Yes, thankfully Victoria seems to know the game and has put some effort into it, On the other hand, Scapes appeared totally lost and more than useless. I dont think he has played very much at all.
You can please some MMO-players all of the time and you can please all MMO-players some of the time but you can't please all MMO-players all of the time.
I really hope Trion can pick and choose what they want to put in the game for us NA people. If they destroy the sandbox feel to the game with themepark elements than I won't be playing. If they do keep it sandbox I will play it for the foreseeable future.
I really hope Trion can pick and choose what they want to put in the game for us NA people. If they destroy the sandbox feel to the game with themepark elements than I won't be playing. If they do keep it sandbox I will play it for the foreseeable future.
That's pretty much what they said is happening ~20:30 in the video. They are not going with 1.0 entirely, and are essentially cherry picking stuff to retain a sandbox (style) game for the western market.
........
Other interesting points. Well taxes confirmed .. no "dead" & abandoned property littering the landscape! Very good to know, since housing is not instanced.
Trion also confirmed that only patrons can own land, but F2P'ers can tag along with friends / guildies who are patrons to still farm & handle livestock, on their land, permission based. A F2P'er can eventually buy patron status with in-game currency (without ever spending a dime), but no word on how difficult that is to do.
A F2P game without restrictions would be chaos. Alternatively, if everything gets nickled and dimed in the cashshop then that takes away some of the enthusiasm right there. It could be subsidized if it were B2P, but that is a barrier to entry right there, effectively your first pay-wall, which Trion is avoiding, with this new IP being released in todays climate.
A true deal breaker would be if they gimp the UI, or other truly critical area, IMO.
F2P'ing is likely going to be rough starting out. But it sounds like if someone can pay with their time (to keep the world populated), then they can do that instead of paying with their wallet. Or conversely, pay a sub initially, gain currency quicker, then convert to F2P & purchase patron status.
SOE's Landmark revolves around property & creation, so naturally there would be an abundance of it. A bit different in ArcheAge, per your example. Different environment.
If having a sub grants patron status and unlocks the ability to own land, I really hope it also unlocks being free from F2P trappings as well. You know, lockboxes, cash shops, currency systems and gameplay inhibitors (skill gain limits, useage and such). I have no desire to deal with those things while I'm trying to play. It's the reason I'd rather pay upfront in the first place and the main reason why I tend to avoid most F2P games (well that and most are terrible) at this point.
So count me in if a sub makes AA feel like it's mimicking a traditional sub based mmorpg and count me out if it only subdues 80-90% reliance on their F2P system. I don't want anything (in-game) reminding me this is a F2P hybrid mmo unless I drop to non-patron status.
"Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas."
If having a sub grants patron status and unlocks the ability to own land, I really hope it also unlocks being free from F2P trappings as well. You know, lockboxes, cash shops, currency systems and gameplay inhibitors (skill gain limits, useage and such). I have no desire to deal with those things while I'm trying to play. It's the reason I'd rather pay upfront in the first place and the main reason why I tend to avoid most F2P games (well that and most are terrible) at this point.
So count me in if a sub makes AA feel like it's mimicking a traditional sub based mmorpg and count me out if it only subdues 80-90% reliance on their F2P system. I don't want anything (in-game) reminding me this is a F2P hybrid mmo unless I drop to non-patron status.
That is a really good way to put it and at the very least if there are still requirements then they need to offer stipends and all the benefits you already mentioned with a subscription.
F2P or P2P I just want to play ArcheAge even if I don't have a house and offering houses as a premium benefit is obviously going to be a good way to make money and if they stick to their guns and keep it truly sandbox and stay away from the controversial updates that ruin the open world or creative aspects then it will be worth it either way regardless imo, cause where it stands I see alot more of what i'm looking for in this than anything else atm.
Comments
Yes, thankfully Victoria seems to know the game and has put some effort into it, On the other hand, Scapes appeared totally lost and more than useless. I dont think he has played very much at all.
You can please some MMO-players all of the time and you can please all MMO-players some of the time but you can't please all MMO-players all of the time.
I really hope Trion can pick and choose what they want to put in the game for us NA people. If they destroy the sandbox feel to the game with themepark elements than I won't be playing. If they do keep it sandbox I will play it for the foreseeable future.
That's pretty much what they said is happening ~20:30 in the video. They are not going with 1.0 entirely, and are essentially cherry picking stuff to retain a sandbox (style) game for the western market.
........
Other interesting points. Well taxes confirmed .. no "dead" & abandoned property littering the landscape! Very good to know, since housing is not instanced.
Trion also confirmed that only patrons can own land, but F2P'ers can tag along with friends / guildies who are patrons to still farm & handle livestock, on their land, permission based. A F2P'er can eventually buy patron status with in-game currency (without ever spending a dime), but no word on how difficult that is to do.
Keep these videos coming!
Want a nice understanding of life? Try Spirit Science: "The Human History"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8NNHmV3QPw&feature=plcp
Recognize the voice? Yep sounds like Penny Arcade's Extra Credits.
yeah, the permission thing with family sharing and so on is .. well, new to me
great
Definitely a dilemma, but a deal breaker? naw.
A F2P game without restrictions would be chaos. Alternatively, if everything gets nickled and dimed in the cashshop then that takes away some of the enthusiasm right there. It could be subsidized if it were B2P, but that is a barrier to entry right there, effectively your first pay-wall, which Trion is avoiding, with this new IP being released in todays climate.
A true deal breaker would be if they gimp the UI, or other truly critical area, IMO.
F2P'ing is likely going to be rough starting out. But it sounds like if someone can pay with their time (to keep the world populated), then they can do that instead of paying with their wallet. Or conversely, pay a sub initially, gain currency quicker, then convert to F2P & purchase patron status.
SOE's Landmark revolves around property & creation, so naturally there would be an abundance of it. A bit different in ArcheAge, per your example. Different environment.
Want a nice understanding of life? Try Spirit Science: "The Human History"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8NNHmV3QPw&feature=plcp
Recognize the voice? Yep sounds like Penny Arcade's Extra Credits.
If having a sub grants patron status and unlocks the ability to own land, I really hope it also unlocks being free from F2P trappings as well. You know, lockboxes, cash shops, currency systems and gameplay inhibitors (skill gain limits, useage and such). I have no desire to deal with those things while I'm trying to play. It's the reason I'd rather pay upfront in the first place and the main reason why I tend to avoid most F2P games (well that and most are terrible) at this point.
So count me in if a sub makes AA feel like it's mimicking a traditional sub based mmorpg and count me out if it only subdues 80-90% reliance on their F2P system. I don't want anything (in-game) reminding me this is a F2P hybrid mmo unless I drop to non-patron status.
"Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas."
That is a really good way to put it and at the very least if there are still requirements then they need to offer stipends and all the benefits you already mentioned with a subscription.
F2P or P2P I just want to play ArcheAge even if I don't have a house and offering houses as a premium benefit is obviously going to be a good way to make money and if they stick to their guns and keep it truly sandbox and stay away from the controversial updates that ruin the open world or creative aspects then it will be worth it either way regardless imo, cause where it stands I see alot more of what i'm looking for in this than anything else atm.
They should make having a sub be required to having a house or putting a scarecrow down.
Scarecrows are a much bigger problem than houses.
People make alts to hold land, have multiple farms etc.
Games are not free to make, a person who does not pay should not have the full game experience.
That's what they will do on the western version.