They said EQN will be the largest sandbox game in existence. Keep in mind that sandbox is a very broad term and it could go in many different directions. F2P isn't very bad either, I think people just have a very bad taste in their mouths from the slew of horrible F2P/P2W games. If you look at much more mature games like Rift and Planetside 2 (Which is SOE btw) you'll notice that the F2P model CAN and DOES work and is no way like those other horrible games.
F2P is P2W... I have yet to see a F2P game that doesn't offer competitive advantages for giving them money. XP potions, more bags, better gear, unlocking weapons... Im not intending to miss your overall point, which is some F2P models are much worse than others. Its just I'm exhausted with people who believe F2P is something beneficial cause it is a blight on the MMO industry.
I am looking forward to EQN, I like sandbox style games, I like the Everquest world, I am intrigued by Storybricks, I love the idea of the Player Studio... The only thing that I have heard so far that I look on with dread is the payment model. Hopefully it will be as subtle as possible but man do I wish they would just let me pay them $15 a month and call it good....
Sorry but P2W is not synonymous with Paying for Convenience.
Buying a Potion that allows you to earn 25% additional exp for a limited time is not the same as buying a suit of armor that gives you a statistical advantage.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Are there some F2P games that are? Sure, but definitely not all.
PS2 - Nothing P2W. You can argue that experience boosts are, but they're not. It gives you absolutely no advantage over me if I spend nothing. Buying weapons? Congrats, all you did was avoid the grind to get a different type of weapon. Speaking of weapons, it's advantage/power over any similar weapon is highly situational.
Similar things can be said about GW2... Gold =/= power, especially in a game where the only differences with weapons/armor are their looks and not their power.
Rift - boosts have been already covered. You gain no actual competitive advantage over someone who doesn't pay. Can you purchase gear? Yes, but it's FAR from the best and again it's just a time saver. If someone wants to skip all the dungeon grind and jump straight into raids they can, but it's not quite the best entry level raid gear.
People need to just get over the whole F2P thing... It's here to stay because it is a much better business model. Better business = better all-around games. You can pay $15 a month and play with less people who, like you, must spend hours and hours to advance each step of progression OR you can bump that style of gameplay down to the free players and give some perks to those that want to pay and skip all the bullshit so they can actually enjoy the GAME. The free players will get there eventually and it won't take a huge amount of time.
As long as I can enjoy my experience and am not hindered in anyway, I'm fine with whatever is offered. I think offering only F2P or Sub is a mistake. The more options, the larger the pool of players. A game being one system or another doesn't draw a better/worse group of people.
And as seen by EQ/EQ2, going F2P will bring in a lot of people that might have never given these games a second glance. It's a good way to draw people in and I'm sure many have started F2P and moved on to Sub. Similar to why many games came with one month free. It's a chance to test the waters and see if you want to invest your time/money in the game after the initial buy in.
If they give us a good sub option I am happy. But if it’s similar to the PS2 model where you need to spend weeks grinding to unlock features of the game that could also be unlocked with micro transactions it will really bum me out. It devastates immersion for me. I want to earn my rewards not purchase them.
As long as I can enjoy my experience and am not hindered in anyway, I'm fine with whatever is offered. I think offering only F2P or Sub is a mistake. The more options, the larger the pool of players. A game being one system or another doesn't draw a better/worse group of people.
And as seen by EQ/EQ2, going F2P will bring in a lot of people that might have never given these games a second glance. It's a good way to draw people in and I'm sure many have started F2P and moved on to Sub. Similar to why many games came with one month free. It's a chance to test the waters and see if you want to invest your time/money in the game after the initial buy in.
If they give us a good sub option I am happy. But if it’s similar to the PS2 model where you need to spend weeks grinding to unlock features of the game that could also be unlocked with micro transactions it will really bum me out. It devastates immersion for me. I want to earn my rewards not purchase them.
It doesn't take weeks if you play enough. Playing with a 10% experience booster, I’ve earned 1173 cert with a 1.62 K/D in 30 hours of in-game time. That would afford one or two weapons of the higher tier, and maybe two more minor upgrades, like optics. That's hardly a week if you play 4 hours a day and you would most likely get more than I have in this example.
The only thing I would agree with is the absurd costs of these things. To get all the weapons unlocked for your faction (Just one) you'd have to spend over $375.
Are there some F2P games that are? Sure, but definitely not all.
PS2 - Nothing P2W. You can argue that experience boosts are, but they're not. It gives you absolutely no advantage over me if I spend nothing. Buying weapons? Congrats, all you did was avoid the grind to get a different type of weapon. Speaking of weapons, it's advantage/power over any similar weapon is highly situational.
Similar things can be said about GW2... Gold =/= power, especially in a game where the only differences with weapons/armor are their looks and not their power.
Rift - boosts have been already covered. You gain no actual competitive advantage over someone who doesn't pay. Can you purchase gear? Yes, but it's FAR from the best and again it's just a time saver. If someone wants to skip all the dungeon grind and jump straight into raids they can, but it's not quite the best entry level raid gear.
People need to just get over the whole F2P thing... It's here to stay because it is a much better business model. Better business = better all-around games. You can pay $15 a month and play with less people who, like you, must spend hours and hours to advance each step of progression OR you can bump that style of gameplay down to the free players and give some perks to those that want to pay and skip all the bullshit so they can actually enjoy the GAME. The free players will get there eventually and it won't take a huge amount of time.
Ok... so we both play PS2 for 40 hours and do everything in game the same earning the same xp and so forth... we are equal skill levels.... I use my credit cards and pay for xp boosts the entire time and pay to unlock the weapons... you don't.... your going to say that I wouldn't have a significant advantage over you? Cause I would. Also gear in GW2 was significant, there was a noticeable difference in upgrading rarity tiers of gear.
You seem to completely dismiss the "time spent" to earn something as if it has no value when in reality that time is giving a competitive advantage to the person that spends money because they are that far ahead of the curve.
You are confusing better business for larger profit margins, I recognize that the gaming studios have increased revenue from F2P. However making more money has not translated to making better products for the consumer.
Ok so you say pay $15 a month and play with less people or join F2P and give perks to those that want to pay. The point is these games are adding "bullshit" into the games in order to encourage you to give them money to skip it. The reason I prefer a subscription over P2W is I don't want the bullshit in the game in the first place.
It doesn't take weeks if you play enough. Playing with a 10% experience booster, I’ve earned 1173 cert with a 1.62 K/D in 30 hours of in-game time. That would afford one or two weapons of the higher tier, and maybe two more minor upgrades, like optics. That's hardly a week if you play 4 hours a day and you would most likely get more than I have in this example.
You are sorta making my point for me, you could either give them cash or spend 28ish hours working to unlock 1 or 2 of the weapons. That puts anyone that spends the money 1 week ahead of you in a PVP game... Thats P2W
Are there some F2P games that are? Sure, but definitely not all.
PS2 - Nothing P2W. You can argue that experience boosts are, but they're not. It gives you absolutely no advantage over me if I spend nothing. Buying weapons? Congrats, all you did was avoid the grind to get a different type of weapon. Speaking of weapons, it's advantage/power over any similar weapon is highly situational.
Similar things can be said about GW2... Gold =/= power, especially in a game where the only differences with weapons/armor are their looks and not their power.
Rift - boosts have been already covered. You gain no actual competitive advantage over someone who doesn't pay. Can you purchase gear? Yes, but it's FAR from the best and again it's just a time saver. If someone wants to skip all the dungeon grind and jump straight into raids they can, but it's not quite the best entry level raid gear.
People need to just get over the whole F2P thing... It's here to stay because it is a much better business model. Better business = better all-around games. You can pay $15 a month and play with less people who, like you, must spend hours and hours to advance each step of progression OR you can bump that style of gameplay down to the free players and give some perks to those that want to pay and skip all the bullshit so they can actually enjoy the GAME. The free players will get there eventually and it won't take a huge amount of time.
Ok... so we both play PS2 for 40 hours and do everything in game the same earning the same xp and so forth... we are equal skill levels.... I use my credit cards and pay for xp boosts the entire time and pay to unlock the weapons... you don't.... your going to say that I wouldn't have a significant advantage over you? Cause I would. Also gear in GW2 was significant, there was a noticeable difference in upgrading rarity tiers of gear.
You seem to completely dismiss the "time spent" to earn something as if it has no value when in reality that time is giving a competitive advantage to the person that spends money because they are that far ahead of the curve.
You are confusing better business for larger profit margins, I recognize that the gaming studios have increased revenue from F2P. However making more money has not translated to making better products for the consumer.
Ok so you say pay $15 a month and play with less people or join F2P and give perks to those that want to pay. The point is these games are adding "bullshit" into the games in order to encourage you to give them money to skip it. The reason I prefer a subscription over P2W is I don't want the bullshit in the game in the first place.
It's subjective to how the player chooses to spend his earnings. While you could be gaining twice as many certs as me and spending money on unlocking the weapons that alone doesn't put you in any kind of advantage. The game is highly skill based and even if we are exactly the same there will be times when we both win or lose. Again, the weapons are situational. You can go ahead and unlock every weapon, but you'll only be limited to using one at a time... This isn't like you're wearing armor that is statistically superior in every way. The starting weapons alone are extremely good.
No one weapon is better than the other, with every buff there is a nerf... Faster rate of fire = lower damage, ect. So even if you unlock all the weapons you would only win if the situation gave you the advantage. In every situation a free player is just as capable of winning as a paying player.
Time, too, is subjective. Why is time important? If you're goal is to unlock a specific weapon then sure, the paying player will win the race, but that's the only thing they will win. If you're racing to unlock everything in the game and it's absolutely important to you then I'd have to ask you why because you won't be very much different from a free player.
I'm confused as to what you think is bullshit. Developers have to make money and in order to do so they have to offer things that others will buy. Since when is that evil? Get out of the way of thinking that developers are greedy. Their pride and notoriety is more important to them.
In pve it dont matter to me what the hell you buy. but in pvp it may if a item of gear or wepon is over powered other wise bought stuff in the shop dont matter .
What matters is when the developers stop createing good stuff for the game and create crap stuff for the shop because thats how they make money.
As for the person who said WoW didn't copy EQ2, of coarse it didnt, it copied original EQ, and made it more accessible with better polish and marketing. Blizzard didn't do anything truly innovative with WoW, it just merely took the formula that already existed and polished it into a fine gem.
Also WoW, in the beginning, wasn't a "themepark", at least not what we consider that term to mean nowadays. It was open, you weren't really hand-held and coddled, you had to figure out your place in the world yourself, and it was challenging. Granted it removed several of the fist-shaking complaints of EQ1 (no XP loss/naked corpse runs, addition of flight paths, offline auction house, etc), but vanilla WoW would be considered a pretty "hardcore" game by todays standards.
What exactly did WoW copy from EQ? Oh, WoW had levels. it had raiding. Uh...yeah, it really ripped those off from EQ! WoW had the talent trees. WoW was quest based leveling, EQ wasnt. In WoW it was efficient to level solo, in EQ it was painfully inefficient to level solo. EQ had sprawling, non instanced dungeons. WoW- instanced dungeons with a goal to beat a final boss (at least some of them were non-linear). EQ's combat was slow paced with resource conservation being the main limiting factor. WoW had fast paced combat with the gcd being the main factor. Really the two games were *EXTREMELY* different, and the similarities were mostly genre similarities or RPG staples.
And WoW was certainly a themepark in the beginning. Quest based leveling, exclamation points and all. You went from quest hub to quest hub. Was it more open than it is now? Yes. But it was still a themepark. And you really were hand held in WoW. You had your bread crumb quests to go from zone to zone. And the game was definitely easy. More challenging than it is now, sure. But mobs were push overs (and while it had group quests they were the minority)
Vanilla WoW got some things right that all its successors have failed: the leveling speed was slow enough that you felt accomplished while leveling and the world was wonderfully designed. LOTRO had this somewhat right, and every game since has failed miserably. they all treat leveling like an inconvenience and the worlds are soulless (even if they look pretty). So yeah it had that in common with EQ as well, but thats just competent game development.
It's subjective to how the player chooses to spend his earnings. While you could be gaining twice as many certs as me and spending money on unlocking the weapons that alone doesn't put you in any kind of advantage. The game is highly skill based and even if we are exactly the same there will be times when we both win or lose. Again, the weapons are situational. You can go ahead and unlock every weapon, but you'll only be limited to using one at a time... This isn't like you're wearing armor that is statistically superior in every way. The starting weapons alone are extremely good.
No one weapon is better than the other, with every buff there is a nerf... Faster rate of fire = lower damage, ect. So even if you unlock all the weapons you would only win if the situation gave you the advantage. In every situation a free player is just as capable of winning as a paying player.
Time, too, is subjective. Why is time important? If you're goal is to unlock a specific weapon then sure, the paying player will win the race, but that's the only thing they will win. If you're racing to unlock everything in the game and it's absolutely important to you then I'd have to ask you why because you won't be very much different from a free player.
I'm confused as to what you think is bullshit. Developers have to make money and in order to do so they have to offer things that others will buy. Since when is that evil? Get out of the way of thinking that developers are greedy. Their pride and notoriety is more important to them.
Its not earnings if its purchased, thats my point. If I work for something I want it to mean something, not be purchased for $14.95 from the station store. Now yes PS2 specifically did have a large skill based element but the purchased (or earned) weapons were better.
Time has value.
The reason I quoted bullshit was because I was quoting the previous post. I know developers need to make money, I am not opposed to this and don't think it is evil. I love sub games and will gladly pay a monthly sub for a game I enjoy. What I dont like is a game that uses a cash shop to offer the rewards of the game for cash. Then it isn't like playing a game anymore, its more like paying bills.
I know some games do F2P better than others, I recognize that GW2 and PS2 were an improvement over other cash shop games. However even with these titles the rewards you should be earning from playing the game itself are available for purchase and this hurts the quality of the game.
Originally posted by deveilblad Originally posted by tkoreaper I'd just like to say that most games take 4+ years to develop.They've given us bits and pieces of information:It exists.It will be a massive sandbox.No Themepark.New Engine (as seen on Planetside 2)I believe they said it is F2P.They've shown a couple of screenshots.I'm sure there's other bits, but you get the point.
Point 2 coupled with 5 ( if true ) make me VERY skeptical about this game... a F2P sandbox ?
If it's heavy on the PvP ( as most, if not all sandboxes are ), this will be the game with the worse community ever, we're talking LoL levels here...
You mean like Age of Wushu? Or Ryzom? Or Entropia Universe? Or Anarchy Online? Or APB reloaded? Or Wurm Online?
In fact, pretty much every sandbox game aside from EVE, DFUW, which isn't really much of a sandbox anyway, and Mortal Online are all Free to Play. So I fail to see your point? Unless you are just really uninformed about sandbox games.
Of all the games you mentioned only one is a true out and out sandbox game,that's Wurm Online.
Are you sure you know what a real sandbox game is?
lots of games are p2w like neverwinter if you dont pay you cant realisticly raise enchants over lvl 5 unless you get lucky v ery lucky , oh and nm lockboxes forget qabout them unless you pay, or use lots of gold
assets that cut productiont ime by 50% per raise quality by 50 and so on mounts, compansions all the best locked behind paywall and the only useful companions are the bought cats
eq2 you cant even wear many items wo paying if it has a cool effect you probably cant wear it
Originally posted by Raventree Wow, it seems like this game has been in development FOREVER! Anyone heard what they are going to show in August? It seems like they haven't really given us anything up to this point.
Everything, it will be a huge reveal according to people working on the game.
It's still about 2 years out. They aren't out of alpha yet. They are just revealing their plan for it
I hope they handle it better this time than they did with EQ2 (you more or less both needs a sub and to buy stuff each month to really enjoy it once you played a while).
What are you talking about? There isnt a single item in the EQ2 store that is remotely necessary for the game for a sub. Its all fluff, in a game that has oodles of fluff to begin with. Plus, subbed players get free station cash each month anyway.
I am baffled as to what you felt you need to buy to 'really enjoy it'.
what do you call requireing unlocks for any item remotely cool like that robe that casts dwarf illusion? thjat i looted myself lots of other items the best group items LOCKED sry need a key
They said EQN will be the largest sandbox game in existence. Keep in mind that sandbox is a very broad term and it could go in many different directions. F2P isn't very bad either, I think people just have a very bad taste in their mouths from the slew of horrible F2P/P2W games. If you look at much more mature games like Rift and Planetside 2 (Which is SOE btw) you'll notice that the F2P model CAN and DOES work and is no way like those other horrible games.
F2P is P2W... I have yet to see a F2P game that doesn't offer competitive advantages for giving them money. XP potions, more bags, better gear, unlocking weapons... Im not intending to miss your overall point, which is some F2P models are much worse than others. Its just I'm exhausted with people who believe F2P is something beneficial cause it is a blight on the MMO industry.
I am looking forward to EQN, I like sandbox style games, I like the Everquest world, I am intrigued by Storybricks, I love the idea of the Player Studio... The only thing that I have heard so far that I look on with dread is the payment model. Hopefully it will be as subtle as possible but man do I wish they would just let me pay them $15 a month and call it good....
TF2/GW2 don't have many P2W options. I haven't played much PS2, but it doesn't seem to have too much of an issue either.
EQN will most likely follow SOE's other games with multiple levels of buy in. F2P, Sub, and something in between when you spend a little $. F2P has its pros and cons, but either way, it is the future (especially SOE's).
F2P has literally only cons. There is not one f2p game that is on the same level as a sub game.
Originally posted by Raventree Wow, it seems like this game has been in development FOREVER! Anyone heard what they are going to show in August? It seems like they haven't really given us anything up to this point.
Everything, it will be a huge reveal according to people working on the game.
It's still about 2 years out. They aren't out of alpha yet. They are just revealing their plan for it
Cool, I know you have a source on this, or else you wouldn't be stating it. So, I'll believe you.
Originally posted by Raventree Wow, it seems like this game has been in development FOREVER! Anyone heard what they are going to show in August? It seems like they haven't really given us anything up to this point.
Everything, it will be a huge reveal according to people working on the game.
It's still about 2 years out. They aren't out of alpha yet. They are just revealing their plan for it
how do you know they arent in alpha hmm ? alphas can and used to be always company only no outsiders ...
I havent found a f2p game toi equal a aaa sub based game "YET" keyword yet LoL did f2p good but new heroes definatly start out op
They said EQN will be the largest sandbox game in existence. Keep in mind that sandbox is a very broad term and it could go in many different directions. F2P isn't very bad either, I think people just have a very bad taste in their mouths from the slew of horrible F2P/P2W games. If you look at much more mature games like Rift and Planetside 2 (Which is SOE btw) you'll notice that the F2P model CAN and DOES work and is no way like those other horrible games.
F2P is P2W
This statement is false. It CAN be P2W but does not mean all models are. Absolute statements like yours show ignorance. By the way please tell me how more bag space is P2W? I have played many P2P games starting with UO and a few F2P games. Some models are P2W(PWI) a lot are not on games that went F2P. Some even have very good f2p models(LOTRO, DDO, EQ2, PS2).
F2P models can add the same items you can get in game for a convenience. That is not P2W. If I can put in the time in game to get the same items that they wasted cash for so be it.
They said EQN will be the largest sandbox game in existence. Keep in mind that sandbox is a very broad term and it could go in many different directions. F2P isn't very bad either, I think people just have a very bad taste in their mouths from the slew of horrible F2P/P2W games. If you look at much more mature games like Rift and Planetside 2 (Which is SOE btw) you'll notice that the F2P model CAN and DOES work and is no way like those other horrible games.
F2P is P2W... I have yet to see a F2P game that doesn't offer competitive advantages for giving them money. XP potions, more bags, better gear, unlocking weapons... Im not intending to miss your overall point, which is some F2P models are much worse than others. Its just I'm exhausted with people who believe F2P is something beneficial cause it is a blight on the MMO industry.
I am looking forward to EQN, I like sandbox style games, I like the Everquest world, I am intrigued by Storybricks, I love the idea of the Player Studio... The only thing that I have heard so far that I look on with dread is the payment model. Hopefully it will be as subtle as possible but man do I wish they would just let me pay them $15 a month and call it good....
TF2/GW2 don't have many P2W options. I haven't played much PS2, but it doesn't seem to have too much of an issue either.
EQN will most likely follow SOE's other games with multiple levels of buy in. F2P, Sub, and something in between when you spend a little $. F2P has its pros and cons, but either way, it is the future (especially SOE's).
F2P has literally only cons. There is not one f2p game that is on the same level as a sub game.
This is your opinion and you are entitled to it. I'm sure there are plenty of players and companies that don't agree or there wouldn't be so many F2P games.
Not having to pay for a game at all or after the initial cost in a big pro for many people. From what SOE has said, their line up of games have had very large comebacks financially and population wise by going F2P. Keeping games from closing down seems like a pro.
Beyond WoW, I can't think of any other sub game that is still doing well. Unfortunately, times have changed and so have players and their willingness to sub. Not saying it is good or bad, it is what it is.
Originally posted by Raventree Wow, it seems like this game has been in development FOREVER! Anyone heard what they are going to show in August? It seems like they haven't really given us anything up to this point.
Everything, it will be a huge reveal according to people working on the game.
It's still about 2 years out. They aren't out of alpha yet. They are just revealing their plan for it
that might not be true... according to smed once the reveal happens "you wont have to wait long til we get our hands on it"
RIP Ribbitribbitt you are missed, kid.
Currently Playing EVE, ESO
Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed.
This statement is false. It CAN be P2W but does not mean all models are. Absolute statements like yours show ignorance. By the way please tell me how more bag space is P2W? I have played many P2P games starting with UO and a few F2P games. Some models are P2W(PWI) a lot are not on games that went F2P. Some even have very good f2p models(LOTRO, DDO, EQ2, PS2).
F2P models can add the same items you can get in game for a convenience. That is not P2W. If I can put in the time in game to get the same items that they wasted cash for so be it.
I guess its true that F2P doesn't theoretically have to be P2W but so far no one with a few hundred million dollars burning a hole in their pocket has decided to put out an MMO for free just to be nice. Since that hasn't happened the F2P games that have been made need to make money, the way they make money is by charging you for things that give you an advantage in the game. (I personally haven't seen a cash shop that ONLY does cosmetic items such as dyes but that would certainly be an exception) So if you spend your time earning an item that can be purchased with cash then the person that purchased it with cash uses that same time to earn something more than you have earned. It is an advantage to the person that just buys everything. As for the bag slot example, obviously the more items you can carry allows a greater amount of time adventuring without having to return to town to sell (unless the game does something like GW2 did) So if you don't purchase the extra bag slots then you have to spend more time traveling back and forth to sell and less time earning xp. Once again advantage to the person who buys the item.
They scrapped the game 18 ,months ago,so in reality the game is barely half done.This has the August time line looking extremely odd as it makes no sense.Why keep everything a secret then release information only half way through the development?
Are they just tossing in a whole pile of rushed maps and going on one gimmick just so they can get the game out this Christmas?Other wise why wouldn't you wait until closer to release,i mean games have their sacred NDA and yet are willing to spill trade secrets this easily and early,makes no sense.
You really need to stop spewing this nonsense all over the place, the entire game wasn't scrapped.
I said the exact same thing earlier in this thread! Keeps saying same crap over and over regardless of us explaining it wasn't ALL scrapped
Comments
Sorry but P2W is not synonymous with Paying for Convenience.
Buying a Potion that allows you to earn 25% additional exp for a limited time is not the same as buying a suit of armor that gives you a statistical advantage.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
F2P =/= P2W
Are there some F2P games that are? Sure, but definitely not all.
PS2 - Nothing P2W. You can argue that experience boosts are, but they're not. It gives you absolutely no advantage over me if I spend nothing. Buying weapons? Congrats, all you did was avoid the grind to get a different type of weapon. Speaking of weapons, it's advantage/power over any similar weapon is highly situational.
Similar things can be said about GW2... Gold =/= power, especially in a game where the only differences with weapons/armor are their looks and not their power.
Rift - boosts have been already covered. You gain no actual competitive advantage over someone who doesn't pay. Can you purchase gear? Yes, but it's FAR from the best and again it's just a time saver. If someone wants to skip all the dungeon grind and jump straight into raids they can, but it's not quite the best entry level raid gear.
People need to just get over the whole F2P thing... It's here to stay because it is a much better business model. Better business = better all-around games. You can pay $15 a month and play with less people who, like you, must spend hours and hours to advance each step of progression OR you can bump that style of gameplay down to the free players and give some perks to those that want to pay and skip all the bullshit so they can actually enjoy the GAME. The free players will get there eventually and it won't take a huge amount of time.
Yep, we've known for a long time that Player Studio was a beta of sorts for EQN. They're going to push player made content much further in EQN.
If they give us a good sub option I am happy. But if it’s similar to the PS2 model where you need to spend weeks grinding to unlock features of the game that could also be unlocked with micro transactions it will really bum me out. It devastates immersion for me. I want to earn my rewards not purchase them.
It doesn't take weeks if you play enough. Playing with a 10% experience booster, I’ve earned 1173 cert with a 1.62 K/D in 30 hours of in-game time. That would afford one or two weapons of the higher tier, and maybe two more minor upgrades, like optics. That's hardly a week if you play 4 hours a day and you would most likely get more than I have in this example.
The only thing I would agree with is the absurd costs of these things. To get all the weapons unlocked for your faction (Just one) you'd have to spend over $375.
Ok... so we both play PS2 for 40 hours and do everything in game the same earning the same xp and so forth... we are equal skill levels.... I use my credit cards and pay for xp boosts the entire time and pay to unlock the weapons... you don't.... your going to say that I wouldn't have a significant advantage over you? Cause I would. Also gear in GW2 was significant, there was a noticeable difference in upgrading rarity tiers of gear.
You seem to completely dismiss the "time spent" to earn something as if it has no value when in reality that time is giving a competitive advantage to the person that spends money because they are that far ahead of the curve.
You are confusing better business for larger profit margins, I recognize that the gaming studios have increased revenue from F2P. However making more money has not translated to making better products for the consumer.
Ok so you say pay $15 a month and play with less people or join F2P and give perks to those that want to pay. The point is these games are adding "bullshit" into the games in order to encourage you to give them money to skip it. The reason I prefer a subscription over P2W is I don't want the bullshit in the game in the first place.
You are sorta making my point for me, you could either give them cash or spend 28ish hours working to unlock 1 or 2 of the weapons. That puts anyone that spends the money 1 week ahead of you in a PVP game... Thats P2W
It's subjective to how the player chooses to spend his earnings. While you could be gaining twice as many certs as me and spending money on unlocking the weapons that alone doesn't put you in any kind of advantage. The game is highly skill based and even if we are exactly the same there will be times when we both win or lose. Again, the weapons are situational. You can go ahead and unlock every weapon, but you'll only be limited to using one at a time... This isn't like you're wearing armor that is statistically superior in every way. The starting weapons alone are extremely good.
No one weapon is better than the other, with every buff there is a nerf... Faster rate of fire = lower damage, ect. So even if you unlock all the weapons you would only win if the situation gave you the advantage. In every situation a free player is just as capable of winning as a paying player.
Time, too, is subjective. Why is time important? If you're goal is to unlock a specific weapon then sure, the paying player will win the race, but that's the only thing they will win. If you're racing to unlock everything in the game and it's absolutely important to you then I'd have to ask you why because you won't be very much different from a free player.
I'm confused as to what you think is bullshit. Developers have to make money and in order to do so they have to offer things that others will buy. Since when is that evil? Get out of the way of thinking that developers are greedy. Their pride and notoriety is more important to them.
In pve it dont matter to me what the hell you buy. but in pvp it may if a item of gear or wepon is over powered other wise bought stuff in the shop dont matter .
What matters is when the developers stop createing good stuff for the game and create crap stuff for the shop because thats how they make money.
What exactly did WoW copy from EQ? Oh, WoW had levels. it had raiding. Uh...yeah, it really ripped those off from EQ! WoW had the talent trees. WoW was quest based leveling, EQ wasnt. In WoW it was efficient to level solo, in EQ it was painfully inefficient to level solo. EQ had sprawling, non instanced dungeons. WoW- instanced dungeons with a goal to beat a final boss (at least some of them were non-linear). EQ's combat was slow paced with resource conservation being the main limiting factor. WoW had fast paced combat with the gcd being the main factor. Really the two games were *EXTREMELY* different, and the similarities were mostly genre similarities or RPG staples.
And WoW was certainly a themepark in the beginning. Quest based leveling, exclamation points and all. You went from quest hub to quest hub. Was it more open than it is now? Yes. But it was still a themepark. And you really were hand held in WoW. You had your bread crumb quests to go from zone to zone. And the game was definitely easy. More challenging than it is now, sure. But mobs were push overs (and while it had group quests they were the minority)
Vanilla WoW got some things right that all its successors have failed: the leveling speed was slow enough that you felt accomplished while leveling and the world was wonderfully designed. LOTRO had this somewhat right, and every game since has failed miserably. they all treat leveling like an inconvenience and the worlds are soulless (even if they look pretty). So yeah it had that in common with EQ as well, but thats just competent game development.
Its not earnings if its purchased, thats my point. If I work for something I want it to mean something, not be purchased for $14.95 from the station store. Now yes PS2 specifically did have a large skill based element but the purchased (or earned) weapons were better.
Time has value.
The reason I quoted bullshit was because I was quoting the previous post. I know developers need to make money, I am not opposed to this and don't think it is evil. I love sub games and will gladly pay a monthly sub for a game I enjoy. What I dont like is a game that uses a cash shop to offer the rewards of the game for cash. Then it isn't like playing a game anymore, its more like paying bills.
I know some games do F2P better than others, I recognize that GW2 and PS2 were an improvement over other cash shop games. However even with these titles the rewards you should be earning from playing the game itself are available for purchase and this hurts the quality of the game.
Point 2 coupled with 5 ( if true ) make me VERY skeptical about this game... a F2P sandbox ?
If it's heavy on the PvP ( as most, if not all sandboxes are ), this will be the game with the worse community ever, we're talking LoL levels here...
You mean like Age of Wushu? Or Ryzom? Or Entropia Universe? Or Anarchy Online? Or APB reloaded? Or Wurm Online?
In fact, pretty much every sandbox game aside from EVE, DFUW, which isn't really much of a sandbox anyway, and Mortal Online are all Free to Play. So I fail to see your point? Unless you are just really uninformed about sandbox games.
Of all the games you mentioned only one is a true out and out sandbox game,that's Wurm Online.Are you sure you know what a real sandbox game is?
lots of games are p2w like neverwinter if you dont pay you cant realisticly raise enchants over lvl 5 unless you get lucky v ery lucky , oh and nm lockboxes forget qabout them unless you pay, or use lots of gold
assets that cut productiont ime by 50% per raise quality by 50 and so on mounts, compansions all the best locked behind paywall and the only useful companions are the bought cats
eq2 you cant even wear many items wo paying if it has a cool effect you probably cant wear it
eq1 forget about raidgear if you dont sub
It's still about 2 years out. They aren't out of alpha yet. They are just revealing their plan for it
what do you call requireing unlocks for any item remotely cool like that robe that casts dwarf illusion? thjat i looted myself lots of other items the best group items LOCKED sry need a key
F2P has literally only cons. There is not one f2p game that is on the same level as a sub game.
Cool, I know you have a source on this, or else you wouldn't be stating it. So, I'll believe you.
how do you know they arent in alpha hmm ? alphas can and used to be always company only no outsiders ...
I havent found a f2p game toi equal a aaa sub based game "YET" keyword yet LoL did f2p good but new heroes definatly start out op
This statement is false. It CAN be P2W but does not mean all models are. Absolute statements like yours show ignorance. By the way please tell me how more bag space is P2W? I have played many P2P games starting with UO and a few F2P games. Some models are P2W(PWI) a lot are not on games that went F2P. Some even have very good f2p models(LOTRO, DDO, EQ2, PS2).
F2P models can add the same items you can get in game for a convenience. That is not P2W. If I can put in the time in game to get the same items that they wasted cash for so be it.
This is your opinion and you are entitled to it. I'm sure there are plenty of players and companies that don't agree or there wouldn't be so many F2P games.
Not having to pay for a game at all or after the initial cost in a big pro for many people. From what SOE has said, their line up of games have had very large comebacks financially and population wise by going F2P. Keeping games from closing down seems like a pro.
Beyond WoW, I can't think of any other sub game that is still doing well. Unfortunately, times have changed and so have players and their willingness to sub. Not saying it is good or bad, it is what it is.
that might not be true... according to smed once the reveal happens "you wont have to wait long til we get our hands on it"
RIP Ribbitribbitt you are missed, kid.
Currently Playing EVE, ESO
Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed.
Dwight D Eisenhower
My optimism wears heavy boots and is loud.
Henry Rollins
I guess its true that F2P doesn't theoretically have to be P2W but so far no one with a few hundred million dollars burning a hole in their pocket has decided to put out an MMO for free just to be nice. Since that hasn't happened the F2P games that have been made need to make money, the way they make money is by charging you for things that give you an advantage in the game. (I personally haven't seen a cash shop that ONLY does cosmetic items such as dyes but that would certainly be an exception) So if you spend your time earning an item that can be purchased with cash then the person that purchased it with cash uses that same time to earn something more than you have earned. It is an advantage to the person that just buys everything. As for the bag slot example, obviously the more items you can carry allows a greater amount of time adventuring without having to return to town to sell (unless the game does something like GW2 did) So if you don't purchase the extra bag slots then you have to spend more time traveling back and forth to sell and less time earning xp. Once again advantage to the person who buys the item.
I said the exact same thing earlier in this thread! Keeps saying same crap over and over regardless of us explaining it wasn't ALL scrapped