A misunderstanding—people who pay don't actually get the buff. They apply the buff to all Glitchen in a certain radius to them as they run around, but they themselves don't get it.
@Seeen, I like the seasonal items and furniture ideas. Honestly, I'd pay a little bit for really rad furniture!
There are some neat ideas from the "What features of Glitch would you really like to (re) see..." thread that could be useful for making a little money for the game, too.
Yeah I think it's generally in the spirit of Glitch and personally much more palatable that we don't by accident OR design create an environment where person X who pays X gets more/less than person Y who pays Y, be it buffs or anything else.
I'd like to point out that there's nothing wrong with that sort of system, so long as it doesn't go too far—Glitch had something like that for Credits, but they only applied to cosmetic items and furniture—never gameplay features. I feel like that's a healthy extent to that sort of system, and that anything too much further becomes a bit less preferred. It was especially advantageous in that the subscriptions were not all that expensive compared to most other sites that offer subscriptions.
I agree with you all that the paid for perks shouldn't affect gameplay (or at the least very, very, very minimally). I'd like to be able to pay for cosmetic things, like fancy outfits or extra furniture.
I was wondering if people would pay for super extra storage, or maybe it could come with a subscription as a perk. Say that all of the SDBs and regular storage items would be in the game just like normal and for free, but you could pay for super storage that could hold a ton more stuff in one item, like a mega SDB. However, it verges on the "changes gameplay" aspect just a teensy bit, so I'm not sure people would love the idea.
You know what I'd love and would pay for? A double tool box: a tool box that lets you carry double the amount of tools in it! Otherwise I always wound up carrying two toolboxes plus all of my bags. I know you can just put extra tools in a regular bag, but I liked the organizational aspect of them being in a toolbox. Just a thought!
Between SDB's and cabinets there was no problem with storage, people hoarded like crazy as it was. I just dont think its necessary and i would consider it a large change in game play between free and paid. Any change to bags or storage should be gamewide and not due to paying, but a larger toolbox wouldnt be a bad idea. As for buffs even if its giving only itd still only be the ppl that pay that would have it available., which im against. I dont think there should be divides between pay and not pay. It was one of the nice things about the game, that there wasnt. Pay items should stay with than cosmetic : furniture , housing, wardrobe and vanity. And id love if people could submit designs for various things. But im not against seasonal or timed holdiay items on various cosmetic items, by timed i mean they expire i would only expect this at holidays, year round items it wouldnt be good on, and i wouldnt like it on year round items either. I do remember that you could gift credits to other players and this id like to have again too
A pay to play system that provides any sort of mechanical benefits to those willing to pay more is sort of at the heart of the curse of app gaming in general. Microtransactions are standard, but also the bane of many gamers' experiences.
I agree that a lot of people don't mind paying for cosmetic perks, and this is a reasonable thing to allow as a funding model - with the caveat that you still need a robust set of free options. Some people make wonderful additions to a gaming community, but simply don't have the disposable funds to spend on things like this. You could even allow access to some (or even most) cosmetic options through in-game progress, for those who can't afford the items with real money, but are still dedicated members of the game community.
And to a larger extent I think this applies to a subscription model as well. I think a subscription model should only be implemented if it's meant to account for only a portion of the revenue - maybe as low as half - in order to keep the costs down. There are some other great ideas, including donations that benefit others (thus reflecting the nature of donating, vs paying a fee) and merchandising, that could potentially supplement a subscription model without forcing people to pay an amount they can't justify. (For instance, I've probably got $5/mo, but I don't have an extra $10/mo to spend on a game, no matter how glitchtastic it is.)
Comments
"or buffs only ppl that pay x amount can get"
A misunderstanding—people who pay don't actually get the buff. They apply the buff to all Glitchen in a certain radius to them as they run around, but they themselves don't get it.
There are some neat ideas from the "What features of Glitch would you really like to (re) see..." thread that could be useful for making a little money for the game, too.
Just my feelings on it.
I'd like to point out that there's nothing wrong with that sort of system, so long as it doesn't go too far—Glitch had something like that for Credits, but they only applied to cosmetic items and furniture—never gameplay features. I feel like that's a healthy extent to that sort of system, and that anything too much further becomes a bit less preferred. It was especially advantageous in that the subscriptions were not all that expensive compared to most other sites that offer subscriptions.
I was a Glitch subscriber because I wanted it to continue, not because I wanted or expected preferential treatment or experiences.
I was wondering if people would pay for super extra storage, or maybe it could come with a subscription as a perk. Say that all of the SDBs and regular storage items would be in the game just like normal and for free, but you could pay for super storage that could hold a ton more stuff in one item, like a mega SDB. However, it verges on the "changes gameplay" aspect just a teensy bit, so I'm not sure people would love the idea.
You know what I'd love and would pay for? A double tool box: a tool box that lets you carry double the amount of tools in it! Otherwise I always wound up carrying two toolboxes plus all of my bags. I know you can just put extra tools in a regular bag, but I liked the organizational aspect of them being in a toolbox. Just a thought!
I agree that a lot of people don't mind paying for cosmetic perks, and this is a reasonable thing to allow as a funding model - with the caveat that you still need a robust set of free options. Some people make wonderful additions to a gaming community, but simply don't have the disposable funds to spend on things like this. You could even allow access to some (or even most) cosmetic options through in-game progress, for those who can't afford the items with real money, but are still dedicated members of the game community.
And to a larger extent I think this applies to a subscription model as well. I think a subscription model should only be implemented if it's meant to account for only a portion of the revenue - maybe as low as half - in order to keep the costs down. There are some other great ideas, including donations that benefit others (thus reflecting the nature of donating, vs paying a fee) and merchandising, that could potentially supplement a subscription model without forcing people to pay an amount they can't justify. (For instance, I've probably got $5/mo, but I don't have an extra $10/mo to spend on a game, no matter how glitchtastic it is.)