Disquieting thoughts about the Frontier Store

[Alphatron_fm217]

So, the prices have been revealed.

And...

It's not too terrible. Sure, it's a worry to those with Shopping addictions, compulsive personalities, or other such disorders. And I feel for those folks.

For anyone without such issues, however, it might be a reflection of the market-place in the 21st (and of course 34th) century, but it's far from rabidly objectionable.

Still, I do feel for those with Shopping addictions, as the grind for Ship kits is going to be quite the thing...

 

[Ezren]

This system has no random rewards mechanic, aka "look boxes". Those can be dangerous, as the chance for big loot/rewards is what scratches a specific addictive itch in many.

 

[Stealthie]

A bit of wild speculation...

The Chines company TenCent bought a 10% stake in FDev back in 2017.
TenCent is a developer who seem to favour the F2P + Microtransactions model and they have a history of shady coding, causing their games to encourage players to buy ever-more stuff once they've started using microtransactions.
Seems like TenCent would be keen to see FDev implement microtransactions in their products and FDev would be obliged to comply as a result of the investment.

I can't help thinking that the introduction of Arx is a way to satisfy the requirement for in-game microtransactions but - importantly - implemented in a way that's pretty transparent and not manipulative or ecourages escalated spending.

If FDev have satisfied TenCent with the introduction of Arx, good on 'em for doing it in such a straightforaward way.
I will remain alert for the possible emergence of less desirable aspects of the model, such as P2W and lootboxes though.

 

[Ezren]

Wasn't it a 9% stake?

And regardless, Xbox and PS4 have had "points" instead of direct monetary transactions for years. Now we earn a little by playing, and get more for buying, and the cosmetics are broken up from packages to individuals. It's much cleaner and more consistent.

 

[[VR] Goooost]

Okay, so feel free to delete this if I'm massively over-stepping the line, but I just saw a video by Jim Sterling. He's certainly a loud character, and his style doesn't easily endear, but this video tells of the Loot Boxes and Microtransactions that run through the greater part of Competitive and Online gaming, and the Psychological damage that these gameplay mechanics can cause.

Now, I'm not suggesting that DBOBE and FDev are slavering over parting kiddies from their pocket money, or anything so extreme or ridiculous, but the existence of the Real-world Cosmetics shop does give me pause, even if coloured skins for your Shiny new 'Conda makes precisely zero difference in-game, apart from a sense of satisfaction.

Perhaps I'm over-thinking this, considering that E was crowdfunded from the get-go, and competitors charge much more, and are significantly less generous. And of course, one could make the argument that we're all adults here, and precious few, if any, commanders are going to drain their wallets getting Every last item in the shop, merely out of a sense of completeness.

Not to mention that the shop does its part to continue to fund further development of the game, alongside purchase of the Base Client, or the Horizons and future Season upgrades.

And I was lucky enough to be able to take advantage of the Lifetime pass when it was offered for £30. Plus, the overwhelming amount of goodwill, good humour, and a distinct lack of other predatory and/or destructive "Triple-A" practices, or "Crunch period" horror stories, from FDev in general.

I don't know where I'm going with this. Like I said, I probably have Massively over-stepped the mark, over-thought this whole issue, and the Skin store is most likely nothing that a Commander should really be worrying about.

But, I just, I'd love to be reassured that the Good folks of Frontier Developments aren't dead-set on turning players into payers.

Look at star citizen. That is what a mad cash grab looks like. They just released another $1000 ship, and I was thinking, "so like are they only gonna sell like 5 of these?" And then I went to the forums to check and I saw a screenshot of a group of 40 of them in a row. It had only been out for a day or two. I dont get it.
Frontier has always been more reasonable. It isnt pay to win, and at least some of the cosmetics are affordable and can be used across all ships.

 

[Non Grata]

This system has no random rewards mechanic, aka "look boxes". Those can be dangerous, as the chance for big loot/rewards is what scratches a specific addictive itch in many.

Like engineering 1.0 but you have to pay with cash.

 

[znôrt]

But, I just, I'd love to be reassured that the Good folks of Frontier Developments aren't dead-set on turning players into payers.

well, the only real irk in all this arx thing are the asinine arx package offerings. it's all just streamlining of the interface and accessibility, but then there are these clearly manipulative, cheap tactics to influence purchase and maximize income. it would have been much more in frontier's 'soft' style to simply put a price tag on arx and be done with it, or at least have a less moronic offer. hope the benefits by this specific change pay off the loss in prestige (they still had).

it does show, imo, at least metaphorically, how the vision has morphed into a cash cow. not that that's a novelty, but now it's even got the appropriate looks.

 

[Cmdr Aeries Hunter]

I honestly doubt that FD will ever go trough the EA, Activision, Blizzard route.

That's what a lot of people said about Bethesda, until.....

 

[Ambroza]

That's what a lot of people said about Bethesda, until.....

I don't recall anyone ever saying that about Bethesda. They were actually the pioneers of nickel-and-diming microtransaction nonsense. Horse armor is a meme for a reason, it was nearly the first of its kind (that sort of thing likely wouldn't get much attention today, as its become the norm). Even Morrowind had some small paid add-ons, a practice that was nearly unheard of in 2002.

Edit: my mistake, just remembered the little add-ons for Morrowind were actually free, you just had to download them through the website.

 

[Gully Foyle]

Okay, so feel free to delete this if I'm massively over-stepping the line, but I just saw a video by Jim Sterling. He's certainly a loud character, and his style doesn't easily endear, but this video tells of the Loot Boxes and Microtransactions that run through the greater part of Competitive and Online gaming, and the Psychological damage that these gameplay mechanics can cause.

Now, I'm not suggesting that DBOBE and FDev are slavering over parting kiddies from their pocket money, or anything so extreme or ridiculous, but the existence of the Real-world Cosmetics shop does give me pause, even if coloured skins for your Shiny new 'Conda makes precisely zero difference in-game, apart from a sense of satisfaction.

Perhaps I'm over-thinking this, considering that E was crowdfunded from the get-go, and competitors charge much more, and are significantly less generous. And of course, one could make the argument that we're all adults here, and precious few, if any, commanders are going to drain their wallets getting Every last item in the shop, merely out of a sense of completeness.

Not to mention that the shop does its part to continue to fund further development of the game, alongside purchase of the Base Client, or the Horizons and future Season upgrades.

And I was lucky enough to be able to take advantage of the Lifetime pass when it was offered for £30. Plus, the overwhelming amount of goodwill, good humour, and a distinct lack of other predatory and/or destructive "Triple-A" practices, or "Crunch period" horror stories, from FDev in general.

I don't know where I'm going with this. Like I said, I probably have Massively over-stepped the mark, over-thought this whole issue, and the Skin store is most likely nothing that a Commander should really be worrying about.

But, I just, I'd love to be reassured that the Good folks of Frontier Developments aren't dead-set on turning players into payers.

Loot boxes are soon to be banned was in the news today.
In UK away https://techcrunch.com/2019/09/12/l...ing-and-should-be-banned-for-kids-say-uk-mps/

 

[Morbad]

Seems like TenCent would be keen to see FDev implement microtransactions in their products and FDev would be obliged to comply as a result of the investment.

Tencent owns less than ten percent of FDev; they can't force anyone to do anything and Tencent selling it's stake wouldn't materially hurt the company beyond the short term.

That's what a lot of people said about Bethesda, until.....

The only 'never' claim I've ever heard regarding Bethesda is that they'd never release a finished product on release day.

 

[Lightspeed]

A bit of wild speculation...

The Chines company TenCent bought a 10% stake in FDev back in 2017.
TenCent is a developer who seem to favour the F2P + Microtransactions model and they have a history of shady coding, causing their games to encourage players to buy ever-more stuff once they've started using microtransactions.
Seems like TenCent would be keen to see FDev implement microtransactions in their products and FDev would be obliged to comply as a result of the investment.

I can't help thinking that the introduction of Arx is a way to satisfy the requirement for in-game microtransactions but - importantly - implemented in a way that's pretty transparent and not manipulative or ecourages escalated spending.

If FDev have satisfied TenCent with the introduction of Arx, good on 'em for doing it in such a straightforaward way.
I will remain alert for the possible emergence of less desirable aspects of the model, such as P2W and lootboxes though.

LOL 10% TenCent v 90% FD ....... which carries more weight in the boardroom?

 

[[VR] Goooost]

Wasn't it a 9% stake?

And regardless, Xbox and PS4 have had "points" instead of direct monetary transactions for years. Now we earn a little by playing, and get more for buying, and the cosmetics are broken up from packages to individuals. It's much cleaner and more consistent.

The fact that on xbox the discount on buying more points was maybe like an extra 50 points for the highest tier already makes me happy to see that arx has a real bulk pricing structure.

 

[Garbarrage]

How can this be true:

I probably have Massively over-stepped the mark

when this is certainly true:

I don't know where I'm going with this.

?

 

[StuartGT]

A bit of wild speculation...

The Chines company TenCent bought a 10% stake in FDev back in 2017.
TenCent is a developer who seem to favour the F2P + Microtransactions model and they have a history of shady coding, causing their games to encourage players to buy ever-more stuff once they've started using microtransactions.
Seems like TenCent would be keen to see FDev implement microtransactions in their products and FDev would be obliged to comply as a result of the investment.

I can't help thinking that the introduction of Arx is a way to satisfy the requirement for in-game microtransactions but - importantly - implemented in a way that's pretty transparent and not manipulative or ecourages escalated spending.

If FDev have satisfied TenCent with the introduction of Arx, good on 'em for doing it in such a straightforaward way.
I will remain alert for the possible emergence of less desirable aspects of the model, such as P2W and lootboxes though.

How many PC games have had Pay2Win mechanics added to them by their gamedevs, after TenCent directly/indirectly invested in said gamedevs?

Spoiler

None.

 

[Stealthie]

LOL 10% TenCent v 90% FD ....... which carries more weight in the boardroom?

Tencent owns less than ten percent of FDev; they can't force anyone to do anything and Tencent selling it's stake wouldn't materially hurt the company beyond the short term.

Why would you assume any "force" would be involved?

The deal with TenCent resulted in significant investment for FDev and the promise of helping them capitalise on the Chinese/Asian games market.
Those things would likely be enough to make FDev willing to listen to requests made by TenCent without the need for boardroom hostility.

I actually don't have any problem with Arx (based on what we know so far).
I'm just speculating that a company like TenCent are likely to want to see microtransactions in a game they've invested in and, on that basis, I'm impressed that FDev might have managed to satisfy their investors without adding anything insidious such as lootboxes or P2W.

 

[Stealthie]

How many PC games have had Pay2Win mechanics added to them by their gamedevs, after TenCent directly/indirectly invested in said gamedevs?

Spoiler

None.

That's a pretty specific set of criteria, which also gives you plenty of wriggle-room to argue over whether or not the microtransactions in a particular game can be classified as "P2W" or not.

The most obvious example would probably be Fortnite, although it seems that almost every PC game TenCent invests in either relies on the "freemium" model, or has microtransactions of some kind - in addition to their core mobile-gaming business, which is exclusively "freemium" games.

Where TenCent goes, microtransactions go too.

 

[StuartGT]

That's a pretty specific set of criteria, which also gives you plenty of wriggle-room to argue over whether or not the microtransactions in a particular game can be classified as "P2W" or not.

The most obvious example would probably be Fortnite, although it seems that almost every PC game TenCent invests in either relies on the "freemium" model, or has microtransactions of some kind - in addition to their core mobile-gaming business, which is exclusively "freemium" games.

Where TenCent goes, microtransactions go too.

Huh? Fortnite doesn't have Pay2Win.

Meanwhile, TenCent bought 40% of Epic back in 2012. Fortnite released in 2017.

Elite Dangerous has had cosmetic microtransactions since its release in Dec 2014. TenCent invested in FDev in July 2017.

 

[Valorin]

Huh? Fortnite doesn't have Pay2Win.

Meanwhile, TenCent bought 40% of Epic back in 2012. Fortnite released in 2017.

Elite Dangerous has had cosmetic microtransactions since its release in Dec 2014. TenCent invested in FDev in July 2017.

And not 40, but I think roughly 10% if I remember correctly, which is absolutely reasonable in my opinion.
Apart from all the speculations, David Braben doesn't have a track record of doing things just to grab more and more cash... Quite the opposite in fact. And Frontier is still a company and needs to generate revenue to go on.
I believe in the Braben.

 

[Cmdr Aeries Hunter]

The only 'never' claim I've ever heard regarding Bethesda is that they'd never release a finished product on release day.

I believe Bethesda said there will only be cosmetics items in their store. Since that promise some non cosmetic items have crept in. Many companies started with the "cosmetics only" promise, only to change their tune down the track. Fdev said that it will be cosmetics only in their store.....until they don't.