How Fateless Plans to Make Spending Feel Fair

“Monetization” is one of those words that can suck the oxygen out of a room in a hero collector. Everyone has baggage. Everyone has opinions. And everyone’s been burned at least once by a game that took the fun, wrapped it in a price tag, and then tried to sell it back to them. In this podcast, Simon and Corey from Fateless sit down with content creators Ragewood and Jake Smash to talk openly about what Godforge monetization might look like, what is likely not coming at early access launch, and how they plan to balance spenders and non spenders without turning the store into a stress factory.

Simon sets the tone early. Godforge is a live service game, and the studio has to earn revenue to keep building it. The key promise is that spending should enhance your experience, not replace playing the game. If you want to spend, Fateless wants you to feel rewarded. If you do not want to spend, there should still be a clear path to progress, build teams, and enjoy the core content.

Both creators echo a similar mindset. Jake admits he has historically spent above average in games like Raid and Watcher of Realms, mainly because he enjoys being competitive. Ragewood also spends, but as a creator he wants to clear content without spending first, so his advice is not just “bring the best hero and win.” That mix of perspectives is important, because it reflects the real spread of players Godforge will need to serve.

Corey is blunt that early access is not the moment to ship every monetization feature under the sun. The priority is building a great game loop first, because the game itself needs to create reasons to invest. Many store systems are expensive to build and maintain, and they can cannibalize development time that would be better spent on new modes, better combat, improved progression, and more satisfying encounters.

The result is a simple expectation for players. Early access should start with a lighter store and fewer complicated offer types, then expand through iteration based on what the community actually responds to.

Jake brings up tiered packs, often called string packs, where buying one offer unlocks the next. He also calls out a common frustration: strings that hide terrible value in the middle just to force you to reach the good part at the end.

Simon does not pretend this dynamic does not exist. In most games, the final step is designed to be the most appealing because the point is to encourage completion of the chain. Fateless does not want to feel predatory, but they also are not aiming to reinvent basic offer design. The important difference is tone and frequency, and whether offers feel fair and optional rather than manipulative and compulsory.

Ragewood asks one of the biggest questions in the genre: can you buy heroes, weapons, or imprints outright, and is anything off limits?

The answer is more philosophical than absolute. Corey explains that if everything is directly for sale, you are telling players they are paying instead of playing. That erodes long term motivation and turns the game into a checkout screen. Simon adds that imprints are a premium style reward that can be used to drive events and engagement, and the weapon and imprint system is one of Godforge’s key differentiators. They want players to interact with it, chase it, and enjoy it.

The takeaway is not “never,” but it strongly suggests Godforge wants parts of the ecosystem to remain play driven, so the game retains meaning and longevity.

One of the most interesting ideas discussed is the calendar style purchase, sometimes called an annuity model. You spend once, and you receive rewards over time. Corey says these performed well with audiences in games like Marvel Strike Force, partly because they support budget minded players who want value and they encourage daily engagement without adding pressure.

The example shared is spicy: beat a campaign boss, then see a purchasable calendar tied to that hero that pays out over a set period, such as 21 days, and includes resources that help you build that hero quickly. Ragewood asks the practical question: is this a buy now or lose it offer? Simon and Corey push back against stress tactics. They want enough time to think, but they also acknowledge that offers cannot sit forever or the store becomes cluttered.

Ragewood brings up a real player behavior: people create personal value rules, like a price per pull currency, and anything above that feels bad. Simon points out that the genre already has a market baseline. Players have learned what normal prices feel like across similar games, so pull currency tends to land in familiar ranges.

Corey goes deeper into the product logic. Their North Star metric is LTV, or lifetime value, which is shaped by retention, payer conversion, transaction velocity, and average purchase price. The goal is not simply higher prices or more offers. The goal is finding a balance that supports satisfaction and retention. They will use feedback surveys, store impression tracking, revisit tracking, and conversion data to iterate during early access until the store fits Godforge’s audience.

Jake asks about banners and whether Godforge will use progressive pity systems like Watcher of Realms, where your chance to land a featured hero increases after misses. Simon says Godforge does not have that exact system planned, but there will be banner style elements, especially tied to the Tower and its Order and Chaos paths, with rotating hero availability.

Corey adds an important design concern: too many modern games create confusion by flooding players with banners and currencies, which forces research before fun. Godforge wants a gacha experience that keeps community excitement high, preserves roster variety, and still gives players something to chase through featured heroes and event rule sets.

This podcast does not promise a perfect store. What it does signal is a direction: build the game first, keep spending optional, and iterate with the community instead of locking into a rigid plan.