Alpe Du Zwift Level 12 :-( :-( could be bye bye zwift


(Mike Day) #41

Has the angry dude ever thought of riding his bike as a stress reducer. The state he’s in he’d get to level 12 in about three days.


(Neil Lloyd) #42

Mike, cudos for comment of the day!

Seriously tho, everyone has differing points of view but abuse is abuse plain and simple and not cool.


(S. M.(C)) #43

I been been on most platforms out there all are about the same cost all in various stages of where they are at in their development life cycles.

TrainerRoad - I gave up as I couldn’t mentally stare at a small dot on the screen

Sufferefest - Not enough Variety

Perfpro (Programmed Own Workouts) again like TR only can stare at a dot so long.

I keep coming back to Zwift just due to the fact I can choose a route which fits my workout and what I mentally can stomach.  For example I don’t climb ADZ when I have a tempo ride under 1.8w/kg as anything under 2.2 w/kg will be very very slow.  Even at 2.5-2.7 you are looking at over an hour from the turn at the bottom.  

I participate in events, races, and do workouts.  I don’t really engage in the social aspect as its a training platform for me.   There is a game aspect to Zwift and that is fun even though it doesn’t mean much to me.  I like to see my XP increasing, I like the bonuses at the top of ADZ, and I like to watch my level go up.  

They have to make money so waiting to get to level 12 is no different than buying a digital asset.  They want you to want to come back and “encourage” you by limiting levels and features. 

They are a baby in the development world of a platform.  They built it from the ground up.  They cant do it all at once or have the budget like big game makers sometimes close to $1Billion US and many years.  You many not agree but try an alternative you will be back.  If you can mentally stare at a dot get PerfPro ($150) one time fee.  Free Updates.  They have tons of workouts or you can program your own.  Just remember you will be stuck watching a dot.


(James Tolosa *AGILA CYCLING*) #44

I say good riddance. Cancel your account if you don’t like it. It’s a free country. I’m happy to have a leveling goal to work towards and wouldn’t have Zwift change a thing.


(Joe) #45

As alluded to somewhere above, you *can* gain access to Level-restricted areas by opting to join a friend who is already riding in that area.  I’m Level 25 and have a friend who just joined recently.  He ‘joined’ me one night while I was in the jungle and got to ride that area despite only being at Level 3 at the time. 

i.e. you don’t necessarily have to join a big group ride to get on to AdZ, you just need a friend who’s at or above Level 12 to tell you when they’re riding it.  

 


(Jeff williams) #46

Paul Allen, I call BS! You obviously work for Zwift.


(Paul Allen (Watopia Wayfinder)) #47

Jeff,

Nope, I don’t work for Zwift.

Ride On!


(Jeff williams) #48

Most of you “people” are missing the point. He,like I, pay for the service. Why aren’t all paying members allowed to use all of the services? Does it state anywhere when you sign up that you must be some random level to use the features you pay for? NO. Does it state anywhere that this form of prejudice should just be accepted, even if you pay the same, or more than other members? NO. The fact that most of you find this practice acceptable is mind blowing and eye opening. If they want to employ this type of reward system, then they need to deploy tiered membership rates. What if they said only white Norwegians can ride it? would that be ok? Same difference. Ride On, but only if you fit the arbitrary criteria.


(Paul Allen (Watopia Wayfinder)) #49

Jeff,

If you join another rider or do a group ride that takes that route you would also have access to it. No one under level 12 is totally excluded from riding the route.


(Stuart Middlecoate) #50

Jeff, if you don’t like the terms of your subscription feel free to cancel it & go elsewhere. You’ll not be missed.


(Neil) #51

Also, Jeff, you are misunderstanding what prejudice is. Everyone starts off at level 1 and has to play by the same rules, so there is no prejudice. That’s an important distinction because real prejudice is a thing.


(S. M.(C)) #52

Jeff my son got ARK Evolution for Christmas.  Game cost me close to $50 bucks.  When he starts the game he is at level 1.  He doesnt have all the gear or experience (level) points to do certain things.  That is gained over time by playing.  As time passes he gains points and experience which allow him to do more things.  Zwift is doing the same thing.  Same as my wife playing clash of clans.  She doesnt start with townhall level 12.  She has to bide her time playing and gaining elixr and gold to which she can then buy stuff, upgrade it, and move further along in the game.  Its the way of the world and how all video games or services work these days online.  People may not even like it, but we understand it.  Same as with Zwift why you earn certain bikes, helmets, gloves, wheels, and ADZ climb.  Its a reward for playing and paying for the service.  JMHO though.


(Adam Fielding) #53

From reading the comments its clear that there is at least two train of thoughts here, which (IMO) is causing this argument.

  1. Zwift is a training tool, with access to an open world and training regimes. I pay a monthly price regardless of my time spent in the world and I should have access to everything. (like a gym membership)

  2. Zwift is a “game” which you can interact and engage with on your trainer. It supplements and enhances my training experience. 

Now, I’m not saying this is binary, that you’re in one or the other, but there is a sliding scale between the two.

It’s also worth noting there are multiple different types of game models available. The two games mentioned above use completely different player and financial engagements. Take for example ARK Evolution. Like any traditional game, you pay an upfront fee and expect to ‘unlock’ content as you go. You could play this game in a couple of hours, days, weeks, months or years, but it still only costs you a fixed amount. Clash of clans, however, is Freemium, you don’t pay any monthly price, but you can pay for getting unlocks quicker. Then there are games like Eve online, where you pay a monthly amount and have to unlock content as you go. However, this game has a very low engagement rate and can normally be played throughout the day whilst doing other jobs. 

Zwift currently has a highly focused player engagement period, whilst having a monthly fee as well as XP locked core content. I can’t think of any highly successful ‘games’ that follow the same model (please comment if you can).

For this argument to be settled, I think Zwift need to make a clearer mission statement for the platform they are providing. Do they want to provide a training platform, whereby they should probably let all paying users have access to core content (e.g. maps), or are they more game focused. If the later I would hope Zwift look at other gaming trends and patterns to see what has been successful in the past. 


(S. M.(C)) #54

Look at Fortenite game du jour…  Free or it was free to download.  However you have to pay a monthly subscription to Xbox live gold in our case to play it.  Many of the games today dont have offline anymore.  So yes the game may have one upfront fee  but the ongoing xbox live gold membership is almost necessary for many games today.  Same concept as the one upfront fee but to get better things or levels you have to pay a fee.  So now that $50 game is $70 with an ogoing fee of about $100 bucks a year for Xbox Live Gold or whatever it is for PS4.  Another similar parallel would be Netflix.  I dont have acces to everything on their streaming library as there are geo restrictions in place for various reasons.   Yes they are all slightly different but very similar as well. 

I explained this thread and what was going on to my 11 year old.  He knew right away what was happening and drew very similar parallels.   Zwift does have aspects of both game and training, but I would guess its more game to keep people engaged.    Its the reason there are events, the power ups, you earn new gear as you ride more, and levels are unlocked based on XP.  If you want a full training module Trainer Road and PerfPro (one time fee ever) are the ways to go.  Put in your workout or use one of their existing ones and stare at a dot on the screen.  

I personally use Todays Plan for the training workouts and they sync right into Zwift and I get the best of both worlds.


(Andrew Smith) #55

I don’t actually use Netflix but I do have a subscription to Amazon Prime video. I have only ever used this to watch the Grand Tour. I would really be pretty annoyed if I had to watch 38 hours of other stuff before I gained enough experience points on Amazon video to unlock access to the Grand Tour, but if I was a new Zwift user then I’d need to ride for around 38 hours before I could ride the Alpe (and yes I know I could ride it with someone else or in a group ride).

To me, and I accept that this is my opinion and other opinions are also valid, Zwift is more like Netflix or Amazon Prime video than a pure video game. In other words, I think that the monthly fee should unlock access to all the key features of the platform, not some artificial XP limit.

I think it’s bad business for Zwift to upset a proportion of its customers by imposing this cap - even if most don’t have a problem with it. I would be surprised if there were calls for this cap to be introduced if it didn’t exist.


(Jeff williams) #56

So far as the gaming aspect, it should be for gear only. Nobody that pays the membership rate should be prohibited from doing any of the courses, at any time. People keep bringing up games. I’m not a gamer thus I would have NEVER paid money if they marketed this as a game instead of a training tool. It can’t be both just for arguments sake.

I’m glad you brought up Netflix. They have tiered packages, which is what Zwift should have if they want to continue these sorts of practices, otherwise open up the courses for serious training because that is what we’re paying for right? 

For those who don’t like “staring at a dot” during training, try BigRingVR, though Trainer Road is absolutely effective, neither of which lock content I might add. For those who like the “gaming” look of Zwift but want real serious training ( as opposed to riding aimlessly for general exercise), try the double ant+ dongle and run both, TR and Zwift at the same time.


(Adam Fielding) #57

I don’t think the two examples you have given here are comparable to Zwift which is owned and distributed by a single company.

For clarity, I assume you are talking about Fortnite Battle Royal, which is a free download and not the original Fortnite game which is a paid for zombie tower defense game. 

You only pay monthly subscriptions to Xbox or Playstation because you are using their platform hardware, online services, friend & social systems. You’re not paying to play the game online. Fortnite can be downloaded on PC or mobile and enjoy free multiplayer. That ongoing fee isn’t going to Epic games (the developer of Fortnite).

Netflix locks content based on region, primarily due to copyright laws across multiple nations.

Zwift doesn’t run on PlayStation or Xbox which is probably due to both platforms wanting to charge Zwift or users for using their online services. Likewise, Zwift owns the copyright to the content they are making, therefore can publish it anywhere in the world. 

I agree, having small XP unlocks to get people to keep coming back is a great idea, its the content in those unlocks that has to be judged. 

Thats why I suggest that the team at Zwift should look at the latest game development trends, the likes of EA, Activision, Ubisoft etc whereby there are XP unlocks for cosmetic items or new characters, but the industry is moving away from charging for maps, tracks and other content which divides up the community social environments. (See PUBG, Rainbow Six, Star Wars Battlefront etc) 


(David Griscom YCW) #58

Put me squarely in the Zwift is a training tool camp.  I would support opening all routes up regardless of level.  I sure hope Zwift doesn’t go down the gamer path.  If they start adding zombies or weapons, that would probably by a deal breaker for me


(Joe) #59

“It can’t be both just for arguments sake.”

 

But it CAN be both. And for a lot of users, it is. That’s the whole point.

If you don’t care about the game-like aspects of the platform (which, honestly? I genuinely never have - except on the rare occasions when I decided to try racing…see below.) - then you can use ‘workout mode’ exclusively for structured interval training w/ the distraction of the graphics (scenery) as a bonus. This is what I did for the better part of a year.

When you’re doing workouts in Zwift (w. ERG or without), the terrain you’re on has absolutely no effect anyway. There are no changes in resistance when going uphill or down.  So, whether you do ‘The Wringer’ or some SST on a totally flat course or up the Epic KOM - the workout experience / training efficacy is exactly the same.  The only difference is your ‘virtual’ speed and distance covered - but if all you care about is training? That’s all moot anyway, except perhaps for tracking changes in your performance over time.  

That you also earn XP and unlock new gear for successfully completing intervals doesn’t matter in this case. As a training tool, it makes no difference which virtual bike you ride or which courses you can (or cannot) access.    

OTOH, some people (though I suspect they are relatively few in number) seem to see it *purely* as a game to be played like any other video game. Complete with innovative ways of “cheating” (a look at the top spots for pretty much any zwift Strava segment and the associated impossible times makes this clear.)  What’s the motivation? IDK. Probably just to annoy those who take ‘virtual cycling’ too seriously and for bragging rights among the other ‘pure gamers’.  

The middle ground is Zwift racing.  If you’ve ever done it and tried to hang on competitively, you know it is a *tremendous* workout.  But it’s also the only place that ‘playing the game’ can actually make a difference (e.g. a better bike makes you faster for a given effort, and strategic use of ‘power-ups’ - where allowed - can mean the difference between winning and not for those at the front.

In short, Zwift is whatever you want it to be: Training tool with nice graphics.  Game. Social Activity. Virtual racing venue. Or varying combinations of all of the above. That’s really what makes it unique among the competition, imo.  

 


(Gerrie Delport TeamODZ) #60

Seriously, are you guys complaining that there are certain goals that you have to earn. 

I think it is a lot of fun to to have that carrot out there and chase it. 

There are ways to ride the new sections by joining group rides/races and workouts also you can ride with a friend.

I wish these type of challenges “unlocks” was there when I started Zwift, I would have trained a lot more in the beginning. 

If you are just using it as a training tool then you would be mostly in workout mode and could do your workout on any section of road.