[li]Personally, I would like it to change. I’d like a version of the game where you don’t have to wait for actions. However, given how the game is built, I see it as unfeasible and I enjoy the game as it is. As another fan, I’d MUCH rather new content to a reworking of the current one, especially since the issue that Failbetter has mentioned previously of people just reading everything then leaving is likely. If Failbetter were to make an Open-World title or something, that would be one thing. But changing this system, not worth the costs.[/li]
[quote=MrChapeau][quote=Snowskeeper]MrChapeau, your business model relies on them rewriting their entire game to be feasible as a pay-to-own game. That would mean they’d have to do nothing but that for over a year. In the meantime, they’d go bankrupt.
So no, your model does not allow them to "grow the pie."[/quote]
[li]
Mr Kennedy’s prerogative is his. It’s not for me to tell him what to do with his business. I am merely making the case that I’m not alone in not being offered a product I want to buy.
Meanwhile, while they rework the system don’t you think they’d keep the current one up doing what it’s doing, and then I presume offer the new version of the game for free to people who have bought a certain amount of nex or more… rolls eyes
I understand that nobody likes the idea of something they love changing, not that this is ever going to happen, but yeesh. FB are making SS happen, no?
In reality most people engage in confirmation bias. You guys don’t want to see something you love change, and Mr Kennedy perhaps doesn’t want to spend a substantial portion of time rewriting something he’s already spent a great deal of his life on.
Who am I to tell him he is wrong to move on to the next thing? I’m just trying to speak to the man and tell him a larger audience is itching to pay him for his superb products.[/quote]
[/li]
Failbetter has been working to make the system less grindy for a very long time, now, and Fallen London fans have been generally supportive of the vast majority of their choices. Reactions of that sort are not characteristic of an audience or developer averse to change. Trust me; I know the difference. I’ve spent seven years of my life trying to put up with the massed horror of the Runescape fanbase whenever Jagex did something even marginally innovative, and I’ve played a few of the last five Call of Duty games.
You’re asking them to add yet another massive project to the pile of stuff they already have to work on–a project that will more than double their existing workload if they continue to put out content while working on it. And neither they nor the majority of their fanbase feel that it’s a necessary change. That’s still not a viable option.
I strongly recommend rereading the blog post Failbetter provided you with to explain why they haven’t chosen to do what you’re asking them to. I’d also like to point out that many of the players who’ve spent some money on action refreshes–say, five dollars–will be totally turned off by a $60 price tag, and that the market for expensive text-based games is incredibly small.
Thanks Dr. Chapeau for bringing this up, and thanks Alexis for the great post. I have a suggestion about EFriendship. I dig the 40 action pool- that’s cool- but it would be nice to be able to choose between that and adding 1 or 2 more cards per hour. Not card spaces, like lodgings provide, I mean like upping the refresh rate from ~6 per hour to maybe ~8 or 9. That’s around half what you get for spending 3 NEX to replenish your Opportunity cards, so in the short term it doesn’t replace refreshes and doesn’t interfere with the income flow from that. But it would feel good over the long run, and would make me feel like Mister Chimes was helping me do battle with the evil wiles of the RNG.
I fear that not even the Masters can combat the wiles of that infernal–no. Not infernal. The RNG bends not even to Hell. But we shall see if perhaps the Masters could strike a deal. After all, we all know how skilled they are at that.
I just want to throw my 2 cents in and say that I like the current system and the idea of including a steady trickle of premium content in Exceptional Friendship. I like the path you’re on. Thumbs up all around.
In slightly longer terms, every time I try to picture how a removal of the timed action system in Fallen London would work I end up at Sunless Sea. Infinite actions would destroy the pacing (I do feel the forced spread of story advancement over time adds something) and when I want to play something like Sunless Sea, well, I play Sunless Sea. No system is perfect, and while some things can occasionally be frustrating (curse you RNG and your fickle nature!) the system still works quite well.
[color=#009900]Thanks, folks, for a clutch of interesting and positive responses![/color]
[color=#ffffff]
[/color][color=#ffffff]"when I want to play something like Sunless Sea, well, I play Sunless Sea."[/color]
[color=#009900]
[/color]
[color=#009900]Exactly this. By making other kinds of game with other kinds of model, we can expand the Failbetter audience without risking Fallen London, and keep different eggs in different baskets. [/color]
[color=#009900]
[/color]
[color=#009900]As it happens, I would like to put out a small, self-contained piece of FL choice-based interactive fiction some time this year, as an experiment, and as a bit of a break after Sunless Sea (and I’d be interested to hear you folks’ thoughts on that). [/color]
[color=rgb(34, 34, 34)]
[/color]
[color=#ffffff]"boxes of Extra Stuff"
[/color]
[color=#009900]We’re still developing and investigating this - there may be news soon.[/color]
[color=rgb(34, 34, 34)]
[/color][color=#ffffff]
>opportunity cards
[/color]
[color=#009900]No promises, but we are in fact discussing an increased op deck flow into the Exceptional Friend offering.[/color]
edited by Alexis on 1/4/2015
[quote=Alexis Kennedy]
[color=#009900]As it happens, I would like to put out a small, self-contained piece of FL choice-based interactive fiction some time this year, as an experiment, and as a bit of a break after Sunless Sea (and I’d be interested to hear you folks’ thoughts on that). [/color]
[color=rgb(34, 34, 34)]
[/color][color=#ffffff]
>opportunity cards
[/color]
[color=#009900]No promises, but we are in fact discussing an increased op deck flow into the Exceptional Friend offering.[/color]
edited by Alexis on 1/4/2015[/quote]
I’d love to see some FL interactive fiction.
Increased Opportunity Deck flow would be great, but I must admit that I prefer to only check FL every few hours, cycle through my alts, and then move on to other stuff - it’s not a good idea to leave it on all the time at work. As such, faster refresh of the deck wouldn’t do me any good.
I know I’m only one anecdotal data point, if we could have a choice of a larger deck or faster refresh, that be wonderful. I must admit that the one thing about the Gift that I wasn’t a fan of was the reward. Just dropping the card from the deck in favour of 10 echoes worth of random bits and pieces would have worked better for me. My problem with the op deck is sorting through the cards, trying to find the ones I’m currently interested in, rather than the refresh rate.
I’ll chime in with my input as well:
I’ve lost count how much money I’ve spent on FL over the years. But it’s highly unlikely I would have paid full AAA price for the game as a standalone. The biggest appeal to me from the start was that this is a free to play browser game. Over time I’ve become invested in the world of FL and have spent money for those pieces of content I thought worth it.
I’ve also paid for Exceptional Friendship a couple of times before - when I was grinding heavily for some particular goal (e.g. Courier’s Footprint) and wanted to make the most of my actions. The House of Chimes is nice but I saw no appeal for a repeat visit. If there will be more delicious content associated with being an EF (or, as was mentioned, double the card deck, the same as actions are doubled), then I expect I’d definitely keep EF active for more months.
Add me to the roster of those interested in the economics that allow FBG to be viable (and interested in maintaining that situation!).
I’ve certainly spent far more on Nex than the cost of any other computer game I have ever bought (kudos, FBG!); and I am cognizant of the many posts noting that even very small Nex amounts are seen as significant burdens. So I was surprised to read from Alexis that the income-stream is not as bimodal as I would have predicted. If there are data whose sharing would not harm FBG, I think that they would be fascinating to examine.
[And I should reflect at some point on how much is too much to pay, really. Hmm. It’s a lot of words, sure; but so are second-hand novels, and much cheaper :)]
A further vote, too, for the proposed new EF model. Only ever paid for EF once, to experience the House of Chimes; more actions per se don’t do it for me, but more content likely would.
Personally, I’m pretty fond of the pacing. While I too enjoy games with higher speed, I think some of the most fun with a game is the time you don’t play it, but instead think about it. When I only get this much actions in a set amount of time, I’m paying much more attention when I’m playing; and I also get to have a life otherwise as well. You might be right that it would be economically smarter to have a higher-paced game and more pay-to-win, but that’s just not the game I’d like to play.
An interesting choice of comparison, since for 2nd hand novels absolutely zero money goes to the author. (You’re merely reducing the cost of someone who bought the original content.) It doesn’t even count towards their advance (which if they don’t earn out, they’re much less likely to get another deal, and won’t get any more money on that book till they do). So pretty much sucks for any author who isn’t already loaded, or isn’t already dead.
That’s just an aside, not a dig. I’ve bought 2nd hand books when the ones I want are out of print. It’s just an interesting point (to me)/problem with funding creative endeavours - of course it’s right that you can sell something you’ve bought (paintings, etc) - is it only because most authors earn so little that I’m discomforted by it? Or is it something more - having read a story you still possess its essence, so aren’t giving it up on handing it on? But then you possess the memory of a picture, the pleasure of having owned it … is that not the same?
I find it interesting that people in general do tend to value creative endeavour highly, but at the same time be unwilling to pay for it. As if art is something so special it should be a privilege in itself to create. Or perhaps it’s hard to price, so we don’t price it at all. I’m waffling. I’m probably high on lemsip.
Books vs hosted things is another issue - one has an upfront cost and nothing else; hosting have ongoing ones. But that’s not as interesting an issue.
Edit: Sorry, Sorry, I off-topiced. Bad Babel.
edited by babelfishwars on 1/4/2015
[quote=An Individual]I just want to throw my 2 cents in and say that I like the current system and the idea of including a steady trickle of premium content in Exceptional Friendship. I like the path you’re on. Thumbs up all around.
In slightly longer terms, every time I try to picture how a removal of the timed action system in Fallen London would work I end up at Sunless Sea. Infinite actions would destroy the pacing (I do feel the forced spread of story advancement over time adds something) and when I want to play something like Sunless Sea, well, I play Sunless Sea. No system is perfect, and while some things can occasionally be frustrating (curse you RNG and your fickle nature!) the system still works quite well.[/quote]
this, i agree. if someone doesn’t like the actions restriction on FL, SS is there. it’s already been described as a sequel of sorts to FL anyway. and if you spend any amount of fate on exceptional friend in FL, you’re probably can save money just buying SS instead… or any other grimdark game that isn’t browser based. but yeah, different game systems.
…which is a further point of difference: the words I pay for in FL aren’t really sharable/transferrable to anyone; they’re inherently transient. Which is a part of their value, of course - the packaging in an interactive discovery experience is clearly different from that of a book - but also perhaps a factor that would rationally reduce their value :).
You’re definitely correct that artists get treated differently depending on circumstance. I’ll pay several hundred dollars or more to host a house concert for a favorite (and by definition, minimal-fame!) artist; but kvetch perhaps at paying $20 for a copy of Lady Beiber Direction’s latest album (as a gift for my teenage niece!). Off-topic, I know, I know.
[li]
[quote=babelfishwars]
An interesting choice of comparison, since for 2nd hand novels absolutely zero money goes to the author. (You’re merely reducing the cost of someone who bought the original content.)[/quote]
That "someone" might not have made the original purchase without knowing that it can be resold.
The RNG seems to be the biggest source of frustration, apart from the grinds. Making certain opp cards pinned storylets for Exceptional Friends (perhaps a varying selection per month) would be a huge draw, or even creating repeatable story chains with new text that summon a functional equivalent of the desired card at the expense of some actions.
As a newish player (assuming newish players are still something of a focus), I think I’d also benefit immensely from some story-meets-tutorial style content that helps me figure out some of the more obtuse mechannics. For example, I just opened Wilmot’s End, I’m trying to get strong-backed labor, and I need Dramatic Tension. How do I get that? Who knows?
Well, the people HERE know, of course, and I’ll end up asking them. But I have three readerly-and-writerly friends who, when I mention FL, say that they played it long ago, then got kind of stuck and quit. They’re not the types to end up on a message board or to use asks on tumblr, so they couldn’t find the help they needed. Personally, I’ve kinda had to repeatedly risk spoilers in order to figure out how to progress with even a modicum of efficiency. You may say that efficient play isn’t really a priority, but when one feels directionless, one tends to start to lose interest.
A fate-locked storyline that is a combination of a tutorial/exposition fairy and a potential companion/spouse would be incredible, and appeal to both old and new players. Or you could start it out as a non-fate-locked tutorial-style NPC, whose extra services and benefits can only be unlocked by exceptional friends. Perhaps themed as someone who is indebted to the bazaar, so they know more about it but have less agency, and you can only reliably see them at the House of Chimes. The end game being freeing them from their debt/getting some patsy to take their place, so they can then become your spouse or companion.
One of the things I like most about the optional sub + microtransactions model is that they have so many potentially delicious interactions, and can be balanced for multiple playstyles.
It… may be obvious that I’ve worked on MMOs before, huh?
(I know I keep saying it, but if I could bank more than 6 cards as an Exceptional Friend I would be REALLY REALLY happy.)
I hope somebody read my post on Mr Kennedy’s blog post before it was deleted.
I didn’t know saying:
- Profit is not the opposite of pursuing a mission; it enables it
and
- People will pay for narrative, just not mobile games
… was so offensive.
I don’t feel I was attacking anybody. I thought I was rather kindly giving player feedback to FB saying “hey look you guys have wonderful stuff you’re making here, but the majority of your audience can’t digest it in its current form.”
Everybody who likes SS would like FL if it weren’t designed to annoy most of its POTENTIAL (as opposed to current) audience.
I wouldn’t bother to communicate this way if I didn’t care.
Oh, well.
[quote=Alexis Kennedy]
[color=#009900]The Gift was encouraging because it got a rave response although the economic impact was minimal.[/color][/quote]
I just hope new content either does not add any more cards, or for every card added you will remove some old card. From an end game point of view having one more card that gives 1.3 echo (or any other 1-3 action reward) is actually a demerit, not a bonus. And end game players are interested in trimming their deck not growing it. It is concerning that as the deck grows it’s getting harder and harder to get the card you want.
But I get why the reaction is so encouraging to you) For me, I always new that FB writes good stories, so no surprise there)
edited by Fhoenix on 1/5/2015
Chapeau, again, you’re failing to understand just how expensive it would be to rewrite and reformat /the entire game/ for the kind of medium you’re talking about. And you’re failing to get how annoyed the POTENTIAL audience would be by a triple-A price for a text-based game. We’ve explained why this wouldn’t work several times, now, and you haven’t really changed your argument to reflect that; you can understand why Alexis might be getting tired of it.
[color=#009900]Chapeau, I left your comment in the moderation queue because it was mostly a copy-paste repost of the one here; and I’m afraid the correct response to the one here was the one you got, that you need to reread my original post.
-
Riskier or more short-term strategies mean a chance of greater profit. Focusing on the long term means more modest profits. We’re a boutique business; I’ve no interest in being Henry Ford.
-
We have different products that address different audiences. It is safer and wiser to expand our range with other premium projects than destroy our existing audience for a successful product.
-
I am confident that unless SS is a runaway hit, FL will make us the same or more revenue over the next five years (although less next year). Many indies would kill to have cash flow as steady as ours right now.
-
Genuine life advice. If you find yourself lecturing a business owner on an obvious way they could make much more money… stop and think about whether they really haven’t thought about it. We have data, we’ve talked to other indies, we’ve talked to our audience. We are confident that very few of the 90% of players who don’t pay would pay a AAA price, and even if they did then we would lose money in the long term.
This thread has been an interesting and useful discussion. Thanks for beginning it, but please don’t keep making the same points: if you are in fact right, then I’m too blind to see. [/color]
Edit: (hopefully) helpful combining posts edit.
edited by babelfishwars on 1/5/2015
edited by Alexis on 1/5/2015