Kefo said: To me that reads that they threw out whatever work they did do(if any) because a demo is a intermediate solution and doesn't help the final product.
Nope, and this was said before, they had to delay it the moment the demo would have required solutions just to make the demo work; They would have to fix the issues just for the demo instead of fixing the issues for the game.
You're twisting what was said many times, by many of the devs involved on that demo that the decision was made after the intermediate solutions started to become necessary to make it happen, not when they were already made. --'
Also as seen here:
There's much work that went there, characters, animations, environments, and so forfh; only a troll would claim all the devs worked to polish up to a demoable state was wasted because the demo was not shown.
If the issues existed in the demo it would be safe to assume the same major issues would exist in the "full game". Ergo fixing one would fix the other. If that wasn't the case then they have some moronic programmers who shouldn't be doing their job if they can't cobble together a demo.
Im not a troll but simply repeating what Chris Roberts said. I'm also not going to sit through 20 minutes of video so if you could point me to a specific time stamp it would be appreciated.
The game is just a hype train to produce money. Its like the door to door salesman who has some stupid presentation that when criticized by science its a big fat lie. Even most of the salesmen themselves don't even realize they are lying with their presentations.
They were very smart but at the same time very deceptive. Giving false hopes of deadlines and false promises in order to generate hype, happy backers, and the results is people throw money at it. So in the end they got plenty of money and yes will end up making a game.
My problem is... I do not expect them to suddenly become reputable once the game launches. I expect them to continually spin the stories.
Just like every politician . They tell you what you want to hear. Even though they know its not possible they bank on the fact that voters are too stupid to realize it.
I'm not sure I'd call it an uninformed troll post. The initial paragraph is certainly combative and a bit hyperbolic but he's not wrong with regards to everything else.
eg. CIG do their build-up for an upcoming event, they show some shiny stuff and announce it will arrive by the end of the week / a couple of weeks / end of the year etc. They then announce an accompanying sale which gets bolstered by the upcoming content and then whoops-a-daisy they don't make the deadline.
How many times have we seen this happen? Or perhaps to be more precise, how many times have we not seen this happen? It seems too repetitive to just be incompetence, it's like some form of marketing that some SC backers are suckers for. If they're willing to do this now then there's a good chance they might behave similarly down the road, especially if they've got an enabling audience.
But what you said is wrapped around a giant steaming turd of a lie IE: "The game is just a hype train to produce money".
If he had just wrote the second and third paragraph I would agree with the whole. But the first and to a lesser extent the last paragraph is just so much troll speak.
Why don't you harp on the fact that I said they will end up producing a game? I mean I did say that too you know.... Now maybe you can take the whole thing into context.
If you had said "The game is turning into a hype train to produce money" I would not object. That is a matter of opinion. What you wrote is just wrong. Po-ta-toh po-tah-toh maybe but if you are trying to make a point you should try to be correct. That separates the Trolls from the truth talkers.
Bah I'm just bored waiting to go to bed before my shift starts tonight. Fuck it, as you were!
If the issues existed in the demo it would be safe to assume the same major issues would exist in the "full game". Ergo fixing one would fix the other. If that wasn't the case then they have some moronic programmers who shouldn't be doing their job if they can't cobble together a demo.
It's not anything for any other world: if your demo needs X or Y bug-fix, or X character, A or B environments, or X set of animations all you would need to do is prioritize those things required for the demo on pipeline of the game. And it goes both ways, game pipeline works on the game but focused o the specifics of what the demo needs.
idk exact time stamp but the quote is of Erin Roberts on it: "The good thing about it is actually a huge amount of of work went into Squadron 42. We really moved it forward, we actually answered a lot of issues and solved a lot of technological issues.."
Well, Erin seems to be stating they did exactly what I mentioned in the first paragraph.
If the issues existed in the demo it would be safe to assume the same major issues would exist in the "full game". Ergo fixing one would fix the other. If that wasn't the case then they have some moronic programmers who shouldn't be doing their job if they can't cobble together a demo.
It's not anything for any other world: if your demo needs X or Y bug-fix, or X character, A or B environments, or X set of animations all you would need to do is prioritize those things required for the demo on pipeline of the game. And it goes both ways, game pipeline works on the game but focused o the specifics of what the demo needs.
idk exact time stamp but the quote is of Erin Roberts on it: "The good thing about it is actually a huge amount of of work went into Squadron 42. We really moved it forward, we actually answered a lot of issues and solved a lot of technological issues.."
Well, Erin seems to be stating they did exactly what I mentioned in the first paragraph.
Alright I can accept that so thanks for that.
It still sounds like a load of crap to me though since they really moved it forward according to Erin but there hasn't been much announced since then.
And if everything was answered in road to citizencon then why the hell would Chris make a statement like the one I posted almost 2 months later that sheds doubt on everything?
It still sounds like a load of crap to me though since they really moved it forward according to Erin but there hasn't been much announced since then.
And if everything was answered in road to citizencon then why the hell would Chris make a statement like the one I posted almost 2 months later that sheds doubt on everything?
I just put myself on their place... I would after the backlash and disappointment from not showing it I got over the decision push the demo to the best quality it possible can, and would put efforts into showing something impressive then. In business terms, that would be the best course of action after all those unmet expectations I would play safe and make a stand later. I believe the delays only lead to greater expectations that the wait will be worth it, so it needs to be.
ofc that'd be me, and i'm running on the assumption the demo wouldn't be looking that good, it's likely for me they are doing just that and did raise the bar.
They're building a demo, run into issues, decide not to finish the demo because those issues are specific to the demo..
Are you listening to yourself? So they are building a demo, not a game?
So they were not developing SQ42, locked part of its content (a few missions), and then they had to NOT work on finishing up all the bits necessary to those missions on every aspect of the development?
Work created just for a DEMO that'd be the PG Planets tech demo, that is not something that will specifically be in the game, instead created to showcase X or Y thing, on the case, PG Planets. On that case, the planet was purposely created for the demo.
I'm going by what I'm reading in this thread, as I quit following SC the summer of last year.
From what I've gathered reading this thread, they began working on a demo and stopped short of completing it. If every bit of the demo's assets, environments, level designs, NPC enemies, etc. is going to be used in the final product- then they wasted no time.
But that didn't seem to be the vibe I was getting from the conversation here. It seemed to indicate that the demo wasn't simply a small piece of the final campaign/level designs that would be in SQ42 itself, but were rather like the PG Planets tech demo you mention. If the planned SQ42 demo was simply an early, partial iteration of the final product singleplayer campaign, I agree the time spent didn't include any waste.
If the demo was not simply a small slice of what will become the end product, they certainly wasted time once they decided not to finish it, because there will be partially finished assets from the demo that did nothing to push the final product forward to completion.
And I'm not sure how to respond regarding your first two questions; yes, they were building a demo. Many companies build demos during the development of the final game. The two have never been exclusive. Most companies just actually finish them before they tell all their fans they're getting one.
But that didn't seem to be the vibe I was getting from the conversation here.
Well rather late but if you see the quote up there, they do mention that on how the work for the demo pushed the whole game forward, as I said it's simple a design; you want to do X demo so you prioritize on the game's pipeline the stuff the demo needs, seeing the demo is of the missions people will play, it benefits both ways.
The tech demo of PG that was a different story, the assets created were for the demo and the whole sand wurm and sand nomads including the designed planet were not part of the game and surrounded the demo that was showing off the new pieces of tech the game is getting.
The game is just a hype train to produce money. Its like the door to door salesman who has some stupid presentation that when criticized by science its a big fat lie. Even most of the salesmen themselves don't even realize they are lying with their presentations.
They were very smart but at the same time very deceptive. Giving false hopes of deadlines and false promises in order to generate hype, happy backers, and the results is people throw money at it. So in the end they got plenty of money and yes will end up making a game.
My problem is... I do not expect them to suddenly become reputable once the game launches. I expect them to continually spin the stories.
Just like every politician . They tell you what you want to hear. Even though they know its not possible they bank on the fact that voters are too stupid to realize it.
I'm not sure I'd call it an uninformed troll post. The initial paragraph is certainly combative and a bit hyperbolic but he's not wrong with regards to everything else.
eg. CIG do their build-up for an upcoming event, they show some shiny stuff and announce it will arrive by the end of the week / a couple of weeks / end of the year etc. They then announce an accompanying sale which gets bolstered by the upcoming content and then whoops-a-daisy they don't make the deadline.
How many times have we seen this happen? Or perhaps to be more precise, how many times have we not seen this happen? It seems too repetitive to just be incompetence, it's like some form of marketing that some SC backers are suckers for. If they're willing to do this now then there's a good chance they might behave similarly down the road, especially if they've got an enabling audience.
But what you said is wrapped around a giant steaming turd of a lie IE: "The game is just a hype train to produce money".
If he had just wrote the second and third paragraph I would agree with the whole. But the first and to a lesser extent the last paragraph is just so much troll speak.
Why don't you harp on the fact that I said they will end up producing a game? I mean I did say that too you know.... Now maybe you can take the whole thing into context.
If you had said "The game is turning into a hype train to produce money" I would not object. That is a matter of opinion. What you wrote is just wrong. Po-ta-toh po-tah-toh maybe but if you are trying to make a point you should try to be correct. That separates the Trolls from the truth talkers.
Bah I'm just bored waiting to go to bed before my shift starts tonight. Fuck it, as you were!
But I did not say they are not making a game. You made that assumption based on the first sentence. I probably could have written it better but if you read the rest of the statement its pretty clear what I was trying to portray. You can't go through life taking things out of context then you will end up marching around protesting everything without even knowing you aren't even understanding the reason.
It still sounds like a load of crap to me though since they really moved it forward according to Erin but there hasn't been much announced since then.
And if everything was answered in road to citizencon then why the hell would Chris make a statement like the one I posted almost 2 months later that sheds doubt on everything?
I just put myself on their place... I would after the backlash and disappointment from not showing it I got over the decision push the demo to the best quality it possible can, and would put efforts into showing something impressive then. In business terms, that would be the best course of action after all those unmet expectations I would play safe and make a stand later. I believe the delays only lead to greater expectations that the wait will be worth it, so it needs to be.
ofc that'd be me, and i'm running on the assumption the demo wouldn't be looking that good, it's likely for me they are doing just that and did raise the bar.
They haven't shown anything impressive though and the backlash is something they created. If this was CIG's first fuck up then cool but they constantly promise the moon and then after it's supposed to arrive they "oops! Sorry guys we couldn't finish it because reasons. Please forget we said anything and here's another ship sale!"
They haven't shown anything impressive though and the backlash is something they created. If this was CIG's first fuck up then cool but they constantly promise the moon and then after it's supposed to arrive they "oops! Sorry guys we couldn't finish it because reasons. Please forget we said anything and here's another ship sale!"
They messed up on not telling stuff to the backers, it was only told right on top of the hour and that is where they need to get their communication straight and play safe, if they don't create the expectation then they don't need excuses later.
I prefer how they played it out on last year's Gamescon, they hyped it down, people around here were already "LOL they have nothing to show, game is RIP" and so it happened.
Put yourself in Chris's shoes, would it be better to release the game now and see sales go down the toilet or.... keep mismanaging things and dragging it out so people keep donating?
You have to ask yourself what kind of revenue stream will the game produce when people like MaxBacon and Erillion have told us over and over again that you can buy any ship in the game with ingame money. If that it true, ship sales will plummet like the titanic after the game launches. They will still sell ships but not near as many as they are now.
Dont forget, there is no subscription model to this game and a large portion of people interested in it have already purchased it.
Bottom line is, unless Chris adds a subscription to the game or makes it so hard to earn enough money for the better ships that people would rather pay real money, launching this game means a reduction in monthly revenue for CIG. Dont forget that launching the game also comes with huge increases in cost for support staff and server/bandwidth hosting. The current amount of people playing the game on the PU is way less than 10% of the people who have purchased it.
Also, dont forget that many of the systems in his "vision" have already been realized by other games. Flying around, shooting at pirates, landing on planets, building bases on planets, trading between stations and zero-G FPS stuff is already out in other games. His game is going to have to do these things at a much higher definition than other games and if that happens, many people will not have the PC to handle it.
We will most likely see some demo footage of SQ42 this year and maybe even get a few playable missions but dont count on it being "commercially released" in 2017. If you are waiting for SC, you will be waiting even longer.
"Sean (Murray) saying MP will be in the game is not remotely close to evidence that at the point of purchase people thought there was MP in the game." - SEANMCAD
You have to ask yourself what kind of revenue stream will the game produce when people like MaxBacon and Erillion have told us over and over again that you can buy any ship in the game with ingame money. If that it true, ship sales will plummet like the titanic
Your bias is what will plummet like the titanic. SC revenue stream will let you buy in-game money with real cash, currency micro-transaction.
So simple match, right now you can only buy ships with real cash, game releases with ability to buy ANYTHING that in-game currency can buy within the game, also by putting money on the game.
Is with that their revenue will plummet like the titanic? hehe, man SC's ship sales revenue is nothing compared to what proper released MMO's around are making.
You have to ask yourself what kind of revenue stream will the game produce when people like MaxBacon and Erillion have told us over and over again that you can buy any ship in the game with ingame money. If that it true, ship sales will plummet like the titanic
Your bias is what will plummet like the titanic. SC revenue stream will let you buy in-game money with real cash, currency micro-transaction.
So simple match, right now you can only buy ships with real cash, game releases with ability to buy currency that can buy ANYTHING that in-game currency can buy within the game, also by putting money on the game.
Is with that their revenue will plummet like the titanic? hehe
How did that work out for Archeage when you could buy anything from the cash shop? hehe
"Sean (Murray) saying MP will be in the game is not remotely close to evidence that at the point of purchase people thought there was MP in the game." - SEANMCAD
How did that work out for Archeage when you could buy anything from the cash shop? hehe
It worked for World of Tanks, that makes in 3 months what Star Citizen funded in 4 years.
It worked for on the more similar business model to what's proposed for SC, Guild Wars 2 with the ability to buy the currency that can be used to buy anything in-game money can buy.
How did that work out for Archeage when you could buy anything from the cash shop? hehe
It worked for World of Tanks, that makes in 3 months what Star Citizen funded in 4 years.
It worked for on the more similar business model to what's proposed for SC, Guild Wars 2.
I guess we will have to wait and see...
"Sean (Murray) saying MP will be in the game is not remotely close to evidence that at the point of purchase people thought there was MP in the game." - SEANMCAD
Yes we will! There's no marketing perspective I see ship sales as more successful than a more open (aka limits likely to be eased) currency micro-transaction.
On ships you only have the motivation to spend money if you want X shiny ship
The peeps that already have MANY of them wouldn't really be interested, what would require effort dev-wise to keep releasing ships constantly.
With the currency you buy anything, you are tight on UEC in-game and don't want to grind for it... You can put real money buy it. You have X piece of gear you want to buy, you can put real money to buy it. That, the maintenance costs and so forth. And the developers don't have to be working on new ships constantly to get that income!
I think you greatly underestimate the success of something that provides the alternative to grind. On Guild Wars 2 I remember well several people who just instead of grinding (usually around 1K hours!), just put 300$ on the game and got themselves a legendary weapon.
You have to ask yourself what kind of revenue stream will the game produce when people like MaxBacon and Erillion have told us over and over again that you can buy any ship in the game with ingame money. If that it true, ship sales will plummet like the titanic
Your bias is what will plummet like the titanic. SC revenue stream will let you buy in-game money with real cash, currency micro-transaction.
So simple match, right now you can only buy ships with real cash, game releases with ability to buy ANYTHING that in-game currency can buy within the game, also by putting money on the game.
Is with that their revenue will plummet like the titanic? hehe, man SC's ship sales revenue is nothing compared to what proper released MMO's around are making.
Your bias is leading to some wild imagination. Erillion is adamant that you will only be able to buy skins and your wallet is capped at a daily limit so how many skins are there going to be to support this level of funding?
Your bias is leading to some wild imagination. Erillion is adamant that you will only be able to buy skins and your wallet is capped at a daily limit so how many skins are there going to be to support this level of funding?
Your wild imagination is leading to some bias. I think you merged the currency microtransaction and skins on the same box, because they are 2 separate things, the currency is just globally the UEC that is the PU's currency.
As for the currency limitation, the limits will be eased for sure, the currency worth and pricing is also not final, as recently said due the ship UEC pricing being already ongoing. And If I recall correctly there have already been mentions of increasing the caps to 200$ in wallet at one time.
I'd say they are already preparing to implement the currency microtransaction on the game on future updates.
Your bias is leading to some wild imagination. Erillion is adamant that you will only be able to buy skins and your wallet is capped at a daily limit so how many skins are there going to be to support this level of funding?
Your wild imagination is leading to some bias. I think you merged the currency microtransaction and skins on the same box, because they are 2 separate things, the currency is just globally the UEC that is the PU's currency.
As for the currency limitation, the limits will be eased for sure, the currency worth and pricing is also not final, as recently said due the ship UEC pricing being already ongoing. And If I recall correctly there have already been mentions of increasing the caps to 200$ in wallet at one time.
I'd say they are already preparing to implement the currency microtransaction on the game on future updates.
So what exactly are you supposed to be able to buy with UEC that you got with real life cash?
Yes we will! There's no marketing perspective I see ship sales as more successful than a more open (aka limits likely to be eased) currency micro-transaction.
On ships you only have the motivation to spend money if you want X shiny ship
The peeps that already have MANY of them wouldn't really be interested, what would require effort dev-wise to keep releasing ships constantly.
With the currency you buy anything, you are tight on UEC in-game and don't want to grind for it... You can put real money buy it. You have X piece of gear you want to buy, you can put real money to buy it. That, the maintenance costs and so forth. And the developers don't have to be working on new ships constantly to get that income!
I think you greatly underestimate the success of something that provides the alternative to grind. On Guild Wars 2 I remember well several people who just instead of grinding (usually around 1K hours!), just put 300$ on the game and got themselves a legendary weapon.
Legendary weapons in GW2 are Cosmetic not Power, Purple Weapons (that are not hard to get) have the same Stats! On Top of That all Players in PvP in GW2 are Equal you cannot buy Power for PvP at all.
Never ever ever sell Power in a Game - SC is not anymore balanceable there is no fake 1/9 NPC Economy that will counter Player with their $1000+ fleet. The Argument that all ships are viable is outdated - try the missions now with an Aurora.
oh and BTT SQ42 was announced to have a good progression in 2017 and they are looking to get PA0.3.0 to be released this year (as of Latest Newsletter)
When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it. The cake is a lie.
So what exactly are you supposed to be able to buy with UEC that you got with real life cash?
Well, everything. If all moves to buying via UEC in-game, then you buy or earn UEC to do so. Note UEC is set as the only currency of the PU, ends up similar as world of tanks on that the aspect of buying currency.
Legendary weapons in GW2 are Cosmetic not Power, Purple Weapons (that are not hard to get) have the same Stats! On Top of That all Players in PvP in GW2 are Equal you cannot buy Power for PvP at all.
Never ever ever sell Power in a Game - SC is not anymore balanceable there is no fake 1/9 NPC Economy that will counter Player with their $1000+ fleet. The Argument that all ships are viable is outdated - try the missions now with an Aurora.
oh and BTT SQ42 was announced to have a good progression in 2017 and they are looking to get PA0.3.0 to be released this year (as of Latest Newsletter)
Yes the legendaries are mostly cosmetic, the point was the micro-transaction was and is there if you want to throw 300$ at it and get one, you save many but MANY hours of grind otherwise to get it by playing the game.
SC doesn't have a manipulative economy or it is player-driven as you would expect on a game like EvE, so get all your massive fleet of ships is not what will let you control the economy. The only real issue to consider is the PvP Balance, what could directly impact other players, though by paying or not, a player with better gear will always be a player with better gear. But those will be balance issues do deal with.
The currency micro-transaction does work, when I weight that vs continuing the ship sales as they stand, only from incompetence I could see a decision to go with the current model that would take them a constant effort to generate revenue.
So what exactly are you supposed to be able to buy with UEC that you got with real life cash?
Well, everything. If all moves to buying via UEC in-game, then you buy or earn UEC to do so. Note UEC is set as the only currency of the PU, ends up similar as world of tanks on that the aspect of buying currency.
So they are planning on going pay to win? Awesome!
Comments
Im not a troll but simply repeating what Chris Roberts said. I'm also not going to sit through 20 minutes of video so if you could point me to a specific time stamp it would be appreciated.
If you had said "The game is turning into a hype train to produce money" I would not object. That is a matter of opinion. What you wrote is just wrong. Po-ta-toh po-tah-toh maybe but if you are trying to make a point you should try to be correct. That separates the Trolls from the truth talkers.
Bah I'm just bored waiting to go to bed before my shift starts tonight. Fuck it, as you were!
Bartoni's Law definition: As an Internet discussion grows volatile, the probability of a comparison involving Donald Trump approaches 1.
It's not anything for any other world: if your demo needs X or Y bug-fix, or X character, A or B environments, or X set of animations all you would need to do is prioritize those things required for the demo on pipeline of the game. And it goes both ways, game pipeline works on the game but focused o the specifics of what the demo needs.
idk exact time stamp but the quote is of Erin Roberts on it:
"The good thing about it is actually a huge amount of of work went into Squadron 42. We really moved it forward, we actually answered a lot of issues and solved a lot of technological issues.."
Well, Erin seems to be stating they did exactly what I mentioned in the first paragraph.
It still sounds like a load of crap to me though since they really moved it forward according to Erin but there hasn't been much announced since then.
And if everything was answered in road to citizencon then why the hell would Chris make a statement like the one I posted almost 2 months later that sheds doubt on everything?
ofc that'd be me, and i'm running on the assumption the demo wouldn't be looking that good, it's likely for me they are doing just that and did raise the bar.
From what I've gathered reading this thread, they began working on a demo and stopped short of completing it. If every bit of the demo's assets, environments, level designs, NPC enemies, etc. is going to be used in the final product- then they wasted no time.
But that didn't seem to be the vibe I was getting from the conversation here. It seemed to indicate that the demo wasn't simply a small piece of the final campaign/level designs that would be in SQ42 itself, but were rather like the PG Planets tech demo you mention. If the planned SQ42 demo was simply an early, partial iteration of the final product singleplayer campaign, I agree the time spent didn't include any waste.
If the demo was not simply a small slice of what will become the end product, they certainly wasted time once they decided not to finish it, because there will be partially finished assets from the demo that did nothing to push the final product forward to completion.
And I'm not sure how to respond regarding your first two questions; yes, they were building a demo. Many companies build demos during the development of the final game. The two have never been exclusive. Most companies just actually finish them before they tell all their fans they're getting one.
The tech demo of PG that was a different story, the assets created were for the demo and the whole sand wurm and sand nomads including the designed planet were not part of the game and surrounded the demo that was showing off the new pieces of tech the game is getting.
Still wish they would have just gone with a basic "better" freelancer game and ditched the 1st person.
Wa min God! Se æx on min heafod is!
I prefer how they played it out on last year's Gamescon, they hyped it down, people around here were already "LOL they have nothing to show, game is RIP" and so it happened.
You have to ask yourself what kind of revenue stream will the game produce when people like MaxBacon and Erillion have told us over and over again that you can buy any ship in the game with ingame money. If that it true, ship sales will plummet like the titanic after the game launches. They will still sell ships but not near as many as they are now.
Dont forget, there is no subscription model to this game and a large portion of people interested in it have already purchased it.
Bottom line is, unless Chris adds a subscription to the game or makes it so hard to earn enough money for the better ships that people would rather pay real money, launching this game means a reduction in monthly revenue for CIG. Dont forget that launching the game also comes with huge increases in cost for support staff and server/bandwidth hosting. The current amount of people playing the game on the PU is way less than 10% of the people who have purchased it.
Also, dont forget that many of the systems in his "vision" have already been realized by other games. Flying around, shooting at pirates, landing on planets, building bases on planets, trading between stations and zero-G FPS stuff is already out in other games. His game is going to have to do these things at a much higher definition than other games and if that happens, many people will not have the PC to handle it.
We will most likely see some demo footage of SQ42 this year and maybe even get a few playable missions but dont count on it being "commercially released" in 2017. If you are waiting for SC, you will be waiting even longer.
So simple match, right now you can only buy ships with real cash, game releases with ability to buy ANYTHING that in-game currency can buy within the game, also by putting money on the game.
Is with that their revenue will plummet like the titanic? hehe, man SC's ship sales revenue is nothing compared to what proper released MMO's around are making.
It worked for on the more similar business model to what's proposed for SC, Guild Wars 2 with the ability to buy the currency that can be used to buy anything in-game money can buy.
- The peeps that already have MANY of them wouldn't really be interested, what would require effort dev-wise to keep releasing ships constantly.
With the currency you buy anything, you are tight on UEC in-game and don't want to grind for it... You can put real money buy it. You have X piece of gear you want to buy, you can put real money to buy it. That, the maintenance costs and so forth. And the developers don't have to be working on new ships constantly to get that income!I think you greatly underestimate the success of something that provides the alternative to grind. On Guild Wars 2 I remember well several people who just instead of grinding (usually around 1K hours!), just put 300$ on the game and got themselves a legendary weapon.
As for the currency limitation, the limits will be eased for sure, the currency worth and pricing is also not final, as recently said due the ship UEC pricing being already ongoing. And If I recall correctly there have already been mentions of increasing the caps to 200$ in wallet at one time.
I'd say they are already preparing to implement the currency microtransaction on the game on future updates.
On Top of That all Players in PvP in GW2 are Equal you cannot buy Power for PvP at all.
Never ever ever sell Power in a Game - SC is not anymore balanceable there is no fake 1/9 NPC Economy that will counter Player with their $1000+ fleet.
The Argument that all ships are viable is outdated - try the missions now with an Aurora.
oh and BTT SQ42 was announced to have a good progression in 2017 and they are looking to get PA0.3.0 to be released this year (as of Latest Newsletter)
When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it.
The cake is a lie.
SC doesn't have a manipulative economy or it is player-driven as you would expect on a game like EvE, so get all your massive fleet of ships is not what will let you control the economy. The only real issue to consider is the PvP Balance, what could directly impact other players, though by paying or not, a player with better gear will always be a player with better gear. But those will be balance issues do deal with.
The currency micro-transaction does work, when I weight that vs continuing the ship sales as they stand, only from incompetence I could see a decision to go with the current model that would take them a constant effort to generate revenue.