General Free to Play Economies Belong in Free to Play Games

[TurkeyApple]

I've been interested in Elite Dangerous for a very long time, but have only recently built a gaming PC to actually play it for myself. So you can imagine my disappointment when I discovered that the microtransactions (for a game that already has an upfront cost to play) have only gotten more agregious over time. What used to be simple cosmetic options for your ships has ballooned into premium currency, and even entire ships if the reviews on Steam are accurate.

I've yet to purchase Elite Dangerous, even during a Steam sale that brought the game down to $5, purely because I don't approve of how Frontier are choosing to handle this game's monetization. If they want a free to play market, then the game needs to be free to play. Or if they want to sell the game for a discounted upfront cost, then they at least need to make sure the microtransactions they offer do not effect gameplay or employ scummy fake currencies meant to hide the real cost of items.

When games like No Man's Sky exist that offers such a wide breadth of content for a single upfront cost, how Frontier are choosing to monetize this game is not okay. I just wanted to provide feedback and ask Frontier to reconsider how they are choosing to sell Elite Dangerous content. I would much prefer buying the game and its DLC for a rduced upfront cost, and having simple cosmetic bundles as microtransactions, or if the game is going to start selling substantial content like ships as part of its microtransactions, then the game needs to be free to play.

 

[Mohrgan]

You're only missing out on the, hands down, best flight model of any space game, ever. You cannot even compare NMS with ED. When you actually know about how ED works, you'd know that the early access and pre-made ships are just a nudge, no real advantage, no engineering (mostly) just a way for players to get into the action a bit faster, to entice reluctant players into giving it a try. With a mature game like ED, you need to help people along, facing 10 yr veterans like myself.

On the surface, you could have a concern over PtW, but FDev aren't doing that. Don't let a knee jerk reaction to micro-transactions stop you from investigating actually what you get for your Arx. I think you'd find a system with limitations that make sense, and keep the competitive nature of ED in tact.

Ships for sale in the Store are no different than what you get in-game for credits. I think you'll see that the cost of ED is vastly reduced from release, and sales happen all of the time to get you in on the cheap. Just what you asked for.

 

[TurkeyApple]

I u

You're only missing out on the, hands down, best flight model of any space game, ever. You cannot even compare NMS with ED. When you actually know about how ED works, you'd know that the early access and pre-made ships are just a nudge, no real advantage, no engineering (mostly) just a way for players to get into the action a bit faster, to entice reluctant players into giving it a try. With a mature game like ED, you need to help people along, facing 10 yr veterans like myself.

On the surface, you could have a concern over PtW, but FDev aren't doing that. Don't let a knee jerk reaction to micro-transactions stop you from investigating actually what you get for your Arx. I think you'd find a system with limitations that make sense, and keep the competitive nature of ED in tact.

Ships for sale in the Store are no different than what you get in-game for credits. I think you'll see that the cost of ED is vastly reduced from release, and sales happen all of the time to get you in on the cheap. Just what you asked for.

I understand the flight model is very robust, every game has elements that it does better and worse than other games. I'm just pointing out that the way ED handles its monetization sets a dangerous precedent that doesn't need to exist.

I think the devs can 'nudge' players and give them an edge without resorting to players having to spend real money for ships that however big a difference they make, do effect gameplay. Maybe there could be a ship rental system with in-game currency?

And rest assured this is not a knee jerk reaction. I'm just very aware of how these things tend to go with games and me not having an existing investment in ED I think let's me call it out with a bit more clarity. This is also coming from someone most interested in PVE and exploration, so I'm not necessarily particularly worried about the competitive side of things from a personal level.

Selling ships for real money however is inherently different from purchasing them with in-game credits. And regardless of how expensive those microtransactions or the game itself end up being, I believe the point still stands that if a game is going to expand on a free to play economy in these ways, then the game needs to be free to play. Or the types of content sold in microtransactions needs to be monitored carefully so long as the game has an upfront cost of any kind.

 

[Koma Pahu]

Well it was nice to meet you.

 

[CMDR Alistair Lux]

I've been interested in Elite Dangerous for a very long time, ...

I've yet to purchase Elite Dangerous, ... purely because I don't approve of how Frontier are choosing to handle this game's monetization.
...
Or if they want to sell the game for a discounted upfront cost, then they at least need to make sure the microtransactions they offer do not effect gameplay or employ scummy fake currencies meant to hide the real cost of items.

When games like No Man's Sky exist that offers such a wide breadth of content for a single upfront cost, how Frontier are choosing to monetize this game is not okay. I just wanted to provide feedback and ask Frontier to reconsider how they are choosing to sell Elite Dangerous content. I would much prefer buying the game and its DLC for a rduced upfront cost, and having simple cosmetic bundles as microtransactions, or if the game is going to start selling substantial content like ships as part of its microtransactions, then the game needs to be free to play.

It's rich that you come here to the forum for a game you don't own to virtue signal at its community. Your worries are valid, don't get me wrong. But if you want to gripe about microtransactions, you should take that up with the entire video game industry nowadays, Frontier secondarily.

First and foremost, be a smart consumer. I'd absolutely recommend purchasing the base game + Odyssey (the Deluxe edition bundle includes both) for the extreme sale that it's offered at right now on Steam, as this is 100% worth the cost to you. If you like the game, it is worth 1000s of hours as-is. All other transactions are completely optional.

New ships are on a release cycle that become available via normal gameplay after some time. This is unfortunately a FOMO tactic, but also unfortunately (I'm assuming), this generates revenue.

Hands-down, Elite: Dangerous deserves to be supported. It's a one-of-a-kind experience, and everyone that enjoys it wants to see it improve even more. It's as if you're torn into just wanting to let go and enjoy an experience, but then something reminds you to "stand up" and resist.

 

[TurkeyApple]

It's rich that you come here to the forum for a game you don't own to virtue signal at its community. Your worries are valid, don't get me wrong. But if you want to gripe about microtransactions, you should take that up with the entire video game industry nowadays, Frontier secondarily.

First and foremost, be a smart consumer. I'd absolutely recommend purchasing the base game + Odyssey (the Deluxe edition bundle includes both) for the extreme sale that it's offered at right now on Steam, as this is 100% worth the cost to you. If you like the game, it is worth 1000s of hours as-is. All other transactions are completely optional.

New ships are on a release cycle that become available via normal gameplay after some time. This is unfortunately a FOMO tactic, but also unfortunately (I'm assuming), this generates revenue.

Hands-down, Elite: Dangerous deserves to be supported. It's a one-of-a-kind experience, and everyone that enjoys it wants to see it improve even more. It's as if you're torn into just wanting to let go and enjoy an experience, but then something reminds you to "stand up" and resist.

I tried to contact the devs directly and they told me to post my thoughts here. I also don't really consider it virtue signaling, I just want a healthy and player respectful economy for the game I'm interested in playing. I certainly won't be buying them, but I feel however optional they are, they don't need to exist in the first place. I certainly agree with you that FOMO tactics are very toxic, so wouldn't it be better if we didn't have to worry about such issues in ED? We can certainly love what the game is doing right, and criticize what we feel could be better at the same time.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

If you're opposed to microtransactions at all regardless of form, then this isn't the game for you, move on and don't worry about it. Frontier don't make a lot of money from the microtransactions compared with what they make from actual game sales, but they make enough not to worry about putting off the very few people who won't buy a game with them at all. They're not going to change that model to stop it entirely.

If you can put up with microtransactions as long as they're not too significant / required to progress, here's specifically what's currently available; decide from there:
- a whole bunch of purely cosmetic stuff, which is the vast majority of it. Your ships will look a bit plain if you don't pay for that, but ... you can't see your ship much while you're inside it anyway, so you don't need to worry. The default paint is what the NPCs use so it can't look too terrible, and you can get a few extras from in-game events or actions.
- a bunch of "quickstart" ship builds. You can skip some aspects of the early game progression with these if you want, but they're mostly unimportant to long-term players: you can build much better ships by in-game methods
- early access to newer ships for an exclusive period of some months. Some of the new ships are a fair bit better than the older ones in at least some aspects. I don't think they've ever had more than two ships be exclusive at once, so far.

If you object to "people who pay more have an advantage" in all forms [1], then the Odyssey expansion is a much more significant source of advantage than anything available for ARX, in many aspects of the game. If you're fine with advantage bought directly with £s but not if there's an intermediate virtual currency then that's not so important.

You can earn a small amount of the microtransaction currency from in-game activity without having to pay Frontier anything (up to around 20000 ARX a year, which is roughly one early access ship a year, or a few cosmetic items)


[1] For completeness on "bought directly with £s": there are also a small number of players who have other advantages - mainly also "quickstart" ones - as a result of originally having backed the game's Kickstarter at particular levels in 2012. These are not available to post-2014 purchasers by any means. There is also one ship only available to people who pre-ordered the Horizons expansion - now merged into the base game - which is again not available to new purchasers by any means (and the specific terms it was advertised as originally mean that probably has to stay the case no matter how much Frontier regret their phrasing nowadays)

We can certainly love what the game is doing right, and criticize what we feel could be better at the same time.

That's true, and lots of people do that, but I'd recommend actually playing the game for a bit before you decide on what (if anything) it's actually doing right.

A lot more people like the idea of a multiplayer spaceship flying game than like any of the existing implementations of that idea (to the extent that they all get roughly the same set of common criticisms regardless of feature set); I don't expect my precise opinions on what ED does right (and what it doesn't) to be shared exactly by other players. You might well find having played it a bit that microtransactions are merely third or fourth on your list of reasons why you give up after a few hours and never come back ... or you might find that you really like it and just don't personally buy the virtual currency.

 

[Brrokk]

I've been interested in Elite Dangerous for a very long time, but have only recently built a gaming PC to actually play it for myself. So you can imagine my disappointment when I discovered that the microtransactions (for a game that already has an upfront cost to play) have only gotten more agregious over time. What used to be simple cosmetic options for your ships has ballooned into premium currency, and even entire ships if the reviews on Steam are accurate.

I've yet to purchase Elite Dangerous, even during a Steam sale that brought the game down to $5, purely because I don't approve of how Frontier are choosing to handle this game's monetization. If they want a free to play market, then the game needs to be free to play. Or if they want to sell the game for a discounted upfront cost, then they at least need to make sure the microtransactions they offer do not effect gameplay or employ scummy fake currencies meant to hide the real cost of items.

When games like No Man's Sky exist that offers such a wide breadth of content for a single upfront cost, how Frontier are choosing to monetize this game is not okay. I just wanted to provide feedback and ask Frontier to reconsider how they are choosing to sell Elite Dangerous content. I would much prefer buying the game and its DLC for a rduced upfront cost, and having simple cosmetic bundles as microtransactions, or if the game is going to start selling substantial content like ships as part of its microtransactions, then the game needs to be free to play.

No microtransactions are needed to play Elite, they're completely optional. All I've ever bought is paintjobs, and those with free ARX earned from playing.

 

[TurkeyApple]

If you're opposed to microtransactions at all regardless of form, then this isn't the game for you, move on and don't worry about it. Frontier don't make a lot of money from the microtransactions compared with what they make from actual game sales, but they make enough not to worry about putting off the very few people who won't buy a game with them at all. They're not going to change that model to stop it entirely.

If you can put up with microtransactions as long as they're not too significant / required to progress, here's specifically what's currently available; decide from there:
- a whole bunch of purely cosmetic stuff, which is the vast majority of it. Your ships will look a bit plain if you don't pay for that, but ... you can't see your ship much while you're inside it anyway, so you don't need to worry. The default paint is what the NPCs use so it can't look too terrible, and you can get a few extras from in-game events or actions.
- a bunch of "quickstart" ship builds. You can skip some aspects of the early game progression with these if you want, but they're mostly unimportant to long-term players: you can build much better ships by in-game methods
- early access to newer ships for an exclusive period of some months. Some of the new ships are a fair bit better than the older ones in at least some aspects. I don't think they've ever had more than two ships be exclusive at once, so far.

If you object to "people who pay more have an advantage" in all forms [1], then the Odyssey expansion is a much more significant source of advantage than anything available for ARX, in many aspects of the game. If you're fine with advantage bought directly with £s but not if there's an intermediate virtual currency then that's not so important.

You can earn a small amount of the microtransaction currency from in-game activity without having to pay Frontier anything (up to around 20000 ARX a year, which is roughly one early access ship a year, or a few cosmetic items)


[1] For completeness on "bought directly with £s": there are also a small number of players who have other advantages - mainly also "quickstart" ones - as a result of originally having backed the game's Kickstarter at particular levels in 2012. These are not available to post-2014 purchasers by any means. There is also one ship only available to people who pre-ordered the Horizons expansion - now merged into the base game - which is again not available to new purchasers by any means (and the specific terms it was advertised as originally mean that probably has to stay the case no matter how much Frontier regret their phrasing nowadays)


That's true, and lots of people do that, but I'd recommend actually playing the game for a bit before you decide on what (if anything) it's actually doing right.

A lot more people like the idea of a multiplayer spaceship flying game than like any of the existing implementations of that idea (to the extent that they all get roughly the same set of common criticisms regardless of feature set); I don't expect my precise opinions on what ED does right (and what it doesn't) to be shared exactly by other players. You might well find having played it a bit that microtransactions are merely third or fourth on your list of reasons why you give up after a few hours and never come back ... or you might find that you really like it and just don't personally buy the virtual currency.

Thank you for the really thorough breakdown of the subject and providing your thoughts on it too. I'm certainly not opposed to them making money off the microtransactions, especially if the game is being sold at a reduced price. I'll certainly take all this into consideration before purchasing the game if I do. My only hope is that the game will go totally free to play to accommodate the economy, and that ships themselves won't be available to purchase, since getting new ships early does seem unfair for PVP, and having starter ships to 'skip the grind' kind of undermines the the gameplay itself. Still I'd like to speak up about it all the same, and I appreciate the space for that. (No pun intended.)

 

[AlSki]

Hi,
for context many of us have fairly significant experience in the game, e.g.

Approximate time played

4719 hours 12 minutes

so even if I bought all of the microtransactions possible, I'm still probably getting good value for money.
I'm also not even in the top 10,000 players according to some ways of ranking it, e.g. https://inara.cz/elite/rankings/

However, in that time I've earned enough in game credits to buy anything. Many times over. So when new players come along, they need a hand to get vaguely competitive.

having starter ships to 'skip the grind' kind of undermines the the gameplay itself

Personally I couldn't agree more, but I've tried playing with my grown up son (on a 2nd account, both started from zero) and he needed a leg up to get into the fun stuff.

The original pay for ships were because we were in the middle of a war with an alien race. Their technology meant that you could only be competitive against with significant engineering and special modules that had become available after players followed specific storylines. These pre-builds enabled players to join the fight too.

M y only hope is that the game will go totally free to play to accommodate the economy

Given there is a cost to running the servers, that run the economy that you are proposing should be free to play, how would you suggest that cost is met?

since getting new ships early does seem unfair for PVP

The PVP meta ship, the FDL has always been free. A close contender, the Python Mk2 was available on Pay for early access but is now also free.

However, unlike other games we have collaborative as well as competitive. E.g.

• We have the fuel rats who deliver free fuel anywhere for free. https://fuelrats.com/
• There's an objective to colonise a system, that requires daisy chaining the colonisation of 100s other systems by delivering tens of thousands of tons of materials to each system, while the largest ships can't move more than 800 tons, and yet one system in the chain was colonised in 2 minutes. https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threa...der-of-orion-colonization-event.635319/page-5

before purchasing the game if I do.

If you do, there are many ways to get help out there. Discords, reddits, joining a player group or just reaching out directly in game. The start is probably best described as a learning cliff, but lots of us are more than happy to give you a nudge in the right direction.
For free ;-)

 

[TurkeyApple]

Hi,
for context many of us have fairly significant experience in the game, e.g.

Approximate time played

4719 hours 12 minutes

so even if I bought all of the microtransactions possible, I'm still probably getting good value for money.
I'm also not even in the top 10,000 players according to some ways of ranking it, e.g. https://inara.cz/elite/rankings/

However, in that time I've earned enough in game credits to buy anything. Many times over. So when new players come along, they need a hand to get vaguely competitive.

Personally I couldn't agree more, but I've tried playing with my grown up son (on a 2nd account, both started from zero) and he needed a leg up to get into the fun stuff.

The original pay for ships were because we were in the middle of a war with an alien race. Their technology meant that you could only be competitive against with significant engineering and special modules that had become available after players followed specific storylines. These pre-builds enabled players to join the fight too.


Given there is a cost to running the servers, that run the economy that you are proposing should be free to play, how would you suggest that cost is met?


The PVP meta ship, the FDL has always been free. A close contender, the Python Mk2 was available on Pay for early access but is now also free.

However, unlike other games we have collaborative as well as competitive. E.g.

• We have the fuel rats who deliver free fuel anywhere for free. https://fuelrats.com/
• There's an objective to colonise a system, that requires daisy chaining the colonisation of 100s other systems by delivering tens of thousands of tons of materials to each system, while the largest ships can't move more than 800 tons, and yet one system in the chain was colonised in 2 minutes. https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threa...der-of-orion-colonization-event.635319/page-5

If you do, there are many ways to get help out there. Discords, reddits, joining a player group or just reaching out directly in game. The start is probably best described as a learning cliff, but lots of us are more than happy to give you a nudge in the right direction.
For free ;-)

I really appreciate having such a seasoned vet giving their perspective on the subject, and I hope that me as a potential new player can provide some fresh insight that might not be common here.

I absolutely think giving new players a bit of a bump could be a very good idea, and I think that can be accomplished with something like ship rentals using in-game credits exclusively. Or maybe Commanders could sponser other players, giving them a slight boost. You and your son should absolutely be able to enjoy the game together and feel like you each have at least somewhat equal footing. And I think creating those solutions without resorting to microtransactions is completely possible for the skilled devs at Frontier.

I most certainly know from other games that ED can be supported and developed without dubiously consumer unfriendly microtransactions that effect gameplay. The game already has persistent servers that it funds with game sales and the existing microtransactions. Frontier could simply expand on cosmetic microtransactions, or create more compelling content to draw new players to DLC expansions.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

My only hope is that the game will go totally free to play to accommodate the economy,

No chance of that. The microtransaction store is not unimportant, but it's maybe 10% of total income (with the rest being base game and Odyssey sales). Maintaining or increasing total income by increasing microtransaction sales by 10x I very much doubt is possible.

and that ships themselves won't be available to purchase, since getting new ships early does seem unfair for PVP,

It can be, certainly - but there are so many bigger problems with trying to play the game "competitively" with other players that it's probably best to treat the game as if it were a co-op with really harsh friendly fire rules. (I think Frontier would like the game to have inter-player competition, but they don't prioritise it at all in design, so what exists is mostly a bunch of informally-agreed player-invented competitions on top of that, and most of the player base therefore also tends very much to peaceful co-op)

This is also a non-microtransaction problem: if you buy Odyssey [1], then you get access to the previous early access ships (Python 2, Type-8 and Mandalay) which someone who just owns the base game won't have.

[1] Between 2015 and 2020 there was the Horizons expansion (made part of the base game in 2020) which was a lot more significant in this respect: you needed Horizons, among other things, to have access to Engineers, which can roughly double the performance of a ship over baseline. The marginal difference (debate over which way the advantage lies at the top level continues) between the Python 2 and the universally-available Fer-de-Lance is insignificant compared with the difference between an engineered and unengineered ship.

and having starter ships to 'skip the grind' kind of undermines the the gameplay itself.

Personally I agree - and from what can be inferred from Frontier's financial reports, so does almost everyone else. There's no sign that people are actually buying the quickstarts much in the general case, possibly because the niche they fit into is just really narrow.
- experienced players can certainly make something better themselves
- new players picking up ED in a sale for £5 are unlikely to then spend £13 on a quickstart ship even if they are having trouble getting going: easier to just accept the sunk fiver and move on.
- new players with experienced friends can be given a mostly-equivalent boost by their friend (and it sounds like the planned Vanguards feature later this year might allow friends to do a bit more of this more easily)

The game does have a problem (in common with all Elite-likes) that the difficulty curve is reversed - the first ten hours are the hardest, and it gets easier after that. So there's certainly some retention problem in converting purchasers into long-term players. But that's something Frontier needs to solve with proper "intro" missions to get people over that hurdle and show them their options in the universe - which is a tricky thing to do, since that's a substantial amount of effort to set up, and none of the established players will care in the slightest.

 

[metatheurgist]

Working niches is Frontier's specialty.

 

[Tryohazard]

Yeah initially I hated it too but money is such an easy thing to come by that after a few billion it really becomes meaningless. Now when ships are released for arx, youre just paying to play with it earlier than you can buy it with credits. Especially given that because PvP is so broken and unbalanced, most players play in solo or private anyway for most of their gameplay, which means its really up to the player buying the ship to decide if they want to make it easier for them to get a good ship and jump into the fun. If you want all players to have to go through the early no money stage, then Arx for ships is the least of your concerns. They boosted your staring money to something like 100,000? Which is enough to just go buy an artemis suit and get a billion with Exobiology if you know what youre doing.
Gone are the days of watching your credits tightly as you slowly build wealth. Kind of sad imo but if im being honest I dont even remember what I did to get my money. I dont remember even what got me into the game. Its a very small part

 

[Greasetrap42]

I've been interested in Elite Dangerous for a very long time, but have only recently built a gaming PC to actually play it for myself. So you can imagine my disappointment when I discovered that the microtransactions (for a game that already has an upfront cost to play) have only gotten more agregious over time.

If you want to buy the game and play it, go ahead.

If you don't want to purchase any micro-transactions, then don't. There is no need to. And IMO no gaming advantage. Certainly no long term benefit. A pre-purchased ship isn't going to get you the ship builds you ultimately want anyway. To obtain the desired ship builds a player needs to gain ingame credits, unlock engineers, collect Guardian and Thargoid stuff, gain PowerPlay rank for PP modules to unlock other modules etc. etc etc.

If you don't want to buy the game, then don't.

 

[KRISXR]

I read the OP three times... it doesn't make much sense in terms of what Elites store is and offers. My impression leads me to think that the OP hasn't had alot of experience in the gaming environment. I come to that conclusion because how could a player look at what is in the Elite store and think this is predatory or pay to win? I think the Elite store is rather unique compared to the rest of the industry. They certainly have not copied any other tactic that almost all games utilize, especially the fremium/subscription based games.

I'd like to ask, do you think a fremium/subscription based game model is less predatory or more predatory than what is currently offered? If so how? I am very familiar with other games that use this method of prying your wallet open, and I can't see the connection at all. Sure some things are a bit pricey, some aren't, but not into the realms of blatant greed and averis.

Idk $5 to purchase Elite Dangerous, which hasn't been done yet, is already crying foul, and thinks the monetization for cosemetics and for early acess is an unfair advantage... I don't know what to say to to you... keep your five bucks, or give it to a fremium or subscription game.

 

[nemolomen]

I've been interested in Elite Dangerous for a very long time, but have only recently built a gaming PC to actually play it for myself. So you can imagine my disappointment when I discovered that the microtransactions (for a game that already has an upfront cost to play) have only gotten more agregious over time. What used to be simple cosmetic options for your ships has ballooned into premium currency, and even entire ships if the reviews on Steam are accurate.

I've yet to purchase Elite Dangerous, even during a Steam sale that brought the game down to $5, purely because I don't approve of how Frontier are choosing to handle this game's monetization. If they want a free to play market, then the game needs to be free to play. Or if they want to sell the game for a discounted upfront cost, then they at least need to make sure the microtransactions they offer do not effect gameplay or employ scummy fake currencies meant to hide the real cost of items.

When games like No Man's Sky exist that offers such a wide breadth of content for a single upfront cost, how Frontier are choosing to monetize this game is not okay. I just wanted to provide feedback and ask Frontier to reconsider how they are choosing to sell Elite Dangerous content. I would much prefer buying the game and its DLC for a rduced upfront cost, and having simple cosmetic bundles as microtransactions, or if the game is going to start selling substantial content like ships as part of its microtransactions, then the game needs to be free to play.

Hi.

If you’re worried about P2W, don’t be. In fact, there is no requirement or need to purchase anything beyond the game and the Odyssey expansion.

If you want to, you can purchase paint jobs which are somewhat cheap though not as cheap as they used to be.

But as others have said, you do not need to purchase anything with real money, beyond the game. There is no advantage to purchasing prebuilt ships for cash except reducing the amount of time you’ll need to save up in game currency to get the ships and build them up yourself.

The prebuilds do do not offer anything you can’t already do/get in the game, it just takes longer, which is also called “just playing the game”. And that is something you’ll want to do anyway…or at least I assume that you’ll want to…

 

[TurkeyApple]

No chance of that. The microtransaction store is not unimportant, but it's maybe 10% of total income (with the rest being base game and Odyssey sales). Maintaining or increasing total income by increasing microtransaction sales by 10x I very much doubt is possible.


It can be, certainly - but there are so many bigger problems with trying to play the game "competitively" with other players that it's probably best to treat the game as if it were a co-op with really harsh friendly fire rules. (I think Frontier would like the game to have inter-player competition, but they don't prioritise it at all in design, so what exists is mostly a bunch of informally-agreed player-invented competitions on top of that, and most of the player base therefore also tends very much to peaceful co-op)

This is also a non-microtransaction problem: if you buy Odyssey [1], then you get access to the previous early access ships (Python 2, Type-8 and Mandalay) which someone who just owns the base game won't have.

[1] Between 2015 and 2020 there was the Horizons expansion (made part of the base game in 2020) which was a lot more significant in this respect: you needed Horizons, among other things, to have access to Engineers, which can roughly double the performance of a ship over baseline. The marginal difference (debate over which way the advantage lies at the top level continues) between the Python 2 and the universally-available Fer-de-Lance is insignificant compared with the difference between an engineered and unengineered ship.


Personally I agree - and from what can be inferred from Frontier's financial reports, so does almost everyone else. There's no sign that people are actually buying the quickstarts much in the general case, possibly because the niche they fit into is just really narrow.
- experienced players can certainly make something better themselves
- new players picking up ED in a sale for £5 are unlikely to then spend £13 on a quickstart ship even if they are having trouble getting going: easier to just accept the sunk fiver and move on.
- new players with experienced friends can be given a mostly-equivalent boost by their friend (and it sounds like the planned Vanguards feature later this year might allow friends to do a bit more of this more easily)

The game does have a problem (in common with all Elite-likes) that the difficulty curve is reversed - the first ten hours are the hardest, and it gets easier after that. So there's certainly some retention problem in converting purchasers into long-term players. But that's something Frontier needs to solve with proper "intro" missions to get people over that hurdle and show them their options in the universe - which is a tricky thing to do, since that's a substantial amount of effort to set up, and none of the established players will care in the slightest.

Then why lock ships behind the microtransactions at all? I definitely hear what you're saying, and I think a lot of it makes sense, I just don't see the point of having some of these MTX when selling the game normally with standard DLC expansions could be more than profitable for ED. And if they want to sell the game at a reduced price to justify MTX for the sake of server upkeep, they are welcome to do so with purely cosmetic items.

 

[TurkeyApple]

I read the OP three times... it doesn't make much sense in terms of what Elites store is and offers. My impression leads me to think that the OP hasn't had alot of experience in the gaming environment. I come to that conclusion because how could a player look at what is in the Elite store and think this is predatory or pay to win? I think the Elite store is rather unique compared to the rest of the industry. They certainly have not copied any other tactic that almost all games utilize, especially the fremium/subscription based games.

I'd like to ask, do you think a fremium/subscription based game model is less predatory or more predatory than what is currently offered? If so how? I am very familiar with other games that use this method of prying your wallet open, and I can't see the connection at all. Sure some things are a bit pricey, some aren't, but not into the realms of blatant greed and averis.

Idk $5 to purchase Elite Dangerous, which hasn't been done yet, is already crying foul, and thinks the monetization for cosemetics and for early acess is an unfair advantage... I don't know what to say to to you... keep your five bucks, or give it to a fremium or subscription game.

Please trust me when I say I am very familiar with the gaming space and its way of handling these types of subjects. I don't think the game needs a subscription based model, I never said that. And frankly I'd prefer to just buy a content complete game with no microtransactions and buy subsequent DLC like Odyssey for an upfront cost. But I'm trying to meet people halfway. I'm okay with microtransactions in a game if it is at least sold at a reduced price. But gameplay effecting microtransactions of any kind just push the bar too far for me.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

Then why lock ships behind the microtransactions at all? I definitely hear what you're saying, and I think a lot of it makes sense, I just don't see the point of having some of these MTX when selling the game normally with standard DLC expansions could be more than profitable for ED.

I certainly agree that if, rather than selling the Corsair early access for 16,500 ARX they'd instead sold it for the equivalent £9.99 as "Early Access Corsair Pack" (with a £20 "Deluxe" version including some cosmetics) a substantial proportion of the people currently objecting to it would have found it perfectly fine. To which I can only say "Frontier are not always the best at marketing/branding their products" and leave it at that.

I don't personally get that myself: the practical difference between it being £9.99 in direct cash and £9.99 via an intermediate virtual currency to gain an in-game advantage is so marginal [1] that I don't understand why so many people appear to think one is absolutely fine and even praiseworthy ("shows that they're still developing the game", "obviously serious players would be expected to buy all the DLC", etc) and the other is scum-of-the-earth predatoriness, pay-to-win slippery slopes, and all the rest.

But given that it is what it is, selling them instead as regular "early access" DLCs for real currencies was possibly a missed marketing opportunity and might have got them slightly more sales overall.

[1] There's a bit of a distinction in terms of refunds. But the vast majority of customers for the early access ships are established players who aren't going to refund it anyway and certainly not within whatever very short window Steam allows.