The uncomfortable issue of server monetization

[Khantron]

Like it or not this is an issue with any game that plays by the private server model, how do server owners pay for their expenses? What are the ethical concerns in server owners giving players, and children in particular, (I suspect children don't play much starmade, but there is always a concern) credits for real money? How do you keep pay to win servers from becoming the servers with the best performance and the most money? Should server owners be able to restrict, for example, custom skins unless players are donors? If credit perks are capped at a monthly amount, making a sort of "soft subscription" model is that pay to win? And even if that is, is it an acceptable amount? What games do monetization right and what can we learn from them, and what games do it wrong and what pitfalls can we avoid?

 

[VendettaDFA]

The game isnt doing any monetization, so your statement is slightly off track. Server owners are solely responsible for how their server is run and private servers have been in existence for years without this being a huge issue. Pay to Win is something more often associated w a game not a private server and as mentioned this game doesn't do that. As for how servers raise money, TBH they aren't that expensive but players who like a certain server may wish to donate to help keep it going. I have no issue with that. Lastly if you happen to be on a server that fits the example you give, leave it. Those type of servers generally whither away on their own from their own actions.

 

[Spartan4845]

In advance private servers are just that, servers that are run by a private group or individual. So each will have different rules and ways of running.

There are plenty of servers to play on, some will abuse the donation system, but there is nothing short of the devs making rules similar to minecrafts that will change this. If a server is abusive of donations then simply don't play on it.

Q: How do you keep pay to win servers from becoming the servers with the best performance and the most money?
A: Not much you can do other than not support said server. If a server want to run on a P2W system then that's their prerogative, if you don't like it play on a different server.

Q: Should server owners be able to restrict, for example, custom skins unless players are donors?
A: Its their choice, some might see it as a perk but its nothing necessary to the game. My server doesn't allow custom skins since a troll incident.

Q: What are the ethics involving children?
A: Their parents should make sure that they are either A: Their on a appropriate server; or B: That the child doesn't have access to the parents credit card or other charge system to donate to the server for what ever reason, unless the parent okay'd it first.

I wouldn't call any of these issues, all can be avoided by choosing the correct server for yourself.

 

[Viridis00]

They're either small enough that the owner can pay out of the pocket, or they take donations. I've seen servers in other games that just have their own forums and get some dosh from adsense or whatever. To do the latter right, don't pester your users about adblock since that's not only a dick move but it's a bad business one as well.

I'd never go to a server that gave out perks for cash or monetized itself because someone else will do it for free because they like it. An admin is free to do so with their own servers, but it really shows where their heart is on the matter since other servers stay open free of charge without the bullcrap on just donations. I can't see SM servers being really expensive to maintain right now since the amount of people playing isn't that big compared to other games.

 

[jstenholt]

You guys are missing the point here, this is a very real issue. As the bigger servers get bigger, they become more popular. The more popular servers want to keep their spot by getting more votes on starmadeservers or more donations to pay for the server itself. So, a server willing to shovel out more in-game assets will grow into a huge mess of people getting bonuses, making gameplay extremely one-sided.

Those "pay2win" servers become the face of Starmade, which makes the game look awful from a competitive PVP standpoint.

 

[Spartan4845]

What would you suggest then? If you tell them no donations then they shut down, no rewards for donations ends the same when people stop donating.

There will be a few extreme P2P/P2W servers and some of those will be the worst of the community. But most servers will be fair. We can only hope that people look at it with reason and see that its not that way with the game and community as a whole.

 

[Viridis00]

You guys are missing the point here, this is a very real issue. As the bigger servers get bigger, they become more popular. The more popular servers want to keep their spot by getting more votes on starmadeservers or more donations to pay for the server itself. So, a server willing to shovel out more in-game assets will grow into a huge mess of people getting bonuses, making gameplay extremely one-sided.

Those "pay2win" servers become the face of Starmade, which makes the game look awful from a competitive PVP standpoint.

You can't really avoid those situations in a large scale environment nowadays, something we are very far from. There will always be some server that is run by someone doing it for the love of the game though, they just may not be as big as the most popular but they are bound to be around. The best anyone can do is not go to the crap server that give advantages for cash.

This thread is starting to make me sad. I remember when we didn't have to deal with this kind of situation in games, period. Single or multiplayer.

 

[VendettaDFA]

I don't believe I am missing the point. The point is the servers are private and those owners can do as they please with them. Starmade doesn't have a dog in this race other than allowing the community to shape this game thru independent servers and feedback in the forums. The community determines how the servers are and if you don't want that kind of server around, and I don't, you simply don't patronize it. The community will also determine the direction or directions of the game and it certainly hasn't been determined that this is nothing more than a competitive PvP game. It's a game type Starmade is capable of , but it can be and most likely will be a multitude of things.

 

[NeonSturm]

Like it or not this is an issue with any game that plays by the private server model, how do server owners pay for their expenses?

For some peoples with good jobs, the cost for SM servers is pretty low.
If a group of friends or very active players share the cost it is pretty low too (at least for SM offers).

What are the ethical concerns in server owners giving players, and children in particular, (I suspect children don't play much starmade, but there is always a concern) credits for real money?

Children should learn how to manage their money.
That is the job parents have to do.

For example X% Dollar/Euro for real-life stuff (and things you can keep) and Y% for internet-stuff (or running costs).

How do you keep pay to win servers from becoming the servers with the best performance and the most money?

If some company can get customers for offering a better server (performance/money-wise), they will do.

Since the game itself is available for no money, there are no restrictions to install it on another server.
This issue arises more in combination with

• license-costs or legal issues
• not being able to access the game's source
• incompatibility with all but special servers (+ no manuals on how make your server combatible)

Should server owners be able to restrict, for example, custom skins unless players are donors?

Maybe not all custom skins. But perhaps give donators 1 or 2 more skin-slots once you can skin your crew.

I think graphic gimmicks are the most ethically correct choice where to limit non-donators if it is not too excessive.
* As long as it does not promotes a group over others in terms of social contacts, etc.

If credit perks are capped at a monthly amount, making a sort of "soft subscription" model is that pay to win?

If you can get the same by playing, it is not pay-to-win.

• And even if that is, is it an acceptable amount?

Maybe allow players to instantly win some quest, but only 3 times a day for each day where they played less than 2 hours.

• With this, players playing 24/7 could not buy any advantage.

What games do monetization right and what can we learn from them, and what games do it wrong and what pitfalls can we avoid?

Just click the ad above this thread and you will see which game makes it wrong.

1. It says "The newest game from Korea/Japan/...", shows beautiful-sexy pictures and have 100 different ads leading to the very same game.
2. Then it let peoples buy something ingame and later release some update which makes that underpowered...
3. They have no "Do you really want to purchase this? You will lose diamonds (for which you paid money)" or similar dialogue.
4. They have "It costs 100 gold (if you don't have gold, it will AUTOMATICALLY purchased with diamonds)" stuff.

 

[Megacrafter127]

Children should learn how to manage their money.
That is the job parents have to do.

I cannot agree more with this. We can all see the consequences of improper budget management on both small- and big-scale.

 

[MrFURB]

I'm just popping in to say that this thread has been quite interesting, even if it's key issues are mostly theoretical at this point in time. We already see lost of server running with 'donation benefits' and I'm curious to see how things evolve in the future. I'd also kinda want to hear some opinions on the matter from server hosts themselves, grab another side of the story.

 

[NeonSturm]

I'm just popping in to say that this thread has been quite interesting, even if it's key issues are mostly theoretical at this point in time.

I am a bit more interested into this "ethical money-issue" :

1. If you {invent something, publish a game/image with some copyright license, ...} you basically steal others the possibility to invent that themselves and some option to gain money or prestige.

• You can even steal others the right to publish something open-source by publishing a game with exactly this mechanics proprietary before the OS is published.
• How likely will this become a digital war - e.g: Microsoft+Apple ... vs some OS-company?

2. If some day StarMade will discontinue being free2play, it still benefits from community content published by free players.

• Of-course people could continue play the last version published as free2play,
• but if it will become incompatible with Java 10 and current Java with Windows 13, we lose the ability to play content.
  • we will lose something we have created by ourself
  • while StarMade could continue to take profit from this very same content.

Space-Engineers and other community-content games written in C have a bigger probability to get to the point where this issue matters.​

• Is it right to promote a game with community content if it will require money?

 

[Megacrafter127]

but if it will become incompatible with Java 10 and current Java with Windows 13, we lose the ability to play content.

From what I know, java has full backwards compatibility. If it runs on java 5, it will also run on java 50, albeit not using java 50's full potential.
Because of that, as long as there is a version of java available, yes, you can play starmade, provided you don't run into hardware/driver issues.

 

[Lidren]

I'm just popping in to say that this thread has been quite interesting, even if it's key issues are mostly theoretical at this point in time. We already see lost of server running with 'donation benefits' and I'm curious to see how things evolve in the future. I'd also kinda want to hear some opinions on the matter from server hosts themselves, grab another side of the story.

I've intentionally avoided entering here as I was more interested in what players were saying about the issue than my own thoughts. Personally, I take issue with p2w and the sale of digital currency that is unavailable via play.

That being said, I have my own company, with a client base that nets me enough to supplement my wife in caring for our two daughters, and no more. Without donations, both the Ragnarok website and server would not exist. We do not offer many rewards, the ones we do offer amount to ship (blueprint slots) and station (sector protection) insurance policies.

In addition to the cost of the server being paid by my players (and other admins), our database is 78 GB, and our catalog is nearing 20. I've found that restricting slots in this way saves us from more bloat on an already overloaded ssd and database.

I'll keep speaking here if y'all have questions or I feel the need to address more. Basically, I agree with most of the players here that it is/can be a slippery slope, and should be done with care by owners when done at all.

 

[Keptick]

You guys are missing the point here, this is a very real issue. As the bigger servers get bigger, they become more popular. The more popular servers want to keep their spot by getting more votes on starmadeservers or more donations to pay for the server itself. So, a server willing to shovel out more in-game assets will grow into a huge mess of people getting bonuses, making gameplay extremely one-sided.

Those "pay2win" servers become the face of Starmade, which makes the game look awful from a competitive PVP standpoint.

That's more an issue with the starmade server list (which is unofficial) abusing of a pay to stay on top method. An easy way to fix that would be an official list that isn't lost deep in the game's launcher.

 

[NeonSturm]

For the server list...

Perhaps let players choose tags like "Role-Play, Pure-RP, PvP, ..." and sort by number of players, server activity, ...

• and then the list should be small enough so that you can randomize (favourite before non-favourite) entries and the player will still find a server he wants.

 

[Lidren]

That's more an issue with the starmade server list (which is unofficial) abusing of a pay to stay on top method. An easy way to fix that would be an official list that isn't lost deep in the game's launcher.

To my knowledge you can't pay for ranking on starmade-servers.com, the ones on top stay there through bloated populations and voting rewards.

 

[Keptick]

To my knowledge you can't pay for ranking on starmade-servers.com, the ones on top stay there through bloated populations and voting rewards.

It's possible to pay in order to "reset" the activity counter, which will bump servers back to the top.