Rocket, don't charge money for the maps please

[DieBrotmafia 79]

But maps are a bit part of the future for this game, and I think we will see a mix of community maps and officially supported maps. It could be a part of the revenue stream. It feels to me that it’s better to ask five or ten Euros to access this new map, than to charge for hats. It’s a reasonable way of doing things. If we hit the numbers that we’re hoping to get, that should be fine.

Source: http://www.rockpaper...y-z-standalone/

I thought it was supposed to follow the Minecraft model? Minecraft worked in a way that whenever you bought the game, you got all future updates and content for free. The alpha version was cheap, as the game progressed it was more expensive, rewarding people that bought early and helped testing the alpha. There was never any money involved for new content or maps.

Regarding the above quote, this is not the minecraft model. I have to say I'm a bit disgusted by this. I'm willing to pay 20$ for the alpha or 60$ for the finished version, but all of this paid developement kit shit that other producers lately introduced in lots of games... It sucks. Because at the same time they introduce a no-mod policy. Look at Battlefield 3, no mods allowed. Because no one would buy the DLCs if there was free content from the community available. In the end, it makes for a worse game with less content that you need to pay more to get.

This makes DayZ look somewhat weird, as it started getting big based on an engine that everyone can mod freely. The standalone will now supress this. I can understand that and I'm all for it regarding the whole hacking issue. But together with this new "information" about paying for additional content it gets a real sour taste one has to admit. And I don't see how community maps are compatible with paying for official maps, as the quality likely won't differ and no one will buy these official maps.

To the guys saying you don't need to buy the maps: Yes I don't. But it will clutter the community in the folks who got access and the ones who don't. This is a step in the wrong direction. I'm all for Rocket making money and Rocket staying true to whatever concept he has in mind, not getting too influenced by what casuals want. This has nothing to do with gameplay.

Edit: To clarify: I don't have a problem with paying money. I don't have a problem with paying for additional maps. I would only have a problem if user-generated content gets restricted for the sake of selling the additional maps better. I don't want to allege that this is what Rocket has planned, its just not clear from the interview. Arma 2 itself is a great example of selling DLCs while at the same time allowing the community to generate content. Battlefield 3 is an example of a company restricting great user-created content just to sell some shoddy DLCs.

Edited August 18, 2012 by DieBrotmafia

[Matalgirrafe 65]

Rocket probably saw the massive profit gain he can get from this mod - he'd be insane not to take the opportunity to earn thousands of dollars. But he shouldn't have said the maps would be free, and now they aren't.

[DieBrotmafia 79]

Rocket probably saw the massive profit gain he can get from this mod - he'd be insane not to take the opportunity to earn thousands of dollars. But he shouldn't have said the maps would be free, and now they aren't.

Rocket will make millions anyway. Think about just 20$ per alpha version and likely 500.000 people buy immediately. Thats 10 Million, obviously there are also costs involved. But he will make money anyway.

What I have a problem is making a game less able to mod and thus decreasing the user experience and quality of the game in order to make money. If he makes a great game and charges money, everyone wins. If he restricts user-created content so he doesn't have competition with his own money-making additional content, he wins but the users lose out. I won't say it is like that, its just something I wonder about. Maybe Rocket indeed has in mind to make people able to mod it in the future and his own maps are just additional.

A statement of him specifically on this would be cool. A sceptic person could otherwise think he sacrifices user experience in order to make more money. Looking at the hate of people on lots of these schemes in the past years one should be really careful with statements like this, as one could think the reason for not making people able to mod it goes beyond the simple hacking issue.

Edited August 18, 2012 by DieBrotmafia

[puppetworx 474]

He's going to charge a pittance for the standalone and then an even smaller pittance for the future maps. Suck it up.

It's a brilliant idea from my perspective, better then charging you more all at once for a game that might turn out to be a total PoS. But people who want everything for free are always going to complain whatever the price.

[magicool 115]

He will figure out more ways how to get our money

Edited August 18, 2012 by Magicool

[puppetworx 474]

Maybe he will workout a way for all you penny-pinchers to pay in beans.

How much do you normally pay to be entertained for hundreds of hours? If it's less then £/$30 you're doing it wrong.

[MisterMisterPlzDontShoot 8]

With the BIS buyout. We are gonna get price gouged at every turn.

So much for Rocket's word.

I guess everyone has a price.

=/

To the people defending these actions, you are a sap. Just cause you want to pay for unfinished products, doesn't mean everyone is willing to get fucked in the ass.

Good day!

[batflaps 20]

I'd say for this game that new maps are basically like a new expansion... Sorta.

PS, business is business.

Edited August 18, 2012 by BatFlaps

[DayZPvP.com 143]

The truth is that not even Rocket knows how this all will go down.

Anyone claiming that they know otherwise is lying. We just have to wait and see. At this point it's like asking an infant to drive a car: it's too early.

[integ3r 5]

I don't mind it in principle, but the problem is that this could potentially split the community leading to some maps being dead in activity....

[paula 3]

With the BIS buyout. We are gonna get price gouged at every turn.

So much for Rocket's word.

I guess everyone has a price.

=/

To the people defending these actions, you are a sap. Just cause you want to pay for unfinished products, doesn't mean everyone is willing to get fucked in the ass.

Good day!

You call people saps for saying they would pay money for extra maps? You sir are a moron. Not everyone is a little jew fuck like you that can't afford to cough up $10-20 for hours of entertAinment. How about move out of your parents house and get a real job you scrub shit.

[user warned, one week suspension. -Max]

Edited August 18, 2012 by Max Planck

[enforcer1975 1111]

He doesn't even have a working alpha, shows a non released version of DayZ at the games con now he is already dreaming about making money with it? WAKE UP ROCKET!

[strangere 9]

You know how long it takes to make this big maps. Limnos island in Arma 3 which is 300+ square kilometers took them more then 2 years. I think it is reasonable charge for maps that are big and took years to make.

[Never 237]

Source: http://www.rockpaper...y-z-standalone/

Reading that interview, and other recent press, The DayZ Standalone alpha is going to be a mess. Rocket is really coming across like he doesn't know what hes doing.

[DieBrotmafia 79]

Maybe he will workout a way for all you penny-pinchers to pay in beans.

How much do you normally pay to be entertained for hundreds of hours? If it's less then £/$30 you're doing it wrong.

You call people saps for saying they would pay money for extra maps? You sir are a moron. Not everyone is a little Jew fuck like you that can't afford to cough up $10-20 for hours of entertAinment. How about move out of your parents house and get a real job you scrub shit.

You don't even comprehend what the point is. I don't care about money. I wrote it in the thread, I would gladly pay 60$ for the game if I like it. I don't like the principle of paying for further content especially if it restricts moddability or seperates the community. And you certainly can't brag about a Minecraft model, in this case you should be honest and call it Activision model.

I'd say for this game that new maps are basically like a new expansion... Sorta.

Then he shouldn't claim Minecraft model if its not.

The truth is that not even Rocket knows how this all will go down.

No question bout that. Makes it even more important for us to maybe influence it in the better direction.

Edited August 18, 2012 by DieBrotmafia

[Banicks 55]

I think pricing and business model decisions would have been a big part of the negotiations with BIS.

If the game retails for around $30, an additional amount of money for what could consitute as an expansion isn't much. Call of Duty was one of the groundbreakers that showed you can have a high retail cost and still charge a premium amount for DLC - naturally this was forced on players because if you didn't have the map, you got kicked out of games.

I don't see that as an issue here though. I believe you could probably purchase DayZ retail with "Chernarus Plus" and be content to play it until you no longer played. I can't see a way of forcably removing Chernarus Plus from players to force a DLC purchase.

For now you have nothing to worry about. But a big wowzer for me in that article is Hall indicating a release date before the end of the year retail. I presume this is going to be pushed very quickly to ensure a WarZ .v. DayZ competition on the shelves. That way BIS don't miss out, presumably that is why alot of Arma 3 programmers have been reassigned to DayZ retail.

But what concerned me was the mentioning of a console programmer (Operation Flashpoint) being brought across perhaps confirming Hall's intention to bring DayZ to consoles. If this is the case, it is more concerning to me than DLC costs. It severely limits what DayZ could become graphically and gameplay-wise.

There are plenty of opinions and threads on that floating around though. Good find on the interview though.

Edited August 18, 2012 by Banicks

[MisterMisterPlzDontShoot 8]

You call people saps for saying they would pay money for extra maps? You sir are a moron. Not everyone is a little Jew fuck like you that cant afford to cough up 10-20 for hours of entertAinment. How about move out of your parents house and get a real job you scrub shit.

First, let me address your obvious bigotry. Then, let me also say, that I am rather well off. I have a home, two cars and pay my bills by the year, not monthly. ;)

Now, let us address the real issue at hand. Corporations, are not people. I don't give a fuck what you have been sold. And you have been sold. I am tired of idiots placating to idiotic developers, in this industry and others. Making them believe it is OK to do, what they do.

Know how they justify what they do? By the numbers. Morons who buy anything that is new and shiny. Without even so much as a concern whether it is a quality product, or produced in a quality atmosphere (different issue).

There are many things I refuse to buy, like Apple products. They are inferior products produced by children in China. (once again, separate issue)

Nevertheless, just because I refuse to spend my money frivolously doesn't mean, I am, that special word that you called me.

My advice to you is, move out of your parents house. Grow up. Get a real job. No, not Mcdonalds, or sales. Go help people. Make something of yourself.

Then, you will see the value of money. Fucking chode!

[Marhaus 1]

Personally, I wouldn't mind paying a little for maps, especially if they're quality.

[MisterMisterPlzDontShoot 8]

And there we have it folks...

What you just said was, you don't mind that your parents pay for your endless BS products.

With the money thing aside, it is just the principle and ethics of it all.

Corporations do not have any. It is time they learned.

[DieBrotmafia 79]

As lots of people still don't get it:

It doesn't matter if he produces maps and we can pay for them. After all, no one is forced to buy them. Everything allright.

It does matter if he is tempted to make the game less modable so his maps don't have to compete with free user-created high quality content. Which will overall make for much less high-quality content. If he doesn't restrict the community in order to make more money, everything is fine.

Think about the Arma 2 developers would've decided to not make their game modable. In this case they could sell some mods they did themselves caused by the lack of free content. More money for them, tempting. But there would not be hundreds of great community-made mods where the quality sometimes exceeds anything the developers could do. We would not have DayZ in the first place. This is what worries me, not if I pay 10$ more or less. With development kits or money for maps comes a huge temptation of restricting a game in order to have less quality competition. If you promise that all content will be free, no matter how much you charge for the initial product, you have no temptation to cripple the game.

I'd rather pay 60$ instead of 30$ and then 10$ for an additional map, even if the latter were to be cheaper.

Edited August 18, 2012 by DieBrotmafia

[paula 3]

First, let me address your obvious bigotry. Then, let me also say, that I am rather well off. I have a home, two cars and pay my bills by the year, not monthly. ;)

Now, let us address the real issue at hand. Corporations, are not people. I don't give a fuck what you have been sold. And you have been sold. I am tired of idiots placating to idiotic developers, in this industry and others. Making them believe it is OK to do, what they do.

Know how they justify what they do? By the numbers. Morons who buy anything that is new and shiny. Without even so much as a concern whether it is a quality product, or produced in a quality atmosphere (different issue).

There are many things I refuse to buy, like Apple products. They are inferior products produced by children in China. (once again, separate issue)

Nevertheless, just because I refuse to spend my money frivolously doesn't mean, I am, that special word that you called me.

My advice to you is, move out of your parents house. Grow up. Get a real job. No, not Mcdonalds, or sales. Go help people. Make something of yourself.

Then, you will see the value of money. Fucking chode!

Lol. Miser? Better choiice of words? You take what I say to you and throw it back at me. Poor kid.

You ain't got shit little man. Tell the Internet what you have. Then get off your mothers computer chair and go look at the pathetic man she created.

They plan on selling the game for no more then $30. You expect a company to continue to service a game and come out with updates and balance tweaks without offering the community dlc's for a low cost? You are a schmuck. Truly you dont appreciate/understand the value of a dollar.

@ the mc donalds comment. I find that insulting. My cashier job at Wendy's has given me plenty of opportunity to do more with myself within the store I work for.

[Banicks 55]

As lots of people still don't get it:

It doesn't matter if he produces maps and we can pay for them. After all, no one is forced to buy them. Everything allright.

It does matter if he is tempted to make the game less modable so his maps don't have to compete with free user-created high quality content. Which will overall make for much less high-quality content. If he doesn't restrict the community in order to make more money, everything is fine.

Think about the Arma 2 developers would've decided to not make their game modable. In this case they could sell some mods they did themselves. But there would not be hundreds of great community-made mods where the quality sometimes exceeds anything the developers could do. We would not have DayZ in the first place. This is what worries me, not if I pay 10$ more or less.

Are you referring to the possibility of the game being on console and/or locking it down? (wanted to clarify)

It's quite common now-a-days for games to prevent modding, keeping any ideas in house and within copyright for the mother company to register and release in the future.

Call of Duty 2 was moddable, and the mods released by third-party programmers in their spare time added some great ideas to it. ie: Trip wires connecting grenades, blood splatter effect on screen instead of redbars either side. All of the most popular mods were stolen and copyrighted by Call of Duty and incorporated into what was the first Modern Warfare.

It's just the nature of the beast unfortunately. We can't stop companies from making money off their own copyright material and perogative. Gaming isn't just about fun and games anymore. Companies raise and lose fortunes each game titlte lately, it is a multi-billion dollar genre.

[MisterMisterPlzDontShoot 8]

You know BIS will, Die.

When is the last time you saw an SDK freely given to the community?

Valve - 2007, I believe.

Oh, look at that, that is right around the time the DLC model came into play (a year or so later)

The whole thing is disgusting.

Like I have been saying for years, if they could make it so we get charged per respawn, they would. On top of the initial privilege of buying the product.

If you don't believe me that most companies think it is a privilege to buy and use their products, read the ToS sometime.

Gross!

[Falcorn (DayZ) 21]

Charging for Alpha, beta, full game (ofcourse), and dlc maps, Better be good maps!

[MisterMisterPlzDontShoot 8]

Wickxx...

If you are serious about the Wendy's thing... I am laughing so hard right now.

But seriously, you are a bigot.

Fuck off!