DDI - vMinis are Extra?

[Heselbine]

Well, except that the virtual table doesn't have that annoying seem where the leaves meet which cocks dice, of course.

Funnily enough, it does have that - but you have to pay extra for it.

I have been 100% supportive of the subscription model and fully intend to subscribe to D&D Insider - but if this is true it's a step too far. And if I don't pay for virtual minis, what am I going to be able to run the online game table with? A bunch of generic stuff?

 

[Asmor]

I can agree with the notion of paying for services. I can't agree with paying extra for mandatory ingredients of a package, especially if you must pay a subscription fee already.

In the case of DDI, minis are not mandatory; on the case of Magic Online, there is no subscription fee. Therefore, you don't disagree with either. QED

BTW, I just want to come out and say that I'm against the idea of paying for minis and agree that the cost of developing minis should be covered by the subscription fee. I just like playing devil's advocate.

 

[Asmor]

Funnily enough, it does have that - but you have to be extra for it.

I have been 100% supportive of the subscription model and fully intend to subscribe to D&D Insider - but if this is true it's a step too far. And if I don't pay for virtual minis, what am I going to be able to run the online game table with? A bunch of generic stuff?

Tokens. Not ideal, but good enough.

At the very least, it's no worse than any other virtual tabletop out there. DDI's the only one that even has the option of having 3d minis.

 

[Heselbine]

It somewhat defeats the object of a three-dimensional projection of a dungeon space to have to use two-dimensional tokens.

Like I said, this is the first thing about DDI that I'm really annoyed about. It's a step too far. Are you listening Wizards? You're even alienating one of your biggest supporters.

 

[JVisgaitis]

...you're actually paying for virtual randomized minis. Now I don't mind the randomization with the real minis that much, but paying extra for randomized Vminis is really a stretch for me.

Who ever said that they would be randomized? If I recall, when I asked at D&D Experience, they said you could buy whatever you wanted. Did that change?

 

[TimeOut]

In the case of DDI, minis are not mandatory; on the case of Magic Online, there is no subscription fee. Therefore, you don't disagree with either. QED

True. If I would be interested in the content (and had the spare money) except for Dragon I would pay the subscription fee. If I don't need to buy minis to use the game table, there is no problem.

Since there is no interesting content except for Dragon and maybe the rules database, I won't subscribe.

Edit:
But my point with Magic Online stands nevertheless: You can't use the software without paying extra money each time you want to do something (fairly generalized, of course you could buy one deck and stay with it).

 

[wedgeski]

I play WoW too. But it is fundamentally different from Magic Online. In WoW you pay a monthly fee for the complete game, including patches. Anything you want to acquire in the actual game comes at no extra cost only limited by time and effort spent.

Not really. Expansion packs are *effectively* mandatory if you want to keep up with the game and not be left behind in a no-man's land of dead servers and content that no-one plays any more. WoW is good in this regard because expansions are few and far between (only 1 so far, way less than its competitors in a similar time-frame), and patches are usually jammed with new content.

So, although WoW is not as clear-cut a case as you make out, I can still grok the idea of a system where you pay for extra content without which you are essentially uncompetitive, and the game ceases to have utility.

Is that really the case with vMini's? Again, not really. You don't have to use them, you can use tokens, which by all accounts will be free. The game table doesn't cease to work for you because you don't have shiny 3D models of the beasties you're fighting.

All of which I say while, essentially, agreeing that extra payments -- however micro -- for 3D mini's are a very bad idea indeed.

 

[PeelSeel2]

I do not cry about most things WOTC does because I can understand why they do it. I cannot understand this. They are going about it all wrong. It like the airlines charging for the ride, and now charging for a bag of peanuts and a coke. Bad press. People will still buy the ride, but the peanuts and coke will not sell (that well).

 

[Herremann the Wise]

Edit:
But my point with Magic Online stands nevertheless: You can't use the software without paying extra money each time you want to do something (fairly generalized, of course you could buy one deck and stay with it).

Not wanting to derail but I think that this is why Magic Online "works", but paying for vMinis might not - unless they take on some of the same concepts. With MODO, you pay for your packs of cards and your $1 "vouchers" as it were. I think TimeOut is incorrect here because a lot of players get their collection, and then literally play with it, trading cards for different cards to keep up with trends and the "metagame". This involves spending a minimum of money (if any). However, if you are particularly good at playing magic, you can win packs of cards in online drafts and competitions, to the point of being in the positive when it comes to outlay versus collection. It is the people in th middle who then end up funding the virtual economy.

Now don't get me wrong, it's not perfect but for people who struggle to play locally, MODO was a godsend. I think the only way how they could sell vMinis is to use a similar model. However, this would involve having a tabletop minis game - fully operational. Would the interest in this be high enough to sustain a virtual economy? I doubt it but it could work. As such, the minis you get would be dirt cheap for the commons, yet expensive for the rares and specials. Yeah... this could possibly have enough momentum to drive it.

HOWEVER, for this to work, you need a fully operational minis game and I have heard no plans for this. I suppose you just shake your head and wonder what could have been - one way or the other.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Fenes]

I play WoW too. But it is fundamentally different from Magic Online. In WoW you pay a monthly fee for the complete game, including patches. Anything you want to acquire in the actual game comes at no extra cost only limited by time and effort spent.

Magic Online on the other hand uses more of a micro-transaction (I hate them) based system. You gain the basic gameplay for free (or a smaller fee) and must buy each thing you wish to use in the game. You can't just try to find item x, you must buy it.

The effects are clear: The first game has a fixed monetary cost and an open ended effort cost, while the second one has no effort cost and an open ended monetary scale.

Edit: A good read about the effects of the second implementation can be found here: http://www.danwei.org/electronic_games/gambling_your_life_away_in_zt.php

I can agree with the notion of paying for services. I can't agree with paying extra for mandatory ingredients of a package, especially if you must pay a subscription fee already.

For some of us, time is worth a lot. Sacrificing hours to get/find an item in game cuts far more into my ressources than spending money. Especially if, as is usually the case with MMOGs like WoW, the "finding the item" part is not fun, but mindless, tiring work.