Are People Here Really Ok With This Sort of Thing?

Then there is nothing wrong with using the free horse, because the author has no intention of trying to get hired by Portalarium. But now he has a horse in SOTA that he can put in his portfolio and say to someone else hire me because the biggest crowdfunded RPG thought my work was good enough to include in their game. That may not even be why he gives it away for free, maybe he just wants to increase his download count so that the customer that has to pay per his license terms finds it on the store because it was a popular asset. You can spin this in circles however you want to, bottom line is the artist is free to do what they want with their art.

To bring it back on topic your original mantra was the selling price far exceeds the price needed to prepare the asset in the game (or the art pipeline is inefficient if they have to charge that price), despite Portalarium has long made clear that the decorations store is used for fundraising for the entire game, and not for funding only assets.

What it should be about is does the owners of POT that are into the game for $$K think a $50 horse for their town square is worth further game funding. If the answer is no Portalarium still did not waste time bringing it into the game, because they already used it as a scene asset. Even if it was a store asset only that nobody buys, even that is useful if they take that as feedback to offer something town owners do want to buy.

 

Ignoring is not the best way to deal with the topic.
I want unique Art for SotA and not generic 08/15 Unity Asset store stuff.

 

Yeah, people taking what you are giving away for free is always a big draw for hiring managers. At the very least it suggests they can pay you less than other candidates.

 

Technically on topic if the squirrel pet offered a few months back came from the Unity store!

 

Then why did you fund the game when RG made it clear from the beginning they chose Unity as their engine because of the Asset store? Do you really prefer they spend crowdfunded money making 2000 unique housing items like ESO did? Even ESO cheaped out all the Thieves Guild treasures are inventory only items that are not 3D assets, they cannot be put in a house. The Asset store is what is enabling Portalarium to make an MMO for a tenth or even hundredth of what doing everything in-house takes.

 

I don't have a problem with a little cookie-cutter models that are available as something interesting in-game. If the advertisement read, "Check out this awesome horse statue you can get THAT WE MADE FROM SCRATCH." then I'd probably be insulted. But, it doesn't say that. And I have no way to add the horse model as a statue into my copy of SotA. So, really, what's there to be mad about?

 

And boy does it look it. This horse statue in particular isn't an issue, but there is so much random stuff that with the general lack of art direction, most "decorated" buildings would make a 90s Applebee's look tasteful.

 

I absolutely agree with this. It is also why I cringe whenever I see Morrowind Sound and Graphics Overhaul, because all those independent authors do not make the game look better in hi-rez, because they veered from the original art style in different ways.

ESO has a consistent art style that somehow managed Skyrim the province to not look like Skyrim the game.

At least ESO has enough sense to instance fence the yard sale so that player aesthetics are not ruining the aesthetics of the game. Doing that in SOTA would go a long way to cutting down the immersion breaking yards, even though you would have misfit art SOTA scenes . Instance does not need to mean sharing your deed with other people, it could have been instanced just like your own private basement is. And for POT the entire instance of the town is up to the mayor to decorate as they want, if you do not like it leave, as there is no story there that forces you to go.

But the reality is that without the Asset store there would be no SOTA, so you have to suffer inconsistent art. It is just magnified by the lack of private instances.

 

What he said.

 

Using the Asset store is not the same as shopping for assets with an eye to sell them in the addon store. If they took that horse statue and turned it into an option for a sculpting skill, no one would bat an eye, it's turning the Asset store into a profit center that rubs many of us the wrong way.

 

This is a problem with the world economic system, not any one company. When we get to where we should be already, the Star Trek future, people will work on their project for free because that's what they do in life, and all this money stuff will be gone.

Until then, they have to stay in business and the asset store gives them the chance.

 

It's always been my opinion that the time would be better spent if the main focus was building on new ideas, trying to make the game better etc etc, instead of this tripe. Only because the game is still in alpha/beta what have you.

If people want to talk about this type of thing, it should be on external sites. Not where the developers are looking for ideas/bugs/etc.

 

Here are some questions I came up with reading through this thread... not necessarily my questions, but questions that seem to fit with the topic at hand.

• Who's vision is being realized when art catalog assets are used to bring the world of SotA to life?
• I had no idea development worked this way - what assets are created in house?
• A hard date has not yet been declared for commercial launch, are the assets being put on sale representative of an urgency for additional funding?
• If the add-on store closed today, would there be an Episode 1?

It's perfectly ok for folks to have questions... and the answers should make folks feel better about what's going on - not worse.

 

Then tell Portalarium how you would prefer to fund their game, and find a majority that agree with you and they can switch to it as long as they do not consider it P2W . That ain't subscriptions because even ESO caved to cash shop. They could charge cash for deed rent and forbid gold for rent, but that would likely cause an uproar.

The store is not a profit center because it is not funding solely the artist, it is the fundraising method for the entire team and all of their facilities, and it is my understanding they usually only break even and if they do start showing a monthly profit they spend it on new hires. Now that the land rush is long over they cannot make money on deed sales, as the crowd determined that the PRT space left is not desirable for off the beaten path vendor reasons. Makes much more sense to focus the store on housing and it's decorations than deeds .

 

I don't disagree with you regarding focus; however, I still think the issue is how much of a markup Port should be charging for "free" assets with the understanding that they may need to put a few hours of work into implementing them. Where do you draw the line Jamma? 50% 100% 5,000%? Do you believe Port would have still charged $50 for a "free" asset if they knew there would be full transparency (e.g., Ice Queen's thread)? Maybe they would have; I don't know. You can draw a parallel to the "Pharma Bro" kid who raised the price of the AIDs medication by some absured amount (i.e., $13.50 per tablet to $750 per tablet). It may be legal, but it sure doesn't look good and can upset a good amount of people.

I agree that Port has every right to pick a price; however, I do wonder what sort of royalty this particular artist is getting. Alternatively, if Port gave a portion of profits to charities I think that would also do a lot to offset the anger some people have over learning they are turning a "free" asset into a $50 one (the same price as a top notch completed game).

 

There's no point being angry about it. If you don't think it's the right value for the item, don't buy it.

If anyone else buys it, they're still supporting the game you're playing.

 

I probably would have drawn the line at around page 4-5, not for specific content but just as a policy.

I don't think you're taking into consideration the other possible factors that were detailed already by page 5, likely because they're buried now and it has become a meaningless circle conversation. Factors like the size of the items or aka their ability to destroy the atmosphere or immersion if there were a pile of them rather than a few.

 

I still don't understand all these saltiness. If the bottom line is that they want the price of the items to be cheaper, then just say so. Rather than trying to to around the circle trying to gauge how everyone feel or chanting rhetoric on how one should not work for free.

I mean... most of the assets I saw for sale on unity cost between $20 - $1000. So even if port were to pay for the license fee, they would have to use the crow funded money to buy the asset and have less money on the total dev budget.

That statue is friggin huge, I would rather not see it placing everywhere in town because it costs $5 to buy. Remember people making a big fuss on the great light houses for Kingsport (not about the price of the items, but rather seeing duplicate tons of them)?

The $20 for the small version sounds about right compare to the statute of the same size. $50 is a bit pricey, but it's on the same par with the holiday trees and these new gigantic trees.

 

The price on the store has nothing to do with the work that went into it, that should not be the issue at all, because Portalarium never said the store was a profit center paying only for asset creators. They have always been very clear they are giving decorations as an incentive reward to those who choose to participate in fundraising ever since the kickstarter days. They are not marking up the goods for resell for infinite profit minus the few hours it took to import. They are giving digital stone horses to players who choose to contribute $50 to the entire team of the game, which requires magnitudes more dollars than the artists few hours.

$50 may not be fair value to you having spent only $40 on the game, but you do not have a POT with a town square this thing can fit in if that is all you spent on the game. The people who can actually use it have spent more than anyone should on a mere game, and even more than some cars are worth, and that is who this horse is for. These are the same players insisting the store have more items to make their town squares decorated in much grander style than their homes.

Do you also yell at classical radio stations that charge $200 for a CD during pledge drives that you can find in the bargain bin for $2, knowing full well that you are funding the operations of the station and not the production of the CD ? It is the exact same thing. Why is it OK for classical radio to do this but not Portalarium?

It has also nothing to with big pharma having monopoly on AIDs drugs. The stone horse is not anything anybody needs to live, it is a decorative digtial cosmetic item that you do not need given in return for funding an undeveloped game. that you do not need to play.

This game is early access, every dollar spent is considered a donation to a game that may never release and fold instead, they should not have to make every item for charity although they have had special items in the past just for that.

 

I have to honestly say, my biggest issue with this game is how much it comes off like a game for rich people. I'm not the sort of person who wants everything for free, but it does seem like full access to all of SOTAs content carries a price tag well beyond what I consider fair. I miss $15 a month for everything.