I really think what people need to know breaks down to this;
*some people are trying to earn a living through their games*
If you wanted something truly free of charge I will point you to the amateur assortment at newgrounds.com. The people that do either because they want to get into the industry, or maybe just love doing this, or even on the slight chance they are actually doing this for you, John Q Public (and I assume a lot of you think you deserve such), their works will be seen on sites like that - and there is tons to choose from.
Now as for CS - sure it's "pushing it" when atop a modest sub already in place - but the arguement starts at the heart of the matter, where it originated in F2P games. It works in the East, but in the West it's universally seen as the "backup plan" for a failed game. It's basically running on donations, and we know how good people are with being generous to the entertainment industry... When a game relies solely on having people offer them money, it will fail - so the only choice is to add incentive, and no matter where the line may be at, somebody in the west is gonna bitch.
Even when the paying players are given advantages over others, what is that to a person with not enough interest in doing the same from the start? Many people keep F2P games as a side-MMO, and from that it's understandable that they don't want to put any money into it if they don't have to... but if it's really someone's side MMO, why such a demand to be competitive in it? Is it not your side-game simply because it's free? People actually paying for the items must see that game as the one that deserves their money, kind of how you treat your main squeeze, just get used to knowing that if your not that invested to begin with then don't cry about competing. Either way, somebody has got to get paid, and if that means the people you consider "suckers" have to - you should be happy somebody is.
Writer / Musician / Game Designer
Now Playing: Skyrim, Wurm Online, Tropico 4 Waiting On: GW2, TSW, Archeage, The Rapture
Being unable to make things perfectly fair is no excuse to not even try to balance things. That's just the law of the jungle, and I thought we had developed past that system. More fair is better than less fair. Take what you can get.
Oh sure, try and do what you can. Which is why there are beginner areas, and arena's which level restrictions. However, all that does is hide how unfair the contest is. Again, if my clone and I duel, and he has a +10% advantage. I'd expect him to win most of the time. Even a small advantage between equal opponents usually relates into a disproportionate win ratio. Otherwise why would people raid/pvp for that extra +1-2% crit, or what not?
For me, I don't care about cash shops because long ago I realized that I wasn't one of those compulsive people who will raid 5 nights a week, or PvP for several months to be on the top. I play the games for the story, the social aspects, and some casual competition. I know it's not fair, and hence I don't care what they did to get an advantage over me. I don't worry about the outcome since it has so little bearing on my skills or abilities.
Yes, more fair is better. However, when it's not fair to start, it really doesn't matter since the results will likely be the same in either case.
Edited for some atrocious grammar and spelling... <sigh>
I also refuse playing games with item malls or any form you can buy items with real money.
But i affraid majority dont care so soon all mmo's have them, then i simply quit mmo's but they dont care im a very small minority who realy quit playing..
Games played:AC1-Darktide'99-2000-AC2-Darktide/dawnsong2003-2005,Lineage2-2005-2006 and now Darkfall-2009..... In between WoW few months AoC few months and some f2p also all very short few weeks.
I also refuse playing games with item malls or any form you can buy items with real money.
But i affraid majority dont care so soon all mmo's have them, then i simply quit mmo's but they dont care im a very small minority who realy quit playing..
I don't think they will ALL have them, as the lack of one will be an attractive feature to some players.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
The above is bad logic. It's being perpetrated throughout this thread. The actual cause for A or B being bad is bad game design.
A, B, C, ... , and Y are low quality.
Therefore Z will also be low quality.
The above at least follows a pattern, but still isn't a foregone conclusion -- especially since we can very easily understand the fundamental reasons why most item shops are low quality currently.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Item malls aren't bad if they are just a few vanity items, while they keep majority of the vanity items ingame. See Blizzard/WoW, they have it done right. There are literally hundreds of pets and mounts you can get ingame, via farming rares, faction grind, questing, made from tradeskills, or purchased from other players.
Item malls are bad if they have a huge selection of vanity items for sale, more so than they have these items ingame. Things such as pets, illusions, mounts, etc.. When they have it in reverse, it means they're gimping the game and the quality of expansions on purpose, so you want to go out and buy these items because you can't get enough of these items ingame. See SOE/EQ1, they've totally ruined the gaming experience for many EQ1 players when there are more mounts & pets for sale than there are available to be obtained ingame.
I have absolutely no issues with free-to-play games having item malls. It's how they are designed, they need it to keep the games running.
I also refuse playing games with item malls or any form you can buy items with real money.
But i affraid majority dont care so soon all mmo's have them, then i simply quit mmo's but they dont care im a very small minority who realy quit playing..
yeah for the most part I try to stay away from item malls. I tend to be of the old-school mentality of getting more bang for you buck when paying a monthly fee and having access to all the games content and item drops.
I found myself going nuts on the item mall in RF online and found it nearly impossible to pvp w/out invisible pots, or instant ressurection items... next thing I knew in just one month I spent well beyond my budget. It's addictive and can suck a lot of ppl in, but I guess that's why f2p is becoming a more popular payment model. Well after RF I swore off f2p/item shop games.
Originally posted by bstripp Sure, things are won. However, that's still pointless to discussion of some kind of fair contest. If you walk up to a toon and have a numerical advantage, it's not a fair competition. You should not want to play that contest period. The method of acquiring the numerical advantage doesn't really matter when you are faced with it. You get killed whether you faced someone who has more time just as you do facing someone with more money. I have yet to see anything in any MMO that was acquired with anything other than hours or money. For reference, I've played: WoW, CoX, CO, UO, EQ, EQ2, SB, AC, AC2, PO, AoC, and WAR. I can't think of anything in any of those games that I could not get by just putting in more hours. Note: I didn't say that I had to get better at the game. Doing the same thing, with the same skills, would eventually achieve the result I wanted. Now, I'll grant you that games that divert content to their item shops better have a good reason for doing so. However, if that keeps them in business and putting things out, then it's cool by me. However, I just laugh when I hear people talking about cash shops destroying the integrity of the game, or the balance, or it's not fair when money is introduced. It's not fair to start. Come back when you are talking about some kind of fair competitive medium like chess or sprints and I'll get worked up on buying an advantage.
Uh huh. Being able to play more IS an advantage. It is unfair. As I said, at least it provides content for other players (thus improving the game overall).
I would be fine with limiting character advancement to a reasonable amount per week. The question is: what is reasonable? Four hours a week? Eight? This IS an MMO after all. Yes, I know lots of players would be against that too, but they are basically on the same level as Mr Moneybags.
So, there's my proposal - no cash purchase of anything in-game, and a limit on the amount of XP, gold, and items one can earn in a week. Does that sound fair?
Let's move into another part of the game territory: what about those guys who number-crunch games endlessly to obtain the Best of the Best character builds? If there's one thing that will probably be never achieved in MMO's it's character build balance. Unbalance is even hard-coded into some, if not most of them via classes and races (healers being the most clear and obvious example in this; since all of these games are geared around combat and killing for advancement, healers are always the weak link in character balance, and yet are not the only one when we get into grouping scenarios... say, a team of tanks).
What about those guys who are just better at the game than you, who understand or exploit the mechanics better, who can react faster, who know more about each class than you and can therefore handle themselves better when confronted? Regardless of the fact that you can achieve anything in an MMO in due time, there's always those guys who intuitively know how to farm shit faster, or move more efficiently through the world, etc.
Your quest for the perfectly "democratic" game is certainly admirable, but it's pure folly. Even chess is only balanced objectively, not subjectively. Since all of these games are essentially asymmetrical, and that's what makes them fun, then there's no point in creating a tightly regulated and policed environment limiting the game's own possibilities (in which achievements and exploits share the same creative space). You said players who play a fuck-ton "create content"; well, they won't anymore if they're being regulated from above all the time. Besides, if I understood your idea right, then players who pay also create content. Instantly.
Let's move into another part of the game territory: what about those guys who number-crunch games endlessly to obtain the Best of the Best character builds? If there's one thing that will probably be never achieved in MMO's it's character build balance. Unbalance is even hard-coded into some, if not most of them via classes and races (healers being the most clear and obvious example in this; since all of these games are geared around combat and killing for advancement, healers are always the weak link in character balance, and yet are not the only one when we get into grouping scenarios... say, a team of tanks). What about those guys who are just better at the game than you, who understand or exploit the mechanics better, who can react faster, who know more about each class than you and can therefore handle themselves better when confronted? Regardless of the fact that you can achieve anything in an MMO in due time, there's always those guys who intuitively know how to farm shit faster, or move more efficiently through the world, etc. Your quest for the perfectly "democratic" game is certainly admirable, but it's pure folly. Even chess is only balanced objectively, not subjectively. Since all of these games are essentially asymmetrical, and that's what makes them fun, then there's no point in creating a tightly regulated and policed environment limiting the game's own possibilities (in which achievements and exploits share the same creative space). You said players who play a fuck-ton "create content"; well, they won't anymore if they're being regulated from above all the time. Besides, if I understood your idea right, then players who pay also create content. Instantly.
Well I think you were commenting on my post. So I'll respond.
You can not achieve balance or fair play in a MMO. It's practically impossible. That's fine by me, I understand that, and play several of them. They're casual entertainment and should be taken as nothing more than that.
I am just saying that if you dislike cash shops because they make the game unfair, then you are barking up the wrong tree. The game is already unfair. It was designed to be unfair. So it really shouldn't matter what caused the disparity between you and whatever opponent you are trying to match up with. $$, mechanics, time, build, or whatever, the end result is that you are either up or down x%, it's not fair. Since all of them can be in play in a given game why pick out a single one to carry the banner of fair play?
Originally posted by tapeworm00 (healers being the most clear and obvious example in this; since all of these games are geared around combat and killing for advancement, healers are always the weak link in character balance, and yet are not the only one when we get into grouping scenarios... say, a team of tanks).
Micro-play, and macro-play. The guys with great twitch are good at the here-and-now. The guys with great number crunching and the like are good at the setup or preparation. Typically, someone who is good at both will 'reign' supreme when pushed up against anyone else.
You nailed it with chess- and how objectively is the only way to balance anything.
However- the highlighted... simply because something is oriented for a certain style of framework, doesn't mean the inverse framework cannot match, much less outperform the design concept.
More laymen terminology: to match things across a common denominator (time), healing must account for double the output of a damage dealing move, with a cost to the damage output of someone who is healing-capable (halved). But there is more to a cost than time commitment: there is ability pool/resource cost as well.
If a healer fits the mold and is able to heal 200hp/s OR able to deal 50hp/s both at the same cost, where a dps is only capable of dealing 100hp/s, then all other things being equal, the 'area under the curve' for both senarios is identical. Albeit, *the healer has more flexibility*.
ch1: deals 100 + 100 + 100
ch2: deals 50 + heals 200 + deals 50
Apply this to tanking. And develop a model that compares downtime:killing. One could go so far as to skew numbers to favor tank/heal/whatever else isn't the 'general populace' to slightly favor the efficiency:effectiveness ratio of a certain class/spec/build.
Anyhow, your post I agree with, saved the blanket statement which was highlighted.
That is exactly right, and we're not saying NO to save WoW, because it is already a lost cause. We are saying NO to dissuade the next group of greedy suits who decide to emulate Blizzard and Cryptic, etc. We can prevent some of the future games from spewing this crap, but the sooner we start saying no, the better the results will be. So - Stand up, pull up your pants, and walk away. - MMO_Doubter
in game items are dropped most are from other clans/class. which means you can sell them. however most only go for like 18 to say 30k. . and they don't have slots to enchance anything. when you get to level 50 or higher you can start buying better clothes with more slots or weapons. but then weapons to make them better have to be refinded . which require a speical stone called blood essece not all of them come out perfect. you get one blood esscee drop after ever 1mil kills. the sell starting out at 1.5 mil and you need I think like 4 to make a really good weapon. does that help.
Why would you care if person has a leveling advantage over you,he is paying for you to play for free. The big mistake with people and F2P games is assuming the game is free,I really wish their was a strong push to call these games Micro Transaction MMOs.All stupid hatred of MT mmos comes from people to cheap to spend money in game they think completely free.I never complain about people getting advantage over me because in every free to play mmo i willing to spend -15 dollars a month -59.99 one time Yes i am willing to spend the same amount of money i do P2P game the only difference,I choose when i spend money and don't feel force to play a game because i am spending 15 dollars a month on it and if i don't play it i am wasting 15 dollars. Now here is the truth,I have not played F2P game yet that was worth of me drop the 60 dollars in it but i have played Requiem,DDO,TCOS, and Rom which are pretty close.I am playing Allods which is at least worth spending 7 -14 dollars a month and is the first game i am considering using 60 dollars in it.The F2P play market is improving.
Here is the difference for me.
I don't want you to determine the rate of progress of your character with money, but with content completed.
Then I know, all characters are equal, based on hours spent completing content.
I expect my 60 hour character, to be roughly equal to your 60 hour character, to ALL 60 hour characters in the game.
I expect my 200 hour character to be roughly equal to all 200 hour characters in the game.
Why? Because in a P2P game, you can only increase your progression with completed content.
If I'm level 25, and you are level 25, we have both completed the SAME content more or less. There is no other way to reach level 25.
For me, that means the game has a level playing field.
In a F2P game, I don't know if you spent 60 bucks, and 20 hours, or 200 hours and zero bucks, or god knows what sort of combination you used to get to the progression you are now.
For me, that means the game is NOT a level playing field, in other words all characters are not equal. Characters are instead based on varying combinations of time, and money.
I simply prefer games where there is a level playing field, and all characters are equal.
If you had a game where there was an item mall and EVERYTHING was based on money, that would be fine.
You buy all gear, all levels, all stats, all abilities.
That would mean EVERY players spent exactly the same amount of money on progression, which would be a level playing field.
My 25 level character would cost 80 bucks, and YOUR 25 level character would cost 80 bucks, perfectly equal.
If not that, then I prefer completed content. My 25 level character killed 6,000 mobs and completed 50 quests, YOUR 25 level character killed 6,000 mobs and completed 50 quests. Equal.
Since you have more time than money, it seems equitable to you that in a game where two people pay 15 USD each, one advances faster because he has more time. However, in a game where a person can, but doesn't necessarily, spend money to level the time/money playing field, you feel that is inequitable.
I for one do not mind the item mall in the game that I am currently subbed to. I have been playing DDO again since the launch of DDO:EU, which is basically the same time that the item mall was live.
Maybe it's the fact that as a VIP(Subscriber) I get free points every month to spend in the store or maybe it's the fact that I'm not as l33t as those of you who frown upon it. Either way I will be buying my XP pots and +1 loot pots and enjoying the rewards from them.
Both sides have their pros and cons, but ultimately it depends on personal opinion. That said...
Keep RMT in F2P, and out of P2P MMOs.
It's simple really. People who want to pay to advance should play games that are explicitly made for it, and people who want their ingame effort to matter more than their pocket book should play P2P games.
Developers need to stop trying to double dip by combining the two together, especially if the game has already been launched with a particular payment system. The payment system is defining for many players in whether or not they decide to play a game, and changing it after launch will only serve to upset a good deal of the playerbase.
However, I would hope that there was a selection of games P2P, Hybrid, and F2P for everyone. Even if I can't understand why people latch onto one method of "fair" over another, I would love to see every type of game supported. Different strokes and all that.
As long as there are pure P2P games, then that crowd can happily live with their delusions of equality. Folks on the F2P servers can do their thing and every other game will try to find the right balance. Hopefully the $$ coming in is used to keep those devs cranking out code... of course I've been hoping for altruism in the political process as well and that hasn't happened either.
Both sides have their pros and cons, but ultimately it depends on personal opinion. That said...
Keep RMT in F2P, and out of P2P MMOs.
It's simple really. People who want to pay to advance should play games that are explicitly made for it, and people who want their ingame effort to matter more than their pocket book should play P2P games. Developers need to stop trying to double dip by combining the two together, especially if the game has already been launched with a particular payment system. The payment system is defining for many players in whether or not they decide to play a game, and changing it after launch will only serve to upset a good deal of the playerbase.
This.
It's amazing how people will fight among themselves when developers are the ones providing this inflammable situation, precisely being P2P MMOs getting into item malls rather than a few extra services (which I also disagree, like gender changes, character transfers).
F2P - For people that don't want to pay a monthly fee, and for those who seek advantages and prestige relative to their budget over others. Even if the item mall itself does not provide the potential "I win" items (I don't remember seeing any that does not feature this) it does sort of bring it as you will probably be able to sell the RMT items or currency legally in the game for in-game currency or items, which will bring this potential "I win".
P2P - For those seeking an in-game experience unrelated to money spent. It's THAT simple. Stop with the vanity items and game content exclusive to those who pay additional money. There is already a monthly fee for that, increase it if necessary, I will gladly pay. Stop with the time argument, advancement is related to time because that's what this revenue model is about, no paying for extra dice rolls, shiny stuff, bending time and space to progress faster than others, this will upset the existing player base.
My issue with Atlantica online wasnt that it charged for the basic things that you needed to play. It was that it charged you (just for the basics) more than a standard mmo subscription. I would of had no problem paying $15 a month for portal/seeing health etc.
I'm pretty sure it was directed to me, as my post was the one quoted. My response is once again - make the game as fair as possible. Nothing is perfect in this world. That does not mean we should not make an effort to improve it.
Also: equality of opportunity is all that is required. Not equality of results.
Then item shop is totally fair. You have the same right to spend your money to buy stuff there as anyone else.
Who can you blame if you suck at making money? No difference than those who cannot afford the time to advance their char.
Time = money ... and I am sure i am not the first or only one who makes that equivalence.
Being unable to make things perfectly fair is no excuse to not even try to balance things. That's just the law of the jungle, and I thought we had developed past that system. More fair is better than less fair. Take what you can get.
So, what is this "fair" you speak of? Is it "fair" that some people can spend 8-10 hours a day, seven days a week in a game? How is that any less "fair" than someone who uses a cash shop? The cash shop is available to anyone who is willing to use it. Unlike having 8-10 hours a day to spend on a game. Many of us have lives outside of the game.
Someone fudged the concept with cash shops for games when they brought them over to subscription based games. However, cash shops are incredibly popular with Asian MMO's. The big thing if they are usually F2P so the cash shop is kind of their way of saying " help support this game and we give you an advantage or nifty item". I can see it working that way sicne developers have to eat as well but I think it's a horrible idea of P2P games.
"If at first you don't succeed, excessive force is probably the answer."
Then item shop is totally fair. You have the same right to spend your money to buy stuff there as anyone else.
Who can you blame if you suck at making money? No difference than those who cannot afford the time to advance their char.
Time = money ... and I am sure i am not the first or only one who makes that equivalence.
That logic is so hilariously broken.
That's the reasoning these scammers are hoping you'll use. I you can compete, you just have to pay as much as the next guy.
No scam involved. Time does equal money. Some have more of one than the other. Its all in what you value the most. I'm willing to support games I enjoy with my time AND my money.
Comments
I really think what people need to know breaks down to this;
*some people are trying to earn a living through their games*
If you wanted something truly free of charge I will point you to the amateur assortment at newgrounds.com. The people that do either because they want to get into the industry, or maybe just love doing this, or even on the slight chance they are actually doing this for you, John Q Public (and I assume a lot of you think you deserve such), their works will be seen on sites like that - and there is tons to choose from.
Now as for CS - sure it's "pushing it" when atop a modest sub already in place - but the arguement starts at the heart of the matter, where it originated in F2P games. It works in the East, but in the West it's universally seen as the "backup plan" for a failed game. It's basically running on donations, and we know how good people are with being generous to the entertainment industry... When a game relies solely on having people offer them money, it will fail - so the only choice is to add incentive, and no matter where the line may be at, somebody in the west is gonna bitch.
Even when the paying players are given advantages over others, what is that to a person with not enough interest in doing the same from the start? Many people keep F2P games as a side-MMO, and from that it's understandable that they don't want to put any money into it if they don't have to... but if it's really someone's side MMO, why such a demand to be competitive in it? Is it not your side-game simply because it's free? People actually paying for the items must see that game as the one that deserves their money, kind of how you treat your main squeeze, just get used to knowing that if your not that invested to begin with then don't cry about competing. Either way, somebody has got to get paid, and if that means the people you consider "suckers" have to - you should be happy somebody is.
Writer / Musician / Game Designer
Now Playing: Skyrim, Wurm Online, Tropico 4
Waiting On: GW2, TSW, Archeage, The Rapture
Oh sure, try and do what you can. Which is why there are beginner areas, and arena's which level restrictions. However, all that does is hide how unfair the contest is. Again, if my clone and I duel, and he has a +10% advantage. I'd expect him to win most of the time. Even a small advantage between equal opponents usually relates into a disproportionate win ratio. Otherwise why would people raid/pvp for that extra +1-2% crit, or what not?
For me, I don't care about cash shops because long ago I realized that I wasn't one of those compulsive people who will raid 5 nights a week, or PvP for several months to be on the top. I play the games for the story, the social aspects, and some casual competition. I know it's not fair, and hence I don't care what they did to get an advantage over me. I don't worry about the outcome since it has so little bearing on my skills or abilities.
Yes, more fair is better. However, when it's not fair to start, it really doesn't matter since the results will likely be the same in either case.
Edited for some atrocious grammar and spelling... <sigh>
I also refuse playing games with item malls or any form you can buy items with real money.
But i affraid majority dont care so soon all mmo's have them, then i simply quit mmo's but they dont care im a very small minority who realy quit playing..
Games played:AC1-Darktide'99-2000-AC2-Darktide/dawnsong2003-2005,Lineage2-2005-2006 and now Darkfall-2009.....
In between WoW few months AoC few months and some f2p also all very short few weeks.
I don't think they will ALL have them, as the lack of one will be an attractive feature to some players.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
The above is bad logic. It's being perpetrated throughout this thread. The actual cause for A or B being bad is bad game design.
The above at least follows a pattern, but still isn't a foregone conclusion -- especially since we can very easily understand the fundamental reasons why most item shops are low quality currently.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Item malls aren't bad if they are just a few vanity items, while they keep majority of the vanity items ingame. See Blizzard/WoW, they have it done right. There are literally hundreds of pets and mounts you can get ingame, via farming rares, faction grind, questing, made from tradeskills, or purchased from other players.
Item malls are bad if they have a huge selection of vanity items for sale, more so than they have these items ingame. Things such as pets, illusions, mounts, etc.. When they have it in reverse, it means they're gimping the game and the quality of expansions on purpose, so you want to go out and buy these items because you can't get enough of these items ingame. See SOE/EQ1, they've totally ruined the gaming experience for many EQ1 players when there are more mounts & pets for sale than there are available to be obtained ingame.
I have absolutely no issues with free-to-play games having item malls. It's how they are designed, they need it to keep the games running.
EQ1-AC1-DAOC-FFXI-L2-EQ2-WoW-DDO-GW-LoTR-VG-WAR-GW2-ESO
I found myself going nuts on the item mall in RF online and found it nearly impossible to pvp w/out invisible pots, or instant ressurection items... next thing I knew in just one month I spent well beyond my budget. It's addictive and can suck a lot of ppl in, but I guess that's why f2p is becoming a more popular payment model. Well after RF I swore off f2p/item shop games.
Uh huh. Being able to play more IS an advantage. It is unfair. As I said, at least it provides content for other players (thus improving the game overall).
I would be fine with limiting character advancement to a reasonable amount per week. The question is: what is reasonable? Four hours a week? Eight? This IS an MMO after all. Yes, I know lots of players would be against that too, but they are basically on the same level as Mr Moneybags.
So, there's my proposal - no cash purchase of anything in-game, and a limit on the amount of XP, gold, and items one can earn in a week. Does that sound fair?
Let's move into another part of the game territory: what about those guys who number-crunch games endlessly to obtain the Best of the Best character builds? If there's one thing that will probably be never achieved in MMO's it's character build balance. Unbalance is even hard-coded into some, if not most of them via classes and races (healers being the most clear and obvious example in this; since all of these games are geared around combat and killing for advancement, healers are always the weak link in character balance, and yet are not the only one when we get into grouping scenarios... say, a team of tanks).
What about those guys who are just better at the game than you, who understand or exploit the mechanics better, who can react faster, who know more about each class than you and can therefore handle themselves better when confronted? Regardless of the fact that you can achieve anything in an MMO in due time, there's always those guys who intuitively know how to farm shit faster, or move more efficiently through the world, etc.
Your quest for the perfectly "democratic" game is certainly admirable, but it's pure folly. Even chess is only balanced objectively, not subjectively. Since all of these games are essentially asymmetrical, and that's what makes them fun, then there's no point in creating a tightly regulated and policed environment limiting the game's own possibilities (in which achievements and exploits share the same creative space). You said players who play a fuck-ton "create content"; well, they won't anymore if they're being regulated from above all the time. Besides, if I understood your idea right, then players who pay also create content. Instantly.
Well I think you were commenting on my post. So I'll respond.
You can not achieve balance or fair play in a MMO. It's practically impossible. That's fine by me, I understand that, and play several of them. They're casual entertainment and should be taken as nothing more than that.
I am just saying that if you dislike cash shops because they make the game unfair, then you are barking up the wrong tree. The game is already unfair. It was designed to be unfair. So it really shouldn't matter what caused the disparity between you and whatever opponent you are trying to match up with. $$, mechanics, time, build, or whatever, the end result is that you are either up or down x%, it's not fair. Since all of them can be in play in a given game why pick out a single one to carry the banner of fair play?
I'm pretty sure it was directed to me, as my post was the one quoted.
My response is once again - make the game as fair as possible.
Nothing is perfect in this world. That does not mean we should not make an effort to improve it.
Also: equality of opportunity is all that is required. Not equality of results.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Micro-play, and macro-play. The guys with great twitch are good at the here-and-now. The guys with great number crunching and the like are good at the setup or preparation. Typically, someone who is good at both will 'reign' supreme when pushed up against anyone else.
You nailed it with chess- and how objectively is the only way to balance anything.
However- the highlighted... simply because something is oriented for a certain style of framework, doesn't mean the inverse framework cannot match, much less outperform the design concept.
More laymen terminology: to match things across a common denominator (time), healing must account for double the output of a damage dealing move, with a cost to the damage output of someone who is healing-capable (halved). But there is more to a cost than time commitment: there is ability pool/resource cost as well.
If a healer fits the mold and is able to heal 200hp/s OR able to deal 50hp/s both at the same cost, where a dps is only capable of dealing 100hp/s, then all other things being equal, the 'area under the curve' for both senarios is identical. Albeit, *the healer has more flexibility*.
ch1: deals 100 + 100 + 100
ch2: deals 50 + heals 200 + deals 50
Apply this to tanking. And develop a model that compares downtime:killing. One could go so far as to skew numbers to favor tank/heal/whatever else isn't the 'general populace' to slightly favor the efficiency:effectiveness ratio of a certain class/spec/build.
Anyhow, your post I agree with, saved the blanket statement which was highlighted.
That is exactly right, and we're not saying NO to save WoW, because it is already a lost cause. We are saying NO to dissuade the next group of greedy suits who decide to emulate Blizzard and Cryptic, etc.
We can prevent some of the future games from spewing this crap, but the sooner we start saying no, the better the results will be.
So - Stand up, pull up your pants, and walk away.
- MMO_Doubter
We have elevated the stupid level to "biz markie".
Writer / Musician / Game Designer
Now Playing: Skyrim, Wurm Online, Tropico 4
Waiting On: GW2, TSW, Archeage, The Rapture
in game items are dropped most are from other clans/class. which means you can sell them. however most only go for like 18 to say 30k. . and they don't have slots to enchance anything. when you get to level 50 or higher you can start buying better clothes with more slots or weapons. but then weapons to make them better have to be refinded . which require a speical stone called blood essece not all of them come out perfect. you get one blood esscee drop after ever 1mil kills. the sell starting out at 1.5 mil and you need I think like 4 to make a really good weapon. does that help.
Here is the difference for me.
I don't want you to determine the rate of progress of your character with money, but with content completed.
Then I know, all characters are equal, based on hours spent completing content.
I expect my 60 hour character, to be roughly equal to your 60 hour character, to ALL 60 hour characters in the game.
I expect my 200 hour character to be roughly equal to all 200 hour characters in the game.
Why? Because in a P2P game, you can only increase your progression with completed content.
If I'm level 25, and you are level 25, we have both completed the SAME content more or less. There is no other way to reach level 25.
For me, that means the game has a level playing field.
In a F2P game, I don't know if you spent 60 bucks, and 20 hours, or 200 hours and zero bucks, or god knows what sort of combination you used to get to the progression you are now.
For me, that means the game is NOT a level playing field, in other words all characters are not equal. Characters are instead based on varying combinations of time, and money.
I simply prefer games where there is a level playing field, and all characters are equal.
If you had a game where there was an item mall and EVERYTHING was based on money, that would be fine.
You buy all gear, all levels, all stats, all abilities.
That would mean EVERY players spent exactly the same amount of money on progression, which would be a level playing field.
My 25 level character would cost 80 bucks, and YOUR 25 level character would cost 80 bucks, perfectly equal.
If not that, then I prefer completed content. My 25 level character killed 6,000 mobs and completed 50 quests, YOUR 25 level character killed 6,000 mobs and completed 50 quests. Equal.
Since you have more time than money, it seems equitable to you that in a game where two people pay 15 USD each, one advances faster because he has more time. However, in a game where a person can, but doesn't necessarily, spend money to level the time/money playing field, you feel that is inequitable.
This post wins the thread.
/thread
Skaroth
See the violence inherent in the system!
I for one do not mind the item mall in the game that I am currently subbed to. I have been playing DDO again since the launch of DDO:EU, which is basically the same time that the item mall was live.
Maybe it's the fact that as a VIP(Subscriber) I get free points every month to spend in the store or maybe it's the fact that I'm not as l33t as those of you who frown upon it. Either way I will be buying my XP pots and +1 loot pots and enjoying the rewards from them.
-Almerel
Hello my old friend.
Both sides have their pros and cons, but ultimately it depends on personal opinion. That said...
Keep RMT in F2P, and out of P2P MMOs.
It's simple really. People who want to pay to advance should play games that are explicitly made for it, and people who want their ingame effort to matter more than their pocket book should play P2P games.
Developers need to stop trying to double dip by combining the two together, especially if the game has already been launched with a particular payment system. The payment system is defining for many players in whether or not they decide to play a game, and changing it after launch will only serve to upset a good deal of the playerbase.
Nah, having a mix of the two is fine.
However, I would hope that there was a selection of games P2P, Hybrid, and F2P for everyone. Even if I can't understand why people latch onto one method of "fair" over another, I would love to see every type of game supported. Different strokes and all that.
As long as there are pure P2P games, then that crowd can happily live with their delusions of equality. Folks on the F2P servers can do their thing and every other game will try to find the right balance. Hopefully the $$ coming in is used to keep those devs cranking out code... of course I've been hoping for altruism in the political process as well and that hasn't happened either.
This.
It's amazing how people will fight among themselves when developers are the ones providing this inflammable situation, precisely being P2P MMOs getting into item malls rather than a few extra services (which I also disagree, like gender changes, character transfers).
F2P - For people that don't want to pay a monthly fee, and for those who seek advantages and prestige relative to their budget over others. Even if the item mall itself does not provide the potential "I win" items (I don't remember seeing any that does not feature this) it does sort of bring it as you will probably be able to sell the RMT items or currency legally in the game for in-game currency or items, which will bring this potential "I win".
P2P - For those seeking an in-game experience unrelated to money spent. It's THAT simple. Stop with the vanity items and game content exclusive to those who pay additional money. There is already a monthly fee for that, increase it if necessary, I will gladly pay. Stop with the time argument, advancement is related to time because that's what this revenue model is about, no paying for extra dice rolls, shiny stuff, bending time and space to progress faster than others, this will upset the existing player base.
My issue with Atlantica online wasnt that it charged for the basic things that you needed to play. It was that it charged you (just for the basics) more than a standard mmo subscription. I would of had no problem paying $15 a month for portal/seeing health etc.
Then item shop is totally fair. You have the same right to spend your money to buy stuff there as anyone else.
Who can you blame if you suck at making money? No difference than those who cannot afford the time to advance their char.
Time = money ... and I am sure i am not the first or only one who makes that equivalence.
So, what is this "fair" you speak of? Is it "fair" that some people can spend 8-10 hours a day, seven days a week in a game? How is that any less "fair" than someone who uses a cash shop? The cash shop is available to anyone who is willing to use it. Unlike having 8-10 hours a day to spend on a game. Many of us have lives outside of the game.
That's not really it though. It's just about keeping the wrong types of RMT out of games.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Then item shop is totally fair. You have the same right to spend your money to buy stuff there as anyone else.
Who can you blame if you suck at making money? No difference than those who cannot afford the time to advance their char.
Time = money ... and I am sure i am not the first or only one who makes that equivalence.
That logic is so hilariously broken.
That's the reasoning these scammers are hoping you'll use. I you can compete, you just have to pay as much as the next guy.
Someone fudged the concept with cash shops for games when they brought them over to subscription based games. However, cash shops are incredibly popular with Asian MMO's. The big thing if they are usually F2P so the cash shop is kind of their way of saying " help support this game and we give you an advantage or nifty item". I can see it working that way sicne developers have to eat as well but I think it's a horrible idea of P2P games.
Then item shop is totally fair. You have the same right to spend your money to buy stuff there as anyone else.
Who can you blame if you suck at making money? No difference than those who cannot afford the time to advance their char.
Time = money ... and I am sure i am not the first or only one who makes that equivalence.
That logic is so hilariously broken.
That's the reasoning these scammers are hoping you'll use. I you can compete, you just have to pay as much as the next guy.
No scam involved. Time does equal money. Some have more of one than the other. Its all in what you value the most. I'm willing to support games I enjoy with my time AND my money.