Real life is real life and a game is a game - at what point when you start bringing real life into a game does a game stop being a game?
Cash shops ruined MMO games. They are over!
I think the topic is adressing virtual life though, an its relationship with the real life assets.
Real life assets are real life assets, why are they in my MMO game? Cash shops blurred the lines for us players as well as developers. There are no MMO games left its all playing the cashshop now which is some weird assets vs time vs fun calculation maximization.
Real life assets are real life assets, why are they in my MMO game? Cash shops blurred the lines for us players as well as developers. There are no MMO games left its all playing the cashshop now which is some weird assets vs time vs fun calculation maximization.
cash services have always existed indirectly as the black market
players selling to other players - characters, gear, gold, power leveling
I remember back in 1999,
i met a player paying his monthly rent by playing EQ and selling his services
cash shops have always existed indirectly as the black market
players selling to other players - characters, gear, gold, power leveling
Thats ridiculous and you know it - some people used the black market, yes and it was wrong, now its legitimate and the games are designed around the cash-shop so much much higher percentage of people use them + they now are a major influence on how the game is designed and developed. That's why there are no more MMO games, just cashshop games.
But if you have no time.. Then you shouldn't be playing games.
Neither should you if you have no money.
Way to go at missing the point.
No, not at all. It's actually making at least as much sense as your example. Which is flawed, by the way.
You say you can make the dollar back, but you can't. That particular dollar is probably never going to end back up in your wallet, but you can replace it with another one. In the same way, you can replace that time you spent getting that dollar, with that dollar you made. Lost you? Read on.
With those dollars, you can literally buy time. Not in the sense that you would have more than 24 hours a day, but if you have enough money, you can for example cut off work hours from your week, or hire someone else to fix your car or clean your house.
Only in the case your 24 hours are filled with nothing but beautiful moments with your family and hobbies can you say that money cannot buy you (more) time. But to get to that point, you need money and a lot of it, too.
And if we stay in topic, time you spend playing a computer game is not something I'd consider precious. If it is, you should definitely re-think your priorities in life. But even in this case, you can buy that time to play games, by having someone else do the menial tasks of your life.
Money=Time. It is that simple and there is no need to try to twist it any further with hyperbole.
EDIT: Have to add that the ratio of how much money buys how much time varies. My boss told me earlier I need to work longer days. I told him he can't afford it.
Originally posted by zymurgeist Pay me $50 and hour and I'll sit in front of a screen while you pummel my avatar like a tackling dummy. I'll even watch you prance around my corpse calling me a loser because I haven't spent money to buy an uber sword of pwnage. Without laughing in your face. Really. I don't care what you have in a game. I don't care how you got it. I do care about being rewarded for the time I spend in a game. If the reward is not money I expect it to be fun. That's the problem with buying game advantages in cash shops. The temptation is too great for developers to place grabbing your money for pixels above earning mine by providing enjoyment. This is why those games suck and it has nothing to do with any advantage anyone else may have from playing more hours. Yes that includes XP boosts. Because if you game is good why are people paying to skip large portions of it? I don't want double the XP I want double the fun.
First of all, you say you don't care what other people have in game, but then you call out the people who use cash shops. Can you decide if you care about it or not?
Second, who are you to determine what is fun for other people? If they find it fun to buy their way to max level and gear and then move on to the next game, who are you to judge that?
Originally posted by Mr.Kujo I'm going to get so flamed for this, but the temptation is just to strong xDAll that hate going towards people who "pay to win", and all that talk about how it is unfair, and how everyone should be equal in a mmorpg, and no one should have any real life advantages over others....How about this - let's say one of you fellow players has two hours of free time after work to play a game. Well, I have one hour. That person already has a huge advantage over me because of real life. Do you not see the hypocrisy?It is okay if someone is using real life advantage in form of time, but not okay if it is in form of cash. You do realize that time is valuable. You have time, I have money, what is wrong with this picture? Time is money! Right?Ok, if you want to be honest about it, and be really equal, cool... I won't use real money to gain advantage, you stop playing longer than me so you won't get advantage. Deal? No? Well... then I guess there is no problem there, is there?How is advantage in time different than advantage in cash? This is what I try to understand, both are real life advantages!If you really want equal chances in game, you would need a game where there is a daily time limit and then the sh*t just goes black screen. Then I leave my money out of it, because we are equal. But it would be retarded, so it won't happen.Remove the cash advantage and you still got people that will have advantage in time. You won't play less, because you want freedom... but only for yourself, screw others, right? I have more free time, screw the guys who have less time. Equal only where it benefits me, right? Like most feminists.... DISCLAIMER: I reserve the right to change my opinion whenever I see fit, without warning. What I say now may not represent the "ME" in my next post xD
While the theory is good, Tiem and Money are not quite the same variable.
The difference is that not everybody has $1000/day (money) to spend on MMOs whereas everyone has just 24 hours/day (time) to play.
While people may choose to have time intensive careers and make lots of money, not everyone has that choice. Some may lack the know-how of the job, the skill set to perform the job, or just plain bad luck in trying to obtain said job.
Some people may choose to have a family, which takes time away from other activities they may do. Some may choose to do volunteer work. There are many ways for any particular person to spend time. However, NO ONE has more than 24 hours in a day. Yet
Time is the equalizer. If a player wishes to be "top notch" in an MMO, they find a way to make the time to play.
Money is the separator. Not everyone's bank account is the same. If a player wishes to "buy their way" to the top, they can. That option is not available to everyone, though.
To be honest, I really don't understand the "me vs. them" mentality I see prevalent here very well. PvP, yea I can see the complaint. PvE? Who cares what "other players" do with their games?
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
cash shops have always existed indirectly as the black market
players selling to other players - characters, gear, gold, power leveling
Thats ridiculous and you know it - some people used the black market, yes and it was wrong, now its legitimate and the games are designed around the cash-shop so much much higher percentage of people use them + they now are a major influence on how the game is designed and developed. That's why there are no more MMO games, just cashshop games.
So in your great wisdom you have specified that an MMO game is a game without a cash shop? You could perhaps argue that there are no more pure subscription MMOs, but even that would be false. Those games are getting rare, I'll give you that.
And the reason is what I mentioned earlier. Gamers have grown up.
Originally posted by AlBQuirky Some people may choose to have a family, which takes time away from other activities they may do. Some may choose to do volunteer work. There are many ways for any particular person to spend time. However, NO ONE has more than 24 hours in a day. Yet
it can be a thin line
I remember taking two years off 15 years ago
I had no job, didnt need one, I had 30k saved up
I spent all my time playing EQ --- at least 60 hours a week for two years
The difference is that not everybody has $1000/day (money) to spend on MMOs whereas everyone has just 24 hours/day (time) to play.
While people may choose to have time intensive careers and make lots of money, not everyone has that choice. Some may lack the know-how of the job, the skill set to perform the job, or just plain bad luck in trying to obtain said job.
Some people may choose to have a family, which takes time away from other activities they may do. Some may choose to do volunteer work. There are many ways for any particular person to spend time. However, NO ONE has more than 24 hours in a day. Yet
Time is the equalizer. If a player wishes to be "top notch" in an MMO, they find a way to make the time to play.
Money is the separator. Not everyone's bank account is the same. If a player wishes to "buy their way" to the top, they can. That option is not available to everyone, though.
To be honest, I really don't understand the "me vs. them" mentality I see prevalent here very well. PvP, yea I can see the complaint. PvE? Who cares what "other players" do with their games?
So we have not been all dealt the same cards in life. What's new?
What about those people who have superior logical thinking and hand-to-eye coordination? In essence these people are good at playing game X. Now how are we going to equalize that? There is no way we are able to level the playing field for everyone unless we trivialize the game to the point even a monkey could play that at the "skill cap".
This whole thing about time = money therefore it is not pay 2 win is ridiculous.
The whole way of thinking has just gone off track and has dragged things in that have nothing to do with the game itself.
You should not bring real life economy into games. If one guy is a manager and makes $50 an hour and another guy is just an employee and makes $10 an hour, the manager should suddenly be able to progress 5x more by paying? You will just end up with the definition of pay 2 win then.
It's like saying that you can use real money in a game of monopoly to cheat your way out.
How is the manager that works 50 hrs a week and the employee that works 20 hrs a week ever going to be on the same playing field ?
In this type of situation real life is always going to intrude on the game. It's just a case of are you the manager or the employee in real life.
First off, I didn't talk about hours worked / week at all.
Secondly, it was just an example, but there are many more factors that you allow to decide who's time is "worth" more than others'.
Just take any MMO published for Europe and you can immediately see a big difference between wages in southern Europe and northern Europe, as well as quality of life (currently), so again, you'll be facing big differences as to how much your time in the game is "worth".
Finally, as someone above already spelled out, there is no universal rule that says time (not) spent = x money. This is not a mathematical axioma. If you follow this philosophy in your game, you are simply paying to not play the game, or paying to progress in the game, or paying to win. It's just another way to sweet-talk it.
Yes, real life economy always matters. Games are luxury products and whether you can pay for a computer and the game itself decides if you have access to it or not.
But after that it's the developers' decision to grant equal access if you pay the entrance fee, or whether to have people pay in order to get ahead of others.
It's the customer's decision which model they like best and / or which amount of P2W is acceptable to them.
We should just stop trying to call the Beast by other names, it is what it is.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
cash shops have always existed indirectly as the black market
players selling to other players - characters, gear, gold, power leveling
Thats ridiculous and you know it - some people used the black market, yes and it was wrong, now its legitimate and the games are designed around the cash-shop so much much higher percentage of people use them + they now are a major influence on how the game is designed and developed. That's why there are no more MMO games, just cashshop games.
So in your great wisdom you have specified that an MMO game is a game without a cash shop? You could perhaps argue that there are no more pure subscription MMOs, but even that would be false. Those games are getting rare, I'll give you that.
And the reason is what I mentioned earlier. Gamers have grown up.
Yes MMO game is a game without a cashshop. Game with a cashshop is a cashshop game, ie youplay the cashshop. Pacing, design, fun, challenge everything is based around the cashshop.
I am a grown up gamer with a family and I dont play because of cashshops because they ruin the game and make it into something that I dont want to be a part of.
cash shops have always existed indirectly as the black market
players selling to other players - characters, gear, gold, power leveling
Thats ridiculous and you know it - some people used the black market, yes and it was wrong, now its legitimate and the games are designed around the cash-shop so much much higher percentage of people use them + they now are a major influence on how the game is designed and developed. That's why there are no more MMO games, just cashshop games.
So in your great wisdom you have specified that an MMO game is a game without a cash shop? You could perhaps argue that there are no more pure subscription MMOs, but even that would be false. Those games are getting rare, I'll give you that.
And the reason is what I mentioned earlier. Gamers have grown up.
Yes MMO game is a game without a cashshop. Game with a cashshop is a cashshop game, ie youplay the cashshop. Pacing, design, fun, challenge everything is based around the cashshop.
I am a grown up gamer with a family and I dont play because of cashshops because they ruin the game and make it into something that I dont want to be a part of.
Nice to see you are at least sticking with your definition.
And by the way, you're making the right decision. If it offends you, don't play it.
I care about my fun. I do care if developers are more intent on making money through cash shops than making good games.
i agree with those concerns
Yes, and that is the problem with cashshops, it is totally understandable that developers focus on designing something that maximizes cashshop income if you have a cashshop ingame. Its business and I would do the same. My problem is that I love to immerse myself in quality MMOs and there are not many left.
Personally I believe that cashshops changed the ideology behind how they are made and thus we have what we have now.
Originally posted by zymurgeist Pay me $50 and hour and I'll sit in front of a screen while you pummel my avatar like a tackling dummy. I'll even watch you prance around my corpse calling me a loser because I haven't spent money to buy an uber sword of pwnage. Without laughing in your face. Really. I don't care what you have in a game. I don't care how you got it. I do care about being rewarded for the time I spend in a game. If the reward is not money I expect it to be fun. That's the problem with buying game advantages in cash shops. The temptation is too great for developers to place grabbing your money for pixels above earning mine by providing enjoyment. This is why those games suck and it has nothing to do with any advantage anyone else may have from playing more hours. Yes that includes XP boosts. Because if you game is good why are people paying to skip large portions of it? I don't want double the XP I want double the fun.
First of all, you say you don't care what other people have in game, but then you call out the people who use cash shops. Can you decide if you care about it or not?
Second, who are you to determine what is fun for other people? If they find it fun to buy their way to max level and gear and then move on to the next game, who are you to judge that?
No I'm not calling out people who use cash shops. I don't care what they have or how they got it. (didn't I just say that?) I don't judge them at all. I care about my fun. I do care if developers are more intent on making money through cash shops than making good games. Which so far is the case in every cash shop that sells game advantages. If other people have fun in cash shop games I don't care. Better yet I applaud them more happy people make the world a batter place. Put your strawmen away. What I do care about is my fun which is why I don't play games with cash shops that sell game advantages.
Ok now I understand what you meant. And also again you are making the right decision.
And I do agree that games designed around cash shops - in essence those that make playing without using the cash shop unbearable for sane people - are bad. Especially if those same games charge a sub (are there any, though?). However, I do NOT agree that cash shops are inherently bad, when they are designed right. There is a way to offer an enjoyable experience to people who pay a little, while offering shortcuts to those who pay more.
I do understand your concern, though. Too many games start with a "fair" cash shop, but gradually move into offering more and more advantages to those who spend a lot of money, by making playing free a horrible grind. The balance is delicate and easy to disturb.
The time for pure sub MMOs is mostly past, however. And it's not coming back unless gaming suddenly again becomes a hobby of just kids and penniless teenagers with tons of free time.
Originally posted by DamonVile Outside of pvp...people should focus more on what they're doing and less on what others are doing when it comes to this type of thing.I've never been the first person to lvl cap or the first person to unlock some god awful time sink quest but I do get there eventually and try and have fun along the way. I don't believe everyone that posts these " It's P2W!!!" arguments are all the cutting edge of content raiders either.The fact that some person can buy it or not doesn't impact my pve game unless I start looking over my fence to see if my stuff is better than theirs. That never ends well in real life, it's not going to end well for you in a game either.
The only thing I would change about this post is: Outside of COMPETITIVE PvP...the rest is spot on. Most of the PvPers that freak out of losing aren't really ever going to be sponsored anyway. Get over it.
Worry about your rice bowl, I will worry about mine.
Good post Damon, +1
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
I care about my fun. I do care if developers are more intent on making money through cash shops than making good games.
i agree with those concerns
Yes, and that is the problem with cashshops, it is totally understandable that developers focus on designing something that maximizes cashshop income if you have a cashshop ingame. Its business and I would do the same. My problem is that I love to immerse myself in quality MMOs and there are not many left.
Personally I believe that cashshops changed the ideology behind how they are made and thus we have what we have now.
Ok can you tell us when that happened, because even WoW has had a cash shop for a long, long time? You could argue it was not designed around the cash shop, though.
Free to Play games obviously need to be designed around the cash shop, because otherwise they would not exist, but even then the designers should keep in mind that a game without the free players will be a very empty game and will lose the paying customers too.
I don't believe cash shops are to blame for the change in the game design ideology. The market has changed, the players have changed. The games had no choice. They needed to change too, or forever remain niche. And with today's game development costs, niche MMOs are not very comfortable investments.
To take this further, I believe the worst enemy of the player is the themepark design of the games. It is just plain and simply an unsustainable model. The game developer cannot create quality content fast enough, so they need to resort in grinding to keep the player paying (for sub or cash shop). We haven't had a big budget sandbox game in a long time. I believe when we do get one (ArcheAge and EQNext have my attention currently), it will show that the payment model does not matter as long as the players can be kept playing without dropping stupid hurdles in their way.
Originally posted by AlBQuirky The difference is that not everybody has $1000/day (money) to spend on MMOs whereas everyone has just 24 hours/day (time) to play.While people may choose to have time intensive careers and make lots of money, not everyone has that choice. Some may lack the know-how of the job, the skill set to perform the job, or just plain bad luck in trying to obtain said job.Some people may choose to have a family, which takes time away from other activities they may do. Some may choose to do volunteer work. There are many ways for any particular person to spend time. However, NO ONE has more than 24 hours in a day. Yet :)Time is the equalizer. If a player wishes to be "top notch" in an MMO, they find a way to make the time to play.Money is the separator. Not everyone's bank account is the same. If a player wishes to "buy their way" to the top, they can. That option is not available to everyone, though.To be honest, I really don't understand the "me vs. them" mentality I see prevalent here very well. PvP, yea I can see the complaint. PvE? Who cares what "other players" do with their games?
So we have not been all dealt the same cards in life. What's new?What about those people who have superior logical thinking and hand-to-eye coordination? In essence these people are good at playing game X. Now how are we going to equalize that? There is no way we are able to level the playing field for everyone unless we trivialize the game to the point even a monkey could play that at the "skill cap".Heeeeey wait a minute....!
lol I thought about that after I posted
Skill is definitely an "unbalancer." To equalize it, you use random number generators and skills that a character, not the player uses. Characters have a dodge skill with a chance to happen with every opponents swing. Characters have a block skill that has a percentage chance to "kick in" with every opponent swing.
Not a lot of player today like this method of equalization, though
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
I care about my fun. I do care if developers are more intent on making money through cash shops than making good games.
i agree with those concerns
Yes, and that is the problem with cashshops, it is totally understandable that developers focus on designing something that maximizes cashshop income if you have a cashshop ingame. Its business and I would do the same. My problem is that I love to immerse myself in quality MMOs and there are not many left.
Personally I believe that cashshops changed the ideology behind how they are made and thus we have what we have now.
Ok can you tell us when that happened, because even WoW has had a cash shop for a long, long time? You could argue it was not designed around the cash shop, though.
Free to Play games obviously need to be designed around the cash shop, because otherwise they would not exist, but even then the designers should keep in mind that a game without the free players will be a very empty game and will lose the paying customers too.
I don't believe cash shops are to blame for the change in the game design ideology. The market has changed, the players have changed. The games had no choice. They needed to change too, or forever remain niche. And with today's game development costs, niche MMOs are not very comfortable investments.
To take this further, I believe the worst enemy of the player is the themepark design of the games. It is just plain and simply an unsustainable model. The game developer cannot create quality content fast enough, so they need to resort in grinding to keep the player paying (for sub or cash shop). We haven't had a big budget sandbox game in a long time. I believe when we do get one (ArcheAge and EQNext have my attention currently), it will show that the payment model does not matter as long as the players can be kept playing without dropping stupid hurdles in their way.
WOW had a cashshop added later but I haven't played WOW so cant tell you what the effect has been. The excuse that the market or the players have changed is IMO just that, an excuse. FFXIV Is p2p and it seems to be doing ok, EVE also to an extent but RMT is present there so not so great. The explanation is - the market has changed therefore we had to make crap games which are free and have cashshops because people wouldnt pay monthly for it - and my answer always is yes because they are crap.
The ideology has changed because once you had artists skilled in pacing, immersion and keeping you playing as long as possible, keeping you challenged and trying to get you to develop a social network so you stay longer in the game. That was their job and focus while now those people are charged with hitting the right spots with making the game just fun enough to play for free but also not too much so we dont buy from the cashshop. The grind without CS convenience should be just grindy enough that you can do it but it would be more fun if you bought a xp boost etc. Yes you can PVP with what you get but if you get this 2% more you will be better. Lets design gear which looks ok but lets spend some time and money on designing gear for the CS which is just that little bit cooler. Ok so we have the initial boost of players, people are hooked lets gradually increase the need for things from the CS, they wont leave as they are engaged already. ETC ETC ETC
Designers before this had a different mental framework ie - how do we make the game as fun as possible, yes with time sinks, but not too much as we dont want to piss them off so they stop the subscription.
Themepark or sandbox doesn't matter if you make the gameplay about the cashshop which they will 100%. Some more some less subtly but they all have to incl EQn AA etc. Look at EVE whose boss wanted to jump on the CS bandwagon under the excuse that its the only way to grow and everyone is doing it - the famous "greed is good" memo, yet the players protested as they understood what that would mean. Ultimately for the developers it was a decision about money and they felt that CS monetization method offered better opportunities for making more money rather than focusing on making the game better, instead they wanted to redesign it for the cashshop.
Ideology behind game design with CS is different and there are experts focusing on trends and metrics of how people buy, at what price points, time points etc and all that filters into game design.
WOW had a cashshop added later but I haven't played WOW so cant tell you what the effect has been. The excuse that the market or the players have changed is IMO just that, an excuse. FFXIV Is p2p and it seems to be doing ok, EVE also to an extent but RMT is present there so not so great. The explanation is - the market has changed therefore we had to make crap games which are free and have cashshops because people wouldnt pay monthly for it - and my answer always is yes because they are crap.
The ideology has changed because once you had artists skilled in pacing, immersion and keeping you playing as long as possible, keeping you challenged and trying to get you to develop a social network so you stay longer in the game. That was their job and focus while now those people are charged with hitting the right spots with making the game just fun enough to play for free but also not too much so we dont buy from the cashshop. The grind without CS convenience should be just grindy enough that you can do it but it would be more fun if you bought a xp boost etc. Yes you can PVP with what you get but if you get this 2% more you will be better. Lets design gear which looks ok but lets spend some time and money on designing gear for the CS which is just that little bit cooler. Ok so we have the initial boost of players, people are hooked lets gradually increase the need for things from the CS, they wont leave as they are engaged already. ETC ETC ETC
Designers before this had a different mental framework ie - how do we make the game as fun as possible, yes with time sinks, but not too much as we dont want to piss them off so they stop the subscription.
Themepark or sandbox doesn't matter if you make the gameplay about the cashshop which they will 100%. Some more some less subtly but they all have to incl EQn AA etc. Look at EVE whose boss wanted to jump on the CS bandwagon under the excuse that its the only way to grow and everyone is doing it - the famous "greed is good" memo, yet the players protested as they understood what that would mean. Ultimately for the developers it was a decision about money and they felt that CS monetization method offered better opportunities for making more money rather than focusing on making the game better, instead they wanted to redesign it for the cashshop.
Ideology behind game design with CS is different and there are experts focusing on trends and metrics of how people buy, at what price points, time points etc and all that filters into game design.
I don't agree. The MMO developers have always strived to make as much money from you as possible. In subscription games they just need to add stuff every month or so to keep you subbing, and/or make the game take long enough that it takes an average gamer several months to get through the content.
There are two big AAA games coming out next year, both with subscription. Do you honestly think the devs of those games are only thinking of how to make your playing as fun as possible, and not how to keep you playing after the first free month or after the first couple extra months after that?
The payment model does not matter. The devs are after your money. The more they get off you, the better for them. To believe anything else is quite naive. The design philosophy after that fact is a different thing. A good game is a good game. Today's MMOs are mostly clones of older games that have been successful, with no ambition or striving to do something new altogether (and the same could be said for non-MMO games,too). The two upcoming AAA subscription MMOs are prime examples of this. Both are taking absolutely zero risks or breaking new ground.
I blame developers who want to play it safe and copy stuff from other MMOs. The payment model has nothing to do with the low quality of the MMO genre today.
Its not so simple - cashshop is very intrusive in game design, all you need is lots of bored short term game hoppers to spend a few nickles, while with subscription you have to create content to keep me there longer than 3 days.
Of course they all want to make money and I am sure I said that or implied for both design philosophies but the philosophies are different and Cashshop design impacts far too much on gameplay, practically takes it over.
I am glad there are developers moving back into subscription territory as that method tends to generete better more immersive games.
The logic in the OP is inherently flawed because despite what the old adage states, time is not money. It is time. A universal force. Money is just currency.
How is that relevant? Let's change the example in the OP up to illustrate this.
There are 168 hours in a week. You can play 20 and the other guy can play 80, but the total number of hours that are available to play doesn't change. You are willing to buy advancement and thus skip actually playing through said advancement and this seems equal to you. It might be in this case where the variables are fixed in such a way that it seems sensible.
Now imagine two players each playing for 110 hours in one week (every waking hour assuming they sleep normally,) but one is willing to pay for progression as well. The other cannot change the time-space continuum and "pay with more time" because time operates outside of the financial sphere of influence. The paying-to-advance player can pump as much of his money as he wants into the game, but the other guy cannot alter his pace of advancement to equivalency by using more time, as it is a resource paid at a fixed rate.
We can't alter that rate, and so the concept that time= money in regard to P2W mmos is meaningless.
Both time and money are currencies. A rich man with little time will hire someone with little money but a lot of time to do tedious tasks such as cleaning or accounting. If Time equals Money that would mean that is an objective currency. A stable one. But it isn't, it is subjective. If I work 2 hours and you work 4 I can still earn more than you if I make more progression.
Same goes for games. If I spend 2 hours playing an MMO and you play 4, I can still be ahead of you because you spent time exploring and enjoying the game and I just rushed to keep up with you. Same goes if I pay 100 quid to skip the progression you "pay" in hours out of your day.
All in all, you need to ask "Do I want to make quick progress or do I want to enjoy myself?" if not, you should probably play something else. So yes. Real life advantages transfer into games. But it isn't limited to time and/or money but to skill, playstyle and enjoyment.
Back in vanilla WoW I was level 19 after 24 hours put into that one character. My mates made fun of me how I was utter crap at the game but I was enjoying myself. I was exploring the world and I traveled to distant continents only to be killed. I made barely any silver and I made barely any progress but I was enjoying my place in the world. I did eventually reach level 55 with my main and I enjoyed every single level of that.
I'm guessing this is similar to what you are getting at?
No. I was getting at exactly what I stated. That time and money are not equal or even related currencies and therefore proposing that one is interchangeable with the other in regard to the P2W issue is not a logically consistent viewpoint.
All the qualitative opinions about how people spend their time are just sidenotes.
I am glad there are developers moving back into subscription territory as that method tends to generete better more immersive games.
I guess we'll see about that. SWTOR wasn't a very good example of a better and immersive game, while GW2 certainly was.
There is a modicum of truth in what you're saying though, in the sense that most cheaply made, dime-a-dozen MMOs are usually F2P with cash shop. These games could not attract any players at all if they had a box price and sub. So we can at least agree that devs coming out with a sub model are at least a bit more confident of the quality of their game, and in that sense on average the quality of sub games is better than F2P games.
That doesn't invalidate my claim though. I believe a quality game can be made with an F2P+CS model. I guess we will see about that too, when EQNext (and Landmark) come out in the next years.
Comments
Way to go at missing the point.
Real life assets are real life assets, why are they in my MMO game? Cash shops blurred the lines for us players as well as developers. There are no MMO games left its all playing the cashshop now which is some weird assets vs time vs fun calculation maximization.
cash services have always existed indirectly as the black market
players selling to other players - characters, gear, gold, power leveling
I remember back in 1999,
i met a player paying his monthly rent by playing EQ and selling his services
EQ2 fan sites
Thats ridiculous and you know it - some people used the black market, yes and it was wrong, now its legitimate and the games are designed around the cash-shop so much much higher percentage of people use them + they now are a major influence on how the game is designed and developed. That's why there are no more MMO games, just cashshop games.
No, not at all. It's actually making at least as much sense as your example. Which is flawed, by the way.
You say you can make the dollar back, but you can't. That particular dollar is probably never going to end back up in your wallet, but you can replace it with another one. In the same way, you can replace that time you spent getting that dollar, with that dollar you made. Lost you? Read on.
With those dollars, you can literally buy time. Not in the sense that you would have more than 24 hours a day, but if you have enough money, you can for example cut off work hours from your week, or hire someone else to fix your car or clean your house.
Only in the case your 24 hours are filled with nothing but beautiful moments with your family and hobbies can you say that money cannot buy you (more) time. But to get to that point, you need money and a lot of it, too.
And if we stay in topic, time you spend playing a computer game is not something I'd consider precious. If it is, you should definitely re-think your priorities in life. But even in this case, you can buy that time to play games, by having someone else do the menial tasks of your life.
Money=Time. It is that simple and there is no need to try to twist it any further with hyperbole.
EDIT: Have to add that the ratio of how much money buys how much time varies. My boss told me earlier I need to work longer days. I told him he can't afford it.
First of all, you say you don't care what other people have in game, but then you call out the people who use cash shops. Can you decide if you care about it or not?
Second, who are you to determine what is fun for other people? If they find it fun to buy their way to max level and gear and then move on to the next game, who are you to judge that?
The difference is that not everybody has $1000/day (money) to spend on MMOs whereas everyone has just 24 hours/day (time) to play.
While people may choose to have time intensive careers and make lots of money, not everyone has that choice. Some may lack the know-how of the job, the skill set to perform the job, or just plain bad luck in trying to obtain said job.
Some people may choose to have a family, which takes time away from other activities they may do. Some may choose to do volunteer work. There are many ways for any particular person to spend time. However, NO ONE has more than 24 hours in a day. Yet
Time is the equalizer. If a player wishes to be "top notch" in an MMO, they find a way to make the time to play.
Money is the separator. Not everyone's bank account is the same. If a player wishes to "buy their way" to the top, they can. That option is not available to everyone, though.
To be honest, I really don't understand the "me vs. them" mentality I see prevalent here very well. PvP, yea I can see the complaint. PvE? Who cares what "other players" do with their games?
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
So in your great wisdom you have specified that an MMO game is a game without a cash shop? You could perhaps argue that there are no more pure subscription MMOs, but even that would be false. Those games are getting rare, I'll give you that.
And the reason is what I mentioned earlier. Gamers have grown up.
it can be a thin line
I remember taking two years off 15 years ago
I had no job, didnt need one, I had 30k saved up
I spent all my time playing EQ --- at least 60 hours a week for two years
I was enabled to have all that free time by money
EQ2 fan sites
So we have not been all dealt the same cards in life. What's new?
What about those people who have superior logical thinking and hand-to-eye coordination? In essence these people are good at playing game X. Now how are we going to equalize that? There is no way we are able to level the playing field for everyone unless we trivialize the game to the point even a monkey could play that at the "skill cap".
Heeeeey wait a minute....!
First off, I didn't talk about hours worked / week at all.
Secondly, it was just an example, but there are many more factors that you allow to decide who's time is "worth" more than others'.
Just take any MMO published for Europe and you can immediately see a big difference between wages in southern Europe and northern Europe, as well as quality of life (currently), so again, you'll be facing big differences as to how much your time in the game is "worth".
Finally, as someone above already spelled out, there is no universal rule that says time (not) spent = x money. This is not a mathematical axioma. If you follow this philosophy in your game, you are simply paying to not play the game, or paying to progress in the game, or paying to win. It's just another way to sweet-talk it.
Yes, real life economy always matters. Games are luxury products and whether you can pay for a computer and the game itself decides if you have access to it or not.
But after that it's the developers' decision to grant equal access if you pay the entrance fee, or whether to have people pay in order to get ahead of others.
It's the customer's decision which model they like best and / or which amount of P2W is acceptable to them.
We should just stop trying to call the Beast by other names, it is what it is.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
Yes MMO game is a game without a cashshop. Game with a cashshop is a cashshop game, ie youplay the cashshop. Pacing, design, fun, challenge everything is based around the cashshop.
I am a grown up gamer with a family and I dont play because of cashshops because they ruin the game and make it into something that I dont want to be a part of.
Nice to see you are at least sticking with your definition.
And by the way, you're making the right decision. If it offends you, don't play it.
i agree with those concerns
EQ2 fan sites
Yes, and that is the problem with cashshops, it is totally understandable that developers focus on designing something that maximizes cashshop income if you have a cashshop ingame. Its business and I would do the same. My problem is that I love to immerse myself in quality MMOs and there are not many left.
Personally I believe that cashshops changed the ideology behind how they are made and thus we have what we have now.
Ok now I understand what you meant. And also again you are making the right decision.
And I do agree that games designed around cash shops - in essence those that make playing without using the cash shop unbearable for sane people - are bad. Especially if those same games charge a sub (are there any, though?). However, I do NOT agree that cash shops are inherently bad, when they are designed right. There is a way to offer an enjoyable experience to people who pay a little, while offering shortcuts to those who pay more.
I do understand your concern, though. Too many games start with a "fair" cash shop, but gradually move into offering more and more advantages to those who spend a lot of money, by making playing free a horrible grind. The balance is delicate and easy to disturb.
The time for pure sub MMOs is mostly past, however. And it's not coming back unless gaming suddenly again becomes a hobby of just kids and penniless teenagers with tons of free time.
The only thing I would change about this post is: Outside of COMPETITIVE PvP...the rest is spot on. Most of the PvPers that freak out of losing aren't really ever going to be sponsored anyway. Get over it.
Worry about your rice bowl, I will worry about mine.
Good post Damon, +1
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
Ok can you tell us when that happened, because even WoW has had a cash shop for a long, long time? You could argue it was not designed around the cash shop, though.
Free to Play games obviously need to be designed around the cash shop, because otherwise they would not exist, but even then the designers should keep in mind that a game without the free players will be a very empty game and will lose the paying customers too.
I don't believe cash shops are to blame for the change in the game design ideology. The market has changed, the players have changed. The games had no choice. They needed to change too, or forever remain niche. And with today's game development costs, niche MMOs are not very comfortable investments.
To take this further, I believe the worst enemy of the player is the themepark design of the games. It is just plain and simply an unsustainable model. The game developer cannot create quality content fast enough, so they need to resort in grinding to keep the player paying (for sub or cash shop). We haven't had a big budget sandbox game in a long time. I believe when we do get one (ArcheAge and EQNext have my attention currently), it will show that the payment model does not matter as long as the players can be kept playing without dropping stupid hurdles in their way.
Skill is definitely an "unbalancer." To equalize it, you use random number generators and skills that a character, not the player uses. Characters have a dodge skill with a chance to happen with every opponents swing. Characters have a block skill that has a percentage chance to "kick in" with every opponent swing.
Not a lot of player today like this method of equalization, though
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
WOW had a cashshop added later but I haven't played WOW so cant tell you what the effect has been. The excuse that the market or the players have changed is IMO just that, an excuse. FFXIV Is p2p and it seems to be doing ok, EVE also to an extent but RMT is present there so not so great. The explanation is - the market has changed therefore we had to make crap games which are free and have cashshops because people wouldnt pay monthly for it - and my answer always is yes because they are crap.
The ideology has changed because once you had artists skilled in pacing, immersion and keeping you playing as long as possible, keeping you challenged and trying to get you to develop a social network so you stay longer in the game. That was their job and focus while now those people are charged with hitting the right spots with making the game just fun enough to play for free but also not too much so we dont buy from the cashshop. The grind without CS convenience should be just grindy enough that you can do it but it would be more fun if you bought a xp boost etc. Yes you can PVP with what you get but if you get this 2% more you will be better. Lets design gear which looks ok but lets spend some time and money on designing gear for the CS which is just that little bit cooler. Ok so we have the initial boost of players, people are hooked lets gradually increase the need for things from the CS, they wont leave as they are engaged already. ETC ETC ETC
Designers before this had a different mental framework ie - how do we make the game as fun as possible, yes with time sinks, but not too much as we dont want to piss them off so they stop the subscription.
Themepark or sandbox doesn't matter if you make the gameplay about the cashshop which they will 100%. Some more some less subtly but they all have to incl EQn AA etc. Look at EVE whose boss wanted to jump on the CS bandwagon under the excuse that its the only way to grow and everyone is doing it - the famous "greed is good" memo, yet the players protested as they understood what that would mean. Ultimately for the developers it was a decision about money and they felt that CS monetization method offered better opportunities for making more money rather than focusing on making the game better, instead they wanted to redesign it for the cashshop.
Ideology behind game design with CS is different and there are experts focusing on trends and metrics of how people buy, at what price points, time points etc and all that filters into game design.
I don't agree. The MMO developers have always strived to make as much money from you as possible. In subscription games they just need to add stuff every month or so to keep you subbing, and/or make the game take long enough that it takes an average gamer several months to get through the content.
There are two big AAA games coming out next year, both with subscription. Do you honestly think the devs of those games are only thinking of how to make your playing as fun as possible, and not how to keep you playing after the first free month or after the first couple extra months after that?
The payment model does not matter. The devs are after your money. The more they get off you, the better for them. To believe anything else is quite naive. The design philosophy after that fact is a different thing. A good game is a good game. Today's MMOs are mostly clones of older games that have been successful, with no ambition or striving to do something new altogether (and the same could be said for non-MMO games,too). The two upcoming AAA subscription MMOs are prime examples of this. Both are taking absolutely zero risks or breaking new ground.
I blame developers who want to play it safe and copy stuff from other MMOs. The payment model has nothing to do with the low quality of the MMO genre today.
Its not so simple - cashshop is very intrusive in game design, all you need is lots of bored short term game hoppers to spend a few nickles, while with subscription you have to create content to keep me there longer than 3 days.
Of course they all want to make money and I am sure I said that or implied for both design philosophies but the philosophies are different and Cashshop design impacts far too much on gameplay, practically takes it over.
I am glad there are developers moving back into subscription territory as that method tends to generete better more immersive games.
No. I was getting at exactly what I stated. That time and money are not equal or even related currencies and therefore proposing that one is interchangeable with the other in regard to the P2W issue is not a logically consistent viewpoint.
All the qualitative opinions about how people spend their time are just sidenotes.
http://www.mmorpg.com/blogs/PerfArt
I guess we'll see about that. SWTOR wasn't a very good example of a better and immersive game, while GW2 certainly was.
There is a modicum of truth in what you're saying though, in the sense that most cheaply made, dime-a-dozen MMOs are usually F2P with cash shop. These games could not attract any players at all if they had a box price and sub. So we can at least agree that devs coming out with a sub model are at least a bit more confident of the quality of their game, and in that sense on average the quality of sub games is better than F2P games.
That doesn't invalidate my claim though. I believe a quality game can be made with an F2P+CS model. I guess we will see about that too, when EQNext (and Landmark) come out in the next years.