unlock awards option

[antixeele]

First off, thank you Fenikso! And I think chriss angel is a jack a$$.

Looking at the market, I see that over 10,000 people have downloaded star traders elite. 4,303 took the time to write a review and 3,410 people gave it five stars. It ranks a 4.7 out of five which is really impressive considering its been on the market for some time. What this tells me is that in its current and established format star traders is widely successful and has recieved excellent reception as the vast majority of its reviews are VERY positive. Obviously Cory is doing something right!

Whats really special about trese brothers's games is that they are dedicated to the game and the people who play the game. I see no evidence that they are attempting to "Entice players to pay to play" or that one of their GOALS is "gain[ing] as large a following of paying customers as possible". As you once pointed out, they are "practically giving away a highly developed game world". If the point was making money, dont you think there would be adds? As there are not, do you see that the Purpose of this game is NOT simply making a buck?

I invite you to read the 'About Us' section on the trese brothers website www.tresebrothers.com/blog/about/


I see that you are put off by Perma-Death. I would imagine the practice modes of Basic and Normal are there to ease the transition into more challenging modes containing Perma-Death. Each level of difficulty is essentially training for the next difficulty level. I observe that Corey places a high priority on maintaining a smooth progression of the learning curve between levels. Also lower difficulty levels appear to be designed so higher level unlocks are NOT NECESSARY for success at that difficulty. Conversly, impossible would be next to impossible without escape shuttle.

And about the rewards... There are higher difficulty challenges which unlock in-game rewards. A big part of the game its tackling these challenges and learning how to complete them, unlocking additional features as the reward for completion. Some of these challenges ARE difficult, hence they are... Challenges. If you enable all rewards from the begining you essentially rob all challenges of their reward for completion. For me this would detract a great deal from my enjoyment of the game, because completing challenges is a big part of my playstyle! I would respectfully like to point out that my playstyle being different than yours, even if its a more involved playstyle DOES NOT make me a more 'elite' or 'Hardcore' player than you. If it did, you could just as easily be concidered a "Hardcore" or "Elitist" Basic Player!

In closing I would like to say:

If you accept the challenge, you may find the challenge to be just as rewarding as the reward. And it will certainly be more memorable.

[ab357]

10,000 paying players versus 400,000 that didn't buy it. I do recall a 399,000 downloads thread. I'm willing to bet if the game was set up more along traditional modes, ie choosing what level to play, earning the rights to purchase "ships of honor" via a certain amount of exp and the cash to pay for it, there would be more than 100,000 paying players.

[taatuu25]

Now, its normal to only 1 of every 50 to buy it, because most of people just dont want to give off ANY money on mobile games.

Also how can you be so sure that making a 'cheat' button would boost the sales? I think it would break a core element of the game, and thereforce make the game boring fasterly, giving it worse reviews, and dumping reviews down.

-- which CANNOT boost sales.

--- i believe you can someday say that normal is a cakewalk and get to the higher difficulties, where the fun really starts. I think you would eventually get bored to just mindlessly PWNing on basic, even with all the better unlocks. So getting an unlock all option wouldnt really fix the game for you.
Also without permadeath i think that even the hardest levels would become boring for eveeyone who wants challenge (not meaning hardcore gamers, but i think that majority of people enjoy a challenge more than just PWNing)

[antixeele]

You really think you can speculate with any accuracy as to the motivations of 400,000 people?

You can "purchase" ships of honor. You do so by completing the challenge. Its really not as uncommon as you seem to think it is, to have unlocks based on actual ACHIEVEMENT rather than being for sale. Thats another thing, why should you be able to BUY hard mode ACHIEVEMENTS, with BASIC MODE currency?

There are more people playing elite than you think. Remember, some people have to use other markets, such as amazon. I myself was using a bootleg apk of elite until I gained the means to purchase the game legitamately.

[Fenikso]

Jan 25, 2012 10:23:23 GMT -5 taatuu25 said:

I havent seen even one market review out of the hundred i have seen (to clear, i managed to access the english ones)to complain about perma-death.

Actually, I have seen one .

[antixeele]

Yes. Perma death seems to one of the top complaints. But like the other top complaint of "needs better graphics", these people completely miss the point. Perma death is as much a part of the game as the graphics interface!

Now if there was something wrong with the perma death system and it was, say, letting people live, then there would be something to complain about!

Death waits for no man...

[khhawkes]

I would have to agree with the OP. It would be rather nice to have the feature available for the paying customer to choose if he wishes to use it or not. I do not need all of you telling me what I should want or do in a game I bought for my entertainment.

[ab357]

A cheat button would be using code the designer didn't put in.

It seems like this board has some living in alternative universes. Billions have been made with the model of multiple levels, user choice, progressively harder levels, rewards/more weapon or ship options, and when you fail a level being able to either start back where you left off or back at the level you couldn't complete.

It isn't like a couple people asking for some new concept. Look how many have came to this forum and were mocked into leaving for asking why is this game DIFFERENT from a core component of like games? Not being killed permanently and forced to start over without your exp or weapons/ships options you have already owned.

When did the business model for selling games stop being make it something the most people want to buy?

Is this about ideology or enticing more people to buy and support it.

Millions are paying anywhere from $10 to $70 bucks a game for rpg and spacer type games that follow the traditional model.

Since when are games designed to reward successful play only with "what you need"? Isn't the idea if you play up to a point you can CHOOSE the more weapons and ships? Because you WANT to purchase them? Isn't that the point of gaining exp and money? To buy what you want.

What kind of game maker penalizes paying customers by only "allowing" them to earn the right to purchase certain weapons or ships if they play on the level the developer wants them to?

And I have seen even regulars here make similar requests. Cory has referenced how many threads there are where he has addressed these questions. If nothing else, it says a lot of people have asked the same questions.

The only reason I even bothered to post about it again because some clown mentioned calling the WAaabulance or something.

Stick to your concrete ideas and you're loosing money. Plain and simple. But you definitely have that right if that's the way you prefer.

However expect people to respond when someone makes a derogatory reference such as WAAaabulance.

[blackgauntlet]

Jan 25, 2012 17:08:41 GMT -5 antixeele said:

Death waits for no man...

Yes it does.

[antixeele]

Why are you comparing apples to oranges? This game is different than SOME games in SOME ways and its like SOME games in SOME ways.

An aspect of a game being Different , or unfamiliar, is not in and of itself a negative. Components of a game should be evaluated based on their effectiveness within the framework of the game itself. Perma-death is a core component of the game! I ask that you give it a closer look before simply dismissing it as Bad.

Have you heard of the Roguelike genra? Roguelike is a better definition of star traders than simply "spacer RPG". And it IS a "traditional" model!
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roguelike

Also from wikipedia:"The most basic type of cheat code is one created by the game designers and hidden within the video game itself, that will cause any type of uncommon effect that is not part of the usual game mechanics." Such as enabling rewards before they are unlocked??
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheating_in_video_games

You seem to think there is only one effective model for desiging successful games. Notice I said designing, not selling. Your proposed model for successful game design appears to incorporate salability as a qualifier for inclusion of game components. This is the model that gave us farmville. Every part of farmville is designed to "intice players to pay to play". If you define success as making as much money as possible, you could even concider farmville a "success"! Some however, like myself concider this type of "success" more like exploitation.

Imagine for a moment that the trese brothers goal in creating games is NOT "to sell as many units as possible". What then could be their motavation? Maybe they are dedicated to bringing high-Quality low price-point games to the market. Maby they care more about the game itself, and the players. Maybe they are more focused on quality than short term financial gain, and understand that by being thus focused they will build a foundation for even greater success.

When the copyright runs out, when the platform becomes obsolete, will people still play star traders simply because its a great game? Is the purpose of chess to sell chessboards?

The WAAaambulance is a joke. The calling of the WAAaambulance is a test of vital Humour. Judging by your response, id say its a 911 WAAaambulace Emergency!

[domush]

To put this entire thread into an analogy of Google Navigation..

User: "I want to be able to have choices of which route I take. I don't like the default route"
Google: "We allow choices, but first you have to drive across country within 12 hours without missing a single turn"
User: "What?! Why?"
Google: "It's a challenge. It's fun"
User: "I don't have time to drive across country, nor do I want to"
Google: "Then we won't let you choose the other routes"
User: "What does it matter if I drive across country or not when it comes to choosing one of the other routes?"
Google: "It proves you are hardcore, and we only let hardcore drivers make choices"
User: "But I don't like the default route, and the optional route is more to my liking"
Google: "Too bad. Drive across country or we won't let you pick a different route."
User: "Your default route is too curvy, and I just want a straight shot"
Google: "No, it is enjoyable, curves are fun."
User: "I know what I enjoy, and it isn't your default route or curves"
Google: "10,000 users drove the default route, so that makes it the enjoyable route. If you don't enjoy it, you are driving it incorrectly"
User: "There is no 'correct' way to drive. I enjoy driving the way I enjoy driving."
Google: "If you don't drive our way, you will never enjoy yourself and miss the entire point of driving"
User: <gives up and moves on to another navigation software>
Google: "Good! We don't need any idiot drivers picking what makes them happy! We know best!"


It should be noted, this isn't how Google responds to their customers. Google does, in fact, allow users to choose what makes them happy, even if it does mean it isn't the most optimal route in their eyes.

The next analogy I'll let you guess what it represents:

User: "Oh, shoot! I missed my exit"
Google: "Go back home and we'll start over"
User: "But I'm half way there already!"
Google: "If you want to use the highway route, we disable Back-on-Track functionality"
User: "You're kidding me, right?"
Google: "This way is more fun"
User: "Wasting hours of my day driving back from my house again isn't fun"
Google: "Yes it is"
User: "Why can't you give me the option to use the highway AND use Back-on-Track?"
Google: "Because hardcore drivers use highways, and they hate Back-on-Track"
User: "Well, I like highways and I'm not hardcore"
Google: "If you have a problem with it, don't use navigation"

[alienfodder]

Problem with analogies is they NEVER produce an accurate comparison.
I can see the points both sides are making, but to me the demand of "I paid $1.99 so I deserve everything the game has to offer" is reasonable on the surface. Dig a bit deeper though and the contrasting arguments gain merit; why do you demand the awards when you don't actually need them? The achievements are a method of preparing players for harder levels both with play-time and the unlocked award.
I used to play a MMORPG called Ultima Online. The official EA world started out as somewhere that represented an approximation of real life - sometimes it wasn't fair. You could work hard for weeks to save up enough for a small house and during your hunt for a suitable location have the deed stolen off you. You could take one step out of town and be ambushed by a dozen PKs. Many players bemoaned this state of affairs and EA nerfed the game with a land named Trammel where you couldn't PvP. It was a utopia of pointlessness. Sure, a lot of players loved it, but not the players who actually played the game - just the ones who wanted the game to be a graphical chatroom.

[Cory Trese]

Also these analogies seem to point towards this being some type of evil choice I make and continue to make.

I have made mistakes, technical ones. SD Access, Permissions, Cryptography Keys, one way ship upgrade structures, overly simple difficulty data segments.

I would love to fix these issues. The problem is not that we do not see the weaknesses in the game.

We are not EA. We are just two brothers making games we enjoy. We put them on the market for $1.99 because it's fun to have other people play them. We don't do it to spite you and we don't do it because we think we know everything or have some great super-game.

Some of the things we don't change because we simply cannot change them for technical, security, device, legal or resource reasons.

[sly]

Maybe you should give everybody a thing that lets them choose to unlock ONE award because at this point in time I can not get this one award and really just want it to be over.

[Cory Trese]

Mar 2, 2012 20:38:59 GMT -5 sly said:

Maybe you should give everybody a thing that lets them choose to unlock ONE award because at this point in time I can not get this one award and really just want it to be over.

Maybe we should sell that for $.99

muhahahahaha