Compulsory Licensing Rather Than Artificial Monopolies?
Laptop Spy Scandal Administrator Just "Loved" Violating Students' Fourth Amendment Rights

Dungeons And Dragons Players Revolt, Storm Super Rewards Castle

(Mis)Uses of Technology

from the spam-survey-broadsword-of-doom dept

Mon, Apr 19th 2010 12:01pm — Karl Bode

We've been covering how Turbine recently changed the business model of their online role-playing game Dungeons And Dragons Online from the fairly typical MMORPG pricing system ($50 for the game and then $15/month to play) to a business model where users can play for free -- but pony up some cash for some additional perks. The decision has been a significant success for a game that was headed downhill in the shadow of larger MMORPG's, like Blizzard's World Of Warcraft, and Turbine saw milions of new players the first few months after the change. However, Nick writes in to direct our attention to the fact that some additional Turbine efforts wound up pushing our free-loving Elven and Dwarven friends a bit too hard.

The company recently implemented a Super Rewards "offer wall." Like in popular Facebook games like Farmville, the offer wall allowed users to fill out surveys and participate in other marketing efforts in exchange for Turbine points, which could be used in game for goods and services. Except judging from posts to the Turbine forums, users weren't pleased to learn that their account name and email were being sent to Super Rewards just for visiting the page -- and some of the early offers wound up being "questionable," even according to a Turbine forum statement. Despite a few changes, customers continued to complain and Turbine wound up tearing down the wall -- "for now":

"Based on your feedback, we're stepping away from the ‘Offer' category for now. We'll keep exploring alternate ways for players who want points to get them. We'll also continue to innovate in pricing and accessibility because that's who we are. As of today, the Offer Wall is coming down. We'll collect all the feedback we've received over the last few days and will use it to guide future decisions."

It's great that Turbine was willing to listen to customer feedback and pull back from (or revise) an offer that was annoying, though it seemed easy enough for users to avoid these kinds of offers if they wanted. The company still seems to be doing quite well by selling a revolving array of specialized in-game loot and additional adventures, though there's also a fine balancing act at play between offering users worthy, compelling content -- and pushing microtransactions to the point where they frustrate and annoy the userbase. That said, many gamers seem perfectly eager to pay a lot of money for relatively little; Blizzard Entertainment recently earned millions in fairly short order by selling users a $25 horse -- which offered players' in-game characters no additional in-game character bonus.

Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: d&d, gaming, lead generation, revolts

42 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    paperbag (profile), 19 Apr 2010 @ 12:22pm

    not horse armor! :)

    As a WoW nerd (who quit back in Aug09) I'll have to say it's not horse armor, but a mount which can be rode. :)

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 19 Apr 2010 @ 12:27pm

      Re: not horse armor! :)

      Yeah, and that mount can be used in flying and in mounted situations. This apparently saves players a bag slot. Of course, players have a lot of bag slots by that point in the game, but an extra slot is worth something.

      There's a WoW-clone called Runes of Magic that's free to play, and has an in game economy working between gold (in game) and diamonds (bought with real-world money). My guess is the producers were doing pretty well. Several of my guildies had bought hundreds of dollars worth of diamonds before I quit.

      It's a decent example of giving stuff away to build a fan base, and sell a few scarce things (artificially in this case) to make money. They also implemented an advertisement option.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        detour, 19 Apr 2010 @ 1:02pm

        Re: Re: not horse armor! :)

        actually, it doesn't save a bag slot as mounts and pets no longer take up bag space (they are "learned" and can be cast from the character UI). However, it does give this mount to all current and future characters, so in the long run saves you gold.

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Nick Coghlan (profile), 19 Apr 2010 @ 2:32pm

          Re: Re: Re: not horse armor! :)

          The most important part though is likely just that the mount graphic in-game is very, very pretty.

          There are also a couple of in-game achievements relating to the number of mounts you collect, and this one probably counts as one more for the tally.

          [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Karl Bode (profile), 19 Apr 2010 @ 12:29pm

      Re: not horse armor! :)

      Hah, corrected, thank you.

      Was confusing the new offer with that Oblivion Horse armor from a year or two ago.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 19 Apr 2010 @ 12:22pm

    karl how many companies get information off of every page view on techdirt? how many set cookies, track ip addresses, and other information to create unique user profiles or to aggregate data? how many of them use that information later? i you would say you need to ask the masnick about it. it would make a good story on techdirt.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Esahc (profile), 19 Apr 2010 @ 12:36pm

      Re:

      Using the occasional capital letter is a good thing.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 19 Apr 2010 @ 12:40pm

      Re:

      Jeez man, didnt you know everyone who reads TechDirt uses Onion routing?

      Get with the times old man.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 19 Apr 2010 @ 12:47pm

      Re:

      What sites buy and track and what information they get is irrelevant. The question is: Why is this not explicitly disclosed upon arriving at Techdirt? Witholding information causes market inefficiencies. Give full disclosure and let the market decide if selling the information is viable.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 19 Apr 2010 @ 12:49pm

      Re:

      You really enjoy beating dead horses.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      The Infamous Joe (profile), 19 Apr 2010 @ 12:59pm

      Re:

      Now, I like FUD just as much as the next guy, but when I think of concerns about data mining and aggregation, Techdirt falls *way* below, oh, I dunno, Google.

      If you don't like the stories on Techdirt, just go away. Really. If you're not here to actually *discuss* the topics, why are you here? I mean, the only way you could get me to go to a site that I didn't like-- that I refused to even discuss topics with-- would be if I were... paid to.

      Hm..

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        :Lobo Santo (profile), 19 Apr 2010 @ 1:05pm

        Re: Re:

        Don't logic too hard, you'll sprain something.

        There ARE people out there who will repeatedly hit themselves on the head with a hammer, because it feels goood when then stop...

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 19 Apr 2010 @ 5:31pm

        Re: Re:

        i am discussing the topic. i think it is key to consider who is raising the topic and what they are doing with your information. shouldnt techdirt be above reproach before calling others out?

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 19 Apr 2010 @ 12:40pm

    it was not just that it was annoying, the third party marketing company involved is a known gold scammer/account hacker/malware distributor.
    There was absolutely no excuse for getting in to bed with them in the first place, and it was a direct threat to users computer security.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 19 Apr 2010 @ 12:42pm

    Maybe so, but at what point does selling items in a game that you already are paying a monthy subscription for get out of hand?

    I know some World of Warcraft players are getting annoyed that the only way to recieve certain items, 3 different vanity pets, and now a useable mount, is to "pony" up even more cash.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 19 Apr 2010 @ 12:43pm

    It was a sparkle pony, not just a horse. Get it right. :P

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Hulser (profile), 19 Apr 2010 @ 12:46pm

    There's just something that I don't like about games which are based on paying cash for in-game items. I feel like it would mean that a kid with his parents' credit card could just buy all of the items that another player would have to earn by in-game activities. Yeah, I know that Turbine are trying out new business models and on one level, I admire them for that, but it just seeme unfair. I suppose there is a way to strike a balance, but in my mind, buying in-game items just seems to much like buying gold from a gold farmer.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Atkray (profile), 19 Apr 2010 @ 1:45pm

      Re:

      I feel like it would mean that a kid with his parents' credit card could just buy all of the items that another player would have to earn by in-game activities.


      It is called MapleStory.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 19 Apr 2010 @ 12:55pm

    If a game is selling vanity items in game i can't see the issue with it, if it's game changers, "buy this or don't bother logging in at end game" then its time to find a new game.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Akj (profile), 19 Apr 2010 @ 1:10pm

    To clarify

    "This apparently saves players a bag slot."

    No it doesn't. Mounts no longer take up bag space.

    There is really NO in-game benefit to the paid mount, none whatsoever.

    Well, except it looks neat...

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 19 Apr 2010 @ 1:14pm

    Super Rewards is essentially an entire platform devoted to scamming players/users into giving up their personal information or entering into "opt out in 30 days or we'll charge your credit card every month!"

    Any company who uses Super Rewards and then feigns ignorance and shock and surprise about the "questionable offers" is just playing dumb.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Zac Morris (profile), 19 Apr 2010 @ 1:20pm

    Today is my 9th anniversary, thanks for the gift idea TechDirt!

    Today is my 9th anniversary with my partner. Thanks for the gift idea TechDirt. The Celestial Mount is PERFECT!

    ;-)

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Joseph, 19 Apr 2010 @ 1:26pm

    Re

    ** Blizzard Entertainment recently earned millions in fairly short order by selling users a $25 horse -- which offered players' in-game characters no additional in-game character bonus.**

    This would be incorrect. The mount in question is given to all current and future characters on the account regardless of the server they are on. Also this mount can take the place of four separate mounts that have to be obtained 'normally' in the game. This would be a considerable bonus.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 19 Apr 2010 @ 1:48pm

    "which offered players' in-game characters no additional in-game character bonus."

    Not true, as Joseph pointed out. The mount automatically scales with skill (it gets faster/flies as you get better riding skill).

    They seem immensely popular too - they're all over the place

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 19 Apr 2010 @ 3:04pm

    achievements are also vanity crap. Again, not game breaking. It wont help you kill Arthas.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    BearGriz72 (profile), 19 Apr 2010 @ 8:07pm

    I just bought a $25 imaginary horse

    I just bought a $25 imaginary horse
    LOL

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    TechNoFear (profile), 19 Apr 2010 @ 11:28pm

    It was not 'easy' to avoid....

    Just viewing Turbine's 'Offer Wall' sent your username and email unencrypted to a third party, without your knowledge or consent.

    Note I said 'viewing' not 'actively participating / responding / clicking'.

    http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=242978

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Txknight (profile), 20 Apr 2010 @ 1:55am

    I bought the horse, quite fun and puts me 4 short of my albino drake mount

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Eo Nomine, 20 Apr 2010 @ 5:35am

    RE: Privacy Policy?

    The issue of what TechDirt may or may not do with "personal information" raises something I've always wondered about: why does TechDirt have no privacy policy? Or terms of use for that matter? Given the amount of space this blog devotes to copyright and privacy (usually railing against them), I've always found it odd that the blog itself sets no rules about these issues.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    NAMELESS.ONE, 20 Apr 2010 @ 1:55pm

    BEWARE the malware nd spyware

    nuff said and if you do these thigns your on your own dont complain when weird things start happening to you

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]


Compulsory Licensing Rather Than Artificial Monopolies?
Laptop Spy Scandal Administrator Just "Loved" Violating Students' Fourth Amendment Rights
Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Loading...
Recent Stories

Friday

19:39 Important Announcement: Techdirt Is Migrating To A New Platform (0)
More arrow

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.