Originally posted by LoktofeitCan you give examples of some of the MMOs in this 'last wave' you are referring to?
runes of magic , 4story, allods
So basically since a handful of games have item malls that give IWIN buttons to players with cash, they all do. Got it.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Originally posted by LoktofeitCan you give examples of some of the MMOs in this 'last wave' you are referring to?
runes of magic , 4story, allods
So basically since a handful of games have item malls that give IWIN buttons to players with cash, they all do. Got it.
no, those were just the latest big european releases, which strangely enough (wink) follow the same asian cash shop advantages' model
if you want a more complete list, feel free to post here every single F2P game released in the last 10 years. The older ones I probably I played them all,the rest i researched on them, specially the cash shop.
and will point you which ones have unbalanced cash shops.
no wait, that would take me hours. I'll just point you which ones do NOT have unbalanced cash shops. that should take me 30-60 seconds top.
I really don't understand why some people on either side of the discussion are so tooth and nail about trying to prove that their way is the only way.
Both ways have merit, to different people. Yes I'm being a broken record, but it boils down to personal preference in what people value and what they want out of a game.
Some people value their time more than their money. Or, they simply hate grinding, and want to get to what they perceive as 'the top' of an MMO as quickly as possible. For these people, they enjoy RMT in MMOs. Other people are simply extremely casual gamers who don't care to 'get to the top', and value their money more, so the F2P with RMT is perfectly fine for them too.
The other side, for P2P, tend to have different values. Many of them prefer their ingame effort, in both time and skill, to dictate their ingame achievements. They prefer that non-RMT games are more economical in the long haul than MMOs with RMT. They value the spirit of the game.
Both sides have varying, but completely valid views and desires for the MMO and payment model/s they prefer. Some people will never play a P2P, where as some people will never play a F2P. It's not irrational hate, it's simply a matter of opinion.
The tension between the two camps however, is when both groups of players want to play a particular MMO because of it's features, but they are conflicted due to the payment model being used. This tends to even out over time, as players either adapt and accept it, or move on in frustration. The absolute worst thing to do however, is to shift the payment model post release. This can potentially alienate and irritate your core playerbase to the point of packing up and leaving.
So, what's the best solution? Well, provided that there is enough interest in both models for both payment models, would be to have servers that explicitly lock out RMT, and servers explicitly for RMT. This way, players who want RMT can play on those servers, and those who don't can play on the others. No one is upset then.
Baring that, as I've said several times before, simply stop trying to mash the two together. Most people who want to play F2P games already are, just like people who prefer P2P non-RMT have chosen those games. The biggest source of tension right now is that a lot of P2P players who dislike RMT, are slowly finding more and more of it forced into the games they play and enjoy, games that never had a bit of RMT.
Actually my choice is to stay 1000 miles away from that kind of games
Im just an old fart but really cant see the point of paying extra so you dont have to play the game that you pay for. Its kinda like paying someone to eat your birthday cake for you.
Honestly, you'll remain baffled by all of this as long as you keep creating a false premise to argue against. I know that pointing that out will never stop you, Ihmo, Obliv and the rest from doing it but one can always hope for miracles.
How is the premise false? Have you never heard or read rather that people spend money because they dont have time to play the game? Reading is a great tool perhaps you should try it.
No I have never heard of games where you can buy your way up so you don't have to play them.
Which games are these?
Perhaps ask those that post about buying because they dont have time to play the game. Funny how those posts get overlooked in the rush to defend what is nothing more than cheating. Amazing how being the best at any cost is so prevalent in the gaming community. Speaks volumes to those who listen.
Its hardly "cheating" if its established by the Dev's themselves. Not to mention, I've clearly stated that done right, such enhances the game, it doesn't play it for you. When you get done dancing with that strawman, put it back in the closet. Thanks. ^^
And as for games significantly impacted by the cash shop, I offer Runes of Magic, PVP server as an example, (see my post about 6 pages back for the details). Cash shops can impart significant advantages that really unbalance the playing field in a PVP game. I'm not saying they all do, but as someone else mentioned earlier, cash shops done right (and not in P2P games) can be fine, but they must be employed carefully.
I'd say you are partially correct, and here's why:
Cash shops can sometimes impart significant advantages that really unbalance the playing field in a PVP game. It all depends on the game. Runes of Magic, Atlantica Online and War Rock are three that are very well known for exactly what you describe. The majority, however simply do not offer this IWIN button that everyone uses as their argument against item malls.
And, again, that would only be in PvP. If you're not in PvP then it doesn't make a difference if the other guy is weilding Thor's Hammer and riding on the shoulders of Zeus.
the majority DO, since the majority are asian, and asians are well known for creating and raising to the category of MUST DO the worst idea ever, "enchant or break"
most asian F2P games work under this basis
- since they are fast food games, they lack itemization teams, so they release only a handful (10-15) weapon sets for all classes
- since such a lack of variety can be gamebreaking but they dont want to spend a single more cent creating models (fast food game,remember?), they came up with the idea of "+1" with a certain % fail rate
- a common perk is that an item which fails to upgrade breaks
- anther common perk of their cash shops are paid items that will prevent the item from breaking, or increase the odds of succeeding by an incredible amount.
I have played dozens of asian F2P MMOs back when i was a teen without a job, and they ALL had this.
Your average kid couldnt upgrade the "basic" sword because losing it was too much of a risk.
The fat wallet guys would run in +10 gear onehitting and being basically raid bosses themselves, because money gave them unlimited tries to get uber pwnzor gear.
worst part is, majority of this last wave european and american F2P games are following this policy, since it was proved a winner time after time in terms of cash shop revenue.
Gates of Andaron is a prime example of that. You have people running around with +16 or +18 weapons and armor. It was entertaining until you get into the mid level 30's when you have to go out into the gank fest zones. That got nasty fast. Its too bad, as it was an entertaining game before that.
Its hardly "cheating" if its established by the Dev's themselves. Not to mention, I've clearly stated that done right, such enhances the game, it doesn't play it for you. When you get done dancing with that strawman, put it back in the closet. Thanks. ^^
Some people still feel that it's cheating, no matter how devs try to spin it.
From the bucket of ridiculous analogies, let's take a chess tournament. Say the organizer decides that hey, there's an optional $5 buy in for each game that is available to both players, to get a second queen on the board, and all money for this goes to the person organizing said tournament. The players don't know if the other has paid extra or not until they face off, in which case they can't buy in for that game once they do. It is technically within the rules of the tournament because the person organizing it dictates the rules.
Think about the above though. If a player chooses not to buy in, they risk being at a huge disadvantage if the other does. Both players pay $5 to get the advantage, when then end result is simply two players now both with equal advantages, each out $5, and the organizer $10 richer. So really, what's that point of all of it? In the end the players are no better off than they were before, only they've spent more money to try to ensure they were not at a disadvantage.
This isn't even touching the fact that pretty much any serious chess player would think that such a tournament was a complete joke, and insult to the game with such a 'buy in' option.
The above is how a lot of people view RMT in MMOs. When players can pay to get advantages or things others cannot via gameplay, then players who don't are inherently at a disadvantage. But when all players pay to get an advantage then no one is at an advantage. So the question is, why bother playing a game where you have to pay extra just to ensure you are not at a disadvantage? it simply doesn't make sense to a lot of people, which is why many people steer clear from RMT.
One mishap with the chess tournement is the fact that when you play a game which has a RMT shop you know before even starting to play you will encounter people who use the shop and not just when the match start. If you hate rtm shops stay out of the games who has them and you dont have to worry about them. Me? Will gladly play such a game and if needed buy stuff. Tons of people use money for a hobby, mine just happens to be mmorpg's.
Waiting in the game = content. "consuming" =/= content. Consuming = consuming. Calling me dumb doesn't change that fact. You may not LIKE the content, but it's a part of the game, and if you pay to skip it, you're skipping part of the game. For example, in EQ there was a boat ride in the original game way before fixes and expansions, that took way over 20 minutes REAL TIME. You sat on the boat. That's ALL you did. Well, you chatted with other players, but that's it. I'm not saying that was a good feature or reasonable, but look what it did. It made the world seem HUGE! It made travel from one continent to another seem epic. And what if you didn't bind and got killed? Another boat ride, which made binding VERY important. And if you saw other races on a different continent, you KNEW they had made the boat ride too. Now, what if you could pay a nickel or a quarter and skip the boat ride? Would that fundamentally change the game? I think it would. And that is what I mean by "skipping content". I mean paying money to fundamentally change the rules of the game. What is content to you? Just quests? Just Mobs? Just phat lewt? For me, it is the entirety of what makes up the game. here's what I think would NOT be skipping content. EVERYONE pays a nickel to go from one continent to another, no exceptions. You got no nickel, you don't leave the continent. OR, EVERYONE rides the boat, no exceptions, doesn't matter if you have a nickel or 100 bucks, you can't skip the content with money.
If you want to define "waiting & doing nothing" as content (and i am talking about staring at a spellbook in EQ, not just riding a boat, which at least u get to see some scenary) .. then I would say that is very bad content, and I will have no problem having an option in game to skip those.
There is interesting content: items, boss fights, quest lines, scripted events, exploring zones, and there are the un-content .. like waiting, like repeating clicking to level up fishing and stuff.
If you really want to define content as everything, and not just the fun stuff, then I have no problem skipping content. To play a game is to have fun, not just because a developer say what i need to do.
And the argument that i am playing money (not that i have ever, my stance is to let other pays to subsidize my f2p games) to automatically play my game is still wrong. I just skip the bad content so i can have more fun playing the good content.
I don't think even you can argue that staring at a spell book is the same content, in terms of fun, compared to fighting a nicely designed boss encounter.
One mishap with the chess tournement is the fact that when you play a game which has a RMT shop you know before even starting to play you will encounter people who use the shop and not just when the match start. If you hate rtm shops stay out of the games who has them and you dont have to worry about them. Me? Will gladly play such a game and if needed buy stuff. Tons of people use money for a hobby, mine just happens to be mmorpg's.
That is exactly my point, actually.
I have no problem with RMT existing in some MMOs, I just explicitly avoid those MMOs, and will only play games that do not have RMT.
The issue I have is that some developers, and a number of the posters in this thread, think that RMT is perfectly okay to add into any MMO, and that players who dislike RMT should change their mind and/or suck it up and accept RMT if it's forced upon them.
Which is why I continue to state that RMT should be left to games built for it, and left out of P2P games that are not. Or, that if RMT is added to P2P games, that they be limited to only be available on segregated servers with a segregated player base.
Some people still feel that it's cheating, no matter how devs try to spin it.
Well, now wait a second here, Cerideth. If something is created by the devs as a feature of the game and is documented as a feature of the game, then how is that "spinning" something to be within the game rules? It IS the game rules.
See, that's the biggest part of the argument here. We have one side stating facts and the other side saying "Well, I feel those facts are wrong." There is a HUGE and MASSIVE difference between someone saying "I don't like games where you can buy things and I won't play them," and someone saying "People who buy things in games are lazy, cheating, playing in easy mode, etc" The former is a solid and indisputable statement of preference and the latter is lies and insults.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
The issue I have is that some developers, and a number of the posters in this thread, think that RMT is perfectly okay to add into any MMO, and that players who dislike RMT should change their mind and/or suck it up and accept RMT if it's forced upon them.
Who had said that? The majority here in favor of item malls seem to be in agreement that it has its place and even then some games still manage to screw it up - Runes of Magic seeming to be the most consistent example.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Waiting in the game = content. "consuming" =/= content. Consuming = consuming. Calling me dumb doesn't change that fact. You may not LIKE the content, but it's a part of the game, and if you pay to skip it, you're skipping part of the game. For example, in EQ there was a boat ride in the original game way before fixes and expansions, that took way over 20 minutes REAL TIME. You sat on the boat. That's ALL you did. Well, you chatted with other players, but that's it. I'm not saying that was a good feature or reasonable, but look what it did. It made the world seem HUGE! It made travel from one continent to another seem epic. And what if you didn't bind and got killed? Another boat ride, which made binding VERY important. And if you saw other races on a different continent, you KNEW they had made the boat ride too. Now, what if you could pay a nickel or a quarter and skip the boat ride? Would that fundamentally change the game? I think it would. And that is what I mean by "skipping content". I mean paying money to fundamentally change the rules of the game. What is content to you? Just quests? Just Mobs? Just phat lewt? For me, it is the entirety of what makes up the game. here's what I think would NOT be skipping content. EVERYONE pays a nickel to go from one continent to another, no exceptions. You got no nickel, you don't leave the continent. OR, EVERYONE rides the boat, no exceptions, doesn't matter if you have a nickel or 100 bucks, you can't skip the content with money.
If you want to define "waiting & doing nothing" as content (and i am talking about staring at a spellbook in EQ, not just riding a boat, which at least u get to see some scenary) .. then I would say that is very bad content, and I will have no problem having an option in game to skip those.
There is interesting content: items, boss fights, quest lines, scripted events, exploring zones, and there are the un-content .. like waiting, like repeating clicking to level up fishing and stuff.
If you really want to define content as everything, and not just the fun stuff, then I have no problem skipping content. To play a game is to have fun, not just because a developer say what i need to do.
And the argument that i am playing money (not that i have ever, my stance is to let other pays to subsidize my f2p games) to automatically play my game is still wrong. I just skip the bad content so i can have more fun playing the good content.
I don't think even you can argue that staring at a spell book is the same content, in terms of fun, compared to fighting a nicely designed boss encounter.
The point is not whether you enjoy a particular feature of the game.
THe point is whether you enjoy a game that is the same for all players, or different for different players.
I enjoy the game more if it is the same for all players.
You enjoy the game if it is different for different players.
It's similar to instances.
I don't like instances, I think they break immersion. I prefer and open world.
Some people think the more instances in a game the better.
I also don't like the feature where you do a quest, and the game world changes for you, but not anyone that hasn't done the quest.
Some people still feel that it's cheating, no matter how devs try to spin it.
Well, now wait a second here, Cerideth. If something is created by the devs as a feature of the game and is documented as a feature of the game, then how is that "spinning" something to be within the game rules? It IS the game rules.
See, that's the biggest part of the argument here. We have one side stating facts and the other side saying "Well, I feel those facts are wrong." There is a HUGE and MASSIVE difference between someone saying "I don't like games where you can buy things and I won't play them," and someone saying "People who buy things in games are lazy, cheating, playing in easy mode, etc" The former is a solid and indisputable statement of preference and the latter is lies and insults.
I agree that the rules are the rules.
If you play by the rules, you are not cheating.
If the rules let you buy and Iwin button, then it's not cheating, it's part of the game.
Poker is a game where you can win with money. You can bet, and if the other person can't cover your bet, he loses the game.
Some people still feel that it's cheating, no matter how devs try to spin it.
Well, now wait a second here, Cerideth. If something is created by the devs as a feature of the game and is documented as a feature of the game, then how is that "spinning" something to be within the game rules? It IS the game rules.
See, that's the biggest part of the argument here. We have one side stating facts and the other side saying "Well, I feel those facts are wrong." There is a HUGE and MASSIVE difference between someone saying "I don't like games where you can buy things and I won't play them," and someone saying "People who legitimately buy things in games are lazy, cheating, playing in easy mode, etc" The former is a solid and indisputable statement of preference and the latter is lies and insults.
Perhaps cheating isn't the proper word. I suppose a better description is "exercise in futility". Personally, I play MMOs to experience the content, to put in the effort within the game to advance. The thought of paying real cash to bypass ingame advancement makes the spirit of the game seem hollow.
I'm not the type to spend money on RMT to advance myself, simply because I think it is a waste of my own money to pay to skip game content. That said, why would I then choose to participate in a game where ingame effort can be substituted with a credit card? Whether or not I choose to pay for RMT or not, RMT puts a certain price tag on advancements. Whether it be specific items of worth, or buffs to make one advance more quickly. So in playing a game with RMT and not choosing to buy RMT, I am essentially putting myself at an inherent disadvantage, so again, why should i bother? Additionally, if everyone simply gives into the RMT system and pays for uber items and bonuses, then everyone is at the exact same level as they would be if no one bought anything via RMT. So again I ask, why should I bother?
That is why I just avoid games with RMT. I simply do not see there as being any advantage in partaking in an MMO that offers it. The only thing I see is the potential to spend a great deal more money just to stay competitive with other players, than if I were simply to play a P2P game with absolutely no RMT. Which is why I dislike RMT and prefer P2P games that have none of it.
The issue I have is that some developers, and a number of the posters in this thread, think that RMT is perfectly okay to add into any MMO, and that players who dislike RMT should change their mind and/or suck it up and accept RMT if it's forced upon them.
Who had said that? The majority here in favor of item malls seem to be in agreement that it has its place and even then some games still manage to screw it up - Runes of Magic seeming to be the most consistent example.
Some, well perhaps maybe only one poster, is arguing that RMT is good everywhere if done right. My view is simply that RMT does have it's place, but it's place is certainly not everywhere, because in many cases there is no "right" way to implement RMT inherently because many people do not like RMT.
If a game is designed for RMT, then RMT is acceptable within that game. But with that in mind, no matter have perfectly RMT is implemented into that game, there will still be a large portion of gamers that will still steer clear of that game explicitly because of RMT. Not out of ignorant hate for that system of payment, but because of their personal views and values. Simply put, they find little value in playing a game that you can pay real money to get advantages and bypass regular gameplay, no matter if it's within the rules of the game or not.
Even though the game might allow paying real money to get ahead, many players feel that 'feature' diminishes the spirit of the game to the point where it is not worth playing.
So in playing a game with RMT and not choosing to buy RMT, I am essentially putting myself at an inherent disadvantage, so again, why should i bother?
Ok, I completely understand your point in all but the above sentence. It makes two assumptions. The first is that the items give some kind of advantage over other players and the second is that the players are competing. This almost includes a third assumption that it is a PvP game.
I buy a straw hat that gives me 5% extra mana when i wear it. You never meet me or even know i exist for that matter. We are not competing in any shape form or manner. What is your disadvantage? Is it just in knowing that someone has a better item than you? That would explain to me why a person may resent the item but I don't see how or where the competition or disadvantage comes in at all.
In a PvP game, I can completely see your point. I can see how losing to someone with an IWIN button is frustrating. Personally, the reason I left Aion is because I have no chance against the capped characters that kill my level 28 character in mere seconds. But the issue there isn't how he got it, rather the inequity of the situation. I didn't feel that he shouldn't have his capped character, rather I felt it was time for me to move to another game.
But the PvP argument is the most puzzling because if someone made a thread about how there should be more PvP-focused games because PvP is extremely popular, what would your response be? Wouldn't it be that it's a small minority that actually enjoys PvP? If that's the case, then why use the PvP scenario to support the Anti-RMT argument when it affects so few people?
If we're talking about PvE, it has nothing to do with inequity. It has everything to do with someone working his ass off in game to get something and enjoying it then seeing someone with something bigger and suddenly he can't enjoy what was fun just one minute ago because there's the chance that the other person may have possibly paid money to get that level, sword, potion, hat, etc.
And that seems to be the real issue here - that someone feels something they consider to be earned is trivialized by what someone else considers to be earned. A stance that makes no sense unless the item mall was added after they had signed up for the game.
"Even if they are cosmetic items, shouldn't these be available to everyone? I mean it's just pure greed, I don't understand how anyone thinks they are a good idea." -Oblivi0n
"Item malls are gamebreaking, no two ways about it really." -Oblivi0n
"Makes all the leveling somewhat worthless when someone can swoop in and pass you up for shelling out an extra 20 bucks." -Oblivi0n
""I mean the whole point in some of these games IS to level up, but that turns into a waste when someone can simply buy it out." -Oblivi0n
From what you and Oblivi0n are saying, it seems like the reason you are playing is to show off what you've accomplished or gained with the time you have sunk into the game. In that light, I can see how you'd perceive that others are doing the same but with money.
It is entirely possible, though, that they are just playing to have fun. It's possible that the money they spent wasn't to skip content but to enhance the way they experience the content. It's possible that they are even going through the content slower or more thoroughly than you are, especially in Oblivi0n's case where he stated that to him the whole point of the game is to level up. It's also very possible that they have no idea you are in competition with them or that you even exist at all.
Possible and rather probable, no?
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
The issue I have is that some developers, and a number of the posters in this thread, think that RMT is perfectly okay to add into any MMO, and that players who dislike RMT should change their mind and/or suck it up and accept RMT if it's forced upon them.
Who had said that? The majority here in favor of item malls seem to be in agreement that it has its place and even then some games still manage to screw it up - Runes of Magic seeming to be the most consistent example.
Some, well perhaps maybe only one poster, is arguing that RMT is good everywhere if done right. My view is simply that RMT does have it's place, but it's place is certainly not everywhere, because in many cases there is no "right" way to implement RMT inherently because many people do not like RMT.
If a game is designed for RMT, then RMT is acceptable within that game. But with that in mind, no matter have perfectly RMT is implemented into that game, there will still be a large portion of gamers that will still steer clear of that game explicitly because of RMT. Not out of ignorant hate for that system of payment, but because of their personal views and values. Simply put, they find little value in playing a game that you can pay real money to get advantages and bypass regular gameplay, no matter if it's within the rules of the game or not.
Even though the game might allow paying real money to get ahead, many players feel that 'feature' diminishes the spirit of the game to the point where it is not worth playing.
I think that in almost every regard, both sides are on the same page and have much the same views.
"...many players feel that 'feature' diminishes the spirit of the game..."
I feel 'many' is used rather loosely there, as it seems more a vocal minority, BUT... who knows.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I think that in almost every regard, both sides are on the same page and have much the same views.
"...many players feel that 'feature' diminishes the spirit of the game..." I feel 'many' is used rather loosely there, as it seems more a vocal minority, BUT... who knows.
In example of P2P forums communities, It may be a vocal minority actively speaking out against it, but that may simply because the majority of players do not post on forums. In fact, comparing the amount of people who specifically ask for RMT to be added, it is actually significantly less than those who speak out against it. Again, this is for most P2P MMO forums. Realize that most other players that don't post are content with how the game currently is.
Additionally, most players already choose which payment system they prefer, so they feel no need to speak out against it. Altering that system can cause lash back. Simply look at how much negative feedback there was concerning Blizzard adding unique vanity pets that give no advantage. There was a lot of it, because a lot of people who chose to play WoW, in part chose it because of it's payment model, which up until recently excluded any form of RMT.
Per your other post... Note that I have in previous posts stated that a single game can cater to both RMT and non-RMT accepting gamers by having servers that are inclusive or exclusive of RMT. The reasoning is simply that players who dislike RMT, whether or not they directly compete against each other in PvE, or PvP, or never see each other, it doesn't matter. Why? Because they are in the same game world, aka playfield, so they have the potential to interact. If they are on separate and exclusive servers, they do not, and therefore it is indeed a non-issue.
Think of it like PvP and PvE rulesets between game servers. Some people simply prefer the option available, while others do not. It's a matter of personal preference. Choosing to make blanket changes to the entire game can, and will, change the game experience for players, some even to the point where they no longer wish to play. The amount of players who are turned off by such changes depends on the game, the playerbase, and how it's implemented. Realize however, that it is a potential gamble that can not only drive away significant portions of the playerbase, but disgruntle them to the point of them completely avoiding any and all future games from said developer.
Here's the thing... I have tried, and I simply don't like the payment model, period. Why can't you just accept that some people just really don't like like RMT in games?
I also accept that some people don't like minorities, and completely understand that most of them don't even need a reason why.
~ Yes it's the same thing if you need to ask. People hate RMT either "just because" or "because it's bad for the rest of us" with no solid proof. Same argument in both boats.
The reasoning behind not wanting to play an RMT is sound. I don't want my video games to be about who wants to spend the most money to get ahead. Sure time and money are similar, but I'd rather have time be the payment, then somebody with a lot of disposable income shooting past everyone after playing the game for one day.
Again, people are rubberbanding the discussion back to the bad forms of RMT.
If this is the one argument you have against RMT, then you're fine with RMT that doesn't "get you ahead", correct?
Stuff like unlocking a Class in DDO. It enables you to create a new character and begin leveling it. The class is intended to be balanced with existing ones, so your purchase doesn't advance you nor does it give you any advantage at all (except perhaps that your class might be in higher group demand due to its rarity.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
If we're talking about PvE, it has nothing to do with inequity. It has everything to do with someone working his ass off in game to get something and enjoying it then seeing someone with something bigger and suddenly he can't enjoy what was fun just one minute ago because there's the chance that the other person may have possibly paid money to get that level, sword, potion, hat, etc.
And that seems to be the real issue here - that someone feels something they consider to be earned is trivialized by what someone else considers to be earned. A stance that makes no sense unless the item mall was added after they had signed up for the game.
"Even if they are cosmetic items, shouldn't these be available to everyone? I mean it's just pure greed, I don't understand how anyone thinks they are a good idea." -Oblivi0n "Item malls are gamebreaking, no two ways about it really." -Oblivi0n "Makes all the leveling somewhat worthless when someone can swoop in and pass you up for shelling out an extra 20 bucks." -Oblivi0n ""I mean the whole point in some of these games IS to level up, but that turns into a waste when someone can simply buy it out." -Oblivi0n
From what you and Oblivi0n are saying, it seems like the reason you are playing is to show off what you've accomplished or gained with the time you have sunk into the game. In that light, I can see how you'd perceive that others are doing the same but with money.
It is entirely possible, though, that they are just playing to have fun. It's possible that the money they spent wasn't to skip content but to enhance the way they experience the content. It's possible that they are even going through the content slower or more thoroughly than you are, especially in Oblivi0n's case where he stated that to him the whole point of the game is to level up. It's also very possible that they have no idea you are in competition with them or that you even exist at all.
Possible and rather probable, no?
I think it's not only possible, but a fact that everyone is playing to have fun. Why else would they play a computer game? Except maybe gold farmers.
Some people are telling you that RMT ruins their fun.
Does it matter why, if that is true?
Why is it important to you to convince anyone that their reason for not having fun must be jealousy of items?
Is it possible that not being able to use RMT in a game enhances the way some players experience the content?
One reason I don't like RMT is for me it's very immersion breaking.
I never want to think about real life money when Im' playing an MMORPG.
I want to pay 14.95 once, and then for the rest of the month not be aware that anything to do with real money is associated with the game.
With micro transactions, I"m constantly reminded about real life money. It really destroys my enjoyment of the game.
When I buy things with gold, it's not real life money. It doesn't make me think about real life money.
When I buy things with credits I purchased, even though you call them credits, or Hooboos, or Dinkets, it's real life money, and it makes me think about real life money every time I buy something.
If I wanted to shop with real life money, I"d go to the mall or ebay.
I am playing a computer game to get away from the mall or ebay.
Again, people are rubberbanding the discussion back to the bad forms of RMT. If this is the one argument you have against RMT, then you're fine with RMT that doesn't "get you ahead", correct? Stuff like unlocking a Class in DDO. It enables you to create a new character and begin leveling it. The class is intended to be balanced with existing ones, so your purchase doesn't advance you nor does it give you any advantage at all (except perhaps that your class might be in higher group demand due to its rarity.)
... Which is exactly why the topic rubberbands. The second there is access that is exclusively gained to a party via transactions external to gameplay itself, then you create an unbalanced playing field, even if all factors involved are designed to be 'balanced'. Even qualitatively, you've examined why in your example, the imbalance occurs. Begin discussion on subjective topics like aesthetics and it's pretty much over.
The only middle ground in the matter is when people accept to see in shades of grey. But since no common terms of 'grey' can be established, it's better off kept in black and white.
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
... Which is exactly why the topic rubberbands. The second there is access that is exclusively gained to a party via transactions external to gameplay itself, then you create an unbalanced playing field, even if all factors involved are designed to be 'balanced'.
That is false. Entering a game with a cash shop and refusing to use the cash shop does indicate a lack of balance in the design of the game unless there is some reason someone is restricted from using it by the game or its developers.
It's like entering a game of dodgeball and not wanting to wail a big red ball at people - if you don't like the rules of the game and won't use the resources available to you to compete (I say 'compete' solely because that is the argument constantly being used by those against item malls) then the problem isn't that the game makers 'created an unbalanced playing field.' The problem is that some people are playing the wrong game.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
... Which is exactly why the topic rubberbands. The second there is access that is exclusively gained to a party via transactions external to gameplay itself, then you create an unbalanced playing field, even if all factors involved are designed to be 'balanced'.
That is false. Entering a game with a cash shop and refusing to use the cash shop does indicate a lack of balance in the design of the game unless there is some reason someone is restricted from using it by the game or its developers.
It's like entering a game of dodgeball and not wanting to wail a big red ball at people - if you don't like the rules of the game and won't use the resources available to you to compete (I say 'compete' solely because that is the argument constantly being used by those against item malls) then the problem isn't that the game makers 'created an unbalanced playing field.' The problem is that some people are playing the wrong game.
The interview you posted reveals the opposite. The person in that interview said the vast majority of players don't use RMT in a game until they get hooked.
He said people generally start the game with the intention to pay no money, but after 6 months manyh of them get convinced to spend money in the game.
He also stated this is why it's hard to make money on a P2P game, because people can just run go play a F2P game with the expectation of not paying anything.
I'm not the type to spend money on RMT to advance myself, simply because I think it is a waste of my own money to pay to skip game content. That said, why would I then choose to participate in a game where ingame effort can be substituted with a credit card? Whether or not I choose to pay for RMT or not, RMT puts a certain price tag on advancements. Whether it be specific items of worth, or buffs to make one advance more quickly. So in playing a game with RMT and not choosing to buy RMT, I am essentially putting myself at an inherent disadvantage, so again, why should i bother? Additionally, if everyone simply gives into the RMT system and pays for uber items and bonuses, then everyone is at the exact same level as they would be if no one bought anything via RMT. So again I ask, why should I bother?
Because a) you are buying additional content (like an adventure pack on DDO, or a new pet on WOW), or b) you are skipping to content you are having more fun with.
You wrongly assume all content is the same, with respect to fun to everyone. May be someone just want to start doing the higher level dungeons sooner, because he wants to play with his higher level friend, or for watever other reasons.
And this "disadvantage" you talk about .. does not really apply to PvE games. What disadvantage? You cannot go to the highest level dungeons where others can go? But people who start to play earlier has that "advantage" too. Also it is not a real disadvantage if you are not competing with the others. There is no competition in PvE.
In fact, i would WELCOME a higher level to adventure with me. And if he buys his way there, better for me since he is using his money to help me adventure.
Actually my choice is to stay 1000 miles away from that kind of games
Im just an old fart but really cant see the point of paying extra so you dont have to play the game that you pay for. Its kinda like paying someone to eat your birthday cake for you.
Honestly, you'll remain baffled by all of this as long as you keep creating a false premise to argue against. I know that pointing that out will never stop you, Ihmo, Obliv and the rest from doing it but one can always hope for miracles.
How is the premise false? Have you never heard or read rather that people spend money because they dont have time to play the game? Reading is a great tool perhaps you should try it.
No I have never heard of games where you can buy your way up so you don't have to play them.
Which games are these?
Perhaps ask those that post about buying because they dont have time to play the game. Funny how those posts get overlooked in the rush to defend what is nothing more than cheating. Amazing how being the best at any cost is so prevalent in the gaming community. Speaks volumes to those who listen.
This means you can't find even ONE example and has to resort to insult?
Tell me how RMT on WOW is for those who have no time to play the game. I bought TWO pets from the wow store (only in-game items you can buy). Tell me how that let me skip me game. That is totally moronic to think that every single RMT item is to skip part of the game and make you advance faster.
In this case, RMT allows me to purchase MORE content. That is the same for the adventure paks in DDO.
Comments
runes of magic , 4story, allods
So basically since a handful of games have item malls that give IWIN buttons to players with cash, they all do. Got it.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
runes of magic , 4story, allods
So basically since a handful of games have item malls that give IWIN buttons to players with cash, they all do. Got it.
no, those were just the latest big european releases, which strangely enough (wink) follow the same asian cash shop advantages' model
if you want a more complete list, feel free to post here every single F2P game released in the last 10 years. The older ones I probably I played them all,the rest i researched on them, specially the cash shop.
and will point you which ones have unbalanced cash shops.
no wait, that would take me hours. I'll just point you which ones do NOT have unbalanced cash shops. that should take me 30-60 seconds top.
I really don't understand why some people on either side of the discussion are so tooth and nail about trying to prove that their way is the only way.
Both ways have merit, to different people. Yes I'm being a broken record, but it boils down to personal preference in what people value and what they want out of a game.
Some people value their time more than their money. Or, they simply hate grinding, and want to get to what they perceive as 'the top' of an MMO as quickly as possible. For these people, they enjoy RMT in MMOs. Other people are simply extremely casual gamers who don't care to 'get to the top', and value their money more, so the F2P with RMT is perfectly fine for them too.
The other side, for P2P, tend to have different values. Many of them prefer their ingame effort, in both time and skill, to dictate their ingame achievements. They prefer that non-RMT games are more economical in the long haul than MMOs with RMT. They value the spirit of the game.
Both sides have varying, but completely valid views and desires for the MMO and payment model/s they prefer. Some people will never play a P2P, where as some people will never play a F2P. It's not irrational hate, it's simply a matter of opinion.
The tension between the two camps however, is when both groups of players want to play a particular MMO because of it's features, but they are conflicted due to the payment model being used. This tends to even out over time, as players either adapt and accept it, or move on in frustration. The absolute worst thing to do however, is to shift the payment model post release. This can potentially alienate and irritate your core playerbase to the point of packing up and leaving.
So, what's the best solution? Well, provided that there is enough interest in both models for both payment models, would be to have servers that explicitly lock out RMT, and servers explicitly for RMT. This way, players who want RMT can play on those servers, and those who don't can play on the others. No one is upset then.
Baring that, as I've said several times before, simply stop trying to mash the two together. Most people who want to play F2P games already are, just like people who prefer P2P non-RMT have chosen those games. The biggest source of tension right now is that a lot of P2P players who dislike RMT, are slowly finding more and more of it forced into the games they play and enjoy, games that never had a bit of RMT.
Im just an old fart but really cant see the point of paying extra so you dont have to play the game that you pay for. Its kinda like paying someone to eat your birthday cake for you.
Honestly, you'll remain baffled by all of this as long as you keep creating a false premise to argue against. I know that pointing that out will never stop you, Ihmo, Obliv and the rest from doing it but one can always hope for miracles.
How is the premise false? Have you never heard or read rather that people spend money because they dont have time to play the game? Reading is a great tool perhaps you should try it.
No I have never heard of games where you can buy your way up so you don't have to play them.
Which games are these?
Perhaps ask those that post about buying because they dont have time to play the game. Funny how those posts get overlooked in the rush to defend what is nothing more than cheating. Amazing how being the best at any cost is so prevalent in the gaming community. Speaks volumes to those who listen.
Its hardly "cheating" if its established by the Dev's themselves. Not to mention, I've clearly stated that done right, such enhances the game, it doesn't play it for you. When you get done dancing with that strawman, put it back in the closet. Thanks. ^^
I'd say you are partially correct, and here's why:
Cash shops can sometimes impart significant advantages that really unbalance the playing field in a PVP game. It all depends on the game. Runes of Magic, Atlantica Online and War Rock are three that are very well known for exactly what you describe. The majority, however simply do not offer this IWIN button that everyone uses as their argument against item malls.
And, again, that would only be in PvP. If you're not in PvP then it doesn't make a difference if the other guy is weilding Thor's Hammer and riding on the shoulders of Zeus.
the majority DO, since the majority are asian, and asians are well known for creating and raising to the category of MUST DO the worst idea ever, "enchant or break"
most asian F2P games work under this basis
- since they are fast food games, they lack itemization teams, so they release only a handful (10-15) weapon sets for all classes
- since such a lack of variety can be gamebreaking but they dont want to spend a single more cent creating models (fast food game,remember?), they came up with the idea of "+1" with a certain % fail rate
- a common perk is that an item which fails to upgrade breaks
- anther common perk of their cash shops are paid items that will prevent the item from breaking, or increase the odds of succeeding by an incredible amount.
I have played dozens of asian F2P MMOs back when i was a teen without a job, and they ALL had this.
Your average kid couldnt upgrade the "basic" sword because losing it was too much of a risk.
The fat wallet guys would run in +10 gear onehitting and being basically raid bosses themselves, because money gave them unlimited tries to get uber pwnzor gear.
worst part is, majority of this last wave european and american F2P games are following this policy, since it was proved a winner time after time in terms of cash shop revenue.
Gates of Andaron is a prime example of that. You have people running around with +16 or +18 weapons and armor. It was entertaining until you get into the mid level 30's when you have to go out into the gank fest zones. That got nasty fast. Its too bad, as it was an entertaining game before that.
Some people still feel that it's cheating, no matter how devs try to spin it.
From the bucket of ridiculous analogies, let's take a chess tournament. Say the organizer decides that hey, there's an optional $5 buy in for each game that is available to both players, to get a second queen on the board, and all money for this goes to the person organizing said tournament. The players don't know if the other has paid extra or not until they face off, in which case they can't buy in for that game once they do. It is technically within the rules of the tournament because the person organizing it dictates the rules.
Think about the above though. If a player chooses not to buy in, they risk being at a huge disadvantage if the other does. Both players pay $5 to get the advantage, when then end result is simply two players now both with equal advantages, each out $5, and the organizer $10 richer. So really, what's that point of all of it? In the end the players are no better off than they were before, only they've spent more money to try to ensure they were not at a disadvantage.
This isn't even touching the fact that pretty much any serious chess player would think that such a tournament was a complete joke, and insult to the game with such a 'buy in' option.
The above is how a lot of people view RMT in MMOs. When players can pay to get advantages or things others cannot via gameplay, then players who don't are inherently at a disadvantage. But when all players pay to get an advantage then no one is at an advantage. So the question is, why bother playing a game where you have to pay extra just to ensure you are not at a disadvantage? it simply doesn't make sense to a lot of people, which is why many people steer clear from RMT.
If you want to define "waiting & doing nothing" as content (and i am talking about staring at a spellbook in EQ, not just riding a boat, which at least u get to see some scenary) .. then I would say that is very bad content, and I will have no problem having an option in game to skip those.
There is interesting content: items, boss fights, quest lines, scripted events, exploring zones, and there are the un-content .. like waiting, like repeating clicking to level up fishing and stuff.
If you really want to define content as everything, and not just the fun stuff, then I have no problem skipping content. To play a game is to have fun, not just because a developer say what i need to do.
And the argument that i am playing money (not that i have ever, my stance is to let other pays to subsidize my f2p games) to automatically play my game is still wrong. I just skip the bad content so i can have more fun playing the good content.
I don't think even you can argue that staring at a spell book is the same content, in terms of fun, compared to fighting a nicely designed boss encounter.
That is exactly my point, actually.
I have no problem with RMT existing in some MMOs, I just explicitly avoid those MMOs, and will only play games that do not have RMT.
The issue I have is that some developers, and a number of the posters in this thread, think that RMT is perfectly okay to add into any MMO, and that players who dislike RMT should change their mind and/or suck it up and accept RMT if it's forced upon them.
Which is why I continue to state that RMT should be left to games built for it, and left out of P2P games that are not. Or, that if RMT is added to P2P games, that they be limited to only be available on segregated servers with a segregated player base.
Well, now wait a second here, Cerideth. If something is created by the devs as a feature of the game and is documented as a feature of the game, then how is that "spinning" something to be within the game rules? It IS the game rules.
See, that's the biggest part of the argument here. We have one side stating facts and the other side saying "Well, I feel those facts are wrong." There is a HUGE and MASSIVE difference between someone saying "I don't like games where you can buy things and I won't play them," and someone saying "People who buy things in games are lazy, cheating, playing in easy mode, etc" The former is a solid and indisputable statement of preference and the latter is lies and insults.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Who had said that? The majority here in favor of item malls seem to be in agreement that it has its place and even then some games still manage to screw it up - Runes of Magic seeming to be the most consistent example.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
If you want to define "waiting & doing nothing" as content (and i am talking about staring at a spellbook in EQ, not just riding a boat, which at least u get to see some scenary) .. then I would say that is very bad content, and I will have no problem having an option in game to skip those.
There is interesting content: items, boss fights, quest lines, scripted events, exploring zones, and there are the un-content .. like waiting, like repeating clicking to level up fishing and stuff.
If you really want to define content as everything, and not just the fun stuff, then I have no problem skipping content. To play a game is to have fun, not just because a developer say what i need to do.
And the argument that i am playing money (not that i have ever, my stance is to let other pays to subsidize my f2p games) to automatically play my game is still wrong. I just skip the bad content so i can have more fun playing the good content.
I don't think even you can argue that staring at a spell book is the same content, in terms of fun, compared to fighting a nicely designed boss encounter.
The point is not whether you enjoy a particular feature of the game.
THe point is whether you enjoy a game that is the same for all players, or different for different players.
I enjoy the game more if it is the same for all players.
You enjoy the game if it is different for different players.
It's similar to instances.
I don't like instances, I think they break immersion. I prefer and open world.
Some people think the more instances in a game the better.
I also don't like the feature where you do a quest, and the game world changes for you, but not anyone that hasn't done the quest.
I like the same world for everyone.
Well, now wait a second here, Cerideth. If something is created by the devs as a feature of the game and is documented as a feature of the game, then how is that "spinning" something to be within the game rules? It IS the game rules.
See, that's the biggest part of the argument here. We have one side stating facts and the other side saying "Well, I feel those facts are wrong." There is a HUGE and MASSIVE difference between someone saying "I don't like games where you can buy things and I won't play them," and someone saying "People who buy things in games are lazy, cheating, playing in easy mode, etc" The former is a solid and indisputable statement of preference and the latter is lies and insults.
I agree that the rules are the rules.
If you play by the rules, you are not cheating.
If the rules let you buy and Iwin button, then it's not cheating, it's part of the game.
Poker is a game where you can win with money. You can bet, and if the other person can't cover your bet, he loses the game.
Well, now wait a second here, Cerideth. If something is created by the devs as a feature of the game and is documented as a feature of the game, then how is that "spinning" something to be within the game rules? It IS the game rules.
See, that's the biggest part of the argument here. We have one side stating facts and the other side saying "Well, I feel those facts are wrong." There is a HUGE and MASSIVE difference between someone saying "I don't like games where you can buy things and I won't play them," and someone saying "People who legitimately buy things in games are lazy, cheating, playing in easy mode, etc" The former is a solid and indisputable statement of preference and the latter is lies and insults.
Perhaps cheating isn't the proper word. I suppose a better description is "exercise in futility". Personally, I play MMOs to experience the content, to put in the effort within the game to advance. The thought of paying real cash to bypass ingame advancement makes the spirit of the game seem hollow.
I'm not the type to spend money on RMT to advance myself, simply because I think it is a waste of my own money to pay to skip game content. That said, why would I then choose to participate in a game where ingame effort can be substituted with a credit card? Whether or not I choose to pay for RMT or not, RMT puts a certain price tag on advancements. Whether it be specific items of worth, or buffs to make one advance more quickly. So in playing a game with RMT and not choosing to buy RMT, I am essentially putting myself at an inherent disadvantage, so again, why should i bother? Additionally, if everyone simply gives into the RMT system and pays for uber items and bonuses, then everyone is at the exact same level as they would be if no one bought anything via RMT. So again I ask, why should I bother?
That is why I just avoid games with RMT. I simply do not see there as being any advantage in partaking in an MMO that offers it. The only thing I see is the potential to spend a great deal more money just to stay competitive with other players, than if I were simply to play a P2P game with absolutely no RMT. Which is why I dislike RMT and prefer P2P games that have none of it.
Who had said that? The majority here in favor of item malls seem to be in agreement that it has its place and even then some games still manage to screw it up - Runes of Magic seeming to be the most consistent example.
Some, well perhaps maybe only one poster, is arguing that RMT is good everywhere if done right. My view is simply that RMT does have it's place, but it's place is certainly not everywhere, because in many cases there is no "right" way to implement RMT inherently because many people do not like RMT.
If a game is designed for RMT, then RMT is acceptable within that game. But with that in mind, no matter have perfectly RMT is implemented into that game, there will still be a large portion of gamers that will still steer clear of that game explicitly because of RMT. Not out of ignorant hate for that system of payment, but because of their personal views and values. Simply put, they find little value in playing a game that you can pay real money to get advantages and bypass regular gameplay, no matter if it's within the rules of the game or not.
Even though the game might allow paying real money to get ahead, many players feel that 'feature' diminishes the spirit of the game to the point where it is not worth playing.
Ok, I completely understand your point in all but the above sentence. It makes two assumptions. The first is that the items give some kind of advantage over other players and the second is that the players are competing. This almost includes a third assumption that it is a PvP game.
I buy a straw hat that gives me 5% extra mana when i wear it. You never meet me or even know i exist for that matter. We are not competing in any shape form or manner. What is your disadvantage? Is it just in knowing that someone has a better item than you? That would explain to me why a person may resent the item but I don't see how or where the competition or disadvantage comes in at all.
In a PvP game, I can completely see your point. I can see how losing to someone with an IWIN button is frustrating. Personally, the reason I left Aion is because I have no chance against the capped characters that kill my level 28 character in mere seconds. But the issue there isn't how he got it, rather the inequity of the situation. I didn't feel that he shouldn't have his capped character, rather I felt it was time for me to move to another game.
But the PvP argument is the most puzzling because if someone made a thread about how there should be more PvP-focused games because PvP is extremely popular, what would your response be? Wouldn't it be that it's a small minority that actually enjoys PvP? If that's the case, then why use the PvP scenario to support the Anti-RMT argument when it affects so few people?
If we're talking about PvE, it has nothing to do with inequity. It has everything to do with someone working his ass off in game to get something and enjoying it then seeing someone with something bigger and suddenly he can't enjoy what was fun just one minute ago because there's the chance that the other person may have possibly paid money to get that level, sword, potion, hat, etc.
And that seems to be the real issue here - that someone feels something they consider to be earned is trivialized by what someone else considers to be earned. A stance that makes no sense unless the item mall was added after they had signed up for the game.
"Even if they are cosmetic items, shouldn't these be available to everyone? I mean it's just pure greed, I don't understand how anyone thinks they are a good idea." -Oblivi0n
"Item malls are gamebreaking, no two ways about it really." -Oblivi0n
"Makes all the leveling somewhat worthless when someone can swoop in and pass you up for shelling out an extra 20 bucks." -Oblivi0n
""I mean the whole point in some of these games IS to level up, but that turns into a waste when someone can simply buy it out." -Oblivi0n
From what you and Oblivi0n are saying, it seems like the reason you are playing is to show off what you've accomplished or gained with the time you have sunk into the game. In that light, I can see how you'd perceive that others are doing the same but with money.
It is entirely possible, though, that they are just playing to have fun. It's possible that the money they spent wasn't to skip content but to enhance the way they experience the content. It's possible that they are even going through the content slower or more thoroughly than you are, especially in Oblivi0n's case where he stated that to him the whole point of the game is to level up. It's also very possible that they have no idea you are in competition with them or that you even exist at all.
Possible and rather probable, no?
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Who had said that? The majority here in favor of item malls seem to be in agreement that it has its place and even then some games still manage to screw it up - Runes of Magic seeming to be the most consistent example.
Some, well perhaps maybe only one poster, is arguing that RMT is good everywhere if done right. My view is simply that RMT does have it's place, but it's place is certainly not everywhere, because in many cases there is no "right" way to implement RMT inherently because many people do not like RMT.
If a game is designed for RMT, then RMT is acceptable within that game. But with that in mind, no matter have perfectly RMT is implemented into that game, there will still be a large portion of gamers that will still steer clear of that game explicitly because of RMT. Not out of ignorant hate for that system of payment, but because of their personal views and values. Simply put, they find little value in playing a game that you can pay real money to get advantages and bypass regular gameplay, no matter if it's within the rules of the game or not.
Even though the game might allow paying real money to get ahead, many players feel that 'feature' diminishes the spirit of the game to the point where it is not worth playing.
I think that in almost every regard, both sides are on the same page and have much the same views.
"...many players feel that 'feature' diminishes the spirit of the game..."
I feel 'many' is used rather loosely there, as it seems more a vocal minority, BUT... who knows.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
In example of P2P forums communities, It may be a vocal minority actively speaking out against it, but that may simply because the majority of players do not post on forums. In fact, comparing the amount of people who specifically ask for RMT to be added, it is actually significantly less than those who speak out against it. Again, this is for most P2P MMO forums. Realize that most other players that don't post are content with how the game currently is.
Additionally, most players already choose which payment system they prefer, so they feel no need to speak out against it. Altering that system can cause lash back. Simply look at how much negative feedback there was concerning Blizzard adding unique vanity pets that give no advantage. There was a lot of it, because a lot of people who chose to play WoW, in part chose it because of it's payment model, which up until recently excluded any form of RMT.
Per your other post... Note that I have in previous posts stated that a single game can cater to both RMT and non-RMT accepting gamers by having servers that are inclusive or exclusive of RMT. The reasoning is simply that players who dislike RMT, whether or not they directly compete against each other in PvE, or PvP, or never see each other, it doesn't matter. Why? Because they are in the same game world, aka playfield, so they have the potential to interact. If they are on separate and exclusive servers, they do not, and therefore it is indeed a non-issue.
Think of it like PvP and PvE rulesets between game servers. Some people simply prefer the option available, while others do not. It's a matter of personal preference. Choosing to make blanket changes to the entire game can, and will, change the game experience for players, some even to the point where they no longer wish to play. The amount of players who are turned off by such changes depends on the game, the playerbase, and how it's implemented. Realize however, that it is a potential gamble that can not only drive away significant portions of the playerbase, but disgruntle them to the point of them completely avoiding any and all future games from said developer.
I also accept that some people don't like minorities, and completely understand that most of them don't even need a reason why.
~ Yes it's the same thing if you need to ask. People hate RMT either "just because" or "because it's bad for the rest of us" with no solid proof. Same argument in both boats.
The reasoning behind not wanting to play an RMT is sound. I don't want my video games to be about who wants to spend the most money to get ahead. Sure time and money are similar, but I'd rather have time be the payment, then somebody with a lot of disposable income shooting past everyone after playing the game for one day.
Again, people are rubberbanding the discussion back to the bad forms of RMT.
If this is the one argument you have against RMT, then you're fine with RMT that doesn't "get you ahead", correct?
Stuff like unlocking a Class in DDO. It enables you to create a new character and begin leveling it. The class is intended to be balanced with existing ones, so your purchase doesn't advance you nor does it give you any advantage at all (except perhaps that your class might be in higher group demand due to its rarity.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I think it's not only possible, but a fact that everyone is playing to have fun. Why else would they play a computer game? Except maybe gold farmers.
Some people are telling you that RMT ruins their fun.
Does it matter why, if that is true?
Why is it important to you to convince anyone that their reason for not having fun must be jealousy of items?
Is it possible that not being able to use RMT in a game enhances the way some players experience the content?
One reason I don't like RMT is for me it's very immersion breaking.
I never want to think about real life money when Im' playing an MMORPG.
I want to pay 14.95 once, and then for the rest of the month not be aware that anything to do with real money is associated with the game.
With micro transactions, I"m constantly reminded about real life money. It really destroys my enjoyment of the game.
When I buy things with gold, it's not real life money. It doesn't make me think about real life money.
When I buy things with credits I purchased, even though you call them credits, or Hooboos, or Dinkets, it's real life money, and it makes me think about real life money every time I buy something.
If I wanted to shop with real life money, I"d go to the mall or ebay.
I am playing a computer game to get away from the mall or ebay.
... Which is exactly why the topic rubberbands. The second there is access that is exclusively gained to a party via transactions external to gameplay itself, then you create an unbalanced playing field, even if all factors involved are designed to be 'balanced'. Even qualitatively, you've examined why in your example, the imbalance occurs. Begin discussion on subjective topics like aesthetics and it's pretty much over.
The only middle ground in the matter is when people accept to see in shades of grey. But since no common terms of 'grey' can be established, it's better off kept in black and white.
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
That is false. Entering a game with a cash shop and refusing to use the cash shop does indicate a lack of balance in the design of the game unless there is some reason someone is restricted from using it by the game or its developers.
It's like entering a game of dodgeball and not wanting to wail a big red ball at people - if you don't like the rules of the game and won't use the resources available to you to compete (I say 'compete' solely because that is the argument constantly being used by those against item malls) then the problem isn't that the game makers 'created an unbalanced playing field.' The problem is that some people are playing the wrong game.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
That is false. Entering a game with a cash shop and refusing to use the cash shop does indicate a lack of balance in the design of the game unless there is some reason someone is restricted from using it by the game or its developers.
It's like entering a game of dodgeball and not wanting to wail a big red ball at people - if you don't like the rules of the game and won't use the resources available to you to compete (I say 'compete' solely because that is the argument constantly being used by those against item malls) then the problem isn't that the game makers 'created an unbalanced playing field.' The problem is that some people are playing the wrong game.
The interview you posted reveals the opposite. The person in that interview said the vast majority of players don't use RMT in a game until they get hooked.
He said people generally start the game with the intention to pay no money, but after 6 months manyh of them get convinced to spend money in the game.
He also stated this is why it's hard to make money on a P2P game, because people can just run go play a F2P game with the expectation of not paying anything.
I'm not the type to spend money on RMT to advance myself, simply because I think it is a waste of my own money to pay to skip game content. That said, why would I then choose to participate in a game where ingame effort can be substituted with a credit card? Whether or not I choose to pay for RMT or not, RMT puts a certain price tag on advancements. Whether it be specific items of worth, or buffs to make one advance more quickly. So in playing a game with RMT and not choosing to buy RMT, I am essentially putting myself at an inherent disadvantage, so again, why should i bother? Additionally, if everyone simply gives into the RMT system and pays for uber items and bonuses, then everyone is at the exact same level as they would be if no one bought anything via RMT. So again I ask, why should I bother?
Because a) you are buying additional content (like an adventure pack on DDO, or a new pet on WOW), or b) you are skipping to content you are having more fun with.
You wrongly assume all content is the same, with respect to fun to everyone. May be someone just want to start doing the higher level dungeons sooner, because he wants to play with his higher level friend, or for watever other reasons.
And this "disadvantage" you talk about .. does not really apply to PvE games. What disadvantage? You cannot go to the highest level dungeons where others can go? But people who start to play earlier has that "advantage" too. Also it is not a real disadvantage if you are not competing with the others. There is no competition in PvE.
In fact, i would WELCOME a higher level to adventure with me. And if he buys his way there, better for me since he is using his money to help me adventure.
Im just an old fart but really cant see the point of paying extra so you dont have to play the game that you pay for. Its kinda like paying someone to eat your birthday cake for you.
Honestly, you'll remain baffled by all of this as long as you keep creating a false premise to argue against. I know that pointing that out will never stop you, Ihmo, Obliv and the rest from doing it but one can always hope for miracles.
How is the premise false? Have you never heard or read rather that people spend money because they dont have time to play the game? Reading is a great tool perhaps you should try it.
No I have never heard of games where you can buy your way up so you don't have to play them.
Which games are these?
Perhaps ask those that post about buying because they dont have time to play the game. Funny how those posts get overlooked in the rush to defend what is nothing more than cheating. Amazing how being the best at any cost is so prevalent in the gaming community. Speaks volumes to those who listen.
This means you can't find even ONE example and has to resort to insult?
Tell me how RMT on WOW is for those who have no time to play the game. I bought TWO pets from the wow store (only in-game items you can buy). Tell me how that let me skip me game. That is totally moronic to think that every single RMT item is to skip part of the game and make you advance faster.
In this case, RMT allows me to purchase MORE content. That is the same for the adventure paks in DDO.