Senior Member
Good idea Gandja. A store would open up animation to novice builders. Nothing wrong with pulling some code into a track, you didn't create. Web designers...etc do it all the time. How things are implemented makes someone a good builder, not a few custom objects. Personally, I think custom objects are great, but too much emphasis is placed on them when judging a track's worth. It's nice to see a mini car or moped on a track, but does that make the track good? No, just a lot of miniature crap...haha
Overrated to me.
You could use in game money or real money...makes no difference. When things are strictly "optional", it doesn't matter to me if a monetary charge is involved. It's when developers force feeds you their purchases...such as gas in Frontier...simply awful. Paying for a custom house or bridge...I could careless if I gave someone $1 to use it. I would gladly give to most good creators on Evo and not think twice.
Imagine if you only got a "thank you" card for Christmas every year...that's great, but I'd rather get some cash
They're even monetizing Twitch with in stream ads...it has become horrid.
That was way too much to type...Noahrock has rubbed off on me. Now, onto posting in 14 different threads here....
Member
Member
While i would be more willing to accept a "donation" model (and keeping all user created content free).
Even then i think this is a bad idea.
Either the creations would be so basic that i would rather the individuals just learn to do it themselves and add their own touch.
Or the creations would be so big that you would just end up seeing the same Catapult, Spaceship, etc. in alot of tracks.
Senior Member
If I may, here is my take on the potential future of games and store front user content creation.
My main example here is something I seemingly understand very little, but enough to use it as a point.
Valve (in cooperation with Hidden Path Entertainment) released Counter Strike: Global Offensive.
The game has (since it released) opened up with a Workshop which allows players to create their own modifications to the game, most notably levels to play in, and weapon skins to fancy up your shooting experience.
Items from the workshop (levels, skins) are not able to be used in the game if you are playing on official Valve servers, until they are voted in by the community.
For weapon skins, they just "make it in" and it is my understanding that the content creators in that sense will receive a cut of the money made.
For levels, they enter a testing period, in which players (including myself) throw down a few bucks ($2.99 US) to have a chance to play these maps on official Valve servers. This lasts for a few months or so. Then players vote on which ones will ultimately return as standard maps to remain in the game. If I am correct, the content creators also receive a piece of this money as well.
I know this might not be a favorable model for all players, to be honest I was almost disgusted at first, but now that I understand all that I do, I'm actually impressed.
In addition to this, the game drops random weapon skins and cases (that hold weapon skins, to be unlocked with a key that is typically $2.49 US) at the end of most official server matches to random players.
^^^ Among these cases, there is the eSports case, and if I'm correct (again, so much uncertainty) all profits Valve receives from the purchase of keys to open these cases (eSport) go towards the pot to be awarded to the world champions in CS:GO.
It's a monetary cycle that keeps the game fresh, the (quality) content creators paid, and the livelihood of the community intact.
Did I mention the best part? Here it is:
Everything I listed is optional. If you care nothing for the "potential new levels" and weapon skins, then that's fine. It does nothing to the core game experience. Weapon skins don't shoot better, they just look cool (and some track your kills). The Steam Market for these items is almost unfathomable, as certain weapon skins easily sell for hundreds of dollars.
Does that bother you? I pose this question because I feel that ultimately it shouldn't. Valve is heading in a direction where we the gamers, decide what something is worth. They may control that with rarity and such, but it only matters if you make it. Would I spend $80 for an AK-47 that looks cool and tracks the kills I make with it? Of course not. But should I open a case and find one, I have the option to sell it (and yes I have, but not that gun).
As I stated before, the core game is untouched.
I understand that this is not perfectly aligned with the original idea posed by the OP, but I see a lot of people not in favor of "micro transactions" and "in-app" purchases.
I firmly believe this model to be an interesting step forward for a game caught up in a world of free to play and "pay to win" marketing strategies.
Track Central has shown us how we, as a community, can take something as great as Trials, and make it even better. The trick, I suppose, is finding the balance between profitability and enjoyment, on both ends (developer / player). I'm comfortable with the path RedLynx has taken.
It isn't right for everything, and probably not Trials, but I hope you can see how it wouldn't destroy the game.
Thanks for reading. We have a great developer here (RL). They tend to choose top content creators to join the company and flourish what we know as Trials.
Member
Hahah dude iv posted way too much in the last 2 weeks ; ) <- noseless smileyOriginally Posted by VEGASTRASHGood idea Gandja. A store would open up animation to novice builders. Nothing wrong with pulling some code into a track, you didn't create. Web designers...etc do it all the time. How things are implemented makes someone a good builder, not a few custom objects. Personally, I think custom objects are great, but too much emphasis is placed on them when judging a track's worth. It's nice to see a mini car or moped on a track, but does that make the track good? No, just a lot of miniature crap...haha
Overrated to me.
You could use in game money or real money...makes no difference. When things are strictly "optional", it doesn't matter to me if a monetary charge is involved. It's when developers force feeds you their purchases...such as gas in Frontier...simply awful. Paying for a custom house or bridge...I could careless if I gave someone $1 to use it. I would gladly give to most good creators on Evo and not think twice.
Imagine if you only got a "thank you" card for Christmas every year...that's great, but I'd rather get some cash
They're even monetizing Twitch with in stream ads...it has become horrid.
That was way too much to type...Noahrock has rubbed off on me. Now, onto posting in 14 different threads here....
Dont you think that wed see something like a skidoo for example overused and in way too many tracks and then it wouldnt be special anymore, and it wouldnt make someones creation(s) feel special when they create something that they worked hard to figure out how to do or make (when everythings already out there on this marketplace aswell)
Agreed gas on frontier was horrible when there was still new tracks and missions to be played (beat the game now, at least up untill the waiting for next update part)
Nice job on the long post hope you did some of your pre-trials exercises before getting on the keyboard jHaha
Senior Member
I'd still rather see good FREE detailed builder tutorials (both written and videos), instead of purchasing custom objects/code blocks from other players, you learn less from that in my opinion.
The community can both take part in and benefit from making tutorials instead of just selling them, and it would set a good base of dedicated effort for things like True Fan.
Even if it's custom bike skins/rider outfits being offered as vanity items, no thanks.
Senior Member
Member
No one is forcing you to do anything. Even in the post apocalyptic vision some people here are having where everything made on track central costs money and the evil people at redlynx just rake in the money and laugh maniacally, even then you wouldnt be forced to buy anything. Just because you choose not to participate in something doesnt mean other people wouldnt gladly give their money, and it certainly isnt a valid argument against it.Originally Posted by ShartRelief
