Spiral Knights - Allow players to pay towards additional features

Allow players to pay towards additional features

10 replies [Last post]

Wed, 04/01/2015 - 13:39

Fehzor

Since I clearly have no interest in trading away money that could be spent on real goods for virtual cosmetics, I recently asked myself- "What WOULD actually make me buy a prize box?" Then it hit me- in the past, I've spent money on content updates. Tortodrones came out? I felt good about them and bought a box or two with steam wallet funds, just to hand the devs some cash. No more elevator fees? Shut up and take my money. Would I have given you ten or twenty dollars to make tortodrones on top of something else, if you'd asked me? Sure.

One of the better ways of making money and tapping into stingy players like me that are less interested in cosmetics/epeen, resistant to gambling, and generally more interested in gameplay is to sell us gameplay and dev-time.

Here's how this idea works-

A new "material" is added to the game, called a credit. Credits are given out in limited quantities alongside energy and prize boxes, as well as purchased directly in much, much larger quantities. Credits are unbound when attained, and may be traded freely with other players.

Credits will then be used to lend support to some predetermined feature that is being offered to the players collectively, and players can view how much of each feature has been "purchased". The number of credits required for each feature will be equivalent to the number of dollars required to produce that feature, including profit margins. The exchange of credits would be based on the price that makes them cheapest, as if they were all purchased in bulk.

If a feature is canceled, players that credited them would receive their credits back in the mail.

Here's why the idea works-

Imagine if credits became a more worthwhile investment than crystal energy. Instead of paying to win or for costumes, players would all be paying for content updates and events which would fuel further credits being purchased and used for more expansion of the game which in turn, fuels the purchasing of more credits; a positive feedback loop that revolves around everyone feeling good and getting what they want. Imagine the gain, if systems like this this were the future of Free to Play, and you were the ones that first took the leap.

Currently, we have a negative feedback loop- in order to motivate players to pay, we rely on prize boxes with valuable commodities that slowly become less and less acceptable, as well as major purchase for things like the black kat set being made. These are not things that make for a good product, because they quite frankly make me want to quit playing. The harm caused by utilizing only them and not real content can easily be seen on Steam's statistics.

Other benefits/details, regarding why this is awesome

Free2Players can still partake in this via the auction house! This is important because it represents the stepping stone to getting players into the scheme. They put money in, they get features out, it feels good. If I get a paycheck and want some feature to win so that I can have it go into development, then I can have a go at it. Further, players that want a say would be able to buy it.

Credits bought alongside prize boxes would primarily be for the sake of selling them and raising the value of individual prize boxes, as well as as an act of good will. Credits bought alongside energy would be for the sake of letting all paying players have a say, and not just the ones that are crazy enough to buy them directly.

These things would overall breed better feelings- even if you lose at the prize box, or just want energy to craft god knows what, you have a say and the developers care about you. The idea of such a win-win system would also gain the game publicity that it very much requires.

Trivial "features" could also be voted towards. These sorts of "features" would be things like what color the next prize box is, or what new events there will be, and will generally serve to deter less serious players, that would rather have a say over these things.. but since these things do not require development time, they would come to represent money spent for no reason, but that could have been spent on dev-time.

The worst that can come of this is players not using it to its fullest extent- a small amount of time wasted that will still serve to gain your game publicity.

Wed, 04/01/2015 - 14:04

Holy-Nightmare

@ Fehzor

There are some that would buy out the credit market (or take a sizeable chunk), why not allow a single credit a month for paying players (that paid that month). Then let them have a single vote on each issue.

Wed, 04/01/2015 - 14:34

Fehzor

Well the thing is that no feature loses unless it's REALLY not getting any credits, and all would be things that players mostly want and that the developers would consider doing anyway-- like some new level. If someone is buying out the market, that's a good thing because it means that this idea is working. That player has decided that they want to fund more of the game! Let them! Further, it brings up the cost of credits when someone buys out the market, and that brings up the value of credits which are equal to content! We want Spiral Knights to be valuable, not the other way around!

It's also important to keep in mind that the so called "whales" going for prize boxes/energy would be getting around the order of magnitude of one tenth as many credits as they would from directly buying them.

Prize boxes/energy = 10 credits per dollar spent on boxes
Buying just credits = 100 credits per dollar spent on credits

If a major feature costs 10,000 dollars to make, it would then require 10,000 * 100 = 10,000,000 credits to complete.. which is a lot, but it accounts for all of the players. Trivial "features" like "1 volcanic prize box awarded once to every player rank whatever and up upon log-in" would only cost say, 25,000 credits = 250 dollars.

Wed, 04/01/2015 - 14:46

Holy-Nightmare

@ Fehzor

There should at least be an option that allows the F2P to have a small say in this. Perhaps a daily mission that lets them get just one vote. Let the paying players have more votes and more say in this but don't totally ignore the F2P community.

Also, none if the voting options should include anything pay to win. Paying player will almost always vote themselves more power.

Wed, 04/01/2015 - 15:16

Malware-Exe

Even if you don't like boxes, you are donating for a good cause.

Wed, 04/01/2015 - 15:38

Fehzor

Keep in mind that the developers and community manger would be responsible for what gets put up to vote. It would be stupid of them to ask something like "Grant all paying players receive 5,000 energy per day." as a feature. Nor would every single development issue necessarily be voted on. If the game needs something then the developers can just do it, no paying involved. Think of this as being akin to the election system in the United States- the issues at hand are brought up by the parties, and the choice of who gets in is binary. If I'm impartial to what is being discussed, but adamantly care about something else, there's nothing I can do. This would be the same way- the developers would choose things for us to pay towards.

The F2P do have a say in this- they can trade in crowns and whatever else they find in the clockworks to purchase credits off of the auction house, just like any other material.

If whoever develops this wanted to, they could grant F2P credits directly, but it would kind of go against the nature of paying the developers for content. Allowing players to just have the credits would raise the question of what happens when the players buy too much content without paying- each thing finished would be added to the developer's backlog of things to do, but at the same time the costs would normally be covered by the money that went in to paying them. In that way, the players could expand the game.. giving F2P players credits could ruin that, but could also be beneficial in the obvious way of making the game feel more equal after some testing.

I'm going to go add to the OP.

Sat, 04/04/2015 - 06:12

Mookie-Cookie

Blah

In a nutshell, pay so you might get something you want? A paid petition, as it were... Alright then.

Regardless, how strict would this be? As in, if they imposed a "pay us and we'll give you content", and then no one pays the amount they've deemed suitable, what happens? They get money for doing nothing? You did say you get your credits back, but what use is a credit when you paid for content you won't get.

How are these prices calculated? We know the effort they put into the sprites, and the time it took, but the actual "value" it held is a bit.. well, you get the idea. Should they go with the worst case scenario, or best case? ie. make it the most expensive thing imaginable to cover their "potential" expenses. Or uber cheap and just suck it if it costs them more? Of course, this is more of a question for how OOO would want to handle it, but it would leave a foul taste in the mouth if after a few months of development, they suddenly announce they're dumping a project because the "credits" have run out.

Can more than one feature be on at the same time? Say, they offer a new level with a choice of theme. Do they leave that as the only feature for a month or however long deemed suitable, or do they add others alongside major ones? You do mention the different types of features, but not their concurrency.

Can you revoke credits? Say, you bought 500. You dump 200 in one idea, and 300 into another. Then you think, the former is closer to the goal, so I want to put my 300 out of the latter, and into the former. Can you do it? Or is it a "you paid already, too bad, so sad" kind of deal?

Not sure how much "power" you deem F2P players should get, but why not make credits purchasable by Energy, as well by money? Of course, the Energy way would be a lot more expensive of a route to take, but it does give F2P players an option, as opposed to forcing them to ride off the purchases of paying players. Of course, this somewhat breaks the "pay to support your developer" feel of credits.

Sat, 04/04/2015 - 14:03

Fehzor

All of the features put up would have to be optional ones- like new levels, danger room expansions, new enemies. If they didn't get paid for the game wouldn't hurt without them. There wouldn't be a time limit on these things either though, and they wouldn't necessarily have to complete etc. either. Like, 95% could be considered "good enough".

The reason I didn't say to buy with energy is because that isn't giving to the developers necessarily. If I buy energy to trade for a black kat set and that gets put into credits by the F2Per that is farming for it, the devs didn't actually make a profit.

The price calculation would be based on how much it would take to get the feature out + turn a profit. I can't measure any of that or tell you how that would be done. More than one feature would be on at a time as well. Revoking credits etc. would be based on implementation and is less important.

Really though this is all quite flexible. If the devs do see this and actually give it a go, I'm sure they'll have to make some changes anyway.

Sat, 04/04/2015 - 15:48

Bullpig

runescape uses bonds to make in-game purchases possible for f2p players, such as membership (which is required to access most of the content in game). but they also have poll booths in game to vote on development, and don't make the players directly fund the content. at the same time, they have a much larger development team, because they can afford one, since 1) so many people play and 2) membership is almost required to play the game.

so you're saying, to help more content be created, provide a new incentive for people who don't care about accessories or costumes start paying for the game. however, all the money they get from their promotions go to development and profit already. since they're a business, it's no secret they care more about the money than the players, so they will always value profit over releasing content. i understand that this would be specifically for development and would make them keep their word about what they're doing with the money they get, but pretty much right now, if everyone bought a bunch of promotion boxes they would have a surplus of money to develop with.

i see where you're going with the f2p friendly part, but at the same time i just don't think it's possible. there has always been, in my opinion, the uber rich and the peasants. the uber rich (not to name any names) control so much of the market already, and by adding a "limited amount" of these credits to the game, how will the lower class players ever get a say in things that happen (i can totally see some people hoarding the credits) so i say that p2p players should only be aloud a certain number of credits per month or something, and f2p players have a lower limit of credits. this way, there won't be an excess of credits, and there also won't be one or a few players controlling what gets developed.

Sat, 04/04/2015 - 18:39

Fehzor

This wouldn't be a contest to see who can dominate the developer's time but a contest to see what can be added to the game with everyone on the same team so to speak. The uber-rich, should they choose to, would be able to "dominate" this feature, and in doing so get more content for everyone alongside the average player. Imagine that this works and that players give too much money for too many features... that's the idea, actually. If that happens, they'll have money to expand and implement those features. Instead of being put on the back burner while promotions are shoved out, the developers and Sega Networks Incorporated can actually develop Spiral Knights.

Since they're a business, it's no secret they care more about the money than the players.

Yeah................. I know I'm wrong but I just can't accept that I should be. This is even posed as a compromise though! Like they can run their stupid casino that no one actually wants to partake in, but also possibly attach more game to it in a reasonable amount of time and get paid to do so? There's like money everywhere in this for them, with little risk.

Sat, 04/04/2015 - 19:41

#10

Bullpig

true i understand. and they would be smart to add more content that would keep players interested and would make players spend more money on but i have lost hope in that. sorry about my negativity :P i do love the idea though! they need more focus on developmental updates and having players pay specifically for it would increase the rate at which these updates were achieved.

Search

Allow players to pay towards additional features