[quote name="Jemadar" date="2024-05-23 06:02:34" ]
[quote name="Almedha" date="2024-05-22 12:32:39" ]
[quote name="YuleLad" date="2024-05-21 20:46:03" ]
As for the treasure sink, it would be important to see how many people actually buy all skins vs those who buy just the ones they like. If most people only buy skins they like, the cost of a skin lowering just means the treasure sink is less important. However if most people want to get all skins, then i think its necessary to lower the cost as to make sure nobody looses interest.
[/quote]
I think this is what I'm trying to say.
I just have a suspicion that the number of people buying all the skins are not the majority. Perhaps even by a wide margin. I don't know how likely it is that casual players will feel the strain on a regular basis of the additional two skins because they're only buying the ones they like. Perhaps on average they'll only buy a few more skins over the course of a year. And if that's how the majority of players work, decreasing the cost of the skins by 10kt adds up a lot more than then additional treasure sunk by the few players buying everything.
[/quote]
One of the things to remember is that lowering the price of the skins might make them a more effective treasure sink, because people might (again might, because I have no data to back this up, just things I have heard based on real world situations and my own feelings) be more likely to buy more skins.
IE, right now, someone wants two skins, but they have a hard time affording those two skins, so they only buy one. If both skins were cheaper, that same person might now decide 'hey I can afford to get both skins'.
Again, a lot of people are focusing on the 'all or nothing' mindset of the people who want to collect at least one of every skin each festival. However, I am sure there are a lot of people who don't collect every skin, who would still benefit from lowering costs, because they can now get more skins each fest.
Which, in turn, benefits the site more in the long run, because that is more treasure leaving the site.
[/quote]
I'm sure everyone would at the very least [i]feel[/i] they benefit from lowering the cost of skins. And that's what makes this question so dang tricky! I like it when things cost less - obviously. But I don't particularly care about that. I care about if it's a good thing for the game to do.
I would certainly like it if I didn't have to spend 10kt more per the skins I do buy, because I don't buy them all. But I always buy some - the ones I want. Suppose that, on average, I buy about eight per festival right now. That's half of them, right? So suppose that I want to buy about half of the new ones, bringing my average purchased per festival to 10. The old price I used to pay for eight of them is 280kt. Now, even if I buy 10 skins at the price of 25kt, I will be spending 250kt. I can get more skins [i]and[/i] it's a less-effective sink even if I keep the number of skins I buy at half of them. At 30kt, it's obviously more effective, though. I'd spend 20kt more.
But since half the skins being added will be EY skins - we don't know if these will be more or less likely to be purchased. But suppose they aren't factoring into the average and someone only buys nine skins on average. At 30kt, for 9 skins, the total someone would spend is 270kt - a less effective sink.
So I suppose for me the bottom line is that 25kt is [i]far too low[/i]. I don't know. But it just seems so. 30kt is less bad. But not everyone is going to want to buy the more skins that are available just because they have the treasure to do so.
Jemadar wrote on 2024-05-23 06:02:34:
Almedha wrote on 2024-05-22 12:32:39:
YuleLad wrote on 2024-05-21 20:46:03:
As for the treasure sink, it would be important to see how many people actually buy all skins vs those who buy just the ones they like. If most people only buy skins they like, the cost of a skin lowering just means the treasure sink is less important. However if most people want to get all skins, then i think its necessary to lower the cost as to make sure nobody looses interest.
I think this is what I'm trying to say.
I just have a suspicion that the number of people buying all the skins are not the majority. Perhaps even by a wide margin. I don't know how likely it is that casual players will feel the strain on a regular basis of the additional two skins because they're only buying the ones they like. Perhaps on average they'll only buy a few more skins over the course of a year. And if that's how the majority of players work, decreasing the cost of the skins by 10kt adds up a lot more than then additional treasure sunk by the few players buying everything.
One of the things to remember is that lowering the price of the skins might make them a more effective treasure sink, because people might (again might, because I have no data to back this up, just things I have heard based on real world situations and my own feelings) be more likely to buy more skins.
IE, right now, someone wants two skins, but they have a hard time affording those two skins, so they only buy one. If both skins were cheaper, that same person might now decide 'hey I can afford to get both skins'.
Again, a lot of people are focusing on the 'all or nothing' mindset of the people who want to collect at least one of every skin each festival. However, I am sure there are a lot of people who don't collect every skin, who would still benefit from lowering costs, because they can now get more skins each fest.
Which, in turn, benefits the site more in the long run, because that is more treasure leaving the site.
I'm sure everyone would at the very least
feel they benefit from lowering the cost of skins. And that's what makes this question so dang tricky! I like it when things cost less - obviously. But I don't particularly care about that. I care about if it's a good thing for the game to do.
I would certainly like it if I didn't have to spend 10kt more per the skins I do buy, because I don't buy them all. But I always buy some - the ones I want. Suppose that, on average, I buy about eight per festival right now. That's half of them, right? So suppose that I want to buy about half of the new ones, bringing my average purchased per festival to 10. The old price I used to pay for eight of them is 280kt. Now, even if I buy 10 skins at the price of 25kt, I will be spending 250kt. I can get more skins
and it's a less-effective sink even if I keep the number of skins I buy at half of them. At 30kt, it's obviously more effective, though. I'd spend 20kt more.
But since half the skins being added will be EY skins - we don't know if these will be more or less likely to be purchased. But suppose they aren't factoring into the average and someone only buys nine skins on average. At 30kt, for 9 skins, the total someone would spend is 270kt - a less effective sink.
So I suppose for me the bottom line is that 25kt is
far too low. I don't know. But it just seems so. 30kt is less bad. But not everyone is going to want to buy the more skins that are available just because they have the treasure to do so.
Conditional support.
I do not think we should lower the price of skins, but I do think more skins should be implemented elsewhere, like Baldwin or the Coliseum. Making some of them cost festival currency instead is also, imo, a great idea.
If you're a player that feels the need to collect EVERY festival skin, then frankly, I feel like you should be working for it. I collect familiars and coliseum skins, and the challenge of collecting them all is well balanced with the work I have to put in. It makes the reward worth it. I just dropped 450kt on the Deadland disciple from 2015, for example--and now I have that whole set of festival familiars. It took me multiple years of playing FR on and off to get them. I have previous festival skins I'm hunting too--one day, when I get them, I'll feel an incredible sense of accomplishment.
It also feels like folks here are talking about treasure like it's a limited resource when it's actually fairly easy to generate treasure through several revenues on the site. 250kt is not a terribly difficult goal to reach--especially if you know you're going to be spending that much money a month in advance.
Conditional support.
I do not think we should lower the price of skins, but I do think more skins should be implemented elsewhere, like Baldwin or the Coliseum. Making some of them cost festival currency instead is also, imo, a great idea.
If you're a player that feels the need to collect EVERY festival skin, then frankly, I feel like you should be working for it. I collect familiars and coliseum skins, and the challenge of collecting them all is well balanced with the work I have to put in. It makes the reward worth it. I just dropped 450kt on the Deadland disciple from 2015, for example--and now I have that whole set of festival familiars. It took me multiple years of playing FR on and off to get them. I have previous festival skins I'm hunting too--one day, when I get them, I'll feel an incredible sense of accomplishment.
It also feels like folks here are talking about treasure like it's a limited resource when it's actually fairly easy to generate treasure through several revenues on the site. 250kt is not a terribly difficult goal to reach--especially if you know you're going to be spending that much money a month in advance.
[quote name="Almedha" date="2024-05-22 12:32:39" ]
I just have a suspicion that the number of people buying all the skins are not the majority. Perhaps even by a wide margin.
[/quote]
There is also the point of "Some people buy far more than one of each skin" - otherwise there wouldn't be any to sell and the "Buy it later on AH" thing wouldn't happen at all.
Almedha wrote on 2024-05-22 12:32:39:
I just have a suspicion that the number of people buying all the skins are not the majority. Perhaps even by a wide margin.
There is also the point of "Some people buy far more than one of each skin" - otherwise there wouldn't be any to sell and the "Buy it later on AH" thing wouldn't happen at all.
[quote name="Almedha" date="2024-05-23 08:42:23" ]
[quote name="Jemadar" date="2024-05-23 06:02:34" ]
[quote name="Almedha" date="2024-05-22 12:32:39" ]
[quote name="YuleLad" date="2024-05-21 20:46:03" ]
As for the treasure sink, it would be important to see how many people actually buy all skins vs those who buy just the ones they like. If most people only buy skins they like, the cost of a skin lowering just means the treasure sink is less important. However if most people want to get all skins, then i think its necessary to lower the cost as to make sure nobody looses interest.
[/quote]
I think this is what I'm trying to say.
I just have a suspicion that the number of people buying all the skins are not the majority. Perhaps even by a wide margin. I don't know how likely it is that casual players will feel the strain on a regular basis of the additional two skins because they're only buying the ones they like. Perhaps on average they'll only buy a few more skins over the course of a year. And if that's how the majority of players work, decreasing the cost of the skins by 10kt adds up a lot more than then additional treasure sunk by the few players buying everything.
[/quote]
One of the things to remember is that lowering the price of the skins might make them a more effective treasure sink, because people might (again might, because I have no data to back this up, just things I have heard based on real world situations and my own feelings) be more likely to buy more skins.
IE, right now, someone wants two skins, but they have a hard time affording those two skins, so they only buy one. If both skins were cheaper, that same person might now decide 'hey I can afford to get both skins'.
Again, a lot of people are focusing on the 'all or nothing' mindset of the people who want to collect at least one of every skin each festival. However, I am sure there are a lot of people who don't collect every skin, who would still benefit from lowering costs, because they can now get more skins each fest.
Which, in turn, benefits the site more in the long run, because that is more treasure leaving the site.
[/quote]
I'm sure everyone would at the very least [i]feel[/i] they benefit from lowering the cost of skins. And that's what makes this question so dang tricky! I like it when things cost less - obviously. But I don't particularly care about that. I care about if it's a good thing for the game to do.
I would certainly like it if I didn't have to spend 10kt more per the skins I do buy, because I don't buy them all. But I always buy some - the ones I want. Suppose that, on average, I buy about eight per festival right now. That's half of them, right? So suppose that I want to buy about half of the new ones, bringing my average purchased per festival to 10. The old price I used to pay for eight of them is 280kt. Now, even if I buy 10 skins at the price of 25kt, I will be spending 250kt. I can get more skins [i]and[/i] it's a less-effective sink even if I keep the number of skins I buy at half of them. At 30kt, it's obviously more effective, though. I'd spend 20kt more.
But since half the skins being added will be EY skins - we don't know if these will be more or less likely to be purchased. But suppose they aren't factoring into the average and someone only buys nine skins on average. At 30kt, for 9 skins, the total someone would spend is 270kt - a less effective sink.
So I suppose for me the bottom line is that 25kt is [i]far too low[/i]. I don't know. But it just seems so. 30kt is less bad. But not everyone is going to want to buy the more skins that are available just because they have the treasure to do so.
[/quote]
The thing is, treasure sinks are never 100% effective.
There will always be those who aren't going to use them, or who won't utilize them more no matter what. It is why having a number of *different* treasure sinks is best.
So, in my opinion, we can discount the people who wouldn't change their buying habits no matter what.
So, as you said, discounting the EY skins, even if that person who would only buy 9 skins period, the next player might decide to get 10 skins, when before they would only have gotten nine, the next player might decide to get 15 skins when before they would have gotten 12. Or the one player might decide to get two sets of the skins they want when normally they would only get one.
Or adding back in the EY skins, some players might have been ready to NOT get them, due to the extra cost and potential for them not being useful, but because they are cheaper, now feel they can afford to buy them 'just in case'.
If the fear is bad enough that the festival skins will become a much less effective treasure sink, then staff could always add more regular treasure sinks as well. (I have long wanted them to bring back skins in the MP, both for gems and treasure, ones that aren't time limited)
To be honest, I am not thinking of any specific price when I support this. I don't know what an optimal price should be. But, I do think that adding more skins and keeping the price the same is going to lead to many players feeling burnt out, and that on its own would lead to the skins becoming a far less effective treasure sink.
Almedha wrote on 2024-05-23 08:42:23:
Jemadar wrote on 2024-05-23 06:02:34:
Almedha wrote on 2024-05-22 12:32:39:
YuleLad wrote on 2024-05-21 20:46:03:
As for the treasure sink, it would be important to see how many people actually buy all skins vs those who buy just the ones they like. If most people only buy skins they like, the cost of a skin lowering just means the treasure sink is less important. However if most people want to get all skins, then i think its necessary to lower the cost as to make sure nobody looses interest.
I think this is what I'm trying to say.
I just have a suspicion that the number of people buying all the skins are not the majority. Perhaps even by a wide margin. I don't know how likely it is that casual players will feel the strain on a regular basis of the additional two skins because they're only buying the ones they like. Perhaps on average they'll only buy a few more skins over the course of a year. And if that's how the majority of players work, decreasing the cost of the skins by 10kt adds up a lot more than then additional treasure sunk by the few players buying everything.
One of the things to remember is that lowering the price of the skins might make them a more effective treasure sink, because people might (again might, because I have no data to back this up, just things I have heard based on real world situations and my own feelings) be more likely to buy more skins.
IE, right now, someone wants two skins, but they have a hard time affording those two skins, so they only buy one. If both skins were cheaper, that same person might now decide 'hey I can afford to get both skins'.
Again, a lot of people are focusing on the 'all or nothing' mindset of the people who want to collect at least one of every skin each festival. However, I am sure there are a lot of people who don't collect every skin, who would still benefit from lowering costs, because they can now get more skins each fest.
Which, in turn, benefits the site more in the long run, because that is more treasure leaving the site.
I'm sure everyone would at the very least
feel they benefit from lowering the cost of skins. And that's what makes this question so dang tricky! I like it when things cost less - obviously. But I don't particularly care about that. I care about if it's a good thing for the game to do.
I would certainly like it if I didn't have to spend 10kt more per the skins I do buy, because I don't buy them all. But I always buy some - the ones I want. Suppose that, on average, I buy about eight per festival right now. That's half of them, right? So suppose that I want to buy about half of the new ones, bringing my average purchased per festival to 10. The old price I used to pay for eight of them is 280kt. Now, even if I buy 10 skins at the price of 25kt, I will be spending 250kt. I can get more skins
and it's a less-effective sink even if I keep the number of skins I buy at half of them. At 30kt, it's obviously more effective, though. I'd spend 20kt more.
But since half the skins being added will be EY skins - we don't know if these will be more or less likely to be purchased. But suppose they aren't factoring into the average and someone only buys nine skins on average. At 30kt, for 9 skins, the total someone would spend is 270kt - a less effective sink.
So I suppose for me the bottom line is that 25kt is
far too low. I don't know. But it just seems so. 30kt is less bad. But not everyone is going to want to buy the more skins that are available just because they have the treasure to do so.
The thing is, treasure sinks are never 100% effective.
There will always be those who aren't going to use them, or who won't utilize them more no matter what. It is why having a number of *different* treasure sinks is best.
So, in my opinion, we can discount the people who wouldn't change their buying habits no matter what.
So, as you said, discounting the EY skins, even if that person who would only buy 9 skins period, the next player might decide to get 10 skins, when before they would only have gotten nine, the next player might decide to get 15 skins when before they would have gotten 12. Or the one player might decide to get two sets of the skins they want when normally they would only get one.
Or adding back in the EY skins, some players might have been ready to NOT get them, due to the extra cost and potential for them not being useful, but because they are cheaper, now feel they can afford to buy them 'just in case'.
If the fear is bad enough that the festival skins will become a much less effective treasure sink, then staff could always add more regular treasure sinks as well. (I have long wanted them to bring back skins in the MP, both for gems and treasure, ones that aren't time limited)
To be honest, I am not thinking of any specific price when I support this. I don't know what an optimal price should be. But, I do think that adding more skins and keeping the price the same is going to lead to many players feeling burnt out, and that on its own would lead to the skins becoming a far less effective treasure sink.
I don't think we need to lower the price of festival skins right now, but I do believe that adding them into other methods would still be a nice idea. Having festival plots for Arlo that change rewards with the festivals might be an interesting way to go about it in some respect, and it would give a use for tools while we wait on the next plots to be released. I like that idea as long as it is doable within the week. Anyway...
Even without a price change, you know in advance what you would need to buy everything in treasure. I don't see the addition of a few more skins being terribly disruptive to anyone as long as they aren't only working on it during the week of the festival. Having to do a little extra work ahead of time to get something you want, in my opinion, is a reasonable ask. is that really a bad thing? I don't think a little over a week each month to get [u]all[/u] of the skins you want (that you wouldn't have to grind for if you do it ahead of time each month) is that big a deal. Just don't wait until the last minute. You'd have plenty of time, assuming your only income is from the Fairgrounds. It's not like we don't know the flight holidays or coming and, generally, we have a rough idea of what to expect.
Also, I do think this is a fantastic point:
[quote name="Snowwall" date="2024-05-23 23:42:54" ]
[quote name="Almedha" date="2024-05-22 12:32:39" ]
I just have a suspicion that the number of people buying all the skins are not the majority. Perhaps even by a wide margin.
[/quote]
There is also the point of "Some people buy far more than one of each skin" - otherwise there wouldn't be any to sell and the "Buy it later on AH" thing wouldn't happen at all.
[/quote]
I don't think we need to lower the price of festival skins right now, but I do believe that adding them into other methods would still be a nice idea. Having festival plots for Arlo that change rewards with the festivals might be an interesting way to go about it in some respect, and it would give a use for tools while we wait on the next plots to be released. I like that idea as long as it is doable within the week. Anyway...
Even without a price change, you know in advance what you would need to buy everything in treasure. I don't see the addition of a few more skins being terribly disruptive to anyone as long as they aren't only working on it during the week of the festival. Having to do a little extra work ahead of time to get something you want, in my opinion, is a reasonable ask. is that really a bad thing? I don't think a little over a week each month to get
all of the skins you want (that you wouldn't have to grind for if you do it ahead of time each month) is that big a deal. Just don't wait until the last minute. You'd have plenty of time, assuming your only income is from the Fairgrounds. It's not like we don't know the flight holidays or coming and, generally, we have a rough idea of what to expect.
Also, I do think this is a fantastic point:
Snowwall wrote on 2024-05-23 23:42:54:
Almedha wrote on 2024-05-22 12:32:39:
I just have a suspicion that the number of people buying all the skins are not the majority. Perhaps even by a wide margin.
There is also the point of "Some people buy far more than one of each skin" - otherwise there wouldn't be any to sell and the "Buy it later on AH" thing wouldn't happen at all.
Support- rn if someone maxed out G&G everyday for the upcoming fest cycle (AND ONLY FOR THE FEST, since we gotta keep in mind things like new apparel/genes, things like WW, gene projects, outfit plans etc.), it's take 8.4 entire days for one fest...that's a lot of time just to put into one fest. And I, as someone who likes to have them in some form...find that just a bit excessive.
And from what I can gather, there always seems to be some sort of extra update in between fests- bare minimum 1. What if you're desperately trying to make sure you have money to survive NoTN?
Even cutting it down to 30kt would be nice... There could also be an alternative payment that relies on fest currency (but NOT replace treasure there) as well to help out. Lord knows how much fest currency I have left over every fest. And people shouldn't have to pray for a Dom shop to be open for a fest skin to get a more reasonable price- I was struggling to find one just for a gene these past few weeks due to my classes taking up my time.
Support- rn if someone maxed out G&G everyday for the upcoming fest cycle (AND ONLY FOR THE FEST, since we gotta keep in mind things like new apparel/genes, things like WW, gene projects, outfit plans etc.), it's take 8.4 entire days for one fest...that's a lot of time just to put into one fest. And I, as someone who likes to have them in some form...find that just a bit excessive.
And from what I can gather, there always seems to be some sort of extra update in between fests- bare minimum 1. What if you're desperately trying to make sure you have money to survive NoTN?
Even cutting it down to 30kt would be nice... There could also be an alternative payment that relies on fest currency (but NOT replace treasure there) as well to help out. Lord knows how much fest currency I have left over every fest. And people shouldn't have to pray for a Dom shop to be open for a fest skin to get a more reasonable price- I was struggling to find one just for a gene these past few weeks due to my classes taking up my time.
I don't even get all the skins usually, and I still go treasure-broke ;w;
I don't even get all the skins usually, and I still go treasure-broke ;w;
Please, I try to get at least one copy of festival skins, and I've been struggling since they went up from ~300k to ~500k, even if I use a dom shop. With this next increase I won't be able to buy anything else, because I'll always be saving for skins.
Please, I try to get at least one copy of festival skins, and I've been struggling since they went up from ~300k to ~500k, even if I use a dom shop. With this next increase I won't be able to buy anything else, because I'll always be saving for skins.
I remember when eye vials were released in response to the eye-pocalypse, and some users were saying that using an eye vial was "the easy way" to justify putting special marks on dragons born with certain eye types. The response to that was that 500,000 treasure could take many players weeks, if not months, to earn making it an accomplishment in its own right. Now, if players want to buy most (not even all) of the festival skins--or buy duplicates of some of them--they're going to need to earn that much on a monthly basis. If 500,000 treasure was an accomplishment then, it's still an accomplishment now. And with only one window to obtain these items before lootboxes and RNG kicks in, I support reducing the price and making skins available through other means.
I remember when eye vials were released in response to the eye-pocalypse, and some users were saying that using an eye vial was "the easy way" to justify putting special marks on dragons born with certain eye types. The response to that was that 500,000 treasure could take many players weeks, if not months, to earn making it an accomplishment in its own right. Now, if players want to buy most (not even all) of the festival skins--or buy duplicates of some of them--they're going to need to earn that much on a monthly basis. If 500,000 treasure was an accomplishment then, it's still an accomplishment now. And with only one window to obtain these items before lootboxes and RNG kicks in, I support reducing the price and making skins available through other means.
Pings are disabled.
If writers are supposed to "show not tell," why are we called "storytellers" and not "storyshow-ers"?
With confirmation that we're going to have *20* skins per fest, the skin price seems like even more of a big deal. If the price was lowered or more skins were moved to Baldwin/Fest currency/etc proportionally to how many more skins we have now, I don't think it'd be too bad for the treasure sink aspect either.
With confirmation that we're going to have *20* skins per fest, the skin price seems like even more of a big deal. If the price was lowered or more skins were moved to Baldwin/Fest currency/etc proportionally to how many more skins we have now, I don't think it'd be too bad for the treasure sink aspect either.
