Online gaming is a competitive endeavour, unlike say stamp collecting so there are differences when it comes to people spending money.
...and like in any sports, competitive level is expensive. Same thing - people spending money on stuff they enjoy.
Competitiveness is as non-factor, in fact it contributes to spending incentives.
I don't recall spending money when I played Dungeons and Dragons. The MMORPG genre has it's variations, but I don't play them for the esport nonsense. If I want competition, I'll play an FPS but if I want to go on a nice long adventure, I don't believe the entertainment value should depend on the size of my wallet.
Just by what you described, proves the genre went from entertainment to business. It's no wonder no one can enjoy an MMO anymore for more than 6 months tops.
Then there was the Dragon Magazine subscription, the minatures, dice, and hex and graph paper.
That was just AD&D. Add on other TSR titles (which were cheaper by far) Top Secret, Gamma World, Boot Hill, etc. and it go more expensive. Add in Marc Miller and GDW's MegaTraveller (just as expensive as AD&D) and ICE/RoleMaster and gaming has always been an expensive hobby.
I'm not even going to touch the ludicrous NIMBY argument about competition because MMORPGs have been competitive since their inception as well.
Of course if you read all that through these:
AD&D was free like the cooperative mmorpg love.
This is true from a certain perspective. I used to walk miles to get to the local hobby store (uphill both ways) to check to see if new modules came in. I just recently found a whole box of old D&D stuff... maybe it's worth something to a collector!
But that's not really quite the same. A purchase of a rulebook, or a module or whatever was really a purchase for the whole group. If I bought
the whole group would go through it. I wasn't buying an advantage that the rest of the group didn't have. Maybe I have lost the most recent train of conversation but the thread is about P2W in CoE, and while I agree there were micro-transaction when I played D&D I don't think that they were relevant to the conversation about P2W...
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
A MMO is the equivalent of a match in RL sports. But unlike RL sports, P2W MMO's allow the players to spend vast amounts of money to directly influence the outcome of the match.
I completely disagree that a MMO is like a sporting match... Your statement makes these games sound like an e-sport. That isn't the case at all, as there is nothing in Open World PVP that promotes a fair playing field, OWPVP is the home of gank and run and the Zerg. It's almost always a mismatched fight. BE it in lvls or player numbers/tactics.
How can such an environment be compared to a sports match, where you yourself said all sports consist of rules to support an environment of fair play? If anything is a strawman it's that this is ever going to be a competitive environment. It's more akin to a war, use whatever method wins....
My argument was directed at those who were trying to justify P2W in MMO's by claiming that RL sports were already P2W. I was not trying to imply that MMO's were an e-sport.
When 2 teams take to the field in a professional sporting match, neither side is allowed an equipment advantage, or extra players or smaller goals. One team does not have 3 players that are barefoot, because they can't afford boots...
You don't win marathons because you spent $20M on special shoes, and paying for a 5km headstart is not a thing.
Real life sports are pay to win. How do they get players? More successful rich franchises have the best equipment, the best player picks, personal sports medicine, dieticians, trainers, facilities. Those teams that can't afford that don't have the same edge.
This is true in every single professionally competitive sport and almost every "amateur" national or international competitive sport. Where there's money, there are people buying advantage.
That same concept extends from professional sports to amateur sports to the hobbyist. Fishing, hunting, off-roading, modeling, war-gaming, TCGs, miniatures/dioramas, and so many others.
Money matters at the competitive levels. Paying to win hasn't ever really meant buying the win. It's a metaphor for paying for a measurable advantage over others.
Right. And basketball, football and hockey all have salary caps and revenue sharing precisely because they recognize that fans want to watch a game that has a more even playing field and that the integrity of competition is a worthwhile goal. Baseball is the one exception to this in NA.
Yes, the richer teams can also add intangibles that do not fall under "salary" such as the professionals that you mention simply because they want to try to get any edge they can get within the rules.
But the leagues do try to prevent the most glaring P2W elements from influencing outcomes because they understand that its something detrimental to the product.
So getting back to gaming, any honest developer just like a sports league, should do whatever they can to remove P2W elements despite the obvious fact that the players will try to do whatever they can to get an advantage. But that's not what's happening here and in many other games. They actually encourage P2W by their design and their fundraising methods.
Some even try to rationalize it on the basis of out of game RMT being a reality. To me that's like saying, well screw the salary cap because the rich teams are just going to buy better equipment and hire dieticians.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Im glad someone like Slapshot has the patience to keep tearing this game a new asshole. Ive already wrote the whole thing off as just one gigantic asshole, cbf'ed.
Oh, yeah, for sure. We should all be thankful that somebody invests so much time and energy towards tearing down a project because they don't like it ... what an admirable goal!
Presenting the truth about a game is admireable. Flat out lying and defending the game because you are a fanatic is what we should loath.
And you yourself have done more than just 1 questionable thing when it comes to this project. You lost your objectivity.
What truth? there is no game to see in practice, therefor we do not know how all of this will play out. Don't mistake confirmation bias for truth.
The truth of him quoting people but no matter if he quotes top donators or even Caspian himself he always get's the "you are spreading misinformation" answer by die hard fans.
"This is what Caspian himself said" -Doesn't matter, you have no idea!
I was referring to the main issue here P2W... It doesn't matter who he quoted the point he's trying to sell is his P2W assertion vs the devs not P2W assertion. FOr all we know all these high rollers could be steamrolled the day the game goes live. Especially if folks know who they are in game.
There is no truth there yet. Oh and thanks for the WTf right back at ya:)
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
If its P2W the backers are happy, if its not P2W then everyone else is happy....Who do you please?
Only a small percentage are large backers. So the question is do you please a few players or the entirety of your potential playerbase? One is not sustainable...
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Actually just to clarify major league baseball does have a salary cap, it's just not a hard cap. They have the competitive balance threshold set at a certain amount and for every million or so you spend over that figure the club must pay a luxury tax to the league.
But that's really besides the point. The comparison of professional sports teams to P2W in an online game doesn't really hold up. Yes there are rich teams and there are poor teams, but all the teams have a vested interest in the league, they are symbiotic far more than they are competitive. Revenue sharing administered by the league is a huge portion of a teams overall income. As a collective they share things like merchandising and cable TV revenue. So it's not 'play to crush' the other team as much as it is 'play 2 bank'. That sort of reciprocal disposition torwards your rival is never going to be preset in an MMO, it's just never ever ever going to be part of the culture.
That's where the inherent naivety in this play to build bullshit the developers are trying to sell seasoned MMO players just isn't going to resonate. They actually want players to believe that all the money being spent by individual players is going to be spent in the spirit of some mutual roleplay soceity building excersize where we all are better for it? The games supporters love to chime in with shit like 'yeah well but guyz this is just for the start so we can build up our empire, THEN you can join in and you will see that the reason some dude spent $20,000 on a video game is so -you- can have fun'. Just lol. No amount of talking is going to mend the cognitive dissonance. That shit doesn't even work on paper, it's amazing this game's supporters have managed to convince themselves that it has a snowballs chance in hell of working in practice.
Actually just to clarify major league baseball does have a salary cap, it's just not a hard cap. They have the competitive balance threshold set at a certain amount and for every million or so you spend over that figure the club must pay a luxury tax to the league.
But that's really besides the point. The comparison of professional sports teams to P2W in an online game doesn't really hold up. Yes there are rich teams and there are poor teams, but all the teams have a vested interest in the league, they are symbiotic far more than they are competitive. Revenue sharing administered by the league is a huge portion of a teams overall income. As a collective they share things like merchandising and cable TV revenue. So it's not 'play to crush' the other team as much as it is 'play 2 bank'. That sort of reciprocal disposition torwards your rival is never going to be preset in an MMO, it's just never ever ever going to be part of the culture.
That's where the inherent naivety in this play to build bullshit the developers are trying to sell seasoned MMO players just isn't going to resonate. They actually want players to believe that all the money being spent by individual players is going to be spent in the spirit of some mutual roleplay soceity building excersize where we all are better for it? The games supporters love to chime in with shit like 'yeah well but guyz this is just for the start so we can build up our empire, THEN you can join in and you will see that the reason some dude spent $20,000 on a video game is so -you- can have fun'. Just lol. No amount of talking is going to mend the cognitive dissonance. That shit doesn't even work on paper, it's amazing this game's supporters have managed to convince themselves that it has a snowballs chance in hell of working in practice.
Working in practice? No, being a clusterFK either way (i don't even mean that in a bad way)? yes. This game like any other PVP game is going to be big fish eats little fish, until little fish learns you need many many little fish. There's going to be so much chaos in such a game who's really going to stop and think "that guy has"....
What does it really matter who has what in that environment in the end? That's essentially been my question all along... If things are true and there's no cash shop going forward, all it takes is something like goons to take down a few whales. Those are the types that would be on top either way. So if you don't like that idea, you might as well not play any game like this.
This is assuming the game gets made and attracts players in the first place. Which with so much negativity even within it's own CF community. How likely is that?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
If its P2W the backers are happy, if its not P2W then everyone else is happy....Who do you please?
Only a small percentage are large backers. So the question is do you please a few players or the entirety of your potential playerbase? One is not sustainable...
I don't mind a game being P2W, or revolve around cash-shop and whales. Like I don't get mad at Clash of Clans or Entropia Universe. It is what it is. Problem starts when a game is P2W but tries to mask it. Although the concept of P2W is meaningless in an MMO for example. What I mean is, the more you spend, the better/bigger/prettier you get in the game. And there's no cap for that.
Both practices can be sustainable, depends on how you design it. One for all, all for one!
Constantine, The Console Poster
"One of the most difficult tasks men can perform, however much others may despise it, is the invention of good games and it cannot be done by men out of touch with their instinctive selves." - Carl Jung
Actually just to clarify major league baseball does have a salary cap, it's just not a hard cap. They have the competitive balance threshold set at a certain amount and for every million or so you spend over that figure the club must pay a luxury tax to the league.
But that's really besides the point. The comparison of professional sports teams to P2W in an online game doesn't really hold up. Yes there are rich teams and there are poor teams, but all the teams have a vested interest in the league, they are symbiotic far more than they are competitive. Revenue sharing administered by the league is a huge portion of a teams overall income. As a collective they share things like merchandising and cable TV revenue. So it's not 'play to crush' the other team as much as it is 'play 2 bank'. That sort of reciprocal disposition torwards your rival is never going to be preset in an MMO, it's just never ever ever going to be part of the culture.
That's where the inherent naivety in this play to build bullshit the developers are trying to sell seasoned MMO players just isn't going to resonate. They actually want players to believe that all the money being spent by individual players is going to be spent in the spirit of some mutual roleplay soceity building excersize where we all are better for it? The games supporters love to chime in with shit like 'yeah well but guyz this is just for the start so we can build up our empire, THEN you can join in and you will see that the reason some dude spent $20,000 on a video game is so -you- can have fun'. Just lol. No amount of talking is going to mend the cognitive dissonance. That shit doesn't even work on paper, it's amazing this game's supporters have managed to convince themselves that it has a snowballs chance in hell of working in practice.
Working in practice? No, being a clusterFK either way (i don't even mean that in a bad way)? yes. This game like any other PVP game is going to be big fish eats little fish, until little fish learns you need many many little fish. There's going to be so much chaos in such a game who's really going to stop and think "that guy has"....
What does it really matter who has what in that environment in the end? That's essentially been my question all along... If things are true and there's no cash shop going forward, all it takes is something like goons to take down a few whales. Those are the types that would be on top either way. So if you don't like that idea, you might as well not play any game like this.
This is assuming the game gets made and attracts players in the first place. Which with so much negativity even within it's own CF community. How likely is that?
Assuming the game does get made, I'll probably play it. But I've never considered myself an 'average' MMO player either. I don't rush to level cap, I couldn't care less what armor the guy next to me has, when I PVP I try to do so by my own set of self imposed morality, stuff like that. That's what makes the game fun for me. The fact that it is P2W isn't going to turn me off directly, I don't play MMO's to be the top dog, so it being unattainable unless I spend vast somes of money is a nonissue. But that is not the average player, and more importantly, the reality is not included in the product overview that they're trying to sell the player on. You might think it won't matter who has what, but the only thing I can assure you is that to the vast majority of players it will, because that is just part of the behavioural pattern that we can observe in players. What they're offering is not really anything that revolutionary, they're relying on their players to buy in on their mentality of how the game should be played for it to 'work' and that isn't going to happen.
I don't think people would bother bashing the game if Caspian and the games supporters just owned up to the reality of what it is rather than practicing self deception. So conceding that it will be a P2W anarchists zergfest where the humble town blacksmith gets pooped on all day is not really altering my point about how ridiculous this pay to build rhetoric is.
There is no truth there yet. Oh and thanks for the WTf right back at ya:)
I checked 3 times now to see if I misclicked since I was lagging yesterday but no.. I never gave you a "wtf"
See this is kind of what I am talking about. You guys are so emotionally involved that you don't check the facts but just toss around random accusations.
If its P2W the backers are happy, if its not P2W then everyone else is happy....Who do you please?
You please the backers since they make up 95-99% of your revenue, while you try to lie to the non-backers and trick them into sticking around for as long as possible, so that they may feed your backers' egos.
There is no truth there yet. Oh and thanks for the WTf right back at ya:)
I checked 3 times now to see if I misclicked since I was lagging yesterday but no.. I never gave you a "wtf"
See this is kind of what I am talking about. You guys are so emotionally involved that you don't check the facts but just toss around random accusations.
Sorry was talking to Yasha there, should have said so ( I just hadn't gotten one since the trade off in the WTF thread so I commented on it with a smile, and come on, we're arguing about imaginary scenarios, we should all be wtf'd every post..).
BTW- What do you mean emotionally involved? I have no desire to play this game as advertised. I don't like any game that relies on arbitrary penalty to thwart PVP and promote RP. It never works. Plus all the loss is of no appeal to me either, nor paying for more lives)...
I just don't think P2W is going to matter here. That's the only reason I chimed in.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
If its P2W the backers are happy, if its not P2W then everyone else is happy....Who do you please?
Only a small percentage are large backers. So the question is do you please a few players or the entirety of your potential playerbase? One is not sustainable...
I don't mind a game being P2W, or revolve around cash-shop and whales. Like I don't get mad at Clash of Clans or Entropia Universe. It is what it is. Problem starts when a game is P2W but tries to mask it. Although the concept of P2W is meaningless in an MMO for example. What I mean is, the more you spend, the better/bigger/prettier you get in the game. And there's no cap for that.
Both practices can be sustainable, depends on how you design it. One for all, all for one!
Don't they say there won't be a cash shop though? Then again they could hide behind illegal RMT to get by. IF we wanna put our tinfoil hats on. WHo knows though ...
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Iselin said: But the leagues do try to prevent the most glaring P2W elements from influencing outcomes because they understand that its something detrimental to the product.
No, they dont.
Leagues only apply structure among those who already spent money to "influence the outcome".
If your claim was true, there would only be 1 league and spending would be limited.
That isn't the case though.
A sport equivalent of an MMO where your spending is capped at subscription fee does not exists.
1) MMOs are not sports. 2) Not all competitive endeavors are fair.
Iselin said: But the leagues do try to prevent the most glaring P2W elements from influencing outcomes because they understand that its something detrimental to the product.
A sport equivalent of an MMO where your spending is capped at subscription fee does not exists.
The actual advantage gained by large market teams doesn't have anything to do with paying for training and equipment or the other stuff you're on about. You really think having a dietitian or a state of the art training facility is going to be a huge obstacle for a sports franchise owner, who by virtue of being a sports franchise owner, is a certified billionaire? lol Cool story bro.
Iselin said: But the leagues do try to prevent the most glaring P2W elements from influencing outcomes because they understand that its something detrimental to the product.
No, they dont.
Leagues only apply structure among those who already spent money to "influence the outcome".
If your claim was true, there would only be 1 league and spending would be limited.
That isn't the case though.
A sport equivalent of an MMO where your spending is capped at subscription fee does not exists.
1) MMOs are not sports. 2) Not all competitive endeavors are fair.
What does having multiple leagues have to do with how the leagues that do have salary caps work?
Well, no shit Sherlock, some leagues do not have salary caps and in those yes, you can definitely buy your way to the top.
Ever hear of the NY Yankees? Your kind of team in your kind of league no doubt.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
What does having multiple leagues have to do with how the leagues that do have salary caps work?
You tell me, I haven't made any such implication...
What I said, is that leagues do not prevent money spendings, they only set 'tiers' regarding how much the team is spending - they put "equally" spending teams together.
Running a sports team is a money thing, better teams cost more money.
Money is big factor in sports, there is no point denying that.
What does having multiple leagues have to do with how the leagues that do have salary caps work?
You tell me, I haven't made any such implication...
What I said, is that leagues do not prevent money spendings, they only set 'tiers' regarding how much the team is spending - they put "equally" spending teams together.
Running a sports team is a money thing, better teams cost more money.
Money is big factor in sports.
Do you know how the salary caps work in the NHL, NBA and NFL?
In the NHL for example each team has the same maximum total player salaries they can spend per year ($73 million currently.) There are harsh penalties for non compliance to the point that no team ever does it even though some, like the NY based teams for example, could easily exceed the caps just like they used to outspend everyone in the pre-cap era.
The competitive benefit is that Phoenix and Columbus can compete against the NY and LA teams on an even footing.
If you think of "league" as being the equivalent of an MMO and "team" being the equivalent of a player in said MMO it's pretty easy to see the parallel.
The whole point is that some professional competitive leagues do indeed try to even the playing field by clamping the ability of some competitors to spend well beyond the cap.
Yes money is a big factor in sports and that is precisely why some of the biggest professional leagues have opted for a salary cap model.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
If you think of "league" as being the equivalent of an MMO and "team" being the equivalent of a player in said MMO it's pretty easy to see the parallel.
False parallel...
MMO would be a parallel to particular sport - ie. hockey. "League" would be a parallel to ranking, ladder system or w/e system of structured PVP within MMO. "Team" would be a parallel to...team, guild or w/e within MMO.
This goes back to my argument about 1 league - it does not exist.
If you think of "league" as being the equivalent of an MMO and "team" being the equivalent of a player in said MMO it's pretty easy to see the parallel.
False parallel...
MMO would be a parallel to particular sport - ie. hockey. "League" would be a parallel to ranking, ladder system or w/e system of structured PVP within MMO. "Team" would be a parallel to...team, guild or w/e within MMO.
This goes back to my argument about 1 league - it does not exist.
Actually the parallel was pretty easy to see in regard to his point about salary caps and a spending cap. It just obviously flew over your head judging by your response.
"You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Im glad someone like Slapshot has the patience to keep tearing this game a new asshole. Ive already wrote the whole thing off as just one gigantic asshole, cbf'ed.
Oh, yeah, for sure. We should all be thankful that somebody invests so much time and energy towards tearing down a project because they don't like it ... what an admirable goal!
This is coming from the person who already said they didn't know this information and that it caused you to re-evaluate your position on the game, that's more irony than the upgraded forums are designed to handle. Yes, you, of all people, should be thankful that someone (anyone) is investing their time and energy into researching the game for you, since you were obviously supporting it without doing so.
I still support the game just not this particular design design, although now that I've read Caspian's explanation I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt to see how it plays out. And no, I'm not thankful for people who consistently push the narrative of "See, I told you this game was trash!". Sharing information is helpful and appreciated; the bullshit narrative that does no good for anyone is not.
So yesterday or whenever you were all doom and gloom 'this decision will destroy the game' but now because Caspian said something you've completely flipped on that perspective and you're all 'ho hum we'll see how it goes'. And even though this thread gave you really good information that you deemed important, according to your prior statements, now it's just a complete waste of time because of the messenger. lol This is what we call in politics a partisan bias, you're not concerned with actual facts as much as you are with who said what. And you have an emotional allegience with Caspian, which seems to override your own judgements. I'm really shocked to hear that.
You're clearly not even attempting to conceal your narrative, because the chronology of your posts on this thread flies in the face of all reason. I fail to see how one bias is more beneficial than another. But maybe you could tell us, being from the school of Caspian, he thinks it's wrong to openly dislike projects because it might hit developers (him) in the wallet. On second thought, I take that back, it is incredibly beneficial to people to continue to hate on this game, they need to know what kind of scumbags they're dealing with.
I have no narrative, but whatever. Keep the hate and rampant paranoia flowing if it makes you feel better to do so.
What does that even mean? lol I'm not hating on these guys or being paranoid about them, I'm just paraphrasing stuff he has already said. I would say the same about anyone who says criticism is bad because it might hurt them financially. How is pointing out that is a scumbag statement 'hateful or paranoid'? I take it you think it's perfectly fine to want to silence detractors if it helps make money non?
And of course you have a narrative, you've regressed back to it now and that's fine. It's what you do. It's not really a big deal.
Comments
But that's not really quite the same. A purchase of a rulebook, or a module or whatever was really a purchase for the whole group. If I bought
the whole group would go through it. I wasn't buying an advantage that the rest of the group didn't have. Maybe I have lost the most recent train of conversation but the thread is about P2W in CoE, and while I agree there were micro-transaction when I played D&D I don't think that they were relevant to the conversation about P2W...
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Yes, the richer teams can also add intangibles that do not fall under "salary" such as the professionals that you mention simply because they want to try to get any edge they can get within the rules.
But the leagues do try to prevent the most glaring P2W elements from influencing outcomes because they understand that its something detrimental to the product.
So getting back to gaming, any honest developer just like a sports league, should do whatever they can to remove P2W elements despite the obvious fact that the players will try to do whatever they can to get an advantage. But that's not what's happening here and in many other games. They actually encourage P2W by their design and their fundraising methods.
Some even try to rationalize it on the basis of out of game RMT being a reality. To me that's like saying, well screw the salary cap because the rich teams are just going to buy better equipment and hire dieticians.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
There is no truth there yet. Oh and thanks for the WTf right back at ya:)
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
But that's really besides the point. The comparison of professional sports teams to P2W in an online game doesn't really hold up. Yes there are rich teams and there are poor teams, but all the teams have a vested interest in the league, they are symbiotic far more than they are competitive. Revenue sharing administered by the league is a huge portion of a teams overall income. As a collective they share things like merchandising and cable TV revenue. So it's not 'play to crush' the other team as much as it is 'play 2 bank'. That sort of reciprocal disposition torwards your rival is never going to be preset in an MMO, it's just never ever ever going to be part of the culture.
That's where the inherent naivety in this play to build bullshit the developers are trying to sell seasoned MMO players just isn't going to resonate. They actually want players to believe that all the money being spent by individual players is going to be spent in the spirit of some mutual roleplay soceity building excersize where we all are better for it? The games supporters love to chime in with shit like 'yeah well but guyz this is just for the start so we can build up our empire, THEN you can join in and you will see that the reason some dude spent $20,000 on a video game is so -you- can have fun'. Just lol. No amount of talking is going to mend the cognitive dissonance. That shit doesn't even work on paper, it's amazing this game's supporters have managed to convince themselves that it has a snowballs chance in hell of working in practice.
What does it really matter who has what in that environment in the end? That's essentially been my question all along... If things are true and there's no cash shop going forward, all it takes is something like goons to take down a few whales. Those are the types that would be on top either way. So if you don't like that idea, you might as well not play any game like this.
This is assuming the game gets made and attracts players in the first place. Which with so much negativity even within it's own CF community. How likely is that?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Both practices can be sustainable, depends on how you design it. One for all, all for one!
I don't think people would bother bashing the game if Caspian and the games supporters just owned up to the reality of what it is rather than practicing self deception. So conceding that it will be a P2W anarchists zergfest where the humble town blacksmith gets pooped on all day is not really altering my point about how ridiculous this pay to build rhetoric is.
I never gave you a "wtf"
See this is kind of what I am talking about.
You guys are so emotionally involved that you don't check the facts but just toss around random accusations.
....I wish I could say I was joking.
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1016417/-100-000-Whales-An
BTW- What do you mean emotionally involved? I have no desire to play this game as advertised. I don't like any game that relies on arbitrary penalty to thwart PVP and promote RP. It never works. Plus all the loss is of no appeal to me either, nor paying for more lives)...
I just don't think P2W is going to matter here. That's the only reason I chimed in.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Leagues only apply structure among those who already spent money to "influence the outcome".
If your claim was true, there would only be 1 league and spending would be limited.
That isn't the case though.
A sport equivalent of an MMO where your spending is capped at subscription fee does not exists.
1) MMOs are not sports.
2) Not all competitive endeavors are fair.
What does having multiple leagues have to do with how the leagues that do have salary caps work?
Well, no shit Sherlock, some leagues do not have salary caps and in those yes, you can definitely buy your way to the top.
Ever hear of the NY Yankees? Your kind of team in your kind of league no doubt.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
What I said, is that leagues do not prevent money spendings, they only set 'tiers' regarding how much the team is spending - they put "equally" spending teams together.
Running a sports team is a money thing, better teams cost more money.
Money is big factor in sports, there is no point denying that.
In the NHL for example each team has the same maximum total player salaries they can spend per year ($73 million currently.) There are harsh penalties for non compliance to the point that no team ever does it even though some, like the NY based teams for example, could easily exceed the caps just like they used to outspend everyone in the pre-cap era.
The competitive benefit is that Phoenix and Columbus can compete against the NY and LA teams on an even footing.
If you think of "league" as being the equivalent of an MMO and "team" being the equivalent of a player in said MMO it's pretty easy to see the parallel.
The whole point is that some professional competitive leagues do indeed try to even the playing field by clamping the ability of some competitors to spend well beyond the cap.
Yes money is a big factor in sports and that is precisely why some of the biggest professional leagues have opted for a salary cap model.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
mmorpg junkie since 1999
MMO would be a parallel to particular sport - ie. hockey.
"League" would be a parallel to ranking, ladder system or w/e system of structured PVP within MMO.
"Team" would be a parallel to...team, guild or w/e within MMO.
This goes back to my argument about 1 league - it does not exist.
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/And of course you have a narrative, you've regressed back to it now and that's fine. It's what you do. It's not really a big deal.