Doctor Vivian

Well, if they can sell Rocket Boards, right?

The only problem I foresee would be that the devs would have to find a way to sit all varieties and sizes of characters into a Sky Skiff cockpit. The "sitting" animation would be easy enough, and also the planting of the hip bones in a relative position to the cockpit seat would be simple, but the sheer SIZE of some characters would pose an issue, as a Sky Skiff really isn't the right size to fit larger characters.

So, it would probably need to be a more scaled-up Sky Skiff... and once you start having a properly-sized vehicle to fly inside, all of a sudden, it's much less of a vanity vehicle and more of a headache... which is probably why we're unlikely to see one.

On the flip side, you know how Kheldians turn into a ball of light when in "Energy Form"... perhaps, when deploying a Sky Skiff vanity power (a la Rocket Board), the hero would simply turn INTO a Sky Skiff with a closed cockpit. Can't see who's in there... but there's a name on top.

All the same power restrictions as a Rocket Board would apply, and with the Character being replaced by a Sky Skiff model, there would be no worries about animations or clipping, etc.

-- Vivian

We can stick a fork in some of these long-standing questions -- because I've got the answers.

The current bug, which has Base Defensive systems active and attacking anyone who is nearby, combined with another tool which was not available pre-Issue-13, the Power Analyzer III, permitted me to absolutely confirm, without a shadow of a doubt, that Force Field Generators are NOT working. I.e., they are not only not generating the effect they display when they are installed but they are not providing any DEF to devices in their immediate vicinity. Stealth Strippers are also still not displaying an effect or functioning in any way to turn off any kind of Stealth, from a Stealth Unique and Cloaking Device all the way up to Superior Invisibility.

Hopefully the current "Base Bug" is a sign that bases are being worked on off-camera (although why any such in-progress code would be pushed to the live servers, I am uncertain), and this all amounts to yet another sign that our much-beloved and long-missed Base Raids are returning to CoX!

-- Vivian

Well-said! I, for one, am also willing to wait in joyful hope.

-- Vivian

I don't think you actually understand my position. I've been trying to point out that it's not attitude but immutable corporate financial realities that govern the course of current and future development, and unless you approach the problem with potential solutions from that angle you'll never get anywhere, as it is money that drives everything -- but that's perfectly okay. We can agree to disagree and still smile and move on. We both want the same goal -- Base Development -- we just differ strongly in our opinions of what's needed to make it happen. Which should come as no surprise really, as two people in this world very rarely share the same opinion.

-- Vivian

Even if a one-shot Pack were on the menu, the limited segment of the player population that would purchase such a pack would seem to make it difficult to achieve a return on the investment of making it. Or is it? We really don't know how many people would buy such a Pack, and it is that uncertainty which is probably behind the fact that we haven't seen one. If we had solid numbers, it could be a different story.

I wish that there was a Polling system in place, so that way each time users log in to the game they could be presented with a quick question -- this would enable Paragon Studios to very quickly determine how many people would be willing to purchase things like a Base Pack, or other one-shot Packs.

Similarly, if they had such a Polling system in place moving forward in the Freemium system, they could more readily steer development of microtransaction-based accessories or optional items to those that the player base felt most strongly about purchasing, and therefore maximize their sales in that area.

-- Vivian

After re-reading your post, I see that you did not understand my position. Whether this is because I did not explain it clearly enough or you were skimming my words in earlier posts and misunderstood is irrelevant. I'll try and explain it a bit more clearly below.

It is not apathy -- i.e., a lack of interest or concern. The Devs, all of them, invariably will tell you if you ever speak to them in person, in game, via PM or via e-mail, that they would love to see more base content. War Witch is on record, along with several others, in saying they really want to get around to making something fun happen with bases.

Yet -- if you do not understand the financial realities that govern, control and limit development at the Studio level, all you have to go on is the above kind of statement from the Devs. Consequently you will always be completely at a loss to explain why Bases aren't getting the attention that the Devs keep saying they want to give them. You'll come up with things like "apathy" to explain it -- which isn't the case at all.

The underlying problem is that there's a limited number of Modelers, Programmers, Designers, Testers, Animators, Riggers, Texture Artists, Producers, Writers, etc., on the Paragon Studios staff, and thus a limited number of man-hours of development time being generated each month.

You need to understand the financial considerations and the corporate decisions that necessarily derive from them that have caused, year in and year out, Bases to not receive any share of those precious monthly man-hours.

Each month, those man-hours will be spread across a variety of tasks, but all of those tasks are chosen on the basis of being most likely to a) result in an increase in the playerbase (like the upcoming Freemium system), b) generate more revenue (like Packs and paid Expansions) or c) keep the game current and relevant in terms of features and content to its current and emerging competitors in the marketplace (the free Issues).

This is what my analogy of the Little Dutch Boy and the Leaking Dam derives from. Too many leaks (things to do), not enough fingers (man-hours of Development) to stop them all up. The boy has to focus on the very largest leaks, and more keep popping up constantly. The boy is facing a losing battle -- he will never get to the small leaks (like Bases) until and unless the paradigm changes.

I honestly hope that the Freemium model will do that -- I hope it will generate tons of new users and tons more money. Because, if it does, then that one lone boy will be joined by several other boys -- and together, their fingers and hands can not only plug all the leaks, but continue to build the dam itself.

I really must disagree. A far, far larger portion of the player base will purchase any given costume pack than they would a base pack, simply based on the statistically much higher level of interest. As was mentioned in an earlier message, costumes and the costume creator are much more central to the core CoX game experience than bases are. Consequently, due to these higher levels of sales, costume packs have a much greater chance of generating a Return on Investment.

Under the current subscription model, subscription generates recurring revenue (recurring, not renewable). Under the Freemium model that is about to be unleashed, VIP players will continue to generate recurring revenue.

Clarifying my earlier suggestion is not harping. I would also ask that you not confuse my suggestion as to a possible way to fund a separate Base Team at Paragon Studios that would be dedicated to generating Base content on an ongoing basis with saying that I am implying that bases "should" provide such recurring revenue.

Personally, I would have little or no desire for such a VIP Base system to be implemented. However, I can see the benefits of it from a business perspective, which is why I brought it up in discussion here. Even in my initial comment, I mentioned it would be extremely unpopular. I am in no way a champion of the idea -- it was only brought up for discussion. Although, if you have a better way to ensure a steady stream of income that could support several staff members at Paragon Studios, please by all means share it.

I am fairly certain that some packs may not have paid for themselves (although I have no proof since sales numbers are not made public), such as the Wedding Pack. Also, although GR was initially released as a paid expansion in an attempt to recoup the development cost (and there is no indication that it was or was not recouped), you will note that all of that content is being provided for free under the upcoming Freemium model. The upgrades and new content provided in GR serve more to keep CoX current and exciting in the face of competing products elsewhere in the marketplace. As you say, it served to largely bring in more players (and have some old ones return)... so even if Expansions such as GR are released at a loss, they can be considered a necessary overhead to avoiding the game falling into stagnation and being outpaced by its competition.

Similarly, no single part of the game has a dedicated team, which is why we must time and again return to the analogy of the Little Dutch Boy and the Leaking Dam. I honestly feel that if we cannot produce a model whereby Bases can be shown to generate significant, recurring revenue for the game, then they will continue to languish as they have for years.

Bases, as I have said, are secondary to the core gameplay experience of CoX, and indeed, non-existent from the Praetorian one. Consequently they have always taken (and will always take) a back seat to any development that promises to enlarge the playerbase and/or generate significant amounts of additional revenue. The Little Dutch Boy, only having two hands, can't do everything... he has to go after only the very biggest leaks.

-- Vivian

I agree there would be challenges, and I am by no means proposing anything complete in terms of design or systems. Yet, that being said, if we wanted to extend our thoughts in that direction, there are many possible solutions that come to mind.

For example, payments for a VIP Base could be split up amongst all VIP SG Members in the SG. I.e., if the Base Rent for a given base was, say, 200 Points (cents) per month, and there was only one owner of that SG Base, they would be on the hook for the whole $2 each month. Alternately, if there were 10 members, each would only have $0.20 added to their monthly Premium VIP bill. Likewise, if there were 100 members in that SG, each would only pay $0.02 a month.

Next, to address your "what happens if I don't pay rent on my VIP base", this would only happen if there were no VIP members with live accounts in the SG, as the total monthly rent would be automatically divided among all VIP Account SG Members. But in such an event, it would be just the same as if you did not pay rent on a classic Base -- the power would first be shut off, and eventually the base would be inaccessible until the rent was paid.

Now, that's just a total off-the-cuff concept, without any lengthy design, discussion or thought put into it. The goal of it is to generate a reliable, recurring, Base-specific revenue stream for Paragon Studios that could be used to maintain the salaries and overhead of a small Base Team, who would do nothing every month but work on Base content. One-shot Base Packs won't do that.

-- Vivian

That's true. But let's use the Little Dutch Boy analogy. There's a leaking dam, and a Little Dutch Boy, who tries to plug the holes with his fingers. But he only has two hands, and there are many holes. Whichever he plugs (and he'll plug the largest, of course), there will still be leaks.

These "leaks" represent all the issues that haven't been gotten to -- like Bases -- and countless others. The problem is, there's only one Little Dutch Boy (Paragon Studios) to go around, and all his time and effort is spent plugging the really big leaks -- implementing things like Mission Architect, the Freemium System and more -- trying to help keep the game competitive and appealing to the market at large, that it might continue to draw new users in to replace those lost through the ongoing churn that is part and parcel of any online game.

That is not exactly what I said -- I said that Bases are not the focus of the game. I honestly feel that the ability to create your own Base is an awesome thing, and I am very glad that CoX has it as one of many things that players can do in the game.

-- Vivian

They were, and are, a factor. I remember when they came out. Aha, I thought. We can make bases! That's awesome! It still is awesome.

I think it's important for the Base Building community to realize that they have taken things much further, higher and to extremes that normal players simply can't, for lack of the requisite artistic ability, time, desire, etc. Most people find the current base system sufficient. It is only those artists (and indeed, I consider the Base Building community artists) that have reached the limits of the Editor, that chafe against those limits. Players who never reached them never feel the pain, and don't really understand what the Base Building Community is complaining about. Bases, to them, are still quite awesome.

I spent a while thinking about it, and although I know that most Base Builders would not like the idea, paying Real Money for rent on "VIP Bases" is the only way to generate recurring revenue of any significant amount. If those funds were earmarked for Base Development on an ongoing basis, it seems to me to be the only system that would eventually pay off the cost of such development. It would totally have to be optional, though. If players don't like the new base shinines, they don't have to get a VIP Base. Only Base Builders and those who wanted the benefits would have to sign up for the plan.

-- Vivian

"Depending on the changes" you might be right -- a very small collection of objects or changes for Bases, sold in "Pack" form, could very easily be recouped and could serve as a dipstick market indicator as to exactly how many Base Builders there really are, and how many actually are willing to buy such things.

The drawback, however, of such a limited Pack would be that it wouldn't address very many of the desires of the Base Building community and to be on the safe side (not knowing how many Base Builders there are), it would probably not represent a good value for its price in terms of number of items when compared to other Packs.

Also, with all efforts at Paragon Studio currently bent towards implementing and testing the Freemium system, such a Pack -- however limited -- seems to be still quite a way off.

-- Vivian

To be honest, I don't think that very small group of people is statistically relevant, which is why I did not address them. The vast majority of players in the user population didn't come to CoX because of bases, nor would they leave it because Bases haven't gotten an update in a long time. Bases are not the focus of the game.

-- Vivian

I think that this is a case where your love for bases, and your very powerful desire to see them grow and evolve is blinding you to the financial realities that have forced them to take a back burner in the face of more urgent development priorities.

I would like us to take a step back and try to give it an objective look.

Rhetorically, in your opinion, how many base builders are there in the playerbase right now that would pay real world money in the form of microtransactions to build their bases? One hundred? Two hundred? Five hundred? A thousand?

Among that number of base-builders, among those who would spend real-world-money under a microtransaction model, you'll find a wide range of money spent -- wealthy builders will plop down hundreds of dollars, whereas more frugal souls will eke out single dollars for specific, highly-desired items and grind to make the rest.

Let's say the average builder's "buy" for base items is around $20. That means that the average base builder will spend $20 on base items. Fair, right? Some few may spend more, but the vast majority will spend less -- or nothing.

Let's take the largest number above -- a thousand base builders -- and multiply that by $20... it's $20,000.

But let's say there are two thousand base builders -- let's say that the new base shinies and larger population from F2P will attract more folks, and double the number of buyers! Yet... that's still only $40,000.

Let's be crazy and double that again for no apparent reason -- it's still only $80,000.

This is not a "large source" of revenue... large sources are several millions of dollars. Moreover, and perhaps more importantly -- this is not "recurring" revenue.

Much like a Pack, Base Item Purchases would be one-shot, one-time purchases. Packs are inherently risky, as they cost a certain amount to develop, and each player will only buy one of them. If they don't sell enough to cover their cost of development, then NCsoft winds up breaking even -- or losing money on the Pack. Not exactly ideal.

In order to prosper, CoX needs recurring revenue. That's money that keeps coming in, month after month. This is needed in order to be able for Paragon Studios to afford more permanent staff and for CoX to rise on the ranks of NCsoft's Annual Earnings Reports -- for that is truly its only safeguard against eventual dissolution.

Bear in mind that the cost of overhauling SG Bases involves several months of work by a team of programmers, modelers, texture artists, riggers, animators, effect artists, designers, testers and producers. That labor represents a cost of many hundreds of thousands of dollars, not including the other overhead of the company surrounding them.

However -- that being said, and that sobering dose of reality having been handed out, I do have a suggestion that would make all of this possible:

If SG base "rent" was ACTUAL rent -- in other words, if it was a real, recurring monthly cost in real-world money -- that would serve to justify the expense of a Base Overhaul. I.e., if a case could be made that the income from a base overhaul would see a Return on Investment within "X" months for NCsoft, we'd probably see it happen.

Yet -- I cannot help but think that the base builder and player community would wholeheartedly reject any such extra recurring monthly cost for something they have received for free for so long already.

So, we are at an impasse -- and thus, in my humble opinion, Bases will probably stay exactly where they are until and unless the Free-to-Play model injects a ton of cash and changes the current dynamic.

-- Vivian

Oh yes, har har. I'm being very funny indeed. Perish the thought that anyone would do such a thing.

The main counter-argument I have heard against that, though, is that Base Building is a service, not an in-game item exchange. I.e., you're not paying for an item or INF, you're paying for someone's time. Ergo, it's not a violation of the Terms of Service.

But I'm not sure that's clear to everyone.

Let's look at three examples of this, and ask the same question of each:

First, if a user was to hire a Base Builder to come join their SG and have them spend 200-300 hours or so building them a magnificent base, and had agreed to pay them $1 per hour (or more, or less, etc) for their time and effort, would it be a violation of the Terms of Service?

Second, if you asked your brother to help you build a base, and gave them money ($20) or goods (your bicycle) for their time and effort, would it also be a violation of the Terms of Service?

Lastly, if you asked your sister to help you build a base and gave them money to buy several Packs (Magic, Animal, Party) and also their subscription fee for that month, would it also be a violation of the Terms of Service?

If Ironblade is correct, they're all violations of the Terms of Service.

If the counter-argument holds true, none of them are.

This calls for a ToS Expert!

Who among the gentle and erudite readers of this thread would like to assay the task of clearly and elegantly defining the rights and wrongs of Base-Building (and the reasonable Compensation thereof) in relation to the Terms of Service?

-- Vivian

It's just a guess on my part, but I would think that if Customer Support doesn't have an answer to a question, and they have no ability to kick it up to an actual member of the Dev Team at Paragon Studios, rather than turn someone away disappointed they'll suggest they ask here -- more in the reasonable hope someone else in the player community will have the answer, rather than in the faint and vague hope that someone like Sunstorm will come out of the woodwork and give an authoritative answer -- I.e., "I am the lead programmer for all base content -- we're aware of this issue... here's what's going on with that, and here's what's on the schedule to address it".

Although -- if that's the case -- it would be nicer for Customer Support to just say that, rather than send people here with the thought that the Dev Team is avidly searching the forums and answering questions of this sort.

-- Vivian