business model:
- It might split up the community (unless only the host needs the DLC). It’s already hard to find people for weaves or cata matches.
- Loads of payable DLC content might scare potential new players away.
- Previous DLC (especially WOM) was overpriced if you look at the amount of content. And compare that to the price of Vermintide 2 itself.
- Previous DLC (again, especially WOM) contained a lot of stuff I didn’t care about.
The benefit outweighs the con. Not only can Fatshark potentially get a lot more money due to combined cosmetic pricing (upwards to around $60) but they also avoid a lot of the possible negative reviews that Shadows over Bogenhafen, Ubersreik and Winds of Magic would have had due to the new maps simply being added to the game for free.
It is also less likely that people would negatively review the cosmetic items because… why?
Another reason is that making new cosmetics to sell for real money is a lot easier then making new maps. It will be interesting to see when they cycle in new real money cosmetics to the game because that can correspond with the amount of time / money the old DLC would be and only emphasize how expensive these new cosmetics will be/are.
We will also have to see if they try to sell maps again after Curse of Drachenfels while keeping this current business model revolving around real money cosmetics.
“Free contents, paid cosmetics” can bring to Fatshark much more money… Moreover it does not split the community and it avoids that a small DLC can receive bad reciews.
And let me to be honest… We are playing and supporting a game with certain same problems since dayone… To have free maps is a nice incentive.
Well. I also prefer the old model, as it’s actually cheaper for me who buys it all.
But I can see the upside.
One of the most interesting point is that we don’t wait 6 months to have like 3 maps. We wait 2 month between each map. And this is not something that could be done with the DLC model.
I mean, you have to wait until the dlc is done to release it, and the waiting did hurt the game a lot already. Especially when you have to rush it by the end and therefore provide a DLC which is not really in a final state.
I’m not really sure in a game like this that one can ever have a map ‘done’ before release. I think they will always have to get to what they think is close to done, release it, and then figure out what’s wrong and fix it (too hard, too easy, glitch spot etc).
I mean, instead of waiting 6 months 2 maps, you have content dropping earlier, like 1 maps every 3 months, which mean less “waiting” for the next “batch” overall.
I can see only one alternative that could please both parties : Season passes.
Season pass could promise some features like 3 maps, and 1 career for example. And drop content like the seasons we have now, but only for the season passes owner.
It’s a kind of early access dlc.
I hope but don’t know if this model will work out for them, because more maps that everyone can play before having to buy extra DLC is a good thing to keep the game infused with fresh blood. The base game becomes a better deal, so to say.
With map DLC, you can only make money from people who are still paying attention and already play the game, but you can also do that partly with these paid cosmetics.
That’s where bundles enter, down the line.
1 map 3 months? Doubt. 1 Map 12 months? Doubt. new model is more income I don’t think its a change in the expected delivery of content. It took them years to not deliver on so many thing a few freemium skins aren’t going to drastically change their output.
Well we just had a map in Old Haunt, instead for waiting the 3rd map to be done. It doesn’t mean it change the output of delivering all content, it’s just that it allows to not wait for all the content drop to be done to drop it all “at once”.
Well im ok with both Free and payed map packs together that would be ok for me
While I agree with the title of the thread - Easily would like to pay for more maps / story (And also if they could be more Skaven maps? Like Into the Nest? pretty please! )
I also realize there is a very good reason premium cosmetics are done in games… They are easy. Now not to say some time does not go into modeling these cosmetics and making sure they look nice… But the time taken to make these cosmetics is probably trivial comparatively to making a whole new map. Now while the people that may buy premium cosmetics may be smaller than those that would purchase new maps. The return on the small amount of time it takes to make a premium cosmetic is probably higher than the majority of players paying for a whole new map.
However the game-state and games in general cannot subside simply on greatest profit / return on investment… at a certain point a game will need substance. Without it you will have fewer players playing your game, and thus buying the cosmetics or (easy money makers) If there was only a say 5 maps, but 100s of premium cosmetics available for purchase probably nobody would play the game for long. There has to be a balance for a game to survive and grow (or just be wildly successful and have lots of players and you don’t even need premium cosmetics / micro transaction’s but even at that point most companies will say “well we have X amount of players, its a popular game, why not make… more money?” and thus throws some cosmetics or micro transactions out there just to get the easy money
Personally I don’t care too much about cosmetics… the Legend skins are black and gold which is perfect style points for me. Now if we played Skaven and I could get Skaven cosmetics Id probably have already spent a few bucks on premium cosmetics (but that’s my Skaven bias squeeking)