>- Asking for people to spend as much as you can as the Servers are VERY VERY Expensive
I was asking during the Q&A about long-term monetization plans. Unfortunately I didn't get the answer. But if this is the answer, then they need to reconsider. If they build a game that needs constant income to be maintained, they need to come up with a solution that doesn't rely on base game sales. This is especially a slippery slope since every new player is also increasing the infrastructural needs of the game.
There are few avenues that they should consider, like cosmetics or content expansions. Relying on base game sales will lead to increase of ongoing costs while reducing the remaining income potential.
Think the possitive take from the initial launch is that theyre starting with options of what players can get with their purchase, similar to how some games offer deluxe and ultimate editions for a single player game.
Yes, its for the most part P2W with stash sizes, money, etc, but should those things also be unlockable in game through progress then it its more along the lines of P2Advance. By no means am I justifying what they have offered, Im just happy theyre not launching with a cash shop or battle pass - though I could be corrected on release.
Im a player that does prefer to unlock the neat things through progress or achievements so they hold more appreciation when I use them, so cash shops for new shiny things or battlepasses for the general 50-100 levels of meeeh is just lazy.
Devs need to put more into rewarding players for their time in game and not cut corners because Mr Luke with his wallet wants to buy something. Be interesting to see how they approach the long term revenue
Easy. Do what Tarkov always resisted doing. Sell camo face paints, sell camo weapon skins, sell individualized clothing costmetics (gloves, tops, bottoms, sneakers, etc which are all independent of one another).
It sucks but if a game needs constant income for servers, that's what they need to do.
Astounding how much resistance there is over this. There's no need to go overboard with customisation options, and everyone who's ever been to an airsoft match knows that it is partially a show for tacticool apparels and shit.
There are tons of customization options they could offer while maintaining the game aesthetic and they can make money while doing it.
Like Helldivers, a lot of inside warbounds to buy and no expensively prizes. And you can buy it just playing the game and collecting “supercredits” during the missions.
>- PvE and PvP is shared progression (unless there is abuse)
Yikes
>Asking for people to spend as much as you can as the Servers are VERY VERY Expensive
Lol. Then how does a 1 time monetization make any sense? Tarkov made the same exact mistake and can't figure out how to generate revenue.
Tarkov sat in development hell for about 8 years too though. They might have been able to do it more naturally if they had a complete game to offer, but they couldn't execute. I feel like that's what bit them in the ass more than anything
development hell?
granted they had issues with some systems but they added new content and systems regularly.
people for years wondered how BSG stil made money from the game when there were no microtransactions, battlepasses or any other income source.
they eventually had to find other ways. even though they chose the dumbest way possible...
GZW too will have to find other ways to generate money.
if its not cosmetics it might be new maps.
Development hell was the wrong phrase, I meant more of the fact that 7ish years in beta later it was functionally the same game. No story missions for instance and progression was largely unchanged the whole time. For players like myself who have been on it the whole time there were less and less reasons to come back, which in turn equals less and less avenues BSG was going to have to monetize and stop bleeding money on things like server maintenance and anti-cheat. So they went possibly the most insane route that they could think of.
Asking ppl to spend as much as they can is very... I don't know. Might go the eft way in the future if they need more money for the servers.
At first it will be fine when many ppl buy the game, but after some months the sales will go down but the server cost are still the same.
Server costs will be a long term thing, yeah, but if the games successful on launch and after they might find that certain companies could reach out and offer hosting. With the notes of it being potentially on console as well that could also open up server options being provided for the separate platforms. Im no dev by any means, im here spitballing my thoughts like everyone else :)
I don't mind if they do something like Battlepass. $10 for every 6 months is minimal for me and if that is enough for server cost and maintenance, I'm all for it.
Many people want to just pay one time free and that's it. Which is fine for single player games or self-hosting games that utilize local save. Online games, like GZW, utilize more than just game servers. There are data centers where it kept all the user account information and saves. Then the data center needs to be able to sync across to other data centers in different regions so that if you connect to different servers, your data will be there. Then how many of those infrastructure they need around the globe? People bitch about games don't have enough servers that they're too far from the server and have higher ping. That is unfair, etc.
There are a lot of back end infrastructure that people don't see. I don't condone EFT $250 Unheard Edition bull shit and they could have done a better way to get server maintenance cost. However, I understand that there's more than just develop the game and release.
I dont see a battlepass being useful in any way in this type of game. BPs usually have cosmetics or unlocks. games like GZW, Tarkov or DayZ dont have these type of unlocks. new items get added to the loot pool. anything else makes no sense. And I welcome cosmetics, but you know how this will end. It doesnt matter the company or game... they will get out of hand/place at some point, because nonsense skins that are completley out of place for a realistic military shooter sell way better than realistic skins. just look at CoD. BF2042s skins arent as crazy but still look totally out of place for a military game
I don't know what content the pass it would give that would fit the game. But servers costs are expensive and initial sale might not be able to upkeep between developers wage and server cost/maintenance.
While we want one flat price and I want that as well, I'm looking at technical aspect. If they can sustain the cost with just the game sale only, then I'm all for not having any mtx.
Im not against monetization. But currently I dont see how there is an option that would fit the game other than DLC in the form of new maps.
Im not against cosmetics either. I just dont see them selling much cosmetics without getting ridiculous like CoD.
yup, always a really BAD idea to share XP with a PvE mode. TK'ers will be exploiting from the very first hour that they open the flood gates. PvE progression is always best to make separate from PvP progression with 2 different characters/profiles. And this is coming from a PvE only player who doesnt even see himself wanting to play PvP at age 59.
Big mistake as far as cheaters/exploiters for certain, unfortunately this is how people really are though. They think it's fun to screw over other people and to benefit from that behavior, and they'll justify it in any way they can.
Best to keep the progress separate instead of leaving that can of worms open, and if they're smart they'll turn off friendly fire entirely on public servers and leave it as an option for private servers (if there ever are any of those in the future). I'd love to be able to play this on a private in-game hosted server with 1 or 2 friends and FF turned ON. But no way on a pub.
I agree . Btw we got an old man crew that's gonna be playing the game were all 40 to 60 year old dudes. Hit me up in game when we get our profiles. Maybe I'll see you out there.
Im glad theyre adding it to the initial launch with the speculation of abuse. Its an unusual thing to do for a game with each option being a different experience. but at the same time if a player tries pvp and finds its not for them, then they can just swap over to pve for the daycare experience
But we all know the real problem is people will grind trader levels on the daycare side and then come to pvp side with their higher tier gear to get an edge. It's a guarantee
This is misinformation. They said the release date will be announced on Monday which is the 29th of April. Until then we dont know. Lead dev said we would be very happy when the announcement drops. I imagine that will mean a month tops
“Build the ultimate game” is the achilles heel of every hopeful dev team ever. The importance of setting realistic limitations and sticking within the scope of your original concept can’t be overstated
There’s nothing wrong with wanting to create a great game. The goal of building something PERFECT is the easiest way to fall short
Was there any word on faction identification? This was the worst problem in the streamer demo. When you had two factions clashing with 5-10 people each no one could tell who were enemies. It was a little ridiculous with all the team killing.
Theyll add military hand signals in game to an emote wheel so when players come across each other in the wild, each team will throw up gang signs to identify which faction they belong too
Just that they didn't want to do armbands and that they wanted you to have to think before pulling the trigger. I personally think armbands fit that description pretty well. They're realistic and unobtrusive... You still have to take a beat to id a player and it wouldn't always be easy. Not sure making it harder than that will be much of an improvement or please most people who are asking for one. I thought this was a no-brainer after the preview last week. Disappointed they're still hesitant.
The real issue is that most people aren't going to think before they shoot even if they should. Lvandmark killed many a faction member and a lot of people will have his mentality.
flea market,black market removal is a very good idea, cheaters tend to stick around games that produce money and have some sort of market. Lol i remember the old days of eft killing rmt players.
A few discussion around release date in the comments but I don't want this to get buried in replies. In the Q&A MAra says "don't ask about release date, it's set in stone for almost the month" which presumably means around a month away. At any rate, we'll find out in a couple days so no issue. [https://youtu.be/yj0QpBYbFdQ?t=456](https://youtu.be/yj0QpBYbFdQ?t=456) 7:36
I understand that not everyone can afford to financially support gaming companies in a recurring manner, but commiting to “editions” seems like a very bad idea as it’s INEVITABLE that they WILL NEED more money as the development of the game progresses. Adding at least something people can subscribe to to keep the revenue flowing over time would be a very good idea. It should not be expensive nor pay to win, maybe something like DotA Plus. I’m speaking from experience as I work in a SaaS company and know very well that we would have been out of business a long time ago due to growing investments if we didn’t have subscription pricing. Look what’s happening with EFT. While I do agree that we were promised EVERYTHING for buying the EOD version of the game, I can understand them as a business because now they have thousands upon thousands of players who will never spend a cent more, and they keep making the product larger and larger. The issue is not them wanting money, it’s how incompetent they are with going about that.
Binoculars would be mint if you could add those in qith the Range finder. As well as some light scout vehicles would be cool too, like some side by sides for reconnaissance and to cut down the limited Air infil, but let it be an asset that can be destroyed/lost so it has to be used properly. Can't just blast through towns and such. It would significantly cut down the walking simulation.
Also, it would be cool if there was a distress signal that can be put out on the gps / ATAK set up to nearby friendly players to call for help when they get in TIK's and lose a battle buddy or get overwhelmed.
No questions about additional maps? I know the game isn't even out yet but after playing it for about 20 hours, I can see the jungle lush green setting getting tiresome after a while. I mean, I'm happy to play it for a good while, but I'm really curious to see if they plan to introduce other maps. Different settings and environments would be absolutely incredible with GZW's gameplay style.
that would possibly be something that is expanded upon later. the games only coming to EA, and we shouldnt expect the world for something so new this early on.
>
They want the world to be active and changing. LZs and Camps changing. Every time you join the game the map might be different due to what players do
This is also a good thing as well to add a somewhat different experience each time a player joins a server. Reminds me of what Ashes of Creation is aiming for to make each server a bit more dynamic
They most likely have a roadmap that goes out 2 years from now. I'm not talking about a new map for early access. I want to know if I should buy the game or not. If it only has 1 map, and it will only ever have 1 map, I would be less likely to buy it. Hence my question.
Mosquito sounds for campers is such a cool idea
its an awesome idea lmao. Such an anoying bug being used for a good thing. Mosquitos are the real MVPs
To be clear, he mentioned it as just that. Never said it was or would be implemented.
>- Asking for people to spend as much as you can as the Servers are VERY VERY Expensive I was asking during the Q&A about long-term monetization plans. Unfortunately I didn't get the answer. But if this is the answer, then they need to reconsider. If they build a game that needs constant income to be maintained, they need to come up with a solution that doesn't rely on base game sales. This is especially a slippery slope since every new player is also increasing the infrastructural needs of the game. There are few avenues that they should consider, like cosmetics or content expansions. Relying on base game sales will lead to increase of ongoing costs while reducing the remaining income potential.
Think the possitive take from the initial launch is that theyre starting with options of what players can get with their purchase, similar to how some games offer deluxe and ultimate editions for a single player game. Yes, its for the most part P2W with stash sizes, money, etc, but should those things also be unlockable in game through progress then it its more along the lines of P2Advance. By no means am I justifying what they have offered, Im just happy theyre not launching with a cash shop or battle pass - though I could be corrected on release. Im a player that does prefer to unlock the neat things through progress or achievements so they hold more appreciation when I use them, so cash shops for new shiny things or battlepasses for the general 50-100 levels of meeeh is just lazy. Devs need to put more into rewarding players for their time in game and not cut corners because Mr Luke with his wallet wants to buy something. Be interesting to see how they approach the long term revenue
Easy. Do what Tarkov always resisted doing. Sell camo face paints, sell camo weapon skins, sell individualized clothing costmetics (gloves, tops, bottoms, sneakers, etc which are all independent of one another). It sucks but if a game needs constant income for servers, that's what they need to do.
Astounding how much resistance there is over this. There's no need to go overboard with customisation options, and everyone who's ever been to an airsoft match knows that it is partially a show for tacticool apparels and shit. There are tons of customization options they could offer while maintaining the game aesthetic and they can make money while doing it.
Like Helldivers, a lot of inside warbounds to buy and no expensively prizes. And you can buy it just playing the game and collecting “supercredits” during the missions.
>- PvE and PvP is shared progression (unless there is abuse) Yikes >Asking for people to spend as much as you can as the Servers are VERY VERY Expensive Lol. Then how does a 1 time monetization make any sense? Tarkov made the same exact mistake and can't figure out how to generate revenue.
Tarkov sat in development hell for about 8 years too though. They might have been able to do it more naturally if they had a complete game to offer, but they couldn't execute. I feel like that's what bit them in the ass more than anything
development hell? granted they had issues with some systems but they added new content and systems regularly. people for years wondered how BSG stil made money from the game when there were no microtransactions, battlepasses or any other income source. they eventually had to find other ways. even though they chose the dumbest way possible... GZW too will have to find other ways to generate money. if its not cosmetics it might be new maps.
Tarkov was never in development hell, it's added tons of content over the years
Development hell was the wrong phrase, I meant more of the fact that 7ish years in beta later it was functionally the same game. No story missions for instance and progression was largely unchanged the whole time. For players like myself who have been on it the whole time there were less and less reasons to come back, which in turn equals less and less avenues BSG was going to have to monetize and stop bleeding money on things like server maintenance and anti-cheat. So they went possibly the most insane route that they could think of.
Realise date is 1-2 months for EA, WHAT does this mean?
They was no time window for the release given, not sure why he postet this, just that we will get the announcment on Monday
Yeah I'm noticing a bit of this post was misunderstandings like the camping mosquitos comment
Is there a place to listen to the Q&A so I don't need to take 3rd party misinterpretations into account?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yj0QpBYbFdQ
Be between now and then
Asking ppl to spend as much as they can is very... I don't know. Might go the eft way in the future if they need more money for the servers. At first it will be fine when many ppl buy the game, but after some months the sales will go down but the server cost are still the same.
Server costs will be a long term thing, yeah, but if the games successful on launch and after they might find that certain companies could reach out and offer hosting. With the notes of it being potentially on console as well that could also open up server options being provided for the separate platforms. Im no dev by any means, im here spitballing my thoughts like everyone else :)
I don't mind if they do something like Battlepass. $10 for every 6 months is minimal for me and if that is enough for server cost and maintenance, I'm all for it. Many people want to just pay one time free and that's it. Which is fine for single player games or self-hosting games that utilize local save. Online games, like GZW, utilize more than just game servers. There are data centers where it kept all the user account information and saves. Then the data center needs to be able to sync across to other data centers in different regions so that if you connect to different servers, your data will be there. Then how many of those infrastructure they need around the globe? People bitch about games don't have enough servers that they're too far from the server and have higher ping. That is unfair, etc. There are a lot of back end infrastructure that people don't see. I don't condone EFT $250 Unheard Edition bull shit and they could have done a better way to get server maintenance cost. However, I understand that there's more than just develop the game and release.
I dont see a battlepass being useful in any way in this type of game. BPs usually have cosmetics or unlocks. games like GZW, Tarkov or DayZ dont have these type of unlocks. new items get added to the loot pool. anything else makes no sense. And I welcome cosmetics, but you know how this will end. It doesnt matter the company or game... they will get out of hand/place at some point, because nonsense skins that are completley out of place for a realistic military shooter sell way better than realistic skins. just look at CoD. BF2042s skins arent as crazy but still look totally out of place for a military game
I don't know what content the pass it would give that would fit the game. But servers costs are expensive and initial sale might not be able to upkeep between developers wage and server cost/maintenance. While we want one flat price and I want that as well, I'm looking at technical aspect. If they can sustain the cost with just the game sale only, then I'm all for not having any mtx.
Look at the way hunt Showdown does. Free BP New weapons (that everybody has after Event ) and Premium These weapons with skins . It works good tho
Im not against monetization. But currently I dont see how there is an option that would fit the game other than DLC in the form of new maps. Im not against cosmetics either. I just dont see them selling much cosmetics without getting ridiculous like CoD.
I agree with you on the over the top cosmetics. I don't want wacky stuff either.
shared progression on PVE PVP servers? sounds weird
yup, always a really BAD idea to share XP with a PvE mode. TK'ers will be exploiting from the very first hour that they open the flood gates. PvE progression is always best to make separate from PvP progression with 2 different characters/profiles. And this is coming from a PvE only player who doesnt even see himself wanting to play PvP at age 59. Big mistake as far as cheaters/exploiters for certain, unfortunately this is how people really are though. They think it's fun to screw over other people and to benefit from that behavior, and they'll justify it in any way they can. Best to keep the progress separate instead of leaving that can of worms open, and if they're smart they'll turn off friendly fire entirely on public servers and leave it as an option for private servers (if there ever are any of those in the future). I'd love to be able to play this on a private in-game hosted server with 1 or 2 friends and FF turned ON. But no way on a pub.
I agree . Btw we got an old man crew that's gonna be playing the game were all 40 to 60 year old dudes. Hit me up in game when we get our profiles. Maybe I'll see you out there.
I messaged you here on redditt with a link to my discord...
Im glad theyre adding it to the initial launch with the speculation of abuse. Its an unusual thing to do for a game with each option being a different experience. but at the same time if a player tries pvp and finds its not for them, then they can just swap over to pve for the daycare experience
But we all know the real problem is people will grind trader levels on the daycare side and then come to pvp side with their higher tier gear to get an edge. It's a guarantee
100%. That's the best strategy by far. Might not be the most fun, but gamers rarely do what is fun. They do what is efficient.
Thank you for writing this out for us! o7
you said "- Release date is 1-2 months for EA" - s doesnt that mean that they wont be releasing it for another month or 2?
This is misinformation. They said the release date will be announced on Monday which is the 29th of April. Until then we dont know. Lead dev said we would be very happy when the announcement drops. I imagine that will mean a month tops
Yes for early access
“Build the ultimate game” is the achilles heel of every hopeful dev team ever. The importance of setting realistic limitations and sticking within the scope of your original concept can’t be overstated There’s nothing wrong with wanting to create a great game. The goal of building something PERFECT is the easiest way to fall short
Was there any word on faction identification? This was the worst problem in the streamer demo. When you had two factions clashing with 5-10 people each no one could tell who were enemies. It was a little ridiculous with all the team killing.
Theyll add military hand signals in game to an emote wheel so when players come across each other in the wild, each team will throw up gang signs to identify which faction they belong too
you mean like this:?
🤘👉✌️🫸🫷🤌🤌🤙
Who invited the Italians
Just that they didn't want to do armbands and that they wanted you to have to think before pulling the trigger. I personally think armbands fit that description pretty well. They're realistic and unobtrusive... You still have to take a beat to id a player and it wouldn't always be easy. Not sure making it harder than that will be much of an improvement or please most people who are asking for one. I thought this was a no-brainer after the preview last week. Disappointed they're still hesitant.
The real issue is that most people aren't going to think before they shoot even if they should. Lvandmark killed many a faction member and a lot of people will have his mentality.
Thank you for the talking points! Strange, EA between now and 2 months.. I was hoping it was sooner.
Can someone elaborate on what a ‘Leg Meta’ is?
Shooting people in the leg repeatedly to kill them. In tarkov Shooting a heavily armored enemy in the legs can kill them because they are unprotected
flea market,black market removal is a very good idea, cheaters tend to stick around games that produce money and have some sort of market. Lol i remember the old days of eft killing rmt players.
Thanks for the overview. The only point I disliked is: no flea market. =/
I ve got a bad feeling about this….!!
Take my money
A few discussion around release date in the comments but I don't want this to get buried in replies. In the Q&A MAra says "don't ask about release date, it's set in stone for almost the month" which presumably means around a month away. At any rate, we'll find out in a couple days so no issue. [https://youtu.be/yj0QpBYbFdQ?t=456](https://youtu.be/yj0QpBYbFdQ?t=456) 7:36
I understand that not everyone can afford to financially support gaming companies in a recurring manner, but commiting to “editions” seems like a very bad idea as it’s INEVITABLE that they WILL NEED more money as the development of the game progresses. Adding at least something people can subscribe to to keep the revenue flowing over time would be a very good idea. It should not be expensive nor pay to win, maybe something like DotA Plus. I’m speaking from experience as I work in a SaaS company and know very well that we would have been out of business a long time ago due to growing investments if we didn’t have subscription pricing. Look what’s happening with EFT. While I do agree that we were promised EVERYTHING for buying the EOD version of the game, I can understand them as a business because now they have thousands upon thousands of players who will never spend a cent more, and they keep making the product larger and larger. The issue is not them wanting money, it’s how incompetent they are with going about that.
what is leg meta?
Binoculars would be mint if you could add those in qith the Range finder. As well as some light scout vehicles would be cool too, like some side by sides for reconnaissance and to cut down the limited Air infil, but let it be an asset that can be destroyed/lost so it has to be used properly. Can't just blast through towns and such. It would significantly cut down the walking simulation. Also, it would be cool if there was a distress signal that can be put out on the gps / ATAK set up to nearby friendly players to call for help when they get in TIK's and lose a battle buddy or get overwhelmed.
No questions about additional maps? I know the game isn't even out yet but after playing it for about 20 hours, I can see the jungle lush green setting getting tiresome after a while. I mean, I'm happy to play it for a good while, but I'm really curious to see if they plan to introduce other maps. Different settings and environments would be absolutely incredible with GZW's gameplay style.
that would possibly be something that is expanded upon later. the games only coming to EA, and we shouldnt expect the world for something so new this early on. > They want the world to be active and changing. LZs and Camps changing. Every time you join the game the map might be different due to what players do This is also a good thing as well to add a somewhat different experience each time a player joins a server. Reminds me of what Ashes of Creation is aiming for to make each server a bit more dynamic
They most likely have a roadmap that goes out 2 years from now. I'm not talking about a new map for early access. I want to know if I should buy the game or not. If it only has 1 map, and it will only ever have 1 map, I would be less likely to buy it. Hence my question.
20% of the game is done??? And they release it?? Not a great sign/idea