Micro-transactions in 3.0 don’t really change gameplay. In a whole lot of other games, you can buy in-game items with micro-transactions.
With in-game currency, I mean like anything from tf2, mobile games, v bucks in fortnite, stuff that you use to purchase stuff.
I mean the game has to have some microtransactions if it’s gonna be free
Currently with Unturned having no actual Pay-2-Win mechanics built into the game, normally the servers kinda do that themselves and quiet badly I must say, Unturned having its system like that has been a key role in being a free and non P2W game, if Nelson was to charge between 5 to 20 dollars I wouldn’t even complain, with over 2000 hours in U3 I find it to be well worth it and incredibly fun when you eventually find a good server with good staff, however I don’t feel that the EULA is strong enough agains’t the P2W servers, I understand funding is needed to run them but their are plenty of other ways to do it, such as like unturned you can donate to help run the server and in turn receive neat cosmetical looking items or kits, I haven’t thought of any other ways YET but their should be some.
@Mr.Snowy The game will have different endings, plus if gameplays posted on YouTube completely spoiled the sale of games all companies would be bankrupt.
Pay-to-play Game
Subscription-based DLC
Permanent Gold Upgrade - DLC
Cosmetic Packs - DLC
Steam Economy
Weapon Skins
Clothing Comsetics
Vehicle Skins
Structure Skins
Decorative Deployables
Gift Presents
Server Realms
Community Hub
I’ve added images to all of the sections to better showcase what’s going on and to help break up the text walls.
Why are you against it while playing Minecraft? Is it just more of a “I support it existing, but I just don’t plan on ever using it” or are there issues you have with Minecraft Realms as its own service?
I’d definitely support a custom “console” for managing Realms. It shouldn’t paywall features, but I’d support a custom interface to make it easier for people. Have some more direct integration with Steam features, since it’d be an official service and doing so as per Steam’s EULA would be easier.
While I’d be fine with a few purchasable gestures, stuff like reloading animations would require the animations all be the same length. That shouldn’t necessarily be that much of a hassle, but I don’t think either are something I’d like to see frequently implemented.
I think you misunderstood anonimoanbu, because by that logic then what’s the point of buying any game with a story? For example—“why buy a game like Red Dead Redemption 2 if you can just watch videos of it?”
I assume you may have mistook “story” to refer to just a short movie, or something else similarly not interactive. He’s referring to an actual story mode though, at least, a chapter of it exclusive to a DLC. I’m not sure how I feel about a DLC for a single-player campaign.
To clarify: TF2 does not have any premium currency that you use to purchase stuff. You buy stuff with actual cash.
Specifically, I’m referring to stuff like this: 
I don’t really agree with Minecraft Realms because if I’m right, you can only have up to 11 people on it and once source I found said it costed $8 a month since I couldn’t view the pricing on the actual website. If I have to pay for a service I expect it to have more to offer than an official logo and a few fancy templates that people made, especially when the competition can offer a much better service for two or three dollars a month. If this server idea is applied to any game that is known for having mods then it should try to support them too. My view on Minecraft Realms is that its a great idea but it needs a fair bit of work. For my personal uses, I haven’t seen a reason for the Realms servers because if I ever needed one running for a few things I could just set it up on my own and have a lot more options for whatever few people I need to play with. For servers with a maximum under 8 people I’d prefer just having a peer-to-peer option like what some other games use.
Realms is a way to set up an easily available server for you and your friends to play on, for a relatively cheaper price than paying for someone else to host the server, or hosting it yourself.
Of course, there are free ways to host servers, but realms is a nice way to do it.
“Relatively cheaper”
Last time I checked, $2 is a lot cheaper than $8 and has a much greater value when it includes decent tech support and lets you have more than eleven people on at a time. With the options that are available, Realms would just be a waste of money if you consider anything else you could do. Hosting yourself costs nothing other than power and internet access if you have the equipment to run it; getting a friend to host a server could potentially be completely free for you; and there are plenty of cheap but decent hosting services you can use for Minecraft.
In the end it comes down to convenience, especially if the person in question wanting to host has no technical know-how in the slightest. There’s also security concerns and peace of mind with using a Realms-esque system instead of hosting on your own PC, as well as not having to worry about specs or other things.
While I really don’t like Realms in Minecraft, I do support such a system in Unturned II, especially as it would both generate revenue effectively and make server hosting more accessible for the community. In addition, it would leave people like you to still be perfectly able to host your own server all the same without being forced to use the new system.
I think that a server paywall would split the community and would likely be empty [small] cough cough [/small] , an example is gold servers, most people with over 500 or so hours has gold, yet they still choose to play non-gold servers and thus no hosters are hosting gold servers. If people are split (say 1 friend has the pass 1 doesn’t they can’t play with each other on a preferred official server) the servers would likely be emptier and the 2 players would migrate to a community server, defeating the purpose of official servers, and this scales largely with a group.
Why is there no “I do not support a server pass for official servers” sort of option on the “Official Server Pass” section poll? Someone is bound to disagree.
Most skin ideas for skins are great ideas and if he made them less common (Drops) and make keys cost tiny bit more then maybe we can have a steam economy, something such as TF2 or Cs:go. The one I disagree on is the structure skins, these would make the game a bit hard to know what the walls were, if they were door skins like Rust then that would be cool but only if the door had a different designs not like in 3 where Metal and Wood Doors are just retextured. Such items as Gun, Cars, Some Cosmetic Items for the Characters, Boxes to Open, and Bags that are free to open are good ideas for making the steam economy stable. Ingame currency should be used maybe as payment for buying Servers.
Unturned is not a game based on story unlike other games and the story probably wouldnt be the main focus of the game and therefore it will be shorter and people wont think they should pay for something they can watch online
I dont think the main focus of unturned will be a story and therefore it will get less attention from nelson and it will be shorter , i dont mean it will be bad but still quite short and i dont think people would pay for the story . Red dead redemption 2 is mostly based on a story (yes you can do all kinds of stuff but you are dragged by the story to other places) so people would pay for that . But that is just how i see things , i could be entierly wrong
This is a great post. Keep it up.
I don’t know why people are against vehicles and item skins. I would like to spray paint my car to have racing stripes or something. I think that the cosmetics should be in the base game as minor differentiation form the regular vehicle.
And for buildings, having a med chest, a gun chest and ect all different looking would be great as.
Welcome to the form. Also I don’t know what to do with trading cards sooo.
My issue with skins is that people can pay for something that potentially gives them an advantage. Vehicle skins should be restricted to decals and paint found ingame if it is a thing at all. With item skins, I’m fine with them in most cases since they don’t stand out as much as a vehicle and they don’t have a major effect on the weapon shape. For skins on placeable items, I don’t agree with them at all unless everybody has access to them. A few color patches here and there could help with organizing storage and these “skins” could possibly cost more resources but add a benefit. Tiered versions of certain placeables could be added. Medical storage would be set up to store medical supplies better, gun safes could have racks built in, and doors could be reinforced with more resources or have a strong window put in.
Okay, here is how I would deal with the implementation of any of these ideas.
First I would create something that isn’t too flashy or weird (like a zombie face vehicle/shirt decal or gun camo) and make it somewhat easy to acquire through the game, similar to the zero kelvin kit.
Next I would watch how this addition affects the community. How do they react to it? Do they like it? Do they even use it?
If the community responds positively, I would add maybe 4-5 more that can be unlocked via achievements. Then I would see how many people actively seek out these achievements so I could figure out if the community even sees value in these cosmetic items.
Assuming they react well, I then introduce the idea of paid versions of these and later on, community curated ones as well.
Null is disagreeance, neutral, and/or undecided. Some polls have both when it’s more relevant, but with official servers if there is not a paywall then it’s not relevant to the post (which is about revenue).
If a poll option was added, it’d be “I don’t support having official servers”, which is more likely to confuse people, but is basically “there are no official servers without some sort of paywall”. They may come eventually, for free, but at that point it is not relevant to the original topic.
The topic you linked already covers that opinion and harbors discussion around it, but the aspects of official servers it covers isn’t relevant to what this topic is doing.
The story is a substantial-ish part of U3, and is planned to be a more thought-out thing in U4.
Part of it is just that people don’t have much of a reference point, so everyone has to come up with their own. I added some images so people are a bit closer to the same page as to what they could expect, but polls can only do so much. It doesn’t cover all feedback, nor is it meant to.
Some people can just be opposed against one part of a much larger idea, but if they feel strongly enough about that one thing then it might not matter in the polls.
Typically, you collect a set and craft them together for a game badge. Crafting badges gives EXP towards leveling your Steam account.
First off, I really don’t think the example of Gold servers applies, because A) they’re community-run servers and are far from comparable to dedicated official servers, and B) there’s barely any of them around, with all the inconsistency of a typical server variety as far as runtime, mods/plugins, and config.
Official servers on the other hand, set a standard that is clearly desirable for a significant portion of the community - they are virtually guaranteed to be up, fully vanilla, and supposedly will deter hackers with paid access. That being said, use of either of these server types are not mutually exclusive, and people who want to buy the pass often seem perfectly content with rotating playtime between official and community servers.
As for your migration argument, I do find it a bit self-contradictory, since if the player was going to use a community server instead, there’d be no reason for the person to have bought the pass to begin with - unless they knew their friends were buying it as well. I personally don’t see this as an issue since the latter is the case for me, but this varies on an individual basis. A lot of people I know have said they’d also be content buying the pass regardless of whether or not their friends did, so I’d expect there to be enough people in the playerbase that the small number of official servers would be well occupied at any given time.
And on a final, more reflective note, while this wasn’t exactly an intended implication of the official server pass, I do like the idea that it’s far harder for a large pre-established group to organize on an official server. A huge complaint of U3’s servers currently is how easily groups dominate, and such a shift favouring solo players or small groups would likely be beneficial to the quality of the gameplay itself. Better still, official servers would be a great opportunity to meet and make new friends who are just as passionate about the game as you are - I speak from experience on this one.