Waderkvarn Battle Pass Leak/Review -English

I’m starting to think these mini BPs might be more about giving newer players (or veterans who skipped previous BPs) a chance to catch up with those of us that bought all the previous real BPs.
When you look at the repeat items, it makes a bit of sense. Especially things like the fused beholder from a previous mini BP.
So I’m still not going to buy them, but I see the purpose of them for others.
I might make some coin selling ingredient items though, if prices go haywire enough.

2 Likes

Yeah… same. I mean, for $10, you are getting pretty good value (far better than that stupid pack they released). I may buy it just for the Wakidate & coin I can get selling over time.

That’s kind of an apologetic way to look at it. Had they just continued to add stuff to the core game as they were originally doing there wouldn’t be any need for these types of extra steps. They literally created a problem for players in order to sell a solution to them at a later date.

1 Like

I thought you got a CK for the Retcher, and not an actual Retcher. Do you get a Retcher, or just the CK?

2 Likes

I think it’s a CK

1 Like

I’ll take the BP system over pack-exclusive items any day.

Ya, it’s just the CK…meh. So it’s basically two trombones, two Summators, two Youguais, and some other stuff.

1 Like

I meant it more as to be really considered true F2P everything should be craft-able by every player. The exceptions are really just early access and that’s about it and that shouldn’t be a permanent situation. The only pack exclusive item when I started was the golden eagle and that should have been added into the core game a long time ago.

I’ve never been very happy with the fortnite inspired BP system. I will admit a few of the challenges can be entertaining when they are build or play styles that a player isn’t use to. It’s nothing innovative or new though.

The idea of locking workbenches behind paywalls in events is ridiculous too. Similarly the idea of buying a excusive pack item off the market and saying it’s fair and accessible is just as much so ridiculous also. This doesn’t change the fact that the item was bought, paid, and placed on the market by someone else.

1 Like

You can think of it as a paid item

1 Like

I would love if everything was craft-able, but I don’t see how that works in a F2P game.
And the player market allows anyone to grind for anything. This seems fair, as many items are cheaper to buy than to craft (meaning selling your grinded resources).
BPs are a great value, compared to the other ways a F2P game could fund itself.

It’s simply not cornering in anything beyond a set period of time. I.e. after a year or so the goods are released to the general game. If I wanted; say CK for every weapon, I’d probably have to commission them from artists. Depending on cost I would budget in how much for the original design and the percentage of profit I want to see over other expenses. I would then work this into the presentation to the player stating that the purchase goes towards the release of the CK in this case to the main game. I would keep it really transparent as far as progress towards release.

In terms of other items I do much the same and even think about retiring some weapons for newer models while replacing them on the crafting charts. This would let them refresh the main game more often while keeping things fresh for the players. New models would come out in packs, bp, or events still until they are paid off. Since they seem to want to manage some of the crafting this is where I’d relegate it too. i.e. how often a retired weapon comes up to craft and any alternative crafting routes with them. Having alt crafting routes and caches of old weapons turning up would probably not up-end the market that much. This could also clip out to handle some of the buffs and nerfs as well.

If the original person had to pay for the item it’s still a paid item regardless if you grind to purchase it from them. The causality is how it came to the market.

Sure if your looking for a cheap fix to attain something early that’s beyond your own resource pool.

There’s a lot of things that could be done without going deep into paywalled strata of the various shades of P2W. Right now though the current method is very much setting up a caste system of players though depending on when they pay in.

um. the pass takes Pack-exclusive items in order to craft stuff.

Yes it makes perfect business sense to re-use already created assets to limit costs and increase profits.

It has zero to do with “being nice and letting new players catch up” or “give older players a chance at it”.

If that was the case, it wouldn’t be behind the paywall at all.

I agree that the crafting recipe for this new gun is weird, and maybe just an attempt to seduce whales into dropping some coin.

But regarding the normal BPs, I don’t see a problem. Game has to make money, and they’re a good bargain.
The suggestions about maximum transparency around developer costs per item just doesn’t make sense in a for-profit game. You’re describing something similar to a not-for-profit business model, where breaking even is the goal. Cool idea, but not realistic.

Basically everything is recycled, there’s like 2 new models (Retcher CK and the new gun), we’ll probably get scammed of the lvl 76+ stuff as usual, and we don’t even get a decent amount of fused items out of it?

Hard pass UwU

2 Likes

I disagree here.

To be true free to play game you need to provide a way to get the items for free.

Grind free resources = turn free resources to free coins with the market = buy whatever you want with free coins for free.

They do not need to provide a way for you to craft the item for it to be free.

1 Like
  1. the event game mode , Fun. 2. Crafting : Bunk/ worthless and a Ponzi scheme. 3. Awards: Like leftovers from the fridge nobody wants only to turn in too a refrigerator science project.
2 Likes

what?? where do you get not for profit??? holy shiz that’s a stupid statement when used with this game.

So you think selling something you already created a second time makes it “not for profit”?

Except on Bind to Account items.

I’m talking about this idea that the devs should be transparent about how much it costs them to introduce an item, and then let it be available for free once that investment has been paid off through pack sales or whatever.
If that’s not what was being described, I apologize.
If that was what was being proposed, that fits in better with how not-for-profit businesses operate.

I think you are confusing the various things I was talking about. Offering the same BP item in a later mini-BP is definitely a for-profit concept, but so what? The game is a business, and it doesn’t hurt me if they bring back some items for the mini-BPs. I can see why some people would buy those mini-BPs, but I have no use for them and I’m not tempted.
Which is basically my point: the mini-BPs aren’t very attractive to those of us that already did the main BPs, so the only way they make business sense is if they are meant for players who don’t already have those items (or those that just like to spend money). Charging for it is just more evidence that they are made for someone, just not me.

Edit: I just realized what happened: I meant to reply to Dirty Hamster, but your reply was quicker and ended up between us, making you think I was replying to you. Sorry for the confusion!

1 Like

ah gotcha. I was wondering!

Yeah, some new players want fancy stuff, and BP looks better than grind for it… But yeah, it’s it’s an established strategy, aimed to lure players to more microtransactions. Internal market dynamics even more suggestive for that.