Arguably, the phrase "play and progress through these games" makes a huge difference. There's no real linear path through SK apart from gear progression, which certainly isn't necessarily contained in the expansion mission itself; they're not selling access to Tier 4 or 6* gear.

Acruf's post seems incendiary and an attack on the game itself; not a smart move. Nick's right in that it was more aggressive than constructive. I'm not sure why he posted it on the forums here, except to brag and/or incite a riot on the forums. Either way, mods do have an awful lot of power on the forums, and it looks like they know how to use it.

rofl!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think you're over thinking it. What you forget is the OOOs is a company, and makes money by selling content in video games. Obviously this forum is also for them to promote the game, and to some extent, get free play testing of new content. They have no obligation to provide a forum for people to promote other games or to attack their marketing.

Most of the feedback, even the really negative stuff, is stuff they probably would consider, even the bitching about the new levels and the shadow keys, but I doubt there's any chance they'll remove the f2p status of the game so long as it's possible to play for free. Hence, there was no need to continue the conversation, because it would not be productive.

Also, assuming that you'll be flamed is, I dunno. A overreaction. This forum is largely civil.

Actually, Nick has openly stated they are looking into allowing the expansion missions to be purchased from other players in-game, rather than having to use the Steam client.

http://forums.spiralknights.com/en/node/45284#comment-293824

Whether it is feasible or not, I don't know, but I do hope it comes about, as it seems an obvious design decision that would greatly help the non-Steam F2P'ers.

That said, the difference between paying for it with CE, and buying from another player with CE is subtle, but important. Let's look at both situations...

A) You buy it directly with CE. That means that either you or someone else bought the $4 or so worth of CE, and you turn it in to OOO for mission access. OOO makes $4 off CE, and $4 worth of CE disappears from the market.

B) You buy it from another player. That means either you or someone else bought the $4 worth of CE, and a second player bought the $4 DLC, and you swap it with them. OOO makes $8 off CE and the DLC purchases, and the amount of CE in the market stays the same.

In option B, OOO makes twice as much money for the transaction, and the CE market goes about unaffected. From a business standpoint, it just makes more sense.

As for the cost, if you spend 3kCE to obtain it, you haven't spent very much. Learn the market, grind FSC, do whatever your preferred method of earning money in-game is, and you'll be able to get it.

This game is still free to play, just because some missions are behind a pseudo pay wall does not make this a P2P only game. Welcome to every freaking F2P game ever - some things in the game are locked behind a pay wall. At least in this game there is still the option to get this expansion for in game currency and not spend a cent.

You want to trade in game currency for the DLC? Download Steam for free and trade CE for it, problem solved.

Acruf and everyone else bawwing up a storm and quitting because of this needs to get over it. And yes that thread deserved a lock with his whiny attitude "I'm reporting you to steam! derpy derp!!". You kids are something else.

Yeah, in a nutshell it's like letting homeless people into your house to protest that you aren't letting them use your shower for free and plan to have your kids taken away by children welfare services as retaliation..

If I came off a bit harsh, is is only because I have enjoyed playing Spiral Knights without any obligation of purchase to experience all the game had to offer. And because I was not obligated I willingly spent perhaps $40, because I thought OOO deserved it for the experience. This opinion was first changed due to the introduction of shadow keys, which I still find unreasonably priced for the amount of game experience they provide, and thus have never tried.

As to why I would take it up with Valve, I realize full well how important their free-to-play status is for OOO on the Steam platform and what would happen if Valve sided with the dissident players and revoked Spiral's free-to-play status. I hit a nerve and the thread was locked.

But if OOO proceeds along this path it risks alienating more players and attracting less new players, on the point that it is splitting up the player community. Nick has argued that one could get someone else to buy and use the Steam trading feature to trade it for CE, but unless that player is a friend the free-to-play player is going to get price gouged due to the demand.

I know some are probably sick of the video being referenced, but if you haven't watched it yet I do strongly recommend it;
http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/microtransactions

Indeed there are alternate interpretations on what constitutes a free-to-play monetization system, but in the end the success of such a system boils down to whether players feel they are being treated fairly, as equals whether they pay or not. That they have the freedom to choose if paying is right for them, rather than feeling coerced by the system.

You can say 'it's a cool bit of fluff', but free-to-play people and some pay-to-play people that have bulk bought energy so they wouldn't have to buy any more, are now being completely denied this content on all fronts.

And you can't tell me it isn't going to become the norm, because you just know that it is. This is going to be every worthwhile content update you ever receive from here on out. King Tinkinzar, the Core, beyond. It's all going to cost you $6 a pop.

Like in League of Legends, every new champ is 6300 IP. They said the RP/IP prices would vary from champ to champ, but they have never stuck to that, 975/6300 forever.

Never underestimate the power of greed.

Some would argue that the gear already provided by the mission is overpowered and is causing a pay to win system in pvp, or that free-to-play players are missing out on a new chapter in the lore of Spiral Knights. I can't say if either of these are valid, however.

What I will say is that I, among others, am disturbed by the general direction OOO is taking Spiral Knights. Indeed, what if pay-only entry to the core was the next major content to be introduced. Another step up in player outrage would be achieved, over the previous two.

I don't get it . . .
I don't view the forums often so pardon my intrusion and/or lack of forum ethics.

I thought this thread was about why the other thread was locked and what was wrong with that argument.
So why are we talking about whether or not they will charge for future updates?
This game is f2p because you can play the main campaign and such as much as you want (granted you do have to be responsible in managing ce).
The new items will probably appear in the auction house at a high price so free players won't be completely kept in the dark.
They also said that they are thinking of a way to allow the dlc to be gifted in-game, so non-steam users won't be left in the dark.
That seems perfectly fine for a f2p game.
I'm not arguing about whether or not it was a good business decision, or if all new content will be dlc purchase only.
This dlc package could have been 500usd, but it still doesn't change the status of this game as f2p, since you could still play everything else and an expansion to the main campaign isn't exactly premium. It's just optional.
It would mean that OOO is greedy and horribly incompetent in business, but it wouldn't change its status as f2p.

In regards to why the previous thread was locked, Nick already explained that. The previous thread was locked because a player was visibly upset at the dlc release and wanted to rally forum members into emailing valve about it. He simply didn't believe that the thread wasn't made to promote discussion or knowlege but rather to annoy valve, a valued business partner to OOO and Sega.

The other point mentioned by the OP is that (s)he may be banned. And I don't think Icy should be banned??

But other than that, I simply don't get it . . . Why?

I'm not trying to be a backseat moderator, but since the points have been answered, shouldn't this thread be closed? There are plenty of other ongoing threads discussing the validity, morality, etc. of OOO and this dlc. Though this is just my opinion. If i'm wrong, my only request is that someone kindly puts me down. And if my post here contradicts my confusion or if I come off as pretentious, then apologies on my part. Thank you in advance.

The thing is the people that are leaving aren't people who can't afford $4, they're the paying contributors to this game that are being outspoken by a minority of people who feel that if you haven't earned a single thing in game and just bought it all with exorbitant amounts of CE, that makes you superior.

Some people like earning things in the game, because they want to play the game. Not buy their way through the game so they don't have to play the parts that they enjoy.
The expansion goes against that, because they are being excluded from content that they cannot earn, cannot buy with in game currencies (without Steam) and as a result, cannot enjoy. In fact, the whole mission system goes against that, since in half an hour you have a full set of tier 2 gear and can enter tier 2 at will.

It's not fair, it's not fun and it encourages a poor attitude from the people who just buy everything that they think their opinion means more because they buy everything. I mean honestly, you people say this is good that F2Ps are going to be excluded from the game and as a result, leave, but then who will you sell CE to so you can buy your horrendously expensive AH accessories?

It's a two way street and both of you have an effect on this economy, you can't say F2P people are just a load on the server, because they're also a large part of the functioning economy. And if OOO is deciding on phasing out F2P players, then they should also be prepared for the absolute worthlessness of CE that ensues.

Like-wise, you're making assumptions about me because I can afford to spend 4 dollars on a DLC which I thought was worth it and will continue to do so for DLC I find of the right value, it somehow means that I buy everything in the game and apparently sell CE so I can buy horrendously expensive AH accessories. Why would I do that? I assume there are people that do do that sorta thing, but I just play the game and pay for stuff I want and CE when I need it.

Also, at what point did I say F2P are just a load on the server? My primary argument has been that there's been the wrong definition of F2P being used in these discussions. Honestly, you're making a lot of assumptions here. Besides, is it so wrong to think it's logical that the company caters more to the paying customers because they're paying customers? O_o

Based on the argument presented by both Shoebox and Knightrails, I feel obligated to post my own experience.

I enjoy earning my rewards, rather than buying them, as Shoebox said. I agree that the sudden appearance of a full set of tier 2 gear by completing the first few missions does strike me as a strange jump in pacing. Without commesurate experience and understanding of the new challenges presented by tier 2, a new player would be overwhelmed by the changes in enemy attack patterns, new damage types, and longer treks between rest stations. A set of tier 2 gear does not make a player ready for tier 2.

However, I also agree with Knightrail's assertions about P2P and F2P players, in that people who consider themselves earners often make the jump to paying in order to show their support and act as a vote of confidence. Additionally, all players are important to the game's economy, and given the active involvement of developers in the economy and community, I imagine that they would be loathe to completely alienate whole segments of the player base. Granted, pay-only expansions blow a hole in my own argument, but that pay wall aside, they have generally been good stewards of the in-game economy.

Recently, I purchased an elevator pass, instead of an equivelent amount of energy or, indeed, the new expansion. Why? I wanted to earn my way through the game, and felt that I was (and still am) underequipped for the new content. I think the expansion is geared toward people who have experienced everything else in the game and want something new. SK has quite a lot of content for a free game, and I can only imagine the cost of a free lunch to those doling it out.

My real problem lies with the current distribution system, which seems to be geared to pander more to the "valued" relationship with Steam, rather than the player base. I do appreciate Nick's constant feedback on the situation, though, and trust the developers to do everything that they can to help us out.

We are customers, in a sense, after all.

Just an update to say I got some feedback on the original issue. Fairly generic so far but that they are looking into it.

I have also requested public feedback on Valve's decision in regards to this issue, as it is setting a bad precedent.

It stands out on the free-to-play featured games scroller, as it is the only title marked with a price tag;
http://store.steampowered.com/genre/Free%20to%20Play

@Icycloud
Are they... Master debaters?

Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to go kill myself for that.

Technically Spiral Knights doesn't have a price tag set on it, but its expansion does.

actually they do... energy/energy packs, elevator passes, starter pack, etc

the only thing is that you can live without them, same with the expansions