Skin Prices

[...] I'd like to think that Frontier have their finger on the pulse enough to understand that undermining the userbase that got you going in the first place is the *worst* possible thing you can do.

Me too, but I've seen how EA introduced MTs just so they can make a profit at the expense of their user-base. In some respects FD also need to make a profit (afterall, the money from Kickstarter, and all the backers can only go so far). Perhaps I lack faith. :(

FWIW, I can't see how anyone could think that cosmetic microtransactions would classify as a game expansion. To me, it does not compute.

Ahem, I did at first (citing that black skin could have a stealth advantage) :rolleyes:. I was disappointed that, having bought the expansion pass, all content would be available, regardless of whether it was cosmetic or not. I've now calmed down and, as I said above, appreciate the need to have some form of extra income as long as it isn't P2W. :)

Because I love what FD are doing with ED, I'm even contemplating MTs to support their marvelous work. :eek::eek:
 
Then why did I play elite 5 minutes ago? How did I play frontier yesterday? How on earth could I have played First Encounters not one week ago?
People want a rich and evolving universe because that's what they payed for. No one payed, funded to have to pay more for all the content.

We're ALREADY being soled an unfinished game and have to pay more for the planned dlc expansions but now I cannot even personalize my ship without paying? I cant even make it a different colour, how difficult is that to implement? They do it because people defend it, they can get away with it, that's the only reason.

Elite or frontier wasn't multiplayer... as in has to use servers which cost something to maintain.. think they just pay for that out of the goodness of their hearts?

FD is a business like anything else... Get real mate...
 
Last edited:
Elite or frontier wasn't multiplayer... as in has to use servers which cost something to maintain.. think they just pay for that out of their own good hearts?

Get real mate...

They pay with the money they got to make the game. You think 54 pounds is going to pay for any server? Get real mate, it costs way more. It's cash grabbing plain and simple. Most people want to play with friends if anything and that doesn't cost frontier money or rather it shouldn't since I can play doom with a friend and no one has to pay for that.

It's going to get worse and worse. I love the game, in it's current state it's pretty good, clearly unfinished but alright, I have an issue with micro transactions.
 

Ozric

Volunteer Moderator
Then why did I play elite 5 minutes ago?
I don't know
How did I play frontier yesterday?
On your PC I imagine
How on earth could I have played First Encounters not one week ago?
Again on your PC I imagine.

I'm not sure what these rants have anything to do with your argument.

I dislike Social Media and therefore I don't use it. I don't like the way I'm discriminated against because a lot of things only allow you to do things via Facebook/Twitter etc. but that is unfortunately the way the world is moving and so if I don't want to be involved then that is my choice, I don't rant about it.

If you paid £200 to back Elite then you must have had Alpha access? Were you not then involved in all of the conversations and debates that happened during the early phases, or did you wait until now to voice your concerns. You also got a lot more for your money than you mentioned in your first post.

Unfortunately like others have said, no-one is forcing you to do anything. You paid your £200 so you have access to all future DLC and that should be enough for you.
 
They pay with the money they got to make the game. You think 54 pounds is going to pay for any server? Get real mate, it costs way more. It's cash grabbing plain and simple. Most people want to play with friends if anything and that doesn't cost frontier money or rather it shouldn't since I can play doom with a friend and no one has to pay for that.

It's going to get worse and worse. I love the game, in it's current state it's pretty good, clearly unfinished but alright, I have an issue with micro transactions.

Do you really think they use the money they got from the KS to fund servers... seriously?.. come on! they go to developing the game.. and maintaining servers etc. requires a steady stream of income, not some finite amount from a KS!

I'm clearly aware that servers cost more than 54 pounds to maintain, but then the audience willing to pay for cosmetic items is also rather large which amount to way more than 54 pounds...

Buy the skins or don't, cause FD aren't going to change this i promise you... peace out!
 
Then why did I play elite 5 minutes ago? How did I play frontier yesterday? How on earth could I have played First Encounters not one week ago?
People want a rich and evolving universe because that's what they payed for. No one payed, funded to have to pay more for all the content.

We're ALREADY being soled an unfinished game and have to pay more for the planned dlc expansions but now I cannot even personalize my ship without paying? I cant even make it a different colour, how difficult is that to implement? They do it because people defend it, they can get away with it, that's the only reason.

Yes, the game is "unfinished" because it doesn't have every single feature under the sun implemented from day one. Just like GTA1 was "unfinished" compared to GTA5. Or how the first version of EVE Online was "unfinished" compared to the current version. :rolleyes:

Their long term plan is to pretty much simulate a sci fi galaxy true to scale with the ability to fly anywhere, FP gameplay inside the ships/stations and eventually entire planets in a seamless world. Atmospheric flight, wildlife, cityscapes, capital ships, alien civilizations and who knows what more.

But yes, since not everything is done on day one after 2 years development the game is "unfinished". Really?
 
It's the "thin end of the wedge" argument and shouldn't be used IMHO. Believe me, if this turns into something genuinely nasty (e.g. a gated section of space with actual content, better weapons or ships) I'll be shouting along with you. :)
I expect if that happens there will be plenty of shouting :). Still, I'm more worried that more of such non-gameplay-altering stuff will be used to milk people - I mean, there is plenty of things that can be customized and at some point having to pay for each of them might get annoying, Although if there were some normal customization options (like paintjobs) available for free and some special ones (like decals) for cash, I'd be cool with that. I'd also be ok with, say, one DLC that would allow ship customization and another for pilot customization (at a valid point), as long as their prices were reasonable (the current are not).

Still, like I said, I if were to make the design choices, I would:

1. Milk those who buy game after release - no trust, no reward
2. Use the credits for real cash model. I'm surprised people were against that as that would solve the problem completely and would not hurt the gameplay considering the focus on skills. And there is plenty of lazy players with extra dough to spend.
 
They pay with the money they got to make the game. You think 54 pounds is going to pay for any server? Get real mate, it costs way more. It's cash grabbing plain and simple.

The logic. So you are saying they cannot ever earn enough to sustain the servers from selling ingame cosmetics. But it is still a cash grab, and they come out with a plus?:rolleyes:
 
I expect if that happens there will be plenty of shouting :). Still, I'm more worried that more of such non-gameplay-altering stuff will be used to milk people - I mean, there is plenty of things that can be customized and at some point having to pay for each of them might get annoying, Although if there were some normal customization options (like paintjobs) available for free and some special ones (like decals) for cash, I'd be cool with that. I'd also be ok with, say, one DLC that would allow ship customization and another for pilot customization (at a valid point), as long as their prices were reasonable (the current are not).

Still, like I said, I if were to make the design choices, I would:

1. Milk those who buy game after release - no trust, no reward
2. Use the credits for real cash model. I'm surprised people were against that as that would solve the problem completely and would not hurt the gameplay considering the focus on skills. And there is plenty of lazy players with extra dough to spend.

Credits for cash model is indeed not that bad, as a bigger ship is not necessarily better. However, the problem with it appears when the developer starts pricing stuff in-game with the 'cash for credit' in the back of his head (i.e. make stuff waaay too expensive so one would feel more inclined to buy cash).
 
Then why did I play elite 5 minutes ago? How did I play frontier yesterday? How on earth could I have played First Encounters not one week ago?
People want a rich and evolving universe because that's what they payed for. No one payed, funded to have to pay more for all the content.

We're ALREADY being soled an unfinished game and have to pay more for the planned dlc expansions but now I cannot even personalize my ship without paying? I cant even make it a different colour, how difficult is that to implement? They do it because people defend it, they can get away with it, that's the only reason.

Correction you are being sold access to a game in beta developement including a prepurchase of the game when it comes out. This is not a finished game with all planned features implemented yet.

Paying for expansions to get expansions - seems pretty normal to me.

There is a cost for servers that is outside the developement cost of creating the game and expansions. The current microtransaction model is better than a lot of others i know of. And there is no obligation to buy any of them. Why does everyone want everything for free.
 
While I do agree with that, the 'fact' (as to me it's a fact, but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong!) is that Frontiers uses time and resources on creating these, which is also funded by the people that 'thought' they paid for a full game, including everything.

While this is true in the literal sense its offset by the fact that if lots of non-backers buy the skins then the backers benefit from the "profit" since some of that will get invested in the basic game mechanics thus benefiting the backers.
 
Interesting you say that - the perks from the KS are currently withdrawn from sale and yet that's not madness or malice - that's good business sense.

The perks gave you ships (Cobra, Eagle) for the game start. Those ships are not finite in number or time, you can earn them ingame the normal way.

If there'd be ship types exclusive to kickstarter perks, that'd be an thing I'd have an issue with.
 
Still, like I said, I if were to make the design choices, I would:

1. Milk those who buy game after release - no trust, no reward
2. Use the credits for real cash model. I'm surprised people were against that as that would solve the problem completely and would not hurt the gameplay considering the focus on skills. And there is plenty of lazy players with extra dough to spend.

Not really well thought out that plan of yours.

No one should be "milked" for money as it's not a nice feeling.

Credits for Cash is perceived, rightly or wrongly in the case of ED, as "Pay To Win" .. that creates a bad atmosphere which many of us here argued against FD about. Seems they listened as we now have vanity items.

The great thing about vanity items is that they are 100% optional - if you don't agree with the design choice; philosophy; price; hell even the moral ethics of it that's fine - don't buy any - people like me (the lazy players with extra cash :rolleyes:) will support you so you can continue playing online for free.
 
Decided to support Frontier and buy 2 skins.
1 for the Eagle and 1 for Sidewinder.

Once my Kickstarter rewards kick in I'll be starting the game in a long range Cobra Explorer and never looking at those 2 ships again, but in this beta .....I'll be flying in style :D
 
Credits for cash model is indeed not that bad, as a bigger ship is not necessarily better. However, the problem with it appears when the developer starts pricing stuff in-game with the 'cash for credit' in the back of his head (i.e. make stuff waaay too expensive so one would feel more inclined to buy cash).
Agreed, but if Frontier would do that they can as well do the worst I mentioned they can do, don't they? :)

nice, well worded and long post, partially constructive.

but really once i read the word "entitled" i stop

maybe that is just me ;)
Thanks nevertheless. I was expecting that the use of that word might cause issues :D

But if there is no such "entitlement", vague as it might be, then what is the motivation for anyone to support games developed in this manner?
 
Back
Top Bottom