kingwint1992 wrote:This will weed out all the kids, and people who are broke as fuck, this is fine by me. Bye bye kiddies, go get a job
People with fulltime jobs might not want to spend the entirety of their spare time grinding in H&H for futile gains. If anything, this game is better suited to people WITHOUT jobs.
jorb wrote:The game can be had for as little as $6/mo.
That's only if someone is committed to playing for a full year. I've played this game on and off many times, usually playing for no more than 3 months at a time. Why would I pay for a whole year when it's so easy to get bored of this game within 3 months?
jorb wrote:There was no secrecy. We just didn't tell you. There's a difference. Also, what difference does it really make? Whenever we told you it would still now be the 29th of August, and you'd be in the same spot you are now.
Obviously, the difference is the community's reaction. Instead of slamming people with a $10/mo subscription, you could've held polls to see what people think is reasonable. There would not be nearly as much outrage.
jorb wrote:Moozy wrote:Ofcourse there was secrecy, you straight out pulled a Pay 2 Play system in the last minute.'
but secrecy to me implies that we were trying to keep it hidden. We weren't.
...
The exact details of the thing were finalized very late in the process. For a long time we were ourselves unsure on how we wanted it to look.
...
We have generally not been talking much about the game, quite simply.
If you didn't intend to keep it a secret, maybe you should've told the players about your ideas. You guys have a history of giving vague answers when people try to ask you questions. You can't just assume all your players are hapless nitwits who know nothing. You should ask for feedback and be part of the community, like any good indie developer does.
You hit the players very hard with your poorly planned monetary ideas. It probably would've went better if you eased it in gradually, like just starting off with cosmetic items instead of going for a full subscription model.
jorb wrote:What do you perceive the alternative to be? How are we supposed to monetize recurring gameplay through other means? What would be an alternative, other than more of a direct item shop? Would you really prefer that?
I want to like your game. You guys have some great ideas and your game offers an interesting experience. I also think you're a pompous asshole and I've only returned to watch the angry mob lynch you as you deserve. You have some horrible ideas for your game and you don't give a shit what feedback people offer, no matter how carefully planned or thought out. I'm wasting my time because you'll just respond saying "tl;dr
" as you have in the past when I'm trying to help you. Fuck you too. You've told people throughout the years to fuck off and leave if they don't like the way your game is, but you're in over your head this time.
Regardless if you agree or disagree with me, here's the ultimate solution: polls. Ask the people what they think. Yes, you'll have a lot of people vote saying "the game should be completely free", but you'll get valuable responses from the more reasonable players who understand you need money to continue running this game. The responses will be infinitely more useful than "RIP H&H, this sucks, I hope this is a troll, you are a swedish piece of jew shit", etc. It will also save you the effort of reading through 70 pages of negative feedback in one topic. All you have to do is gather the popular opinions and see if people agree or disagree, such as reducing the cost in poorer countries or having a one-time fee to buy the game.
For my actual opinion:
1. Let people play as long as they want for free. Instead of ruining the gameplay for the free players, it would be wiser to improve the gameplay for the paying customers. For example, reduced wait times on the hourglass. People will have tons of incentive to pay, but at least it will still be possible to play the game for free. More population (free players) also makes the game more worthwhile for paying players. Make this cost, say, $5 a month or $2.50 per month if they pay for a whole year in advance. At a price like that, people will even buy the service for their alts. It also basically has the same effect as your current model (paying players can accomplish more), just without nearly as much backlash.
2. Microtransactions are better than a subscription. Let people buy a dumb hat for $1. They'll drown in a river and have to buy another one.
3. The game needs way more character customization. Granted, I haven't bothered downloading the new game. Laugh in my face if I'm wrong, but in the old Haven, everyone looked exactly alike. Wearing a toga and nettle cap just made you look like a peasant - there was no such thing as style. When people play a game so heavily focused on their personal character, they like to personalize. They build their village the way they want, arrange their home the way they want, but they've never had much control over their character's appearance. We need hairstyle options (dozens of them, including colour choice), more casual clothes to wear around the village, different looking armour (even if the stats are the same). These can be sold for a modest $0.50 or $1 each. Then people won't be afraid of wasting their money since their character will likely die anyway. They might even buy stuff for their alts since they'll be playing on them a lot of the time.
4. Let people pay for things that are difficult (or impossible) to find. For example, they could pay $5 for some sort of water purification prayer. You'd drop the item in the river or into a well and it would turn it into a Q100 water source with a small radius. It would replenish quality over time like normal, but perhaps the quality cap would decrease by 1 daily. So, in 3 months, they'd have to buy it again if they want that sweet Q100 water. Same thing for clay, soil, etc. This would also please future and past ragequitters (like myself) who find it impossible to compete with other players.
5. Let people pay to destroy nearby imperfections, like logs that are stuck in a cliff. I dunno if that's still a problem, but some people might be willing to pay a buck or two to remove those. It could cost some measly sum like 10 cents or something. Let people destroy tree stumps in the same way. It'll add up.
6. Pay to declaim an inactive land claim. I dunno how it is now, but it was easy enough to make a gigantic land claim before while exceedingly difficult to take it over. If someone hasn't logged in for 90 days, let their claim be removed for a few bucks.
There are tons of solutions that are WAY better than a subscription. Just look at the things people have complained about in the past (such as the things I just mentioned) and monetize it. Best of all, the players will actually thank you and gladly give you money for these abilities without it completely breaking the game or ruining it for free players. If it were monetized in this way, I might actually be willing to play it again AND pay for it, too.
You need to realize that most people who play your game hate it and quit within a month. I say this because I've introduced (directly and by association) at least a dozen players to your game and they didn't last long. Don't ask them for $72, just try to squeeze $5-10 out of each new user (while your older users will happily pay much more throughout the course of time).
by ThisIsLandon » Sat Aug 29, 2015 8:26 pm 
