Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Astral diamonds, labor points -> Action points
phumbaba
Member Posts: 138
Just wondering to what extent people here are concerned over what could be becoming a trend. The two examples in the title may not be so unique, but there are certain arguments about their effects in the respective games. That, and they are just examples.
- Are the additional currencies becoming too important? To what extent are they becoming more important considering players' power and experience progressions than the actual leveling progression itself?
- If the main arguments for them are combating third party economics and mudflation, do you believe they work at all?
- To what extent do you think it's cool that the said currencies are directly sold for real money?
- To what extent are the systems effectively different from the AP systems of many mobile games? Would you enjoy an AP system in a mmorpg?
It's nothing major, considering wow is selling level capped characters, but the thing is wow is xx years old and the relative power compared to other players achieved by the purchase is close to nothing. In new games, the relative power which can be bought, could be described as significant. Nothing much against the games with the two examples, but I guess I really wouldn't enjoy the trend getting any worse.
In case the thread begins to get out of hand, I'm not in the least interested in discussing whether or not either of the two examples resembles "p2w". I am a bit concerned about the trend, though. And interested to know what people think about it.
Comments
My main issue with multiple currencies in an MMORPG is when they are spent on too many different things. I would rather have, a currency I can earn in game that is trade able. A non-trade able currency that I can earn. A currency I can buy that is trade able. And a currency that i can buy that isn't. And, the kicker...have it all be good for the same things. Or at least any single one interchangeable for for another kind (with an exchange tax on it).
I don't like having plenty of one kind of currency and not being able to get the only thing I want. That seems ridiculous to me. And, a lot of games are in the habit of trying to squeeze me personally for every nickle and dime. Then just getting it from somewhere and letting me spend money as I actually want to. And, in doing so by changing up what exactly you can get with certain currencies so much. They make me feel like not spending anything really.
Look at EVE Online or Runescape as examples of an easy alternative. In EVE Online if I work hard enough for in game money I can buy currency to let me pay for in game time or get premium items. The same goes for Runescape. Except in Runescape I get currency as well for maintaining my membership consistently month to month (which is pretty easy since I pay for it on an annual renewal basis). That currency is not redeemable for membership. But, it can be used as an alternative to pay for some cosmetic items. And the Membership tokens can also be exchanged for Cash Shop currency. I can even donate it to charity (I admit I know alot more about runescape then EVE, as I have played runescape for almost a decade and a half...Where as i have only dabbled in EVE to the total of about 1 years experience).
But, in the case of either game someone pays at some point in the chain. The companies get their money just the same. And I think some newer games could stand to take a hint from some of the older titles out there. There are plenty games out there that handle this fairly. But, the way a lot of games choose to handle it does feel exploitative to me (at least on the surface).
Labour points have destroyed ArcheAge for me. If I can't even open all the gold bags I've looted off enemies, the FTP option is worthless. The amount of times I said to myself.. no, ignore that ore.. there might be a quest soon that needs 100 labour to complete and I don't want to have to wait 2 hours before I can complete it.
They put in too much control. It's controls exactly how much you can earn, make, identify and gather. Can be changed whenever they want. It controls your time.. forcing you to do things you might no want to do because you've got to wait.
Only applies if you don't want to subscribe though.. of course. I probably won't touch ArcheAge again with them in place. I would have probably subbed anyway but I'm not supporting this kind of system.
If they cared about game economy they would have put item decay in game, which would have solved the abundance of items problem. The only thing labour points is doing is pushing even subscribed players to buy labour points potions so the crafters which want to spend lot of real money will control in game markets. No much difference between this and a facebook game and is quite funny to see old school sandbox fans white knighting a system from mobile/social media gaming but is to be expected - if wow tried this then it will be awful,shameful, a sign of blizz greed but since is a "sandbox" game then is a great system.
I understand all this. I still don't like it. It's TOTAL control.
They could have just had a mechanism for restricting those best in slot items on their own.. instead of something that controls everything. It's not an excuse or a decent reason. Let's not try to fool everyone, it's there to make doing the things you want in game take longer so that you HAVE to play for longer.. with a carrot constantly hanging over FTP players showing how they could get TONS more labour points.
If it was just for controlling the economy, the labour rates would be the same for FTP and subbers.
Yes,super rare armour in a pvp game - another "wise" choice because all good pvp games are about veteran players in uber gear crushing noobs ,yes ? Actually I regret using term sandbox regarding archeage before, all this talk about uber gear and "danger" of losing a best in slot item makes it sound like the usual themepark.
Until the game is launched to public for a few months, there is no proof that the reality of labour points is anything like you described it too and the fact that the game borrows systems from facebook games,well know for trying to monetize every aspect of the game should be enough to make potential players avoid buying it before trying the game. Cooldown or not, if the labour points are needed (and no one can't be sure that a patron will have an infinite supply until some time after launch) then a patron spending money in cash shop will have an advantage over another patron which does not uses the cash shop and with "uber" weapons that sound quite pay to win.
Those are labour points gaining rates but how fast you spend them ?Especially to craft good items, it is true that even gathering materials takes away labour points ?
Actually RNG just supports my theory of heavy monetization and I was comparing two paying players since in a normal p2p game they would have been on equal level just by paying a subscription.Thanks to fb like system and RNG, not only a subscriber will end by buying potions but RNG will push him or her into doing it over and over again because "next time I'll have more luck". I also doubt that RNG will be better than other asian games,can't say I enjoyed it in Tera and I was not even at max level - at least Tera didn't have labour points and it is quite decent as far as f2p systems go.
To answer your question OP, if you are worried about these systems starting to appear in more and more games the only way to show that is not to buy those games. I don't buy any mobile games which have in game purchases for same reason, to avoid being pushed towards cash shop and these kind of systems will be much worse in mmos since people usually play them long term.
No matter what evidence I provide, you will only use it to further promote your own hypothesis.
End result = no meaningful discussion
Actually there was no evidence supporting your theory that archeage system will not try to follow fb model, just suppositions regarding no need from patrons to buy potions even to craft powerful weapons and the whole RNG thing is a well know mechanism of asian f2p games. So no evidence provided just a pro archeage bias which as so many mmo launched in last few years told us, is not a good adviser regarding the quality of a new game.
Problem is that these kind of systems start to enter even p2p games, same as with mobile gamining where you pay for a game then you still have a cash shop with all kind of boosters.If Archeage would have unlimited labour points for subscribers then it would not be much to discuss. I think developers saw how much money they can make with cash shops in other genres and sooner or later most mmos will have them together with game system designed to push players into using them.
Wasn't ArcheAge initially planned as P2P only? I thought that was what I read somewhere any way. And, when people say "decay" is every one talking about irreparable item degradation; reparable item degradation; or both? (as it's a main point of debate I am just wondering if everyone is going of the same idea of what that means).