This is why you need to have an ability to filter Vanilla, whitelisted changes to vanilla and plain old modded content. None of which should be penalised by features such as stats, they should just be separated into groups so you aren’t corrupting the data.
XP/Coins I would say perhaps in just the first two options.
Blizzard shows that a rigid separation of custom and stock functions well. However, this is done with a different attitude. Custom games in Starcraft are weird as hell, they’re completely different takes on the game or just completely different games altogether. Blizzard also has a very strong quality control on their custom content. If your custom game doesn’t belong among the top 10 most popular games it has a very low chance to ever be played at all. The only chance is when Blizzard starts to meddle by featuring the games that interest them. So they both have a very strong top-down and bottom-up system to make sure custom content truly complements the stock content rather than overlaps with or makes up for weaknesses.
Keeping stock and custom separate like that works mainly because the stock game is solid, balanced and open to all types of players. The custom content can then be used for things that are truly different.
I suspect that there’s different motives going on here though. Custom content isn’t used for truly unique content, it’s there so people who want a slightly different alteration of the main game can get their way. Now I already said that doing that is a cop-out but in this context it’s bad for a different reason. If on both side of the filter similar games can be found then the filter starts to lose it’s meaning. That’s what happened in many games, UT2K4 was a good example of the standard filter being pointless because of this.
So it’s because of this that I say that custom content is great and everything but only if the official game already has an enormous backing by the community and isn’t dismissed based on wanting a few parameters slightly different. Custom content and filters only work if they’re implemented with the right reasons in mind, otherwise it’s just a rubber stamp.
[QUOTE=tokamak;411744]Blizzard shows that a rigid separation of custom and stock functions well. However, this is done with a different attitude. Custom games in Starcraft are weird as hell, they’re completely different takes on the game or just completely different games altogether. Blizzard also has a very strong quality control on their custom content. If your custom game doesn’t belong among the top 10 most popular games it has a very low chance to ever be played at all. The only chance is when Blizzard starts to meddle by featuring the games that interest them. So they both have a very strong top-down and bottom-up system to make sure custom content truly complements the stock content rather than overlaps with or makes up for weaknesses.
Keeping stock and custom separate like that works mainly because the stock game is solid, balanced and open to all types of players. The custom content can then be used for things that are truly different.
I suspect that there’s different motives going on here though. Custom content isn’t used for truly unique content, it’s there so people who want a slightly different alteration of the main game can get their way. Now I already said that doing that is a cop-out but in this context it’s bad for a different reason. If on both side of the filter similar games can be found then the filter starts to lose it’s meaning. That’s what happened in many games, UT2K4 was a good example of the standard filter being pointless because of this.
So it’s because of this that I say that custom content is great and everything but only if the official game already has an enormous backing by the community and isn’t dismissed based on wanting a few parameters slightly different. Custom content and filters only work if they’re implemented with the right reasons in mind, otherwise it’s just a rubber stamp.[/QUOTE]
Can you post this in a new thread? I don’t think it’s good to clutter this one up.
Just read this now, but I like what I see here SD!
Something like the founders club is perfect for someone like me, I like me some bragging rights 
I have one more idea!
How about a paid clan service? I think about something like http://et.trackbase.net/ or http://splatterladder.com/ but everything would be simply integrated with the Launcher. Players would be able to see some kind of players ranking for instance and clans ranking which would be calculated basing on clan members’ skill/ranking - for free. However, registering a clan would cost (I think that the price up to €10 could satisfy everyone). Players wouldn’t be able to set their clantag, it’d be automatically done when they are invited to one of the existing clans (it can work only if login = in-game name so people cannot “bypass” the system by just adding a prefix to their IGN). Newly registered clan would be able to hold, let’s say, 25 members. What about bigger clans? It’s simple! Next 25 slots would cost, let’s say 80% of the price of registering a clan. Of course, more member slots you pay for, more discount you get!
It’s just one simple example of what can people pay for in such a service but since I’m not any good in writing essays, I want to leave the field clear for you (naturally, if you do like the idea).
Offtopic:
I’d like to see much more funcionality in the Launcher, come on people, just take a look at the LoL’s one 
Yeah makes sense. Planetside 2 and WoT only have social functionality for the paying players.
If you do that, then don’t forget to add the ability for people to pool their ingame currency to keep paying the clan subscription.
Sounds awesome. Really happy to see you guys will have full control of the game. The idea of the “Founder’s Club” is interesting too, wouldn’t mind more info on that if available.
Locki, thx for sharing your ideas about making a new multiplayer PC shooter.
It is smart to acknowledge ones mistakes to learn from them.
Congratulations on being able to develop and publish your very own game. To use a cricket metaphor, you are still “not out”. Given this risk, it is astonishing that you still trust your instincts and follow your ideas on how a great PC multiplayer team-based shooter should be developed. You got guts and I thank you guys for your efforts to explore and test the Dirty Bomb core philosophy and mechanics, although there must be, as said, a lot of risks involved.
For me as a player, I am sure that challenge will always be there (i.e. to stay alive and to help your team win) but will Dirty Bomb always reward skills and tactics rather than something else? This is a key matter, as you stated yourself: “players should always understand why they won or lost” or, if I may add, why they lost a duel. In BRINK I was never certain if I lost because some other guys had managed to equip a better weapons because he or she was able to decipher the weapon select menu. I guess this is why asynchronous game mechanics (different characters and weapons depending on what team you are on) is not present in Dirty Bomb. I like it when games are easy to understand and when it is obvious what weapons are available to me and the enemy. It becomes a fair game, which, in turn, makes it more fun to play. Fun game = a sustainable community.
Thank you for opening up the pre-alpha. I cannot comprehend that you dared to let us in, in the pre-alpha. It is not even an alpha yet. Once again, it shows guts and a strong belief in doing the unorthodox things necessary to polish and perfect Dirty Bomb.
One of the best things you said was this often-quoted section : “The idea is that money will never buy a gameplay advantage in Dirty Bomb, and there will be no Pay-to-Win mechanics. We’ll ensure core classes, maps, and clan support will always be well-balanced, and free.” This is extremely important. In the future, when the game is gold and released in full to the public, I never want to feel that I lost a duel because someone had a weapon (or some other thing) that they obtain outside the game. You see, for me, being able to pay for things that can be used is per definition something outside the boundaries of the game. You understand what I mean?
You said that Dirty Bomb is “not a traditional free-to-play/pay-to-win game”. I am afraid you lsot me there. What is a traditional free-to-play/pay-to-win game? Do they enable players to buy gameplay advantages and/or do they have Pay-to-Win mechanics? Sorry for being such a noob, but I just have to ask these things. Why would anyone want to play such games? Simply because their friends play it? (And the friends have bought cool paraphernalia?) If this is the trend in modern game, and you are going against it, my hat is off to you, team Bromley. You step forward and deliver fours and sixes.
“players may be able to buy additional new characters”. You got to have a female medic. There will be so many players wanting that. It may be perceived as a gender stereotype, but I just feel that this game will be a killer, with tons of positive appraisal, and, consequently, lots and lots of players. What I am trying to say here is that there will be many players around the globe that want to be able to play as a female medic.
Loffy, currently on a conference in Sydney, Australia, hence all the cricket talk
Good to see you Loffy!
[QUOTE=Loffy;412241]What is a traditional free-to-play/pay-to-win game? Do they enable players to buy gameplay advantages and/or do they have Pay-to-Win mechanics?
[/QUOTE]
Yes, sadly there are a lot of games that offer these quick win advantages, but all they do is kill the experience for non-paying players. There are even examples of FPS games out there where you have to pay to take grenades into a match!
It’s an interesting question, the free part of it will obviously help draw in a lot of players, and aid word of mouth recruitment. With these greater pools of players I’d imagine there are some that would and do enjoy paying to have a massively more powerful gun, that makes it easier for them kill opponents and therefore feel better about themselves.
We do! Hit Ctrl + F2 (debug command) and you’ll be able to respawn as them.
Enjoy the cricket!
Dirty Bomb must provide a balanced playing field and a fair contest, challenging players, against or alongside real people. Players should only succeed as an individual, group of friends, or team, by competing in battles where skill and tactics alone determine the winners. Players should always understand why they won or lost, or by being part of a social community that shares knowledge, continually learn from other player’s skills, and achieve status and recognition for their own credible successes and contributions.
This is the critical part. Get this right and the rest of your business model can evolve to meet the demand. Until you get this part right, everything else seems too much like “putting the cart before the horse.” I’ve got my fingers crossed that this part will get done right.
Locki, I really like the model/philosophy for DB. This really has me excited for the game and believe the future is bright for DB. I love you guyz!
What I have seen so far is the game itself, which I like a lot.
I don’t know of any company who gets the stuff around an FPS right, measuring skill, providing a platform for a community, platform for clans to plan tactics, shoutcasted matches in a online tv show. And poor admins, having to deal with various problems, evil huge logfiles, evil players.
If a newbie can see how his skill is growing - thats rewarding, you guys can record matches - maybe if its to intensive to analyze a match while its running, then maybe have some deeper analyzing afterwards? Only to measure the skill, not affecting the outcome of the match.
Have to admit I did not play QW or BRINK more then an hour. But from what I read it has a lot of features which are missing in ET. So I might not be on the current level of information.
An idea to make money with F2P.
I once played with the idea of a payed ladder tournament where all the teams have to buy a certain amount of “lives” to enter the tournament. Every win gets you one or two lives from your opponent (depending on your relative position). When you are out of lives you are out of the tournament. The team with the most Lives when the tournament ends (duration just a few weeks) wins the tournament and gets all the glory and can cash in the lives. To get some money out of this you have to make profit on the Lives.
Ofcourse you can raise the stakes a lot (like with Poker) and then the profit will be bigger.
[QUOTE=GlobalWar;412921]An idea to make money with F2P.
I once played with the idea of a payed ladder tournament where all the teams have to buy a certain amount of “lives” to enter the tournament. Every win gets you one or two lives from your opponent (depending on your relative position). When you are out of lives you are out of the tournament. The team with the most Lives when the tournament ends (duration just a few weeks) wins the tournament and gets all the glory and can cash in the lives. To get some money out of this you have to make profit on the Lives.
Ofcourse you can raise the stakes a lot (like with Poker) and then the profit will be bigger.[/QUOTE]
I think Richard Branson was doing something like this?
You’ve all posted fantastic feedback to this thread that has really helped our ongoing internal discussions. I think you would all be surprised by how often you are each being quoted in Splash Damage’s Bored Room. Please don’t stop - please keep it up!
Now we really need Donnovan in on the testing. The idea of having his feedback quoted out loud in the board room is just delightful.
I want a chair with my nick name on it reserved in your Splash Damage’s Bored Room