What does the community think of the idea of having a monthly fee version of Gwent?
I am not referring to the Living Card Game example, however I will expand on this part of our dialogue as it touches upon the subsequent posts below...
CDPR has many options available to itself as to how it ultimately chooses to monetise Gwent. For example their temporary release of their PTR version of Gwent clearly demonstrates that they are more than capable if they decided to explore the option to release a subscription based version of the game, a version which has a full library of all available cards. This subscription based model could charge players maybe somewhere between $10 to $20 per month, or maybe perhaps something like $2 a day or $5 a week for casual mode.
This subscription version could be set up to run parallel with the free to play version. It would be important to draw the distinction (just like the current PTR version) that progress between the different versions is not transferable to the other. Perhaps there could be 1 exception at the very start... whereby people who have paid real money in the free2play version are offered a transfer credit to the subscription service (perhaps the fine print might require a complete transfer of their account).
There is no reason why CDPR couldn't promote 2 versions of the game, they would have to think it through a little bit for their esport tournaments... as the 2 versions would be running in parallel. My understanding is that currently Xbox players cant play matches against PS4 players, I believe this limitation is due more to current technical constraints. Never-the-less with regards to qualifiers for their esport series, I believe it would be important for matches between the 2 versions to be firewalled... ie both versions would have their own separate ranking ladders, otherwise the subscription players would have a huge advantage.
From this perspective CDPR could run separate tournaments, or could even combine them, whereby places for the tournaments could be filled half and half from each version of the game (and perhaps so as to create a level playing field, for the actual tournaments have an open card library for all competitors).
The advantage of having 2 parallel versions of Gwent is that a subscription based version (if it didn't have too high a monthly cost) would appeal immensely to:
And as everyone would have access to the same cards, it would allow potentially a lot more diversity in decks as people would be free to experiment without facing the constraints of what their limited collection actually has. At the same time for those that wish to play the free2play version, that option would still be available to them as well. Its also quite possible that a certain percentage of the player base would play both versions as well... as it is quite probable that the different versions although having access to the same cards... with the different constraints... could quite easily end up having different metas.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SELECT YOUR RESPONSE IN THE POLL BELOW
In essence I am asking CDPR to consider releasing a paid subscription stand alone version of Gwent. The subscription would be a monthly fee to access the entire library of cards. Whilst at the same time CDPR would still have their free2play version, both versions would use the same identical cards, and both versions would have their own separate ranking boards. This nucleus of this discussion originally started in another thread, to give the topic true justice (and to prevent it from derailing the other thread) it deserves its own thread (beneath the following quotes I have expanded on this topic of discussion).
Jezaboom2;n10398312 said:At the end of the day as there are so many games out there 3 key questions gamers will often ask are...Am I getting value for money?How engaging and enjoyable is the game?How time consuming will it be?
4RM3D;n10398422 said:There are too many games out there and too little time (and/or money). The questions you are asking are good, but still does not cover the full extend of ones choices. Gwent can be played in many different ways. For most players, I guess it's just a daily routine to kill an hour or two. It's different from an immersive single player game like the Witcher 3. Everyone has their preferences and reasons for playing certain games in certain ways. It's an interesting topic, but it goes beyond the scope of this thread.
Jezaboom2;n10398312 said:Gwent has the potential to be a truly amazing game and perhaps to realise its true potential, CDPR might have to make some bold decisions about the model they ultimately choose to monetise it. For example do you know if CDPR has ever considered making Gwent into a monthly subscription (with an open card library) instead of being micro transaction based?
4RM3D;n10398422 said:I don't know, but it's not really relevant anymore, anyway. CDPR went on a different path and it's too late to turn around, if that actually would have been a good idea to begin with, which is debatable. FYI, subscription based is a horrible idea, but let's assume you were talking about a Living Card Game, instead.
I am not referring to the Living Card Game example, however I will expand on this part of our dialogue as it touches upon the subsequent posts below...
Hellsmoke77;n10398832 said:I am the type of person who gets really into a game and plays the hell out of it, I study everything. I'm a huge fan of the Whicher and love gwent in general. My main goal is to get my hands on as many cards as I can so I can spend hours building decks trying to come up with new ideas. That said I need cards to do so. I don't care about being "the best", I don't care about titles or borders even though some of them look really cool like the monster one I just got. I like gwent so much that I even paid for kegs because again I love the Witcher and CDPR for making the effort to really make a great game. I respect that so I don't mind spending money on them.
What does MMR do for me? It gets me kegs. If I reach rank 20 I get 4 or 5 more kegs plus one more at the end of the month. The higher I get the more kegs I get and the more I can do what I like to do which is build decks and try out new stuff. I believe the reason most average players go idle in a two month season is because they can't advance and aren't earning anything, at least that was the case for me. I simply stop playing and watch videos instead of playing because there's no way for me to advance.
Now I pulled out cash and come to find out that this method gets me very little to nothing and although I'm ready to throw 20 or so a month at this game NO GAME is worth me throwing 200 or 300 dollars at it which by the looks of it is what it would take and even then I'd get mostly cards I don't even want from factions I don't like.
I know what's good for me and and have too much pride to throw that much money at digital cards, it just isn't going to happen. The rewards slowed down and so did the fun for me. The slower MMR is part of what slows down the rewards.
If they would sell scraps...I'd be tempted to buy 100 dollars worth or so to get what I want. As is they are trying to play on the gambling addiction part of people which is exactly why Battlefront 2 is causing politicians to look at gaming as a whole.
They really should rethink how they are going about all of this, even for money you simply can't get ahead.
Ic3Purple;n10398952 said:I personally despise every Video Game Company that takes advantage of a very debatable profit model, like RNG boxes. In particular those that SELL in-game items that goes beyond cosmetics and sort of.
By one side, I can't that much blame CDPR for adopting this system (curse you EA), after all, so many other companies are taking advantage of it, why shouldn't CDPR too? Yes, why not, many do it! But in this way, you are trading your credibility in front of all gaming community. I did put CDPR on Tier 1 game developer beside colossus like Blizzard with the Wthicher trilogy, but now?
I mean, come guys, CDPR ins't "HELLO GAMES" that started their venture on Kickstarter or Patreon the past year, but a well consolidated studio in about a deacade. Not all alibis are justified.
The fact that the game gets money while in beta (and testers gets cheap candies), tells it long way. High profit with minimum investment.
But what bothers me the most, is seeing investment spent to advertising tournaments and sort of on a unfinished product? Really? Well... Some may find it cool, I find it very controversial and makes me quite doubtful. Trust level went pretty down while seeing all of this. From the stars to clouds.
CDPR has many options available to itself as to how it ultimately chooses to monetise Gwent. For example their temporary release of their PTR version of Gwent clearly demonstrates that they are more than capable if they decided to explore the option to release a subscription based version of the game, a version which has a full library of all available cards. This subscription based model could charge players maybe somewhere between $10 to $20 per month, or maybe perhaps something like $2 a day or $5 a week for casual mode.
This subscription version could be set up to run parallel with the free to play version. It would be important to draw the distinction (just like the current PTR version) that progress between the different versions is not transferable to the other. Perhaps there could be 1 exception at the very start... whereby people who have paid real money in the free2play version are offered a transfer credit to the subscription service (perhaps the fine print might require a complete transfer of their account).
There is no reason why CDPR couldn't promote 2 versions of the game, they would have to think it through a little bit for their esport tournaments... as the 2 versions would be running in parallel. My understanding is that currently Xbox players cant play matches against PS4 players, I believe this limitation is due more to current technical constraints. Never-the-less with regards to qualifiers for their esport series, I believe it would be important for matches between the 2 versions to be firewalled... ie both versions would have their own separate ranking ladders, otherwise the subscription players would have a huge advantage.
From this perspective CDPR could run separate tournaments, or could even combine them, whereby places for the tournaments could be filled half and half from each version of the game (and perhaps so as to create a level playing field, for the actual tournaments have an open card library for all competitors).
The advantage of having 2 parallel versions of Gwent is that a subscription based version (if it didn't have too high a monthly cost) would appeal immensely to:
casual players,
to players who are ethically opposed to a RNG / loot box model of gaming,
to players who want to truly experiment with different decks,
to players who don't wish to outlay literally hundreds of dollars all at once to build a collection,
to players who are time poor and don't want to grind,
etc, etc, etc
And as everyone would have access to the same cards, it would allow potentially a lot more diversity in decks as people would be free to experiment without facing the constraints of what their limited collection actually has. At the same time for those that wish to play the free2play version, that option would still be available to them as well. Its also quite possible that a certain percentage of the player base would play both versions as well... as it is quite probable that the different versions although having access to the same cards... with the different constraints... could quite easily end up having different metas.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SELECT YOUR RESPONSE IN THE POLL BELOW
Last edited: