If FS really lowered the price on cosmetics

Of course, we don’t have access to their ledger, so we don’t know what funding comes from where and how it gets spent. Do they spend money from Vermintide on Darktide? Or are the self-sustaining and only their money goes to that game? Who knows? Lots of variables to consider. So, I put this question to you…

Following the question in the title, they would need to find funding through some other means, correct? Would you be content to pay for all of the new levels and DLC as well as the skins at a lower price? Personally, I like buying the skins I want at a slightly higher price while getting free DLC, but that’s just me. I’m sure there are others who prefer the other way. Perhaps there’s a model people ain’t thought of yet or discussed that is potentially more fiscally viable.

Cosmetics are done nowaday cause they are more effective than Dlc. I think there are higher chances that DT is playing for development of Vt2 than the other way arouns.

Not possible and they’ve already promised that Maps, modes and enemies would remain free.

The only content that I would regard as potentially having to be paid would be a new archetype.

And even in those cases I think it’s more worth releasing it for free and sell cosmetics for it.

2 Likes

I’m surprised by your answer, you seem to have started to take FS at the word for the notion of promises made. Why the change of heart?

What change of heart.

3 Likes

No, it’s simple economics.

3 Likes

The rotation isn’t there simply cause they want to sell cosmetics only. But also cause they want to sell variations of past cosmetics

3 Likes

That wasn’t part of the hypothetical… but… :+1:t2:neat

I may be mistaking you for someone (other people) who are jaded by FS promises and considers FS flimsy of its word. The notion that you saw this promise as solid was surprising, off of that assumption. I would’ve sooner expected something to the effect of “they’ve broken so many promises before, what’s one more?” (Or something to that effect.)

I’d pay for a new archetype. Though, as previously established, I don’t mind putting money down for this game again and again. I would have issue with paying for level DLC given that promise. I think that would be where I would draw the line on FS is if they changed their MTX model to reflect that.

Then what is? I’m perfectly on topic.

Happy birthday!

Honestly i wouldn’t mind paying for maps if it actually meant we got more than one extremely short map every year, i would also probably buy more cosmetics if they weren’t as expensive as they are now, and even moreso if the cosmetic store wasn’t a FOMO rotation that means i can’t ever complete sets that they intentionally separate months apart

this

But I would not be against a system that would permits us to buy colors and models in a for the drip system.
The current prices of cosmetics makes me not wanting to buy them. I have only bought the sets of the yellow armored cosmetic. This one was really great, so I took it (and feel ashamed to have done it).

1 Like

The thing with paid maps/missions (which regardless wouldn’t come out faster) is that its not possible in the slightest with the current map selection system. Imaging you’ve not bought the map but the Maelstrom map is that one.

No Maelstrom for you?

In Vt2 they made it work at first with Hosting being gated by ownership, while you could join people on the map if they hosted. Then they realised that map dlc weren’t really that successful and separated maps/modes and weapons (Forgotten Weapon pack)

2 Likes

This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.