I certainly hope you are right as I need a good challenging and immersive game to play, it doesn't have to last for months but I would like to get engaged a bit longer than any of the recent ones have managed.
I am happy to pay subscription but refuse to buy anything from a cash shop. I will never buy virtual items but I will pay you to let me enjoy what you have worked hard to create. A pink hat or a flying donkey don't interest me, if the game has things like gold ammo (world of tanks) then its a no, if it has xp boosters also no, if it has fluffy hats then ok (grudgingly) if its good but I will never spend a dime on it. Gold ammo and xp boosters are very intrusive in design and subsequent gameplay, pure cosmetics while annoying that they wasted time on that I can ignore if the game is good.
And yes if the game is not very good the only option is F2P and cashshop and fishing for whales.
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.
I agree. And the usual problem with F2P+CS games is that they have little confidence in their returns, so they stack the CS with items that people are more likely to buy. Then the game becomes P2W and people stop playing, leading to the lack of success of the game itself.
I think a F2P+CS model is compatible with a good game, but only if the devs/publishers are not greedy and have confidence that the game is good enough for people to play long term and ultimately spend money in the CS as a result. I haven't played in a year, but GW2 seems a good example of this.
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.
I agree. And the usual problem with F2P+CS games is that they have little confidence in their returns, so they stack the CS with items that people are more likely to buy. Then the game becomes P2W and people stop playing, leading to the lack of success of the game itself.
I think a F2P+CS model is compatible with a good game, but only if the devs/publishers are not greedy and have confidence that the game is good enough for people to play long term and ultimately spend money in the CS as a result. I haven't played in a year, but GW2 seems a good example of this.
Well GW2 is B2P + CS, that's a lot more money than majority of people would ever spend in a cash shop (myself included). The pricing of GW2 is not cheap in comparison to other models and ita all a bit of a PR gimmick. Ultimately the presence of the shop with its discounts of the week, bla bla crap is annoying and ruins immersion.
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.
I agree. And the usual problem with F2P+CS games is that they have little confidence in their returns, so they stack the CS with items that people are more likely to buy. Then the game becomes P2W and people stop playing, leading to the lack of success of the game itself.
I think a F2P+CS model is compatible with a good game, but only if the devs/publishers are not greedy and have confidence that the game is good enough for people to play long term and ultimately spend money in the CS as a result. I haven't played in a year, but GW2 seems a good example of this.
Well GW2 is B2P + CS, that's a lot more money than majority of people would ever spend in a cash shop (myself included). The pricing of GW2 is not cheap in comparison to other models and ita all a bit of a PR gimmick. Ultimately the presence of the shop with its discounts of the week, bla bla crap is annoying and ruins immersion.
True, I forgot GW2 is B2P :P
Yes I don't like CS either as it's like watching a movie and hitting pause to buy something you want to see happen next. I'd pay subs every time, hell I'd even pay $50/month for the right game, but unfortunately CS seems to work as a form of monetization, otherwise devs would have ditched it long ago.
How is advantage in time different than advantage in cash? This is what I try to understand, both are real life advantages!
This thread will not result in anything usefull but anyway.
Time and money are very different. Time is a fixed value and it is the same for everyone. Doesn't matter if you rich/poor, good looking/ugly, pacifist/warmonger, a day has 24hrs. You can't increase time nor can you go backwards or increase the speed in which time elapses. But you have many more options to influence the amount of money you own. It's not the same for everyone.
So far about time and money differences.
Next thing is you must first decide whether there is anything to "win" by playing an MMO. If you don't think so this whole topic is more or less irrelevant to you anyway.
So let's assume your point of view is that you can win something by playing an MMO. Be it by beating someone in PvP or being the first one to reach max level in PvE or defeating some raid mob, or whatever you define as "winning" in an MMO context. Maybe even the MMO gives such a definition of "winning". Most don't.
In that case I advise to you to read some books/articles about game theory and "fair game". After that you might understand why bringing money into a game is considered pay2win.
Originally posted by Pala Originally posted by Nadiacash shops have always existed indirectly as the black marketplayers 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.
By 2005 the 'black market' was approaching a million dollar a year industry. This is why developers finally took notice, they wanted a chunk of that action, and who wouldn't? With Free to play becoming so popular and people not wanting to waste hours levering their toon, grinding mats, etc they pay people to do it for them. However they justify it, makes no difference to me it happens, and it happens a lot. Why is FFXIV filled with gold spam? because people buy gold, it's big business and has been for a few years now.
FFXIV is just one example, it happens in just about every game out now, cash shop or no.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
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.
I agree. And the usual problem with F2P+CS games is that they have little confidence in their returns, so they stack the CS with items that people are more likely to buy. Then the game becomes P2W and people stop playing, leading to the lack of success of the game itself.
I think a F2P+CS model is compatible with a good game, but only if the devs/publishers are not greedy and have confidence that the game is good enough for people to play long term and ultimately spend money in the CS as a result. I haven't played in a year, but GW2 seems a good example of this.
"As I said, P2W has become slap-it-on-everything word for those who have a weird idea that game developers don't need or deserve any money. Hell, just now there is a thread about GW2 with some outrageous claims that offering better looking cosmetic items is P2W, because the game obviously is all about who looks better."
You are always going to get genuine arguments used to push forward irrational agendas. That does not make the argument any less valid. P2W is a horrible business ethos that should have nothing to do with gaming. The fact posters are using this to air their issues (if it was not just trolling) with GW2 is by the by.
Originally posted by Scot "As I said, P2W has become slap-it-on-everything word for those who have a weird idea that game developers don't need or deserve any money. Hell, just now there is a thread about GW2 with some outrageous claims that offering better looking cosmetic items is P2W, because the game obviously is all about who looks better."You are always going to get genuine arguments used to push forward irrational agendas. That does not make the argument any less valid. P2W is a horrible business ethos that should have nothing to do with gaming. The fact posters are using this to air their issues (if it was not just trolling) with GW2 is by the by.
It's not "by the by". What they are doing is trying to prove that GW2 is a bad game by using the P2W argument. Very few people would say "P2W is a good thing". The problem with something like the OP is that if it's accepted as true, then everything is P2W because there are currently few, if any MMORPGs that do not have cash shop items.
It's not an argument against P2W, it's an argument against Cash Shops in general.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Originally posted by Scot "As I said, P2W has become slap-it-on-everything word for those who have a weird idea that game developers don't need or deserve any money. Hell, just now there is a thread about GW2 with some outrageous claims that offering better looking cosmetic items is P2W, because the game obviously is all about who looks better."
You are always going to get genuine arguments used to push forward irrational agendas. That does not make the argument any less valid. P2W is a horrible business ethos that should have nothing to do with gaming. The fact posters are using this to air their issues (if it was not just trolling) with GW2 is by the by.
It's not "by the by". What they are doing is trying to prove that GW2 is a bad game by using the P2W argument. Very few people would say "P2W is a good thing". The problem with something like the OP is that if it's accepted as true, then everything is P2W because there are currently few, if any MMORPGs that do not have cash shop items.
It's not an argument against P2W, it's an argument against Cash Shops in general.
Well that is pretty much the agenda of the f2p hater? but pointing that out wont change the fact that they're going to make the same rant in the next thread. Showing someone that all RNG loot systems are just gambling boxes with better wrappers didn't stop it from happening here.
If someone is going to rant, they're going to continue to rant regardless of what's said to them.
Originally posted by Scot "As I said, P2W has become slap-it-on-everything word for those who have a weird idea that game developers don't need or deserve any money. Hell, just now there is a thread about GW2 with some outrageous claims that offering better looking cosmetic items is P2W, because the game obviously is all about who looks better."
You are always going to get genuine arguments used to push forward irrational agendas. That does not make the argument any less valid. P2W is a horrible business ethos that should have nothing to do with gaming. The fact posters are using this to air their issues (if it was not just trolling) with GW2 is by the by.
It's not "by the by". What they are doing is trying to prove that GW2 is a bad game by using the P2W argument. Very few people would say "P2W is a good thing". The problem with something like the OP is that if it's accepted as true, then everything is P2W because there are currently few, if any MMORPGs that do not have cash shop items.
It's not an argument against P2W, it's an argument against Cash Shops in general.
Well that is pretty much the agenda of the f2p hater? but pointing that out wont change the fact that they're going to make the same rant in the next thread. Showing someone that all RNG loot systems are just gambling boxes with better wrappers didn't stop it from happening here.
If someone is going to rant, they're going to continue to rant regardless of what's said to them.
But it is often the slightly more extreme arguments that prevent things drifting in a direction that would be undesirable to all. Rabied rantings against F2P/ P2W (the two often appear interchangeable in these arguments) at least keep some of the devs more outlandish ideas in check- without the haters they would just have carte blanche to charge for whatever they wanted and the fanbois would never complain until it reached a point where their game was ruined.
Time has been and always will be the greatest currency.
It is irreplaceable and more valuable than the worth placed on a dollar.
You can always make a dollar back. But you'll never get the time back it took to make it.
Should an advantage in game come due to more time spent playing. Then that player has earned whatever advantages come their way.
Should an advantage in game come due to spending money. That player has bought the advantage over running the same gauntlet as everyone else and therefore considered unequal.
I'm sure no one really wants to get into how much more valuable someone else's time is over another's.
But if you have no time.. Then you shouldn't be playing games.
At the end of the day.. They put that shit in there because they know people will buy it.
They are still finding the best ways to bottleneck players into buying things they don't need.
I was following you until the highlighted line, a bit selfish don't you think?
We all have varying amounts of free time available to spend on gaming or other activities, is there a limit on how much time someone must spend in order to enjoy the content of a game?
I remember when L2 first came out, being a fan of the first title, I really looked forward to the castle sieging the 2nd offered.
As I got into the 50's (70 was cap in those days) the leveling really slowed down, and I estimated based on current progression curves that in order to actually hit 70 and properly earn enough adena to outfit him it would quite likely take me over a year more in grind before I would reach level 70.
As my Silver Ranger was nothing but fodder during sieges at level 52, I had a choice, stick it out for the year (not realizing they planned to raise the cap to 74 and toss in some other multi-class options as well) or move on to a new game. I decided to play WOW instead where I reached "end game content" in a little under 3 months.
There were numerous folks who had far more free time to play, and they hit level 70 in the first 3-4 months. They totally dominated the Castle ownership scene and the rest of us could only look on in envy wondering what it might be like.
Had there been a true option to significantly shorten that leveling curve for a reasonable price so I could have been part of the end game, I would have gladly paid it in order to get to the good stuff.
I suppose you can argue I didn't "deserve" to participate, because I wasn't able, or willing to devote the time up front, and you might be right, but I still wish I could have been part of those activities because I did really enjoy them in L1. (and DAOC)
Modern MMO's really don't present barriers to the end game content these days, only problem is, I'm not interested in what they are offering. (PVE centric raiding).
Which is why I'm paying nothing at all to play on a freeshard of DAOC that actually delivers exactly what I'm looking for in a MMORPG. Good things come to those who wait, and despite my limited free time, I am able to fully participate in almost all end game activities with a relatively low up front investment in time. (except for high level RVRing, I'm still fodder in that world, however slowly but surely working my way up)
But I still look back at L2 and wonder....what if? (and I know they've revamped it so it's a bit easier, but don't kid yourself, I gave it a go and there's still some significant grind at the upper levels all designed to encourage strong cash shop usage buying exp boosting pots.)
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I remember one day, when I was working at a big game company on an unnamed MMO, we had invited some guilds into the office to talk about things. This exact topic of time and money came up. Now we had a raiding guild or two, plus a couple RP and casual guilds, and a big PvP guild. The conversation went very much like this thread .... depending on how they "played" the game the attitude of the players differed. One interesting thing I remember very much from that day was how much more angry and pissed off the time side of the table became when we (developers) impinged on their territory. One guild leader left the table when we mentioned implementing diminishing returns (xp, coin, material drops, etc ...). Gamers are not all created equally and will eventually separate themselves based on the things that make them different, the type of game does not matter.
So to answer the OPs question of "What is real life advantage in mmorpg's" ... the answer is really "It depends on who or what type of gamer you ask."
P2W ruins immersion and destroys any sense of true risk vs. reward. The only reason these cash shops and such exist is because developers saw a lot of money being raked in by gold-farmers and wanted in on the action. Instead of fighting a battle they felt they couldn't win, they decided to become that which they hated.
Personally, I could care less if P2W somehow "evens" the playing field for those who don't have or can't be bothered to make time. I'd rather see players earn their keep by playing the game and experiencing the content and participating in the community.
Originally posted by LittleBoot Originally posted by DamonVileOriginally posted by lizardbonesOriginally posted by Scot"As I said, P2W has become slap-it-on-everything word for those who have a weird idea that game developers don't need or deserve any money. Hell, just now there is a thread about GW2 with some outrageous claims that offering better looking cosmetic items is P2W, because the game obviously is all about who looks better."You are always going to get genuine arguments used to push forward irrational agendas. That does not make the argument any less valid. P2W is a horrible business ethos that should have nothing to do with gaming. The fact posters are using this to air their issues (if it was not just trolling) with GW2 is by the by.
It's not "by the by". What they are doing is trying to prove that GW2 is a bad game by using the P2W argument. Very few people would say "P2W is a good thing". The problem with something like the OP is that if it's accepted as true, then everything is P2W because there are currently few, if any MMORPGs that do not have cash shop items. It's not an argument against P2W, it's an argument against Cash Shops in general. Well that is pretty much the agenda of the f2p hater? but pointing that out wont change the fact that they're going to make the same rant in the next thread. Showing someone that all RNG loot systems are just gambling boxes with better wrappers didn't stop it from happening here.If someone is going to rant, they're going to continue to rant regardless of what's said to them.But it is often the slightly more extreme arguments that prevent things drifting in a direction that would be undesirable to all. Rabied rantings against F2P/ P2W (the two often appear interchangeable in these arguments) at least keep some of the devs more outlandish ideas in check- without the haters they would just have carte blanche to charge for whatever they wanted and the fanbois would never complain until it reached a point where their game was ruined.
The 'haters' aren't keeping developers in check. The world doesn't work like that. Or at least a market where competition exists doesn't work like that. Developers will always charge what they can 'get away with'. They always have and they always will.
It's not a perfect relation, but increasing the price of 'stuff' in an MMORPG will reduce the number of people who buy 'stuff'. The extra revenue from higher prices is not enough to offset the fewer people buying stuff. We know this because otherwise prices would be higher. There is only so much that people are willing to buy and only so much that they can afford. Charging less for 'stuff' in an MMORPG will increase the number of people who buy 'stuff' so more revenue will be generated, but it won't offset the additional costs of 'more people'. Somewhere in that continuum between 'higher' prices and 'lower' prices, there is a point where the developers get the most amount of money possible from their product. That is the price they are currently charging for their stuff. The willingness or unwillingness of people to buy stuff is what keeps developers in check. Not posts on forums.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Your example is flawed. If the game has a cash shop, it's "rules" clearly state that you can use that cash shop to get rewarded in-game. It also doesn't invalidate the fact that person A did get rewarded by spending more time.
You could at least have the example use outside sources like gold sellers. But then of course you could not blame the publisher for P2W, could you?
If the game starts off as F2P with the "shortcut" options available in the cash shop then that's one thing. I don't really object to games like that. I'm not a great fan of that model but I can make an informed decision on whether to play it before I start.
However a lot of games start with either no cash-shop or a cash-shop that only sells cosmetics and then change their business model to include pay to win or even "shortcuts" that pisses me off a lot more. Suddenly I have to either ditch all my progression in that game or put up with the business model I don't like.
As far as buying gold or power leveling from 3rd parties, that's always been considered a form of cheating in MMOs, as far as I know. It's only now that greedy companies are offering you ways to do it "legally" that we're all just supposed to accept it. But the thing is there were good reasons why they banned it in the first place.
As I said, as long as they are honest about what pricing model they plan use from the beginning the "if you don't like it don't play option" exists. Games which change models part way through make that a lot harder though.
As my Silver Ranger was nothing but fodder during sieges at level 52, I had a choice, stick it out for the year (not realizing they planned to raise the cap to 74 and toss in some other multi-class options as well) or move on to a new game. I decided to play WOW instead where I reached "end game content" in a little under 3 months.
There were numerous folks who had far more free time to play, and they hit level 70 in the first 3-4 months. They totally dominated the Castle ownership scene and the rest of us could only look on in envy wondering what it might be like.
Had there been a true option to significantly shorten that leveling curve for a reasonable price so I could have been part of the end game, I would have gladly paid it in order to get to the good stuff.
I suppose you can argue I didn't "deserve" to participate, because I wasn't able, or willing to devote the time up front, and you might be right, but I still wish I could have been part of those activities because I did really enjoy them in L1. (and DAOC)
Stuff like that always feels to me like you are being prevented from joining a bowling league because you did not get a high enough score in Space Invaders. The leveling content/grind and the end game content are so different from each other that they feel like seperate games and it seems silly that you have to beat one in order to participate in the other.
I'm going to get so flamed for this, but the temptation is just to strong xD
All 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
In my experience of Life...
Time is NOT money, and as I used to say years ago.... "MMOs are all about "Time".
It's was always OK to spend lots of time in a MMO, it was even expected of Players many times.
It was NOT OK to spend lots of RL money in a MMO, especially if it bought you an advantage over others.
That was how MMOs were years ago, at least the MMOs I was involved with. There were and still are MMOs were real money flows into and out of game fluidly, but I always disagreed with that for reasons I will not discuss here.
I will always see time spent in a MMO as a good thing and Real Life Money transferred into a MMO (thru RMT) as a bad thing.
This is one topic we as a forum audience will never agree upon, we can argue forever on this and never get anywhere. We all have different reasons why we play MMOs, we all "See" MMOs differently, we all think they should be "designed this way or that".
I don't really now how to approach this, since only few people in this thread actually understand my point.
I try to avoid walls of text in my posts, but it is hard. I am not saying that paying to get advantage is the right thing to do. I am just saying... hey, maybe it is not pure satanic evil and it actually has some justification. I don't get upset about any unfairness in game and that is why I am so confused, that people are ticked off by the p2w term, while there are also other advantages to take into account.
Originally posted by Robokapp
the comment that stood out the most for me is the one about who is paying...and I want to see OPs thoughts on it.
How do we keep the hardcore playing most of the day from ALSO paying ?
because at this point he's minmaxing on two fronts and you have a fraction of the chance you had to keep up with him.
By saying that having both time and money is even more advantageous than having just money you admit, that time can be also unfair advantage. So that only proves what I'm trying to say. And yes, I do realize and agree, that there are people that can have both of those advantages, making it even more unfair, but that is going perfectly fine with my statements.
Originally posted by Pala
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? I dont want real life in my MMO games.
Cash shops ruined MMO games. They are over!
Only if you had infinite time, would your statement make sense, but in reality, you always need to sacrifice part of your real life in order to play a game. It is not like time stops and you are not getting old while you play a game. How else do I have to phrase that to get the message through. U use time from real life... so you need to mix the two, it is not seperable.
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.
Other than building up your ego, what does this bring into the discussion? The thread is directed to people that get upset about p2w, with question: why get upset only about that one advantage, and skip others. You are obviously not uspet, so why you react to my question like it actually was directed to you... and with a little bit of frustration in what you say you give the impression like you are actually bothered, which is probably not what you are aiming for anyway.
Originally posted by Pala
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.
I was able to get premium account in Knight Online back in 2005 and be able to level up much faster than people who are not paying - legally. And if I wanted to go black, there was gold and characters all over ebay. Both legal and illegal ways were years ago, how is it different now? Why people act like p2w was born few days ago, while it was always there.
Originally posted by AlBQuirky
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.
But I will say it again, everyone takes one side, and completely abandons the other. Yes not everyone has $1000/day, but not everyone has time too. Both resources vary, so why be so upset only about one.
Answer me this question people:
Someone is supported by his parents and doesn't have to work.... so he plays 8 hours a day or more and gets ahead of you. Isn't that just as unfair, as a guy who decides to work more, and then just pay to get to the next part of the game faster? It is his bussiness that he looses fun, but is it more unfair?
Someone is supported by his parents and doesn't have to work.... so he plays 8 hours a day or more and gets ahead of you. Isn't that just as unfair, as a guy who decides to work more, and then just pay to get to the next part of the game faster? It is his bussiness that he looses fun, but is it more unfair?
Of course it's fair. If the game is set up to reward time spent (as almost all MMOs are) and the kid puts in much more time to the game than you do, do you think he should get exactly the same rewards that you get?
Most MMOs aren't directly competitive either. So what if some kid does something before you can? Does that really ruin your enjoyment of the game and ability to play at your own pace? I mean, when you were a kid you probably went through a phase where you had more time for games and now you have less but presumably get some "rewards" out of the other things you do with your time (you now have way more options to enjoy and get meaning out of different things in your life than that kid has.)
I'll never understand people who insist on viewing PvE games as some sort of race they can only enjoy if they're in the lead and get insanely jealous when someone has a set of pixels that they don't have.
Answer me this question people: Someone is supported by his parents and doesn't have to work.... so he plays 8 hours a day or more and gets ahead of you. Isn't that just as unfair, as a guy who decides to work more, and then just pay to get to the next part of the game faster? It is his bussiness that he looses fun, but is it more unfair?
Of course it's fair. If the game is set up to reward time spent (as almost all MMOs are) and the kid puts in much more time to the game than you do, do you think he should get exactly the same rewards that you get?
Most MMOs aren't directly competitive either. So what if some kid does something before you can? Does that really ruin your enjoyment of the game and ability to play at your own pace? I mean, when you were a kid you probably went through a phase where you had more time for games and now you have less but presumably get some "rewards" out of the other things you do with your time (you now have way more options to enjoy and get meaning out of different things in your life than that kid has.)
I'll never understand people who insist on viewing PvE games as some sort of race they can only enjoy if they're in the lead and get insanely jealous when someone has a set of pixels that they don't have.
"Fair" treatment implies that some people are boned. Imagine a father and his young son standing next to a fence. The father is tall enough to barely see over the fence. Someone rides by and gives them two same sized boxes. If they each stand on a box, the father can easily see over the fence, and the son can't. This is "Fair". If both boxes are stacked on top of each other, then the father can put the son on top of the two boxes, and they can now both see over the fence. This is "Reasonable". When the father sits on both the boxes, this is "P2W".
Games used to take time to play because that was the best method for getting people to pay more money. It wasn't some 'high road' choice trying to be "Fair", it just worked the best for making money. It stopped working because people got tired of spending so much time grinding. Other methods had to be found, and so we now have cash shops with XP potions and the like.
**
The argument that cash shops can create a reasonable environment are true. I think the problem is that it rarely happens. Developers create boring game play to push people towards cash shop purchases far more often than not. This isn't fixed by having subscriptions. People don't want to play long enough to make subscriptions truly viable any longer.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Originally posted by tom_gore Originally posted by PalaI 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.
SWTOR, even though I do not really like it, was far more immersive than GW2 is imo.
The rest of your opinions I mostly agree with but that one, is far off the mark. imo.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
Originally posted by zymurgeist Originally posted by Mr.KujoOriginally posted by zymurgeistPay me $50 and hour and I'll sit in front of a screen while you pummel my avatar like a tackling dummy.
Other than building up your ego, what does this bring into the discussion? The thread is directed to people that get upset about p2w, with question: why get upset only about that one advantage, and skip others. You are obviously not uspet, so why you react to my question like it actually was directed to you... and with a little bit of frustration in what you say you give the impression like you are actually bothered, which is probably not what you are aiming for anyway.Go back and read the whole post again. The point is advantages real or imagined no matter what the supposed source don't matter. I don't care if someone else's pixels are better. I don't care how they got them. I care that games I play are enjoyable for me. I care that developers make games that are enjoyable to me. If someone else wrings all the enjoyment out of a game before me it makes no difference because I'm still having fun, or I've moved on to another game that is fun.
I like your outlook on this. Makes sense and it's pretty close to how I look at it. Barring of course, competitive PvP, which imo is a whole different topic.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
Well that is pretty much the agenda of the f2p hater? but pointing that out wont change the fact that they're going to make the same rant in the next thread. Showing someone that all RNG loot systems are just gambling boxes with better wrappers didn't stop it from happening here.If someone is going to rant, they're going to continue to rant regardless of what's said to them.
But it is often the slightly more extreme arguments that prevent things drifting in a direction that would be undesirable to all. Rabied rantings against F2P/ P2W (the two often appear interchangeable in these arguments) at least keep some of the devs more outlandish ideas in check- without the haters they would just have carte blanche to charge for whatever they wanted and the fanbois would never complain until it reached a point where their game was ruined.
The 'haters' aren't keeping developers in check. The world doesn't work like that. Or at least a market where competition exists doesn't work like that. Developers will always charge what they can 'get away with'. They always have and they always will.
It's not a perfect relation, but increasing the price of 'stuff' in an MMORPG will reduce the number of people who buy 'stuff'. The extra revenue from higher prices is not enough to offset the fewer people buying stuff. We know this because otherwise prices would be higher. There is only so much that people are willing to buy and only so much that they can afford. Charging less for 'stuff' in an MMORPG will increase the number of people who buy 'stuff' so more revenue will be generated, but it won't offset the additional costs of 'more people'. Somewhere in that continuum between 'higher' prices and 'lower' prices, there is a point where the developers get the most amount of money possible from their product. That is the price they are currently charging for their stuff. The willingness or unwillingness of people to buy stuff is what keeps developers in check. Not posts on forums.
Yeah littleboot I just can't agree it's that cut and dry. Lizardbones covered my thought but I just wanted to give an example.
PoE I've been really enjoying the game so I went to the cash shop to look around thinking I'd buy something. Then I saw the prices of things. I like the game but I'm not just going to throw money at them to show support. If they want to charge $20+ dollars for some bank slots that I don't really even need or offer things that are more like a donation than a purchase....I just wont buy anything.
As any cash shop tries to push the limits they always run that risk of going over the edge and losing more customers than they gain back in higher value of sales. I guess we just have to hope there is always someone involved in the game that knows 50 sales at $100 each is less money than 5000 sales at $10 each.
Comments
I certainly hope you are right as I need a good challenging and immersive game to play, it doesn't have to last for months but I would like to get engaged a bit longer than any of the recent ones have managed.
I am happy to pay subscription but refuse to buy anything from a cash shop. I will never buy virtual items but I will pay you to let me enjoy what you have worked hard to create. A pink hat or a flying donkey don't interest me, if the game has things like gold ammo (world of tanks) then its a no, if it has xp boosters also no, if it has fluffy hats then ok (grudgingly) if its good but I will never spend a dime on it. Gold ammo and xp boosters are very intrusive in design and subsequent gameplay, pure cosmetics while annoying that they wasted time on that I can ignore if the game is good.
And yes if the game is not very good the only option is F2P and cashshop and fishing for whales.
I agree. And the usual problem with F2P+CS games is that they have little confidence in their returns, so they stack the CS with items that people are more likely to buy. Then the game becomes P2W and people stop playing, leading to the lack of success of the game itself.
I think a F2P+CS model is compatible with a good game, but only if the devs/publishers are not greedy and have confidence that the game is good enough for people to play long term and ultimately spend money in the CS as a result. I haven't played in a year, but GW2 seems a good example of this.
Well GW2 is B2P + CS, that's a lot more money than majority of people would ever spend in a cash shop (myself included). The pricing of GW2 is not cheap in comparison to other models and ita all a bit of a PR gimmick. Ultimately the presence of the shop with its discounts of the week, bla bla crap is annoying and ruins immersion.
True, I forgot GW2 is B2P :P
Yes I don't like CS either as it's like watching a movie and hitting pause to buy something you want to see happen next. I'd pay subs every time, hell I'd even pay $50/month for the right game, but unfortunately CS seems to work as a form of monetization, otherwise devs would have ditched it long ago.
This thread will not result in anything usefull but anyway.
Time and money are very different. Time is a fixed value and it is the same for everyone. Doesn't matter if you rich/poor, good looking/ugly, pacifist/warmonger, a day has 24hrs. You can't increase time nor can you go backwards or increase the speed in which time elapses. But you have many more options to influence the amount of money you own. It's not the same for everyone.
So far about time and money differences.
Next thing is you must first decide whether there is anything to "win" by playing an MMO. If you don't think so this whole topic is more or less irrelevant to you anyway.
So let's assume your point of view is that you can win something by playing an MMO. Be it by beating someone in PvP or being the first one to reach max level in PvE or defeating some raid mob, or whatever you define as "winning" in an MMO context. Maybe even the MMO gives such a definition of "winning". Most don't.
In that case I advise to you to read some books/articles about game theory and "fair game". After that you might understand why bringing money into a game is considered pay2win.
By 2005 the 'black market' was approaching a million dollar a year industry. This is why developers finally took notice, they wanted a chunk of that action, and who wouldn't? With Free to play becoming so popular and people not wanting to waste hours levering their toon, grinding mats, etc they pay people to do it for them. However they justify it, makes no difference to me it happens, and it happens a lot. Why is FFXIV filled with gold spam? because people buy gold, it's big business and has been for a few years now.
FFXIV is just one example, it happens in just about every game out now, cash shop or no.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
Which mmo are you talking about ?
"As I said, P2W has become slap-it-on-everything word for those who have a weird idea that game developers don't need or deserve any money. Hell, just now there is a thread about GW2 with some outrageous claims that offering better looking cosmetic items is P2W, because the game obviously is all about who looks better."
You are always going to get genuine arguments used to push forward irrational agendas. That does not make the argument any less valid. P2W is a horrible business ethos that should have nothing to do with gaming. The fact posters are using this to air their issues (if it was not just trolling) with GW2 is by the by.
It's not "by the by". What they are doing is trying to prove that GW2 is a bad game by using the P2W argument. Very few people would say "P2W is a good thing". The problem with something like the OP is that if it's accepted as true, then everything is P2W because there are currently few, if any MMORPGs that do not have cash shop items.
It's not an argument against P2W, it's an argument against Cash Shops in general.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Well that is pretty much the agenda of the f2p hater? but pointing that out wont change the fact that they're going to make the same rant in the next thread. Showing someone that all RNG loot systems are just gambling boxes with better wrappers didn't stop it from happening here.
If someone is going to rant, they're going to continue to rant regardless of what's said to them.
But it is often the slightly more extreme arguments that prevent things drifting in a direction that would be undesirable to all. Rabied rantings against F2P/ P2W (the two often appear interchangeable in these arguments) at least keep some of the devs more outlandish ideas in check- without the haters they would just have carte blanche to charge for whatever they wanted and the fanbois would never complain until it reached a point where their game was ruined.
I was following you until the highlighted line, a bit selfish don't you think?
We all have varying amounts of free time available to spend on gaming or other activities, is there a limit on how much time someone must spend in order to enjoy the content of a game?
I remember when L2 first came out, being a fan of the first title, I really looked forward to the castle sieging the 2nd offered.
As I got into the 50's (70 was cap in those days) the leveling really slowed down, and I estimated based on current progression curves that in order to actually hit 70 and properly earn enough adena to outfit him it would quite likely take me over a year more in grind before I would reach level 70.
As my Silver Ranger was nothing but fodder during sieges at level 52, I had a choice, stick it out for the year (not realizing they planned to raise the cap to 74 and toss in some other multi-class options as well) or move on to a new game. I decided to play WOW instead where I reached "end game content" in a little under 3 months.
There were numerous folks who had far more free time to play, and they hit level 70 in the first 3-4 months. They totally dominated the Castle ownership scene and the rest of us could only look on in envy wondering what it might be like.
Had there been a true option to significantly shorten that leveling curve for a reasonable price so I could have been part of the end game, I would have gladly paid it in order to get to the good stuff.
I suppose you can argue I didn't "deserve" to participate, because I wasn't able, or willing to devote the time up front, and you might be right, but I still wish I could have been part of those activities because I did really enjoy them in L1. (and DAOC)
Modern MMO's really don't present barriers to the end game content these days, only problem is, I'm not interested in what they are offering. (PVE centric raiding).
Which is why I'm paying nothing at all to play on a freeshard of DAOC that actually delivers exactly what I'm looking for in a MMORPG. Good things come to those who wait, and despite my limited free time, I am able to fully participate in almost all end game activities with a relatively low up front investment in time. (except for high level RVRing, I'm still fodder in that world, however slowly but surely working my way up)
But I still look back at L2 and wonder....what if? (and I know they've revamped it so it's a bit easier, but don't kid yourself, I gave it a go and there's still some significant grind at the upper levels all designed to encourage strong cash shop usage buying exp boosting pots.)
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I remember one day, when I was working at a big game company on an unnamed MMO, we had invited some guilds into the office to talk about things. This exact topic of time and money came up. Now we had a raiding guild or two, plus a couple RP and casual guilds, and a big PvP guild. The conversation went very much like this thread .... depending on how they "played" the game the attitude of the players differed. One interesting thing I remember very much from that day was how much more angry and pissed off the time side of the table became when we (developers) impinged on their territory. One guild leader left the table when we mentioned implementing diminishing returns (xp, coin, material drops, etc ...). Gamers are not all created equally and will eventually separate themselves based on the things that make them different, the type of game does not matter.
So to answer the OPs question of "What is real life advantage in mmorpg's" ... the answer is really "It depends on who or what type of gamer you ask."
P2W ruins immersion and destroys any sense of true risk vs. reward. The only reason these cash shops and such exist is because developers saw a lot of money being raked in by gold-farmers and wanted in on the action. Instead of fighting a battle they felt they couldn't win, they decided to become that which they hated.
Personally, I could care less if P2W somehow "evens" the playing field for those who don't have or can't be bothered to make time. I'd rather see players earn their keep by playing the game and experiencing the content and participating in the community.
Well that is pretty much the agenda of the f2p hater? but pointing that out wont change the fact that they're going to make the same rant in the next thread. Showing someone that all RNG loot systems are just gambling boxes with better wrappers didn't stop it from happening here. If someone is going to rant, they're going to continue to rant regardless of what's said to them.
But it is often the slightly more extreme arguments that prevent things drifting in a direction that would be undesirable to all. Rabied rantings against F2P/ P2W (the two often appear interchangeable in these arguments) at least keep some of the devs more outlandish ideas in check- without the haters they would just have carte blanche to charge for whatever they wanted and the fanbois would never complain until it reached a point where their game was ruined.
The 'haters' aren't keeping developers in check. The world doesn't work like that. Or at least a market where competition exists doesn't work like that. Developers will always charge what they can 'get away with'. They always have and they always will.
It's not a perfect relation, but increasing the price of 'stuff' in an MMORPG will reduce the number of people who buy 'stuff'. The extra revenue from higher prices is not enough to offset the fewer people buying stuff. We know this because otherwise prices would be higher. There is only so much that people are willing to buy and only so much that they can afford. Charging less for 'stuff' in an MMORPG will increase the number of people who buy 'stuff' so more revenue will be generated, but it won't offset the additional costs of 'more people'. Somewhere in that continuum between 'higher' prices and 'lower' prices, there is a point where the developers get the most amount of money possible from their product. That is the price they are currently charging for their stuff. The willingness or unwillingness of people to buy stuff is what keeps developers in check. Not posts on forums.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
If the game starts off as F2P with the "shortcut" options available in the cash shop then that's one thing. I don't really object to games like that. I'm not a great fan of that model but I can make an informed decision on whether to play it before I start.
However a lot of games start with either no cash-shop or a cash-shop that only sells cosmetics and then change their business model to include pay to win or even "shortcuts" that pisses me off a lot more. Suddenly I have to either ditch all my progression in that game or put up with the business model I don't like.
As far as buying gold or power leveling from 3rd parties, that's always been considered a form of cheating in MMOs, as far as I know. It's only now that greedy companies are offering you ways to do it "legally" that we're all just supposed to accept it. But the thing is there were good reasons why they banned it in the first place.
As I said, as long as they are honest about what pricing model they plan use from the beginning the "if you don't like it don't play option" exists. Games which change models part way through make that a lot harder though.
Stuff like that always feels to me like you are being prevented from joining a bowling league because you did not get a high enough score in Space Invaders. The leveling content/grind and the end game content are so different from each other that they feel like seperate games and it seems silly that you have to beat one in order to participate in the other.
In my experience of Life...
Time is NOT money, and as I used to say years ago.... "MMOs are all about "Time".
It's was always OK to spend lots of time in a MMO, it was even expected of Players many times.
It was NOT OK to spend lots of RL money in a MMO, especially if it bought you an advantage over others.
That was how MMOs were years ago, at least the MMOs I was involved with. There were and still are MMOs were real money flows into and out of game fluidly, but I always disagreed with that for reasons I will not discuss here.
I will always see time spent in a MMO as a good thing and Real Life Money transferred into a MMO (thru RMT) as a bad thing.
This is one topic we as a forum audience will never agree upon, we can argue forever on this and never get anywhere. We all have different reasons why we play MMOs, we all "See" MMOs differently, we all think they should be "designed this way or that".
To Each their own. As it should be.
I don't really now how to approach this, since only few people in this thread actually understand my point.
I try to avoid walls of text in my posts, but it is hard. I am not saying that paying to get advantage is the right thing to do. I am just saying... hey, maybe it is not pure satanic evil and it actually has some justification. I don't get upset about any unfairness in game and that is why I am so confused, that people are ticked off by the p2w term, while there are also other advantages to take into account.
By saying that having both time and money is even more advantageous than having just money you admit, that time can be also unfair advantage. So that only proves what I'm trying to say. And yes, I do realize and agree, that there are people that can have both of those advantages, making it even more unfair, but that is going perfectly fine with my statements.
Only if you had infinite time, would your statement make sense, but in reality, you always need to sacrifice part of your real life in order to play a game. It is not like time stops and you are not getting old while you play a game. How else do I have to phrase that to get the message through. U use time from real life... so you need to mix the two, it is not seperable.
Other than building up your ego, what does this bring into the discussion? The thread is directed to people that get upset about p2w, with question: why get upset only about that one advantage, and skip others. You are obviously not uspet, so why you react to my question like it actually was directed to you... and with a little bit of frustration in what you say you give the impression like you are actually bothered, which is probably not what you are aiming for anyway.
I was able to get premium account in Knight Online back in 2005 and be able to level up much faster than people who are not paying - legally. And if I wanted to go black, there was gold and characters all over ebay. Both legal and illegal ways were years ago, how is it different now? Why people act like p2w was born few days ago, while it was always there.
But I will say it again, everyone takes one side, and completely abandons the other. Yes not everyone has $1000/day, but not everyone has time too. Both resources vary, so why be so upset only about one.
Answer me this question people:
Someone is supported by his parents and doesn't have to work.... so he plays 8 hours a day or more and gets ahead of you. Isn't that just as unfair, as a guy who decides to work more, and then just pay to get to the next part of the game faster? It is his bussiness that he looses fun, but is it more unfair?
Of course it's fair. If the game is set up to reward time spent (as almost all MMOs are) and the kid puts in much more time to the game than you do, do you think he should get exactly the same rewards that you get?
Most MMOs aren't directly competitive either. So what if some kid does something before you can? Does that really ruin your enjoyment of the game and ability to play at your own pace? I mean, when you were a kid you probably went through a phase where you had more time for games and now you have less but presumably get some "rewards" out of the other things you do with your time (you now have way more options to enjoy and get meaning out of different things in your life than that kid has.)
I'll never understand people who insist on viewing PvE games as some sort of race they can only enjoy if they're in the lead and get insanely jealous when someone has a set of pixels that they don't have.
"Fair" treatment implies that some people are boned. Imagine a father and his young son standing next to a fence. The father is tall enough to barely see over the fence. Someone rides by and gives them two same sized boxes. If they each stand on a box, the father can easily see over the fence, and the son can't. This is "Fair". If both boxes are stacked on top of each other, then the father can put the son on top of the two boxes, and they can now both see over the fence. This is "Reasonable". When the father sits on both the boxes, this is "P2W".
Games used to take time to play because that was the best method for getting people to pay more money. It wasn't some 'high road' choice trying to be "Fair", it just worked the best for making money. It stopped working because people got tired of spending so much time grinding. Other methods had to be found, and so we now have cash shops with XP potions and the like.
**
The argument that cash shops can create a reasonable environment are true. I think the problem is that it rarely happens. Developers create boring game play to push people towards cash shop purchases far more often than not. This isn't fixed by having subscriptions. People don't want to play long enough to make subscriptions truly viable any longer.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
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.
SWTOR, even though I do not really like it, was far more immersive than GW2 is imo.
The rest of your opinions I mostly agree with but that one, is far off the mark. imo.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
Go back and read the whole post again. The point is advantages real or imagined no matter what the supposed source don't matter. I don't care if someone else's pixels are better. I don't care how they got them. I care that games I play are enjoyable for me. I care that developers make games that are enjoyable to me. If someone else wrings all the enjoyment out of a game before me it makes no difference because I'm still having fun, or I've moved on to another game that is fun.
I like your outlook on this. Makes sense and it's pretty close to how I look at it. Barring of course, competitive PvP, which imo is a whole different topic.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
Yeah littleboot I just can't agree it's that cut and dry. Lizardbones covered my thought but I just wanted to give an example.
PoE I've been really enjoying the game so I went to the cash shop to look around thinking I'd buy something. Then I saw the prices of things. I like the game but I'm not just going to throw money at them to show support. If they want to charge $20+ dollars for some bank slots that I don't really even need or offer things that are more like a donation than a purchase....I just wont buy anything.
As any cash shop tries to push the limits they always run that risk of going over the edge and losing more customers than they gain back in higher value of sales. I guess we just have to hope there is always someone involved in the game that knows 50 sales at $100 each is less money than 5000 sales at $10 each.