What does the community think of the idea of having a monthly fee version of Gwent?

[Jezaboom2]

What does the community think of the idea of having a monthly fee version of Gwent?

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).​

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?​

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.​

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?​

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...​

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.​

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

 

[Kingoko]

Terrible idea, sry

 

[Draconifors]

Cannot say I like the sound of this. It sounds like an awful lot of work and managing, especially if it were to be introduced before the full release of the game.

Also, I believe it would inevitably lead to bad blood between those choosing to subscribe and those sticking to the free-to-play(-with-optional-transactions) model. Splitting the community like that would be very bad for the game, and by extension CDPR as well.
Even with the current system there are those who downright despise "pay-to-win" players, as well as those of the exact opposite opinion.


(I'm no expert in business or game development, so this is just my "uneducated", personal opinion.)

PS. Tbh I dislike the very idea of monthly/yearly fees on games, which is definitely affecting my opinion.

 

[CallMeHoot]

Definitely not.

 

[Rawls]

Yeah I've never been a big fan of subscriptions. It would also mess with the free-to-play model ... and lead many to accuse the game of being pay-to-win unless you had totally different player pools. Even if you did the separate pools, that would have its own HUGE logistical challenges. I didn't vote in the pole because I don't think it's a terrible idea. But I would say given where to game is currently ... it's has many more problems than benefits.

 

[Hellsmoke77]

Cannot say I like the sound of this. It sounds like an awful lot of work and managing, especially if it were to be introduced before the full release of the game.

Also, I believe it would inevitably lead to bad blood between those choosing to subscribe and those sticking to the free-to-play(-with-optional-transactions) model. Splitting the community like that would be very bad for the game, and by extension CDPR as well.
Even with the current system there are those who downright despise "pay-to-win" players, as well as those of the exact opposite opinion.


(I'm no expert in business or game development, so this is just my "uneducated", personal opinion.)

PS. Tbh I dislike the very idea of monthly/yearly fees on games, which is definitely affecting my opinion.

I am not a fan of pay to win either, I despise it but people keep paying and companies keep making games with this business model and this is one of them. How are kegs any different than the loot boxes in Battlefront 2? Simple answer..they are exactly the same. I feel dirty having paid the 25 dollars that I did to get some cards even more so when I got nothing but trash for my money.

I'm not sure what's good for business or not but one thing is sure, I broke my standards because I loved the Witcher 3 and gwent and thought "since this is free why not" but if I can't get a hold of cards even with money this customer will simply walk away and I'm sure I'm not alone.

It's either buy 500 kegs at a ridiculous price or suffer with a noob deck and that's not what I consider fun so SOMETHING has to be done. The prices are too high and the rewards are way too low, if the next update doesn't blow me away and surprise me I'm finding another game to spend my time and money on. This is not some rage threat or anything I love this game and I'm trying to give feedback because I want to be able to play it but not like this.

I'm not spending hundreds on cards.

 

[Rawls]

Simple answer..they are exactly the same.

Except you don't pay $59.99 up front for GWENT. And you don't need to pay to get kegs. You can get everything in GWENT just from playing. I was a free to play player for over a year (premium card weekend got me ... SO pretty). It doesn't take much time to build a decent deck.

 

[Hellsmoke77]

Except you don't pay $59.99 up front for GWENT. And you don't need to pay to get kegs. You can get everything in GWENT just from playing. I was a free to play player for over a year (premium card weekend got me ... SO pretty). It doesn't take much time to build a decent deck.

You are correct it's free to start and I've been playing for a year myself off and on and I got all the monster cards thinking "they gotta balance em out at some point right" turns out no, they are not going to balance them out. They are getting nerfed patch by patch instead. Now I'm fed up with it and so I'm trying to set up in a new faction. That's what "got me".

To do so I got the starter pack and 20 bucks worth of kegs, that's $25.00 totals so far. I got a hand full of junk and scrapped enough to make 1 gold I wanted along with a few bronze cards so I can even build the deck. Looking at what I got $59.99 isn't nowhere near enough to complete my deck, if it were I'd gladly pay it so what now? Due to massive balance issues people with complete decks are giving up so what am I supposed to do with my half complete deck?

Honestly I'm just bored now because 4-5 crates full of doubles a day isn't doing a thing for my deck. Keep in mind this is just a meta deck I chose to make in order to grind, this isn't leaving me room to try anything new or be creative.

I want what's best for this game because I love it and I'm not easily amused however when I get hooked on a game I'm hooked and if I'm short of putting it down I know many new players already have. There is much room for improvement here and I'm just giving feedback. When people can't advance and get cards they lose interest.

 

[Makhil]

The longer the argumenation it needs, the worst is the idea

 

[Ic3Purple]

Yeah I've never been a big fan of subscriptions. It would also mess with the free-to-play model ... and lead many to accuse the game of being pay-to-win unless you had totally different player pools. Even if you did the separate pools, that would have its own HUGE logistical challenges. I didn't vote in the pole because I don't think it's a terrible idea. But I would say given where to game is currently ... it's has many more problems than benefits.

In my opinion, a 1 time purchase (buy to play) is always the best from a player stand point of view. If I like the game, I buy it. Simple. But from a commercial point of view, the FREE TO PLAY (p2w) model is much more profitable (Electronic Arts knows it better than most). You could still leave the PREMIUM cards on the shop, sicne they won't affect the game progression, and get still some extra bucks out of the game.

BUT you don't milk your customers the most you can with this crap RNG model.

So? Is GWENT going to OPTIMISE FOR QUALITY OR PROFIT?

The way I see it, for now, it is the second.

 

[4RM3D]

How are kegs any different than the loot boxes in Battlefront 2? Simple answer..they are exactly the same.

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.

But from a commercial point of view, the FREE TO PLAY (p2w) model is much more profitable (Electronic Arts knows it better than most).

CDPR is not EA and Booster packs are not loot boxes. Let's take a look at some of the important differences.

- Gwent is a F2P game, Battlefront is not; you have to pay a triple A price for it on top of it having loot boxes.
- CDPR gives free content (Witcher) and huge expansions for little money, while EA actively tries to extract as much money from your wallet and they can.
- Booster packs predate loot boxes and even the internet itself. Booster packs are inherent in the CCG genre, with the only alternative being a Living Card Game. As such, it's the only genre I will forgive for having a buyable advantage.
- Gwent is one of the most generous F2P CCG games out there.

And while on the subject of P2W. Let me copy-paste my other post:

Gwent is a Free To Play Online Collectible Card Game (F2P CCG). As with (almost) every collectible card game, online or otherwise, one of the goals is to collect cards. You do this by buying booster packs. The F2P element is that you can get these booster packs when spending time instead of money. The fact that you can buy boosters and as such buy an advantage means the game is pay to win (P2W) in the strictest sense. However, it's important to note that this applies to the whole F2P CCG genre. So, it's pointless to argue whether or not Gwent is P2W. Instead, you should compare the game with other CCG and ask how generous Gwent is. The conclusion is that Gwent is one of the most generous F2P CCG.

As for gaining cards, a new account can almost instantly create a competitive (Tier 1) deck for FREE.

There are only three simple things you need to do:
1. Get level 3 to unlock milling (which is easy) and mill all unused cards.
2. Beat the challenges to get the leaders (still easy).
3. Copy a netdeck from the internet (also easy).

I wouldn't recommend the above, but it's possible nonetheless.

 

[Jezaboom2]

Except you don't pay $59.99 up front for GWENT. And you don't need to pay to get kegs. You can get everything in GWENT just from playing. I was a free to play player for over a year (premium card weekend got me ... SO pretty). It doesn't take much time to build a decent deck.

​

Correct you don't have to pay anything upfront, and if a person is willing to do a lot of grinding over a year, then maybe they will be able to build a decent deck... its been calculated in another thread that a person needs 799 kegs to get all the cards. In Australia a x60 keg pack costs AUD$97.95... thus one would have to spend around $1300 to $1400 to get all the cards. ​

WOW! That's a lot for a game which is promoted as being FREE TO PLAY. Perhaps CDPR made a spelling mistake as FEE TO PLAY sounds more appropriate.​

In addition CDPR announced that for the single player campaign... Thronebreaker, you will have to pay for that. They also announced that with Thronebreaker, there will be 20 unique cards given to you which you can use in Gwent. ​

So... as you have to buy Thronebreaker... to get the 20 unique cards, CDPR is not forcing people to pay, but as a cross promotion incentive which do you think is more likely... That the unique cards will be crap? Or that they will be OP (and hence potentially meta)?​

If it's the first option, then only people interested in actually playing the single player campaign will buy it, but if its the later... then no amount of grinding will help you out unless one is willing to pay for it.​

​

To do so I got the starter pack and 20 bucks worth of kegs, that's $25.00 totals so far. I got a hand full of junk and scrapped enough to make 1 gold I wanted along with a few bronze cards so I can even build the deck. Looking at what I got $59.99 isn't nowhere near enough to complete my deck, if it were I'd gladly pay it so what now? Due to massive balance issues people with complete decks are giving up so what am I supposed to do with my half complete deck?

Honestly I'm just bored now because 4-5 crates full of doubles a day isn't doing a thing for my deck. Keep in mind this is just a meta deck I chose to make in order to grind, this isn't leaving me room to try anything new or be creative.

Well if you buy a 60 keg pack for a AUD$100 I can promise you will have a lot more doubles! However, one can do some sums with this amount... on average the mill value of a keg is around 50 scraps, thus $100 would get you around 3000 scraps, which works out to be about a dollar per 30 scraps.

Common cards costs 30 scraps to create... realistically you wouldn't need to craft any, but if you did each one costs about a dollar.
Rares are 80 scraps to create... chances are you would need to craft a fair few of these... each one would effectively cost around $2.60 each
Epics are 200 scraps to create... that works out to be around $6.70 each
Legendaries are 800... which works out to be around $26.70 each

to create a new deck, from scratch... 4 x gold or about $107, 6 x silver is about $40, and lets pretend that the rest of the deck didn't use rares, but only commons (which you already have)... all up just under $150 to build a single deck from scratch.

 

[Ic3Purple]

As for gaining cards, a new account can almost instantly create a competitive (Tier 1) deck for FREE.

When you say new account, you omit some important details. A new account, intended as new player in the game. And that is somebody who has no idea YET of what a competitive deck is, unless he/she spent/dedicated/invested a certain amount of time (not small to figure out it).

I begun to play GWENT few days before Midwinter update. First, I was forced to craft 1 of the leaders I needed for the deck I decided to invest, which turned out to be a bad investment that time. And soon I realized that in the game, there were so many more advanced decks compared to the one I got (as you say competitive) just buy completing the challenges and mini quest.

That statement doesn't get close not even an inch to the reality. If you wanna play competitive, after 2 years the game is OUT, you gotta open your wallet, or you give up your real life for some weeks. But don't tell me that the starting decks are competitive, that's an insult to my intelligence.

I'm currently R20, but i thrown 60+ bucks to play "competitive", plus so many hours of studying the game and cards. And this is exactly what I call, pay to win.

 

[OG.laloquaint]

Some people just want to get cards without putting in the effort to actually get them. That's just ridiculous. "Free to Play" doesn't mean you'll immediately get every card in the game. It's not guaranteed that you'll get every card even after opening 800 kegs. I don't get you Jezaboom2 , you're saying it's really expensive for you to build one deck but you're willing to pay for a subscription to not even actually own the cards? It's a terrible idea, man. I would never pay for something that I would not own myself. This is why buying kegs is ultimately better because you're actually getting something.

 

[Hellsmoke77]

This is my first "CCG" and I'm only here because I fell in love with the Witcher so I don't know how generous CDPR is compared to others but as a normal gamer $150 dollars for a deck sounds ridiculous. Imagine I paid that for a dwarf deck that is about to be gutted in the next update, I'd be spitting fire.

I'll keep playing for free and if boredom gets me because I can't be creative and build decks then so be it I'll move on. As much as I love the game this price is too high for my taste and when I think about how much trouble they have balancing the game even more so. This pretty much tells me even if I was to spend that $150 my deck could be made as useless as the monster deck I invested in.

I don't want to compare CDPR to EA as that is an insult they don't deserve but I can't support these prices either. Put scraps up for sale at reasonable prices so we can build what we want and I'll gladly invest. If there's a price on the Thronebreaker update and I like the cards I'll get that as well but that's as far as I'm going.

 

[4RM3D]

When you say new account, you omit some important details. A new account, intended as new player in the game. And that is somebody who has no idea YET of what a competitive deck is, unless he/she spent/dedicated/invested a certain amount of time (not small to figure out it).
[...]
That statement doesn't get close not even an inch to the reality. If you wanna play competitive, after 2 years the game is OUT, you gotta open your wallet, or you give up your real life for some weeks. But don't tell me that the starting decks are competitive, that's an insult to my intelligence.

I'm currently R20, but i thrown 60+ bucks to play "competitive", plus so many hours of studying the game and cards. And this is exactly what I call, pay to win.

Of everything I've said, you are going to focus on that one thing. Well, okay. It's theoretically possible to create a competitive deck almost from the start. Not by using the starter decks. No, I've said you can mill all but one faction and create a better deck. The point being that F2P players can get a competitive deck pretty quickly when compared to other CCG. Of course that doesn't compensate for the lack of skill, but neither does buying a whole deck. Thus, my original point still stands in favor of the game being generous for F2P in terms of money investment. Regardless, like I've said in my closing statement, I wouldn't recommend going this route, although it's still possible. So, I disagree with the statement that "If you wanna play competitive, after 2 years the game is OUT, you gotta open your wallet". A deck in Gwent is capped because of the silver and gold limit, unlike in many other CCG. Once you have a competitive and play the dailies as well as reaching rank 18, you'll get enough kegs to transition into another deck next season. In the end, you either have to spend time, money or a combination of both, if you want to advance. To each their own.

 

[Ic3Purple]

Of everything I've said, you are going to focus on that one thing.

Yes, because, it is exactly where the topic is focused on. How the game is commercialized. it is a very bad moment for endorsing the RNG model shop, today! You are well aware of what I'm talking about, I assume.

And to be fair, I never said that CDPR is greedy by itself. But again, defending a sales model that everybody (if not the majority of players) for at at least hates, isn't too wise. And anyway, if the things has always been in a certain way, this doesn't imply that also today it should stay the same. The greatest companies succeed because of innovation and thinking out of the box, not for being conservative on certain standards or "has always been".

However, I don't work for CDPR, neither for competitors, I leave the topic, I've dedicated already enough of my precious time to the cause. I hope the things will turn out for the best of the community in the future, not just for their investors.

 

[hydra66]

To be fair, a $5.99 subscription fee does remove a lot of the initial grind from the game and is more feasible to a number of people compared to the current business model. It becomes more attractive the larger the card pool is (reducing barrier to entry) and was considered for MTGO and a number of previous MMOs.

That said, it is a different business model with its own pros and cons. It has issues with recruiting people who may not feel there is value if they only play for a few hrs each month. Also player drop off rate will be higher if CDPR can't generate new content at a far quicker rate than current. Splitting the community is a no-no (lack of players drives more people away from the game in a vicious cycle). However, I'd have no qualms about people having access to cards in this this way.

Bear in mind, even with free to play dailies, I'm getting enough in terms of rewards for a completely new deck every 3-4 weeks. You cant go completely subscription base without losing players to play against on ladder and casual.

There's a number of ways to monetise a game. F2P is considered one of the most profitable- there's a reason that subbsciption based models have become less prominent over the years. Without the figures in front of you, the discussion of subscriptions cant go very much further.

 

[Therealmorkvarg]

Hahaha subscription? That would be my que to quit! Please keep it as is, maybe add a keg worth 150/200 ore for higher rarity chance but thats it, :hai:

 

[Rayon_34_]

Had to vote No... You should never pit free base and sub base. That will destroy fan loyalty. No matter the intentions, that will be the result.

V/R
Rayon 34