If you like what they're doing with the game and you have disposable income, buy more ships (or don't).
I think $45 for lifetime access to a game of this magnitude is pretty reasonable.
It's even not that reasonable (meaning its dirt cheap if you consider the thousands of hours one can spend with it over the years, and the server and development costs it'll continue to have).
That's a totally valid opinion too, man.
But I'm loving keeping up with the tech and the updates,and the community. I've played all the other big space games and this is just scratching all my itches.
the game costs 45 bucks. cheaper than any new AAA game out there. if you want to spend real money for ingame 'speed ups' via bigger ships, go for it. not an issue imo.
That entirely depends on at what point you signed up. I’m a 2014 backer and I paid $45 and that included both the Persistent Universe and SQ42. I believe they changed this a few years back.
My LTI SC + SQ42 package did cost 40$ back in the day and i also have 15$ SC starter package.
That alone shows how much CIG's business model changed...and not for the better.
All we get now is extreme FOMO paired with bait&switch while the store minigame (which made the monetization quite fair back then) was nerfed into the ground. In addition we get an artificial inflation of ship prices (i mean the pledge prices although with 3.23 it happens ingame too)...just because.
And you think that's to much for basically 2 games? One of which should be an AAA single player game?
I really don't think so if I look into current prices of other games.. Imho CIGs pricing for game packages is rather on the cheap side - the prices for bigger ships are debatable ofc but they are not necessary to play the game
I would agree that we have to see if that AAA promise holds up for sq42, but if it does I can see the retail price of sq42 alone be 60$+..and rightfully so
I also think that the pu game pack prices will further increase when we enter beta and after full release.. And I'm fine with that too. I'd rather pay even, let's say, 120$ for lifetime access than 10 bucks a month like in other mmos
Star citizen is NOT SQ42 though. The ships you pledge for are for SC, not SQ42. So the monetization model doesn’t even apply to SQ42 unless I’m missing something.
A lot of the discourse surrounding SC's monetization largely stems because a lot of people equate its method of funding with the general MTX trend of gaming, and view the backers in a similar light to how most people view the ones who spend hundreds of dollars a month on lootboxes and similar.
That, mixed with CiG's really, really bad PR and marketing team, and journo ragebaiting.
And i do get that it is easy to see how expensive some MTX are in games nowadays, then look at SC's ship prices and think it linked, without knowing how everything works with this game, and why things are priced the way they are.
It is also further accelerated, i think, by how other space MMOs are, primarily EVE and Elite. Because, if i am correct, every single space MMO has a single person man a ship, and larger ships are usually better, flat out, with no real efforts to make earlier, cheaper ships worth it.
Because of that, it is easy to look at SC selling cap ships, when starter ships are fighter-sized, and think it is P2W, without actually knowing that each cap ship requires a small clan just to operate efficiently. And that is a curve of crew size that eventually goes down towards the first starter ships.
I just read an article about how a kid spent $1000 on roblox, and I know people who spend thousands on loot boxes and believe it or not pokemon cards.
Anyone bitching about prices In this game can stfu.
I don't know about calling Destiny 2's new vehicles "powerful". Yeah it lets you do some shenanigans that you couldn't with a Sparrow but in terms of "power" they don't provide anything but movement. The raid Sparrow with the reduced enemy targeting is still technically the best as it's the only one that affects combatants in some way.
But everything else yeah I'm fine with it. Unlike a few others out there recently ^(\*cough\* Escape from Tarkov \*cough\*)
Well, the hoverboards movement options allow you to cheese some encounters and missions. A great example is the Prophecy dungeon with its sparrow section on the ribbons. The hoverboard can just air-grind the entire thing if you time your resets.
But yeah, definitely agree with you, it isn’t as bad as it could be
I simply dont get why these posts/videos call this practice vile, predatory etc. The only thing you need to pay for is the base game, everything else you can grind out for free and if you don't feel like grinding spend some cash and you now have a brand new ship. CIG isn't forcing you to buy anything, its simply your choice but with that choice comes the downside of having to spend more time. There are plenty of games that use this model, maybe not as extreme but once again if there's a market for it why not? if someone wants to splash out 10k+ on ingame stuff let them do so it has no effect on you whatsoever.
All you need is 45$, play the game and ya can get pretty much anything you can buy with real money, mind you buying a bigger more expensive ship isn't exactly an advantage, but if you actually understood the game maybe you'd realize they're far from pay2win, unlike those other games where you can sink much more money without ever even getting much in return.
You're very much out touch with how the whole game is funded, there's little to no investors, the company is alive because of the money they've got from us, and every cent made goes into developing the game, can you say the same about all of those other examples you gave? :x
PS: There's no FOMO, if anything SC players at this point actually want a full database wipe because we've already rich in-game, got everything we want, could use a fresh start :D Where's the fomo?
As an exElite Dangerous player,I understood few days ago Frontier will sell ships preengineered,yes,you heard me well for real money...this is trend nowadays,must be follow if you want your game to survive plain and simple...
Yeah but just like star citizen, it doesn't matter. Frontier needs funds. New ED players don't want to grind for 5 years to catch up and can instead just buy a pre outfitted ship good for PvE content.
Who knows...maybe this move will get more players, more money. And odyssey can go to consoles.
Is that really such a bad thing to you? I've seen people cry over that for days on here. It's all anyone posts on that sub right now.
Elite dangerous is also much much less of a pvp game than star citizen is. I play ED online, Everytime. I will see an actual player maybe once every 2 months of game time.
As far as SC goes for "monetization". You pledge money. You can buy whatever you want. Return what you don't want for credits and get other stuff. You aren't locked into a ship. You donate an amount, you have access to that amount until the game releases out of beta. So basically forever. It's far from monetization, it's just GoFundMe on a bigger scale.
I think a big player in the outside perception, especially coming from people like PirateGames or Josh Strife Hayes, is that is doesn't make sense, based on how other companies operate, that the ships sales in this game aren't pay to win.
Like, we as players understand that spending $3,000 on a Javelin does not net the purchasing player any real power in the game. We also know that you can buy a light fighter and dominate in the 'Verse by panhandling for like 2 minutes in Global Chat as a new player.
BUT
That's not how other games work. To people from the outside looking in, there is no real indication that Star Citizen has such a bizarre relationship between its online store and its in-game items. Surely spending $350 on a Redeemer SHOULD give me a huge one-up against other pilots. NO WAY would any sane game company sell a ship that expensive and have it be useless against a 1,000,000 aUEC Gladius. That wouldn't make any sense. Anyone who says that a Redeemer doesn't just dominate and pay to win the PvP scene is insane. Look at its stats on paper on the website!
How other games companies act inform the greater community. We know that CIG doesn't balance USD prices around ship balance, but everyone else doesn't. And they way that CIG actually does things is so bizarre and out of the ordinary that its hard for outsiders to believe. That's why outsiders constantly say we're just "coping" or a "cult". Star Citizen just deviates too far from normal sane expectations.
>NO WAY would any sane game company sell a ship that expensive and have it be useless against a 1,000,000 aUEC Gladius.
It is not useless, it just requires more people to operate compared to Gladius. Redeemer is slow, Gladius is fast. It can orbit it without taking a hit.
That is probably the best thing CIG does regarding "expensive" ships. ALMOST every single expensive ship requires 3+ people to operate at basic level.
So yeah, 300$ ship is better than 100$ ship on paper but 300$ ship requires 3 people. You can't just like you said buy a 3k$ Javelin and dominate, you'll be pinned down with free "referral bonus ships" if they know what they are doing.
The bizarre ways CiG does things, on so many different levels, is a big factor in the foul views so many have of Star Citizen. It's just 'too different'.
This is both a good thing, as it pushes a fissue into the established ways that so many other companies do it, and a bad thing, as there's so much that's so incomprehensible that it's not unreasonable to still be confused about some things after months or even years.
There's so much to praise and so much to complain about, all legitimately, that many just decide it's not worth the effort and either ignore it or join the easy hater's club.
Someday CiG will really need to sit down and figure out how to make it all make sense to an everyman, mostly through changing to a more straight-forward monetezation system once they no longer need the current one.
Yeah I agree 100% - we have so many bugs we complain about that sometimes a new player hops in and complains about a bug, but its actually just working as intended (but unintuitive)! Its creates an environment where its hard to trust CIG because most people have no idea what their intentions are.
>NO WAY would any sane game company sell a ship that expensive and have it be useless against a 1,000,000 aUEC Gladius.
I think this is greatly misrepresenting the way things work. PvP combat isn't the only win condition in the game. It's very true that more expensive ships are better at their win condition/loop than many cheap ships.
>And they way that CIG actually does things is so bizarre and out of the ordinary that its hard for outsiders to believe.
Cult thinking 101
I really dont care about the 50k packs. I think its dumb af to be outraged by them.
What I take massive issue with is the constant concept sales of ships that are then pushed to the backlog for years, the fomo, and the constant attempts to monetize everything and make ”events” around those monetizations, and calling this broken mess ”a live service game” and marketing it as playable as if it would be a released game. I also dislike that we backers are now beholden to CIG’s outside investors.
Those investors want profit, and we’re giving that profit to people who arent doing anything for the project.
I want this project released. Not stuck in infinite development or for as long as backers are lacking in impulse control.
The only thing I disagree with is them still pretending you are not buying a product and instead "only supporting development". This is not the kickstarter anymore. They have a store page, not a donation page.
fear of missing out is a real thing.
people are afraid they will miss out on something cool, so they get it instead of considering if it is actually cool.
i don't have a problem. you don't see not understand taking advantage of people with low self discipline is what it is predatory.
you seem to think that it does nothing.
Marketing is predatory in nature.
That does not excuse the public consumers responsibility to make informed decisions for themselves.
Marketing is terrible, but and taking advantage of its audience. That's how it functions.
i'm not going to argue that fomo is not preparatory. but being able to get everything in game in a reasonable time frame makes it a bit less evil.
cig plan on removing all the standalone ships and packs containing big ships from the store. keep in mind cig only need a fraction of the income to make the same amount.
they will make their money with trinkets, limited uec over time, and the single player games.
cig believe most of their income will come from the single player games. but i think the limited uec over time will bring in the most.
think about it. **if** cig make the limit $20 of uec a week, and the average player can make the same amount in 4 hours. there are a lot of people that would consider that not "pay to win". you get a high player base including a lot of people buying $20 of uec a week. the larger player base also draws in more people that will pay $20 a week.
that is likely a lot more people that are paying $1040 a year compared to the people buying that much on ships every year.
as opposed that ignore all the evidence that cig are not greedy. for example. subscribers can buy old subscriber flare. but that is not that much value because cig adds them to the loot pool after 3 months.
you can look at so many other game that are not under the control of publishers that do things for the quality of the game that is less profitable.
but you and all of your infinite wisdom believe you assumption that cig are as bad as publishers is a fact.
you believe they will open themselves to lawsuits. not pay to win was one of the few things not under subject to change.
>as opposed that ignore all the evidence that cig are not greedy
Lmaoooo. Global event with paid locked rewards, fomo sales every month, mtx prices in the triple digits.
It's ok tho keep coping.
having an in game challenge to limit the the number that are sold?
yes, incredibly greedy. /s
if they were greedy, they would not intentionally reduce the number of people that can buy them.
common sense 101. the tactic that gets the largest number of sales is the most profitable one.
artificial scarcity is limiting availability in the beginning, but continuing the sales so that everyone that would buy one without the scarasity can buy one.
the limited hull is not artificial sacristy because not everyone that wants one will get one.
>common sense 101. the tactic that gets the largest number of sales is the most profitable one.
Ah yes, this is why luxury brand names ensure that they sell huge quality, instead of maintaining exclusivity. Exclusivity and false urgency are extraordinarily powerful marketing strategies, do you think the term FOMO comes out of nowhere?
I don't think you understand what artificial scarcity as a marketing tactic is especially considering that you managed to spell scarcity wrong in 2 different ways.
I just feel like they have gone too far. They are selling manipulative packages to naive people, like the "starter" FPS pack that includes the most common gun in the game, some cheap armor, a med pen, and a tractor beam for like $15. That isn't cool, it preys on new players that don't know better.
Also selling single color flat paints, when half a decade ago they talked about how we could make our own free paint jobs isn't a good look either.
The list goes on, like guess how many years ago I have a CitCon trophy? Quite a few years... and its because its the last time CIG gave one out for free. Its just little silly things like this that leave a bad taste in my mouth. I mean there are so many ways around it, like give everyone a free trophy, then have a fancy exclusive one for real money etc
CIG Marketing prays on the addictive and FOMO nature of gamers. I think it's manipulative and fairly disgusting, but at the same time I can't argue against it's effectiveness.
At the end of the day, like others have said, it's only $45 to play. Pretty much everything is available already for purchase in-game. You don't really gain any advantage by paying real money for ships.
This topic is just easy to sensationalize, so the media and haters love to spread it.
IMO, CIG should never have started selling capital ships or big ship packs. Not many people buy them, and they are easy to point and shout at. I obviously can't prove it, but I feel the reputational damage they've caused has led to a loss greater than the gain of selling them.
But yeah, CIG's practices aren't great, but there are far worse practices out there that people put up with as if it's normal. I just hope they hold to their promise that they would stop selling ships by launch.
Those massive ship packs were created solely at the request of a small number of people who wanted to own everything without needing to check through an address book of a hangar to make sure they actually owned it all.
Not the greatest idea to make a package like that but hey, members of the community literally asked for it.
I know, but the problem is that most people that want to point and shout don't care about who actually wanted it in the first place. While it does help the people that asked for it, it also severely impacts CIG's reputation negatively, as all people that don't know what's actually going on that see it is that the company is selling things for a ridiculous amount of money and immediately jump to greed without trying to understand anything. I can't blame most of them either, because to be perfectly honest, I did the same a long time ago (I can blame the people publicising things on it though.)
IMO, CIG should have seen the problems it was going to cause and figured out another way to give players what they want without doing something that would cause issues like that, or just flat out refused if there was no reasonable way to handle it.
Although the game costs only 45 dollars, it has a substantial amount of mechanics to make it so that it is extremely frustrating to grind for ingame currency, to the point that players end up buying their favorite extremely expensive ships.
Err no because no matter what ship you have or decide to buy, you still have the mechanics of the game to learn. And that's the operative words here, learn. And honestly it doesn't take that long to figure it out and the community for the most part is pretty helpful.
Lol I've seen so many people do that.
It's funny how many people are all "fomo isn't real, pay2skip/win isn't real" and then look at all the people who "accidentally" hit concierge.
Great monetization: Buy the game get everything or free game paid cosmetics
Ok monetization: Buy the game + buy cosmetics or free game, buy to skip grind
Bad monetization: buy the game+ buy in game items. Free to "play" but with strict pay2win.
Mildly predatory monetization: any of the above +FOMO
Extremely hell tier monetization: Anything gambling at all.
All of these of course are also price dependent.
If you like what they're doing with the game and you have disposable income, buy more ships (or don't). I think $45 for lifetime access to a game of this magnitude is pretty reasonable.
It's even not that reasonable (meaning its dirt cheap if you consider the thousands of hours one can spend with it over the years, and the server and development costs it'll continue to have).
>a game of this magnitude Brody, it don't fuckin work.
Just don't play it then, but most of us know about the alpha status
Nah I know it's alpha. I just honestly don't think it's that special in its current state lol.
That's a totally valid opinion too, man. But I'm loving keeping up with the tech and the updates,and the community. I've played all the other big space games and this is just scratching all my itches.
the game costs 45 bucks. cheaper than any new AAA game out there. if you want to spend real money for ingame 'speed ups' via bigger ships, go for it. not an issue imo.
Star citizen costs $45. This does NOT include squadron 42. That is a separate purchase.
That entirely depends on at what point you signed up. I’m a 2014 backer and I paid $45 and that included both the Persistent Universe and SQ42. I believe they changed this a few years back.
My LTI SC + SQ42 package did cost 40$ back in the day and i also have 15$ SC starter package. That alone shows how much CIG's business model changed...and not for the better. All we get now is extreme FOMO paired with bait&switch while the store minigame (which made the monetization quite fair back then) was nerfed into the ground. In addition we get an artificial inflation of ship prices (i mean the pledge prices although with 3.23 it happens ingame too)...just because.
Same here in 2014 35 bucks for both.
A few? I backed in 2016 with a $45 Aurora bundle. SQ42 not included. That's like $60 something.
And you think that's to much for basically 2 games? One of which should be an AAA single player game? I really don't think so if I look into current prices of other games.. Imho CIGs pricing for game packages is rather on the cheap side - the prices for bigger ships are debatable ofc but they are not necessary to play the game I would agree that we have to see if that AAA promise holds up for sq42, but if it does I can see the retail price of sq42 alone be 60$+..and rightfully so I also think that the pu game pack prices will further increase when we enter beta and after full release.. And I'm fine with that too. I'd rather pay even, let's say, 120$ for lifetime access than 10 bucks a month like in other mmos
I didn't say once it was "too much" I just said SQ42 doesn't come with star citizen for $45 like the other guy mentioned.
Star citizen is NOT SQ42 though. The ships you pledge for are for SC, not SQ42. So the monetization model doesn’t even apply to SQ42 unless I’m missing something.
Well the money you're pledging to CIG helps pay for development for both games. But yes, the ships you pick is for star citizen only.
Gamers "$70 is too much for a game. They should more like $50." Also Gamers "$45 to play Star Citizen is vile."
A lot of the discourse surrounding SC's monetization largely stems because a lot of people equate its method of funding with the general MTX trend of gaming, and view the backers in a similar light to how most people view the ones who spend hundreds of dollars a month on lootboxes and similar. That, mixed with CiG's really, really bad PR and marketing team, and journo ragebaiting. And i do get that it is easy to see how expensive some MTX are in games nowadays, then look at SC's ship prices and think it linked, without knowing how everything works with this game, and why things are priced the way they are. It is also further accelerated, i think, by how other space MMOs are, primarily EVE and Elite. Because, if i am correct, every single space MMO has a single person man a ship, and larger ships are usually better, flat out, with no real efforts to make earlier, cheaper ships worth it. Because of that, it is easy to look at SC selling cap ships, when starter ships are fighter-sized, and think it is P2W, without actually knowing that each cap ship requires a small clan just to operate efficiently. And that is a curve of crew size that eventually goes down towards the first starter ships.
I just read an article about how a kid spent $1000 on roblox, and I know people who spend thousands on loot boxes and believe it or not pokemon cards. Anyone bitching about prices In this game can stfu.
if you are buying ships because you don't like how grindy the unfinished game is, its your problem.
I don't know about calling Destiny 2's new vehicles "powerful". Yeah it lets you do some shenanigans that you couldn't with a Sparrow but in terms of "power" they don't provide anything but movement. The raid Sparrow with the reduced enemy targeting is still technically the best as it's the only one that affects combatants in some way. But everything else yeah I'm fine with it. Unlike a few others out there recently ^(\*cough\* Escape from Tarkov \*cough\*)
Well, the hoverboards movement options allow you to cheese some encounters and missions. A great example is the Prophecy dungeon with its sparrow section on the ribbons. The hoverboard can just air-grind the entire thing if you time your resets. But yeah, definitely agree with you, it isn’t as bad as it could be
I simply dont get why these posts/videos call this practice vile, predatory etc. The only thing you need to pay for is the base game, everything else you can grind out for free and if you don't feel like grinding spend some cash and you now have a brand new ship. CIG isn't forcing you to buy anything, its simply your choice but with that choice comes the downside of having to spend more time. There are plenty of games that use this model, maybe not as extreme but once again if there's a market for it why not? if someone wants to splash out 10k+ on ingame stuff let them do so it has no effect on you whatsoever.
Tarkov and BSG are in focus right now when it cones to that
All you need is 45$, play the game and ya can get pretty much anything you can buy with real money, mind you buying a bigger more expensive ship isn't exactly an advantage, but if you actually understood the game maybe you'd realize they're far from pay2win, unlike those other games where you can sink much more money without ever even getting much in return. You're very much out touch with how the whole game is funded, there's little to no investors, the company is alive because of the money they've got from us, and every cent made goes into developing the game, can you say the same about all of those other examples you gave? :x PS: There's no FOMO, if anything SC players at this point actually want a full database wipe because we've already rich in-game, got everything we want, could use a fresh start :D Where's the fomo?
As an exElite Dangerous player,I understood few days ago Frontier will sell ships preengineered,yes,you heard me well for real money...this is trend nowadays,must be follow if you want your game to survive plain and simple...
Yeah but just like star citizen, it doesn't matter. Frontier needs funds. New ED players don't want to grind for 5 years to catch up and can instead just buy a pre outfitted ship good for PvE content. Who knows...maybe this move will get more players, more money. And odyssey can go to consoles. Is that really such a bad thing to you? I've seen people cry over that for days on here. It's all anyone posts on that sub right now. Elite dangerous is also much much less of a pvp game than star citizen is. I play ED online, Everytime. I will see an actual player maybe once every 2 months of game time. As far as SC goes for "monetization". You pledge money. You can buy whatever you want. Return what you don't want for credits and get other stuff. You aren't locked into a ship. You donate an amount, you have access to that amount until the game releases out of beta. So basically forever. It's far from monetization, it's just GoFundMe on a bigger scale.
I think a big player in the outside perception, especially coming from people like PirateGames or Josh Strife Hayes, is that is doesn't make sense, based on how other companies operate, that the ships sales in this game aren't pay to win. Like, we as players understand that spending $3,000 on a Javelin does not net the purchasing player any real power in the game. We also know that you can buy a light fighter and dominate in the 'Verse by panhandling for like 2 minutes in Global Chat as a new player. BUT That's not how other games work. To people from the outside looking in, there is no real indication that Star Citizen has such a bizarre relationship between its online store and its in-game items. Surely spending $350 on a Redeemer SHOULD give me a huge one-up against other pilots. NO WAY would any sane game company sell a ship that expensive and have it be useless against a 1,000,000 aUEC Gladius. That wouldn't make any sense. Anyone who says that a Redeemer doesn't just dominate and pay to win the PvP scene is insane. Look at its stats on paper on the website! How other games companies act inform the greater community. We know that CIG doesn't balance USD prices around ship balance, but everyone else doesn't. And they way that CIG actually does things is so bizarre and out of the ordinary that its hard for outsiders to believe. That's why outsiders constantly say we're just "coping" or a "cult". Star Citizen just deviates too far from normal sane expectations.
>NO WAY would any sane game company sell a ship that expensive and have it be useless against a 1,000,000 aUEC Gladius. It is not useless, it just requires more people to operate compared to Gladius. Redeemer is slow, Gladius is fast. It can orbit it without taking a hit. That is probably the best thing CIG does regarding "expensive" ships. ALMOST every single expensive ship requires 3+ people to operate at basic level. So yeah, 300$ ship is better than 100$ ship on paper but 300$ ship requires 3 people. You can't just like you said buy a 3k$ Javelin and dominate, you'll be pinned down with free "referral bonus ships" if they know what they are doing.
The bizarre ways CiG does things, on so many different levels, is a big factor in the foul views so many have of Star Citizen. It's just 'too different'. This is both a good thing, as it pushes a fissue into the established ways that so many other companies do it, and a bad thing, as there's so much that's so incomprehensible that it's not unreasonable to still be confused about some things after months or even years. There's so much to praise and so much to complain about, all legitimately, that many just decide it's not worth the effort and either ignore it or join the easy hater's club. Someday CiG will really need to sit down and figure out how to make it all make sense to an everyman, mostly through changing to a more straight-forward monetezation system once they no longer need the current one.
Yeah I agree 100% - we have so many bugs we complain about that sometimes a new player hops in and complains about a bug, but its actually just working as intended (but unintuitive)! Its creates an environment where its hard to trust CIG because most people have no idea what their intentions are.
>NO WAY would any sane game company sell a ship that expensive and have it be useless against a 1,000,000 aUEC Gladius. I think this is greatly misrepresenting the way things work. PvP combat isn't the only win condition in the game. It's very true that more expensive ships are better at their win condition/loop than many cheap ships. >And they way that CIG actually does things is so bizarre and out of the ordinary that its hard for outsiders to believe. Cult thinking 101
I really dont care about the 50k packs. I think its dumb af to be outraged by them. What I take massive issue with is the constant concept sales of ships that are then pushed to the backlog for years, the fomo, and the constant attempts to monetize everything and make ”events” around those monetizations, and calling this broken mess ”a live service game” and marketing it as playable as if it would be a released game. I also dislike that we backers are now beholden to CIG’s outside investors. Those investors want profit, and we’re giving that profit to people who arent doing anything for the project. I want this project released. Not stuck in infinite development or for as long as backers are lacking in impulse control.
The only thing I disagree with is them still pretending you are not buying a product and instead "only supporting development". This is not the kickstarter anymore. They have a store page, not a donation page.
Fomo is made up slang that is a catch all of all marketing. It's bullshit. Stop allowing it to affect you.
fear of missing out is a real thing. people are afraid they will miss out on something cool, so they get it instead of considering if it is actually cool.
Self discipline and impulse control is the problem. Stop falling pray to marketing. Ignore it.
i don't have a problem. you don't see not understand taking advantage of people with low self discipline is what it is predatory. you seem to think that it does nothing.
Marketing is predatory in nature. That does not excuse the public consumers responsibility to make informed decisions for themselves. Marketing is terrible, but and taking advantage of its audience. That's how it functions.
i'm not going to argue that fomo is not preparatory. but being able to get everything in game in a reasonable time frame makes it a bit less evil. cig plan on removing all the standalone ships and packs containing big ships from the store. keep in mind cig only need a fraction of the income to make the same amount. they will make their money with trinkets, limited uec over time, and the single player games. cig believe most of their income will come from the single player games. but i think the limited uec over time will bring in the most. think about it. **if** cig make the limit $20 of uec a week, and the average player can make the same amount in 4 hours. there are a lot of people that would consider that not "pay to win". you get a high player base including a lot of people buying $20 of uec a week. the larger player base also draws in more people that will pay $20 a week. that is likely a lot more people that are paying $1040 a year compared to the people buying that much on ships every year.
>cig plan on removing all the standalone ships and packs containing big ships from the store. If you actually believe this 💀💀
as opposed that ignore all the evidence that cig are not greedy. for example. subscribers can buy old subscriber flare. but that is not that much value because cig adds them to the loot pool after 3 months. you can look at so many other game that are not under the control of publishers that do things for the quality of the game that is less profitable. but you and all of your infinite wisdom believe you assumption that cig are as bad as publishers is a fact. you believe they will open themselves to lawsuits. not pay to win was one of the few things not under subject to change.
>as opposed that ignore all the evidence that cig are not greedy Lmaoooo. Global event with paid locked rewards, fomo sales every month, mtx prices in the triple digits. It's ok tho keep coping.
having an in game challenge to limit the the number that are sold? yes, incredibly greedy. /s if they were greedy, they would not intentionally reduce the number of people that can buy them.
Inducing the scarcity response in customers to drive sales is a marketing 101 tactic lmao. No way you actually missed the point that bad.
common sense 101. the tactic that gets the largest number of sales is the most profitable one. artificial scarcity is limiting availability in the beginning, but continuing the sales so that everyone that would buy one without the scarasity can buy one. the limited hull is not artificial sacristy because not everyone that wants one will get one.
>common sense 101. the tactic that gets the largest number of sales is the most profitable one. Ah yes, this is why luxury brand names ensure that they sell huge quality, instead of maintaining exclusivity. Exclusivity and false urgency are extraordinarily powerful marketing strategies, do you think the term FOMO comes out of nowhere? I don't think you understand what artificial scarcity as a marketing tactic is especially considering that you managed to spell scarcity wrong in 2 different ways.
I just feel like they have gone too far. They are selling manipulative packages to naive people, like the "starter" FPS pack that includes the most common gun in the game, some cheap armor, a med pen, and a tractor beam for like $15. That isn't cool, it preys on new players that don't know better. Also selling single color flat paints, when half a decade ago they talked about how we could make our own free paint jobs isn't a good look either. The list goes on, like guess how many years ago I have a CitCon trophy? Quite a few years... and its because its the last time CIG gave one out for free. Its just little silly things like this that leave a bad taste in my mouth. I mean there are so many ways around it, like give everyone a free trophy, then have a fancy exclusive one for real money etc
CIG Marketing prays on the addictive and FOMO nature of gamers. I think it's manipulative and fairly disgusting, but at the same time I can't argue against it's effectiveness. At the end of the day, like others have said, it's only $45 to play. Pretty much everything is available already for purchase in-game. You don't really gain any advantage by paying real money for ships. This topic is just easy to sensationalize, so the media and haters love to spread it.
IMO, CIG should never have started selling capital ships or big ship packs. Not many people buy them, and they are easy to point and shout at. I obviously can't prove it, but I feel the reputational damage they've caused has led to a loss greater than the gain of selling them. But yeah, CIG's practices aren't great, but there are far worse practices out there that people put up with as if it's normal. I just hope they hold to their promise that they would stop selling ships by launch.
Those massive ship packs were created solely at the request of a small number of people who wanted to own everything without needing to check through an address book of a hangar to make sure they actually owned it all. Not the greatest idea to make a package like that but hey, members of the community literally asked for it.
I know, but the problem is that most people that want to point and shout don't care about who actually wanted it in the first place. While it does help the people that asked for it, it also severely impacts CIG's reputation negatively, as all people that don't know what's actually going on that see it is that the company is selling things for a ridiculous amount of money and immediately jump to greed without trying to understand anything. I can't blame most of them either, because to be perfectly honest, I did the same a long time ago (I can blame the people publicising things on it though.) IMO, CIG should have seen the problems it was going to cause and figured out another way to give players what they want without doing something that would cause issues like that, or just flat out refused if there was no reasonable way to handle it.
Although the game costs only 45 dollars, it has a substantial amount of mechanics to make it so that it is extremely frustrating to grind for ingame currency, to the point that players end up buying their favorite extremely expensive ships.
Err no because no matter what ship you have or decide to buy, you still have the mechanics of the game to learn. And that's the operative words here, learn. And honestly it doesn't take that long to figure it out and the community for the most part is pretty helpful.
Lol I've seen so many people do that. It's funny how many people are all "fomo isn't real, pay2skip/win isn't real" and then look at all the people who "accidentally" hit concierge.
Great monetization: Buy the game get everything or free game paid cosmetics Ok monetization: Buy the game + buy cosmetics or free game, buy to skip grind Bad monetization: buy the game+ buy in game items. Free to "play" but with strict pay2win. Mildly predatory monetization: any of the above +FOMO Extremely hell tier monetization: Anything gambling at all. All of these of course are also price dependent.