F2P and Lootboxes (Honestly I think they are a good thing)

[Nick]

All of these ideas are much more reasonable than most f2p games, however, i still do hesitate about how we would launch without an initial purchase. that ramp up time is very harsh, especially with no guarantee of money from each user.

Especially with a more indie launch, there is a good chance things won't be flawless, so we need people to be funding us fixing them even if they are not supper pleased with it at the moment they start playing.

Add to that, the fact I think many gamers would not support a free to play game, like, it will be much harder to sell them on pre-ordering something free especialy with the natrual negative reaction to free to play.

[Lord Tyrius]

I have played a lot of Guild Wars 2, and I think some of their decisions are worth looking at. They are an MMO that was one-time-purchase which instantly got me on board. They have premium currency, but there is a player-controller market to exchange that with normal in-game currency. That way there is never something a premium player can have a non-premium player can't, which feels good (never bought premium currency).

I think whether or not there will be something like lootboxes, they have to be accessable by everyone (even if rare), so people also see what they are getting, and are likely to buy some if they feel like it.

GW2 then did something controversial: They released an expansion, and made the base-game f2p (with certain quality of life restrictions). Obviously this helped to keep the game regions crowded, and I never felt negative towards f2p players "getting what I paid for for free", because I have a lot of traits for being more "veteran" (unique items, character/bankslots etc). I think that's important for a successful f2p transition.

Where they lost me was the expansions: when you need to buy the expansion to unlock an achievement (even for base-game content) and generally feel like all the fun/high-loot is happening in restriced expansion areas, it wasn't fun for me. If I didn't buy because of that and how it was "forced onto" base-game players (restrictions that felt illogical etc), or because I already had 2k+ hours in the game I don't know.
(The game is still fun, but over the years I sometimes needed a longer break, and getting back in was both hard and time consuming once you're in lol)

Over all, gw2 for me is an example of an MMO with good monetization (I don't like subscriptions + their premium-shop was well done I think). I realize however that gw has a huge brand-recognition in the MMO market, so they have options Hades doesn't I'm sure. Still worth a look IMO.

[Flatlander]

Exactly as Lord Tyrius said.
It is very important for the "Paid Currency" to be freely exchangable for "In-Game Currency".

So if you had Galactic Gold (In-game Currency) and Premium Platinum (Paid Currency) players need to be able to trade these with each other freely.
This way, even free players can have premium accounts, with premium cosmetics, and premium feature upgrades.

Now, Lord Tyrius brought up the greatest example of why Expansions and DLC are bad.
If it splits your playerbase, or makes it so you have to pay to access content or gain acheivements, or even finish quest storylines. Players will get upset.

One of the biggest "Asshole Moves" I have seen a developer do is with Destiny 2.
A few months after they released their game, they release a DLC Pack, which added new maps and strikes, but you didn't have access to them without buying the DLC.
Effectively locking players out of matchmaking modes they previously had access to, because they no longer met the requirements to enter those zones.

It is VERY easy to know which things are good and bad when selling your game.
Rules of selling your game:
#1 - Never split your community. If you add a new map, everyone gets it. Add a new zone? Everyone can go there.
#2 - Never give power for money. Even if an Expansion/DLC/Micro-Transaction simply gives access to a new Unit Type, you have to get it to everyone. Even if it isn't powerful, people will complain that your game is pay to win.
#3 - Anyone you allow to play your game, should be able to obtain everything in-game without spending any additional money. (This goes for F2P and Pay to Own both)
#4 - If you have a powerful item you have to grind to unlock, do not let Premium Players "Pay to Own" it.

I once made a War MMORPG, where it was just a huge battle between Elves, Orcs, Dwarves, and Humans and each race had a different special ability. But me and my friends (about 20 of us) wanted to play on the same team, but any team we joined was too powerful (we tipped the scales because of our large player-count).
So what I did was I created a 5th race, The Pigmy race (little green men) and I did not even give them a special ability (so they were simply less powerful than all other races).
Of course, since my friend group worked well together, we still did pretty well, and started being called the "Overpowered Admin Race" Saying we made our race more powerful than theirs.

This gave me the realization. Anything a player cannot own, is seen as overpowered if it is used against them, no matter what it is. This means you can never lock any content behind a paywall or make it exclusive to only certain players, even if it is LESS POWERFUL than other in-game items that are easily available.

[ante185]

Something that you can do that this game called starmade did, well they straight had the game be free until 1.0 release, it being a different game and a lot smaller game it might not work doing exactly that but it might be an idea to explore
They essentially just had the current stable build up and free to download for anyone to play but at the same time were like "yo, once this game is done you will have to pay for it alright?" And if you wanted to support the game and the game dev you could buy the game before it's 1.0 release

Just an idea y'know
Might make it easier to get people I know to try the game that way

[Nick]

I have played a lot of Guild Wars 2, and I think some of their decisions are worth looking at. They are an MMO that was one-time-purchase which instantly got me on board. They have premium currency, but there is a player-controller market to exchange that with normal in-game currency.MO.

doesn't this technically make the game kinda pay to win? if you have infinite cash, you can convert it for invite in-game currency? also, what were the player's opinions on this system? to be fair this is fairly similar to EVE's Plex.

I just wonder how much players would consider this pay 2 win,

.

These are good rules similar to what we were thinking just not listed so clearly before.

(p.s. I think I broke your post, I meant to quote it and instead, I edited it without noticing until now =/ sorry)

Something that you can do that this game called starmade did, well they straight had the game be free until 1.0 release, it being a different game and a lot smaller game it might not work doing exactly that but it might be an idea to explore

Due to us being an MMO, every player costs us money and time, especially in alpha where things may break they need tech support etc, so a flood of people in during alpha could slow down development A LOT., however, it is a great idea to help spread the word, maybe we could do it in more controlled busts kinda like free weekends or somthing, where we knw that everything will go to shit over that weekend but during the week we don't worry about it and can focus on normal development.

[Lord Tyrius]

Free weekends are a good idea.
As I said, I like the overall system in GW, but it is not 100% applicable to hades for a couple reasons:
1. Guild Wars has a strict line between PvE and PvP --> in PvP all players can choose max stats
2. The gem shop has mostly skins and quality of life stuff (which feels very rewarding when I got them by exchanging ingame-currency instead of buying)

Regarding infinite amounts of ingame currency: For a single person pretty much yes. However what I didn't mention is that the exchangerate depends on what players put into the market (demand & supply). There is also kinda like a "tax", so exchanging constantly isn't really profitable.

So pay to win is less of an issue with visual/fun items and PvE. The community in gw also was always one of the best I have witnessed in an MMO, sure jerks are always around, but you always find people to group, that help, that explain stuff etc.

I just wanted to give some input, and if one of you happened to know gw2 monetization we could discuss how some of that could be used...
I 100% agree that given the PvP focus of hades 9 we have to be extra careful with what players can buy/exchange rl-cash for, I underestimated that aspect when first referring to gw2.

[Nick]

Free weekends are a good idea.
As I said, I like the overall system in GW, but it is not 100% applicable to hades for a couple reasons:
1. Guild Wars has a strict line between PvE and PvP --> in PvP all players can choose max stats
2. The gem shop has mostly skins and quality of life stuff (which feels very rewarding when I got them by exchanging ingame-currency instead of buying)

Regarding infinite amounts of ingame currency: For a single person pretty much yes. However what I didn't mention is that the exchangerate depends on what players put into the market (demand & supply). There is also kinda like a "tax", so exchanging constantly isn't really profitable.

So pay to win is less of an issue with visual/fun items and PvE. The community in gw also was always one of the best I have witnessed in an MMO, sure jerks are always around, but you always find people to group, that help, that explain stuff etc.

I just wanted to give some input, and if one of you happened to know gw2 monetization we could discuss how some of that could be used...
I 100% agree that given the PvP focus of hades 9 we have to be extra careful with what players can buy/exchange rl-cash for, I underestimated that aspect when first referring to gw2.

Honestly, i think maybe the reason guild wars had such a good community is partly due to the initial fee, I notice the communities in pay to play games are normally better than free to play games.

Personally, I think there is a lot of good inspiration can be drawn of guild wars monetization, except not the DLC thing, I completely agree dividing the community is the last thing I want to do.

[Flatlander]

Pay to Own is the #1 way to stop hackers.
Depending on how Hades 9 is made, hacking may or may not be a huge problem, if you have to pay for each copy of the game, then getting banned as a hacker is costly.

Though depending on how Hades 9 is designed, hacking in a meaningful way may not even be possible.
(When you design a game, you basically decide how much power you are willing to give the Client. The best practice for MMORPGs or Online Games is giving the client absolutely 0 power)

If you think Hacking may be an issue, please sell each copy of the game.
If you think you designed the game in a way that Hacking is generally impossible, then you have more options.

[Nick]

Pay to Own is the #1 way to stop hackers.
Depending on how Hades 9 is made, hacking may or may not be a huge problem, if you have to pay for each copy of the game, then getting banned as a hacker is costly.

Though depending on how Hades 9 is designed, hacking in a meaningful way may not even be possible.
(When you design a game, you basically decide how much power you are willing to give the Client. The best practice for MMORPGs or Online Games is giving the client absolutely 0 power)

If you think Hacking may be an issue, please sell each copy of the game.
If you think you designed the game in a way that Hacking is generally impossible, then you have more options.

I don't forsee hacking being an issue at all, however, i do still think pay to own has other benefits along this line, i.e. being banned for toxic behaviour etc. Its impossible to really measure but I do think having a payment gate to enter does help produce a more pleasant ingame community.

[Flatlander]

Depends what kind of game you want I guess.

Personally I enjoy having a diverse community in my MMORPGs.
I want the Brazilian Mobs of people that don't speak english, and they walk up to players and ask "Br?" And if you say "no" or "English" They kill you.
I want the players who steal your loot, kill you, then when you message them to ask why they pm you "Because your mother is a whore."
etc.

I actually get frustrated when games start policing behavior.
For example, we played a game where you couldn't attack players, but you could "annoy" them.
A player ran up to my friend, and threw a huge amount of his loot in a nearby lake. (The loot weighed too much, so he had it on the ground and was going to drag it to town with him)
So my friend, messaged all of his friends, and they trapped the guy in a dead-end hallway for 2 hours.

A Game-Master came and told my friend he had to move, or he would be banned. My friend explained that the guy had thrown his loot in the water, but the GM did not care. My friend refused to move, and was banned, and never played the game again.


Now, i'm not saying don't give players the tools to deal with harassment (The ability to mute other players). But you shouldn't remove people from the game for playing in a "not nice" way.