Stretch Goal Confusion

Its not really a stretch goal if it was, then every backer would be able to benefit from it.
Its 6 shop items being called a stretch goal.

It should have been raising $250,000 will get every backer the choice of 1 mount if the goal is achieved, then every backer would be able to contribute what they could afford to put in.
With 35,404 backers it would only need about $7 dollars from each one to reach it those with more spare cash could add more if they really wanted the mounts added to the game. Their is no time limit on the stretch goal target being met.

Once the goal was reached the horses, saddle & outfits could have gone into the shop to raise extra funds.

If wealthy backers buy 3 mounts each only 4100 will have a mount if they buy all 6 items its down to 2000.
Its supposed to be a community project not an elitist club.

 

Well I don't drink virtual ale so it would not bother me an empty tankard looks just like a full one.

 

I would say that the stretch goal is to actually get the programming and animation done around the concept of riding a mount. The stretch goal isn't really the the pixels of the horse.....I would also imagine that if the stretch goal is reached players will be able to buy horses ingame albeit I expect they will be a different hue.

 

It's a community project....$20 gets you a mount.

But if only 5,000 people pay any money into this thing, I don't see why 35,000 should get the base reward. I don't have a problem with the game foundation allowing mounts for ALL players. What I have a potential problem with is allowing ALL players to essentially benefit from the people that do all the "work on the project."

It's just like if I goto a store and buy a new iphone (i'd never actually do that btw). I don't mind if the technology is available for people to buy a Samsung or a Microsoft phone....but they should do that on their own using their own money or means. I don't want the next person coming into the store to get a free iphone because I already bought one. And I'm probably as close to a socialist politically as you can get.

 

Forgive me for being pedantic, but that is only mostly true.

There are some exclusive Founder items for example that you can't acquire in game later. And it would seem these stretch goal add-on items are exclusive and can't be acquired later. But most things (such as crafting tables or Town lots) can be acquired later with in game gold.

 

Just to add, I think the crafting tables that you get when you pledge will be slightly better than the ones made in the game. So there's a lot of nuance to all this.

 

Items can also be enchanted and improved. An Expert level crafting station in a pledge tier is better than a starter table, but I think Expert level stations will still be obtainable later in game.

 

You could be right...I don't see any verbiage that says someone can't create an expert level crafting station on their own. They probably just can't put that benefactor/founder symbol on it.

 

$20 = 12500 mounts = $250.000 so even if everyone only buys one mount 22.900 backers cant have one. i-phone's are not limited to 12500 then no one else can have one, even the kickstarter backers have seen their rewards handed out to anyone a bit like someone coming into the shop late and getting the exclusive deal you paid for.

 

You're totally right...but iphones are built with cheap slave labor. It's kind of a different business model.

Unlike iphones, SOTA has different goals in mind...they want a good game without all the bad business. So they created the stretch goal store. It's obviously going to be a difficult concept for many people to understand. But instead of just giving people everything (which with a small team like this they CAN'T DO) they're instead going to let the people with the means to pay for it be their funding mechanism as opposed to outsourcing everything to India, getting into bed with a big publisher, and making you pay a subscription fee.

While you may think that horse mounts are a guaranteed right in an MMO that you should never have to pay for...I think you're wrong. It's time to pony up, pun intended.

 

My Pony up days have gone mate I sold my Royal Founder after they sold me out. And I sold it for exactly what I had pledged, although I did feel a little guilty that I may have ripped him off with the way the game is going.

 

It's pretty damn ridiculous for a game that will have taming not to have tameable horses. That's the first thing you would aim for as a tamer in UO, taming your own horses, and try to sell some for 100gp at Brit bank.

 

Without mounts I'm assuming you can tame horses as well as any other animal for a non-combat pet. The stretch goal is adding riding/mounts.

And while I think mounts are a great convenience feature and something I wish had been scoped into Episode 1 either way, Portalarium has been clear that it wasn't promised/planned for Episode 1. It was in their official FAQ.

 

Wow, looks like my son made the right choice in backing out.
In Lotro, which is now a free to play game I now have a grand total of 73 horses. Do not ask me where I carry them, but they are all there, and all ride-able. Within the store the do seel exclusive mounts at 20-40 dollars a pop. I do not bother buying them. While I am still a huge fan of UO, and still have my account going there and my original horse, I cannot see myself throwing more money at this project to do something that is so basic in the parent game.

 

Since all travel is just across a hex, having a horse for traveling seems meaningless. Now if you want to sit high in the saddle with your riding duds glowing in the sunset, totally unprepared for a sneak attack by person or beast, then a horse is a necessity. If you cannot engage in combat while mounted then strutting your stuff is all that is left.

 

I'd much rather have you here than not here. But if it means that everyone can have 73 horses in their backpack, please count me out of that train wreck.

 

They'll be sold in the Stretch Goals Store? That's separate from the Add-On store.

 

I'm sorry to hear you feel that way. However, this game has a limited budget, and mounts were not in scope for Episode 1. It was said repeatedly and in the official FAQ. I believe they were planned for Episode 2. Now there is a chance of getting them in Episode 1 with the stretch goal.

 

Sorry, Sundews I don't see your point. Yes, that's separate from the add-on store. You can go view it right now.

https://www.shroudoftheavatar.com/?page_id=40715

 

I haven't played DDO in over a year now, but last time I was there they still didn't have mounts. And that game is what, 8 or 9 years old now? We used to see newcomers in chat asking, "Where do I get a mount?" The answer was almost always, "In some other game!"

Some people seem to feel that a mount is a basic right in every MMO. Not every game has mounts. Not every game needs them. Let's face it, the hexes in SotA aren't so huge that it takes hours to explore one on foot and you really need a horse. (Perhaps owning a mount will make travel on the overland map a little faster.)

The dev team has said before that mounts were something they hoped to add at some point in the future but it wasn't planned for Episode 1. This stretch goal store thing is just a way for those people who feel strongly that they want mounts immediately, to be able to put money towards that goal exclusively and not have it swallowed up by a different project. It's like being able to specify where your contribution is used when you donate to certain charities.

Now, I don't know what's going to happen to that money if the stretch goal isn't met - I checked the page again and it doesn't say there's a deadline, but it also doesn't say those items will continue to be available until the goal is reached. It does, however, say this:

When you purchase an item, you will receive it as an in-game reward, even if the goal is not met.

That implies to me that there will be some kind of end date, at which point they decide they're not going to raise enough money and you've just bought an expensive pet or three. However, they haven't specified this. If you buy a foal you will get a foal as a pet regardless - but you may not ever get to raise a riding horse, and presumably they may put that money towards something different. I would hope not, though - if the money was paid for that purpose, then it should be used for that purpose at some point even if it needs Portalarium to add more funds to the pot when they can. Especially as they've already said they wanted to add mounts later anyway, which they would have needed to pay for by themselves. This is just helping them to do it faster, and I'd presume that when they reach their target they'll hire a couple of people specifically to work on riding and get it into Episode 1.

As for the whole 'exclusivity' part of the argument, I would hope that if riding is put into the game then everyone will have the ability to acquire a horse somehow (for an in-game cost of time, skill, resources or gold), regardless of whether they were able or willing to put real money into this specific goal. However, if it's been stated that those store rewards will not be available elsewhere then they should not be. It says nothing about a different-looking version of those rewards, e.g. horses in other colours, or some other style of riding outfit that could perhaps be crafted with Tailoring. Granted they haven't said there will be alternative versions available in-game, but they also haven't said there won't be. Just because something is not specifically spelled out doesn't mean it's not going to happen, but since there seems to be a fair bit of confusion and angst over this issue perhaps it will be clarified soon.

Suggesting that players should never be able to ride horses if they didn't put money into this goal is like saying that players should never have the chance to buy a piece of land with in-game gold if they didn't pledge high enough before launch. (Note that I did not say other players should get said things for free... they still need to put in time or whatever, they just don't get it immediately.) Just because we are the ones helping to fund the development of the game right now, that doesn't mean we are the only ones who should ever be able to play it. That would just be silly.