Stash Pages Cost... (info from Kripp Streams)

More grim news.

I would prefer to pay a monthly service charge and get everything rather than be nickle and dimed for every little function they dream up.

I was on board for the cosmetic micro-transactions but it is becoming clearer that GGG's version of ethical micro-transactions is quite different than my version.

They clearly intend to sell functionality which does in fact create a divide between those that pay and those that do not.

Not what I was expecting from their anti pay2win rhetoric.

I guess once the game leaves beta all game improvements will only be offered for a fee.

We improved the synch problems, but it will cost you $2 per monster type.

We have added player to player trade windows but that will cost you $1 per player.

Want a larger ignore list? Just pay $5 per 10 extra ignores.

Would you like to move the chat window around or resize it? Only $10 to get to do both!

EDIT: I hope to god I am over reacting and my worries turn out to be unfounded stupidity.
Last edited by Guurt on Aug 10, 2012, 9:08:27 PM
complaining about 5-6 dollar for 1 stash tab in a complete F2P game. are u serious ?

i am interested in ur job, how do u earn your money ?
"
I guess once the game leaves beta all game improvements will only be offered for a fee.

We improved the synch problems, but it will cost you $2 per monster type.

We have added player to player trade windows but that will cost you $1 per player.

Want a larger ignore list? Just pay $5 per 10 extra ignores.

Would you like to move the chat window around or resize it? Only $10 to get to do both!


I think its a bit irrational to be jumping to those conclusions so early on, especially since Chris just responded saying that the prices are not set in stone and will be subject to alteration.

However, if I understood the OP here, I'm also quite disappointed I'll have to pay to change the 1 on a tab to read "skills", as it's not so much an added convenience as it should be a default game feature, I understand the reasoning behind paying for public tabs.. but I believe people should not have to pay a convenience charge to change a string of text from 1 numerical value to 5 alphabetical values. That, to me, is quite rude from the developer as very little to no effort is involved (comparing to an actual aesthetic item which took time to design).



Someone used the 'playing for different teams' reference and it's a good way to put it. I, as a player have no problem purchasing items from micro-transaction shops to help support developers (especially indie developers), but there's a line you have to draw between players and developers to at least give us the confidence that we're paying for worthwhile development time and not just paying for an automated script to change a string of text in a database.

please consider rethinking the items that will be left in as 'default features' and items that will be micro-transaction only.

paying to rename tabs would be as silly as paying to rename rune/mastery pages on league of legends.
Last edited by teek on Aug 10, 2012, 8:53:12 PM
Ok, so let me get this straight.

You complain about pricing for things that are not necessary to enjoy a great game. And the exaggeration of pricing actually is just sad and without true basis. Currently, the game is in closed beta, so NOTHING is set in stone. I don't care who says it, unless it is an official statement at release, I don't give a flying hoot.

And if you didn't have these options you would complain too.

Dear devs, this is the rough part of getting more people. You are now officially caught in a Catch 22. These are the people that complain, "Why am I so shiny?" or "I am not shiny enough!"

And btw, the TL2 fanbois. Please buy all means, play a game that looks like 5 year olds drew the graphics. I have a better looking game for you...Angry Birds!
"
Charan wrote:

So let's assume that a NAMED stash tab (and we'll want to name them, do not think otherwise) will be somewhere between 4 and 5 bucks. That's not so bad, but it's definitely not the 3 bucks we were led to believe would be the 'stash tab default cost'.


Actually it's exactly what you were led to believe. Does the tab not function exactly the same without a label on it? The label is a luxury. If you want that particular luxury then you can pay more, or you can improve your memory and remember what number is associated with the type of items you've placed in each tab. Just because you see something as a must-have doesn't mean it obligated GGG to include it for free...it's the whole premise of giving the game away for free and paying to host/maintain it: if you want to further improve the experience then you can pay more to do so.
"
papakapp wrote:
I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around the complaint here. I read every post in this thread carefully.

5 bucks, even 10 bucks isn't that much. I don't think anyone is complaining about the cost. Even people who say they are complaining about the cost probably really aren't complaining about the cost.

My best guess is that some people feel like they are being upsold on what should be "essentials". Then then go off and complain about the cost when even they are not aware that cost really is not their chief complaint.

Personally, I think the microtransaction model is generally a bad idea because it puts the developer and the end user on different "teams". But I really look forward to the day that I am proven wrong. And I am virtually certain that if any company ever manages to do it right, it won't be an American company. So I'm actually a bit optimistic in this case.

Regardless, I'm American and I think its my American bias that assumes all companies are evil, and out to screw you. But there's actually a pretty simple test for that in this case. Wait until the game releases, and then see what the prices are. First set your standard, like 50 bucks lifetime, or 5 bucks a month, or 10 bucks a month or whatever. Then look at all the features you would want to buy, and only play it if it meets your limits.

Regardless, I am positive that a game like this would never get the attention of American investors. The concept of giving their end users the option of paying for the product they are funding would be anathema to the lot of them.

Dont assume all americans are alike because I trust in many corperations and I dont wear tin foil hats. I dont trust activsion and ea. I also dont like how you compare game companys against american ones, because other then this and minecraft I found only american games too be any sort of fun.
Last edited by Creation on Aug 10, 2012, 9:29:15 PM
"
papakapp wrote:

Personally, I think the microtransaction model is generally a bad idea because it puts the developer and the end user on different "teams". But I really look forward to the day that I am proven wrong. And I am virtually certain that if any company ever manages to do it right, it won't be an American company.


There is one American company which made a perfect Microtransaction model, without selling ANY power. I'm talking about League of Legends here, the game where you won't buy ANY power with money. There are 2 types of points: RP - bought for money, and IP - you earn those by playing the game. Things you can buy:
- Champions (with RP and IP)
- Skins (with RP)
- Runes (with IP)
- Rune Pages (With RP and IP)
It is impossible to buy power in League of Legends and I hope PoE will be the same.

I don't really care about naming my stash pages or colouring them, but...

If I understood correctly - to use the website trading system - I will have to pay? That's ridiculous, and if it will be so - I'll just stop playing.
"
Pivu wrote:

If I understood correctly - to use the website trading system - I will have to pay? That's ridiculous, and if it will be so - I'll just stop playing.


That is entirely your choice to make, but I can also see why that'd be a little bit iffy of them to make it so you needed to pay to use their innovative trading system. Perhaps they can give every player one Trade Tab to start with so everyone can experiment with it. I think Trade Tabs should be much smaller than stash tabs though.

And with all due respect to GGG, naming stash tabs should be no more than 10 cash shop credits, and probably more like 5. If that were the case, OK, I understand. Fair enough. I have 35 stash tabs. It's going to cost me a decent amount of money to get naming privileges on most of those, but honestly I probably won't bother. First few tabs will be gems and armor that I've reserved for alts, a page or two for curency, then endless seas of rare items following after that.

TLDR: Naming stash tabs better be DIRT CHEAP and please, GGG, consider giving us one, or like, half of a free public tab.
Last edited by teacherpeter on Aug 10, 2012, 9:49:13 PM

Silly question but is there a difference between an advertising trading tab and any proposed trading system? I assume there will be a default trading system for everyone and people who do not pay for trading tabs will not left throwing items on the ground? People should certainly not be made to pay for features that should be standard.

I do not understand the fuss though because I can never imagine paying to name tabs, (as if it is hard to remember by number) and only ever using one tab to advertise trades, if you need more than one tab to advertise items you need to learn what is worth selling otherwise no one is going to bother going over all your junk anyway; it is rare for anyone to even have a dozen items that are REALLY worth selling at any time. Even then you will still have chat and the forum to trade no?
"
Creation wrote:
other then this and minecraft I found only american games too be any sort of fun.


Try Rock of Ages. It's an indie game from Chile. Yet somehow its lowbrow humor expects more sophistication than I have ever seen any other game expect from its users.

I mean honestly, what game has ever combined fart jokes with inside jokes that would only be funny to a person who has studied the religio-political climate of 14th century Europe?

That's gotta be worth something.

Report Forum Post

Report Account:

Report Type

Additional Info