If I've played Witcher 3 40 more hours than you, my Geralt is highly likely to be more powerful innately, my skill level is likely to be higher than yours as a player, and my Geralt is likely to have higher quality gear. Yet, it's monetized based upon content, without any microtransactions to help boost your progress. Do you despise CD Projekt Red? Is The Witcher 3 monetized poorly? It monetizes content, selling expansion packs that add nothing but more content for the player to complete. Are you telling me this is unfair because a "basement dweller" (psst, your bias is showing) will have a more powerful Geralt than you?
Progression has never been a requirement to classify a game as an RPG. You can read up on what actually makes an RPG an RPG in the link I gave if you would care to dispel your apparent ignorance on the subject.
I'll give a quick summary though. It has a lot more to do with roleplay and a lot less to do with power gaps and grinding.
You'll notice I used terms like "modern RPGs" and "dominant themes," or maybe you won't, since you think linking that is actually applicable in any way to my argument.
EDIT- As an aside, these two posts wouldn't be necessary had the RPG genre not evolved beyond the roleplaying aspect and more heavily into the progression systems in-game. Now the term can be used generally to refer to both, creating confusion in debates such as these. Evidence to support the argument that generalizing the MMORPG category/definition is foolish!
If I've played Witcher 3 40 more hours than you, my Geralt is highly likely to be more powerful innately, my skill level is likely to be higher than yours as a player, and my Geralt is likely to have higher quality gear. Yet, it's monetized based upon content, without any microtransactions to help boost your progress. Do you despise CD Projekt Red? Is The Witcher 3 monetized poorly? It monetizes content, selling expansion packs that add nothing but more content for the player to complete. Are you telling me this is unfair because a "basement dweller" (psst, your bias is showing) will have a more powerful Geralt than you?
I won't care because your Geralt and my Geralt will never come head to head. I will never want to go do content together with your Geralt but be stopped by the fact there is a gap in our levels.
Similarly I don't mind progression in D&D as much (Though I can say that epic 6 campaigns feel a lot more realistic than 1-20 campaigns) because as my character levels, so does the challenges the DM throws at us. So does everyone else in the party. If we were level 18 and someone else joined us and that DM decided to start them at level 1. Yeah it wouldn't be any fun. They'd get one shot in practically any encounter unless the party babysat the living crap out them.
These things translate poorly into MMO format. They run into issues that are not encountered in an tabletop or single player RPGs. Unfortunately rather than taking the opportunity to back off the leveling system, game companies doubled down on it, because they discovered it was like crack to many people. They got an addiction to watching numbers go up.
Unfortunately that's ALL it provides, and unlike a crack addiction it's an addiction that wears off over time for most people. Now people are bored with it and they are going on to survival games and MOBAs leaving this genre to slowly die people capitalizing on copying the WoW model have made no progress toward making their games compelling in any way other than catering people addicted to the form of crack they were selling.
In terms of making deep, compelling games, it's proven to be a poor mechanic. It should have been left out of MMOs. Sort of like how in D&D there are spells like this and this but they got scratched for video games because developers realized they ruined the fun when implemented in the wrong type of game.
So your issue is that you can't stand that someone who placed more time into the game than you have is ahead of you in terms of power? And your response is that we should abandon the objectively more equitable currency of time to replace it with money?
If you're upset that you keep getting ahead of your friend, then create an alt that you only play when you can't play with your friend. Problem solved.
Whether you think gear, levels, and RNG are boons or banes to the genre has absolutely zero to do with monetization methods.
Replace Witcher 3 with Diablo 3 or any other RPG that includes gear and multiplayer, and your counter-argument falls apart.
Time is constant for everyone. Unless you're doing something at close to the speed of light, we all have 24 hours in a day.
What is *not* constant is how we *value* the time we have. Or, more specifically, how much we value the things we spend our time on. This is different for everyone. But in regards to playing an MMO, if you value playing highly enough, then you'll spend your time on it. When you claim that you don't have time to play, what you're really saying is that there are other things you value more highly than playing an MMO and that those things are consuming so much of your time that you haven't much left to spend playing an MMO.
But that is YOUR decision. And it's a decision you're perfectly free to make. But that being said, it doesn't give you the right to reduce or undermine the results of others who are willing to spend more time playing an MMO than you are. If some people are willing to forgo food, sleep, a job, friends, family, or whatever else, and they spend more time playing as a result, that is THEIR choice, which they are also free to make. They *deserve* the fruits of their time investment just as you do for the things you spend your time on. You shouldn't be able to just buy comparative results simply because you chose to spend your time differently.
I don't really like the premise of "MMOs were always Casinos but your Money was spent through Time Farming".
It's only partially true in comparison to what we have going on today.
When I used to pay 15 a month to play the game in hopes to find that one special drop, I wasn't paying that money directly for that drop. I was paying for everything in between. It didn't matter if I spent 10 minutes in game or 10 hours, or if I was a guy who wanted a pink helmet or a sparkly ...goblin...foot.
In the end what you spent time on was the entirety of the game, and not a particular item.
But then they gave you the option to spend money on a specific item - only you would always get that item. Basic merchant trading of currency for goods and services.
Now though, all you get is the option to pay for a chance. So instead of your money equaling a game that equates to play time you're essentially equating money with a chance irrespective of any gametime played.
Conceivably you could pay for loot boxes in a game without ever playing the content (not saying you would). But thats the biggest change here. You don't need to play or be part of the game to pull that slot machine lever.
Time is constant for everyone. Unless you're doing something at close to the speed of light, we all have 24 hours in a day.
What is *not* constant is how we *value* the time we have. Or, more specifically, how much we value the things we spend our time on. This is different for everyone. But in regards to playing an MMO, if you value playing highly enough, then you'll spend your time on it. When you claim that you don't have time to play, what you're really saying is that there are other things you value more highly than playing an MMO and that those things are consuming so much of your time that you haven't much left to spend playing an MMO.
But that is YOUR decision. And it's a decision you're perfectly free to make. But that being said, it doesn't give you the right to reduce or undermine the results of others who are willing to spend more time playing an MMO than you are. If some people are willing to forgo food, sleep, a job, friends, family, or whatever else, and they spend more time playing as a result, that is THEIR choice, which they are also free to make. They *deserve* the fruits of their time investment just as you do for the things you spend your time on. You shouldn't be able to just buy comparative results simply because you chose to spend your time differently.
If you know the posting history of many posters here who are always disparaging those who play one game a lot and see paying for advancement as some great time equalizer, you'll see that they typically play 4, 5, 6... MMORPGs at the same time.
So even with their allegedly limited gaming time due to their allegedly full, rich lives, they are making choices to spread their time around very thinly.
"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
I don't really like the premise of "MMOs were always Casinos but your Money was spent through Time Farming".
It's only partially true in comparison to what we have going on today.
When I used to pay 15 a month to play the game in hopes to find that one special drop, I wasn't paying that money directly for that drop. I was paying for everything in between. It didn't matter if I spent 10 minutes in game or 10 hours, or if I was a guy who wanted a pink helmet or a sparkly ...goblin...foot.
In the end what you spent time on was the entirety of the game, and not a particular item.
But then they gave you the option to spend money on a specific item - only you would always get that item. Basic merchant trading of currency for goods and services.
Now though, all you get is the option to pay for a chance. So instead of your money equaling a game that equates to play time you're essentially equating money with a chance irrespective of any gametime played.
Conceivably you could pay for loot boxes in a game without ever playing the content (not saying you would). But thats the biggest change here. You don't need to play or be part of the game to pull that slot machine lever.
I don't really like the premise of "MMOs were always Casinos but your Money was spent through Time Farming".
It's only partially true in comparison to what we have going on today.
When I used to pay 15 a month to play the game in hopes to find that one special drop, I wasn't paying that money directly for that drop. I was paying for everything in between. It didn't matter if I spent 10 minutes in game or 10 hours, or if I was a guy who wanted a pink helmet or a sparkly ...goblin...foot.
In the end what you spent time on was the entirety of the game, and not a particular item.
But then they gave you the option to spend money on a specific item - only you would always get that item. Basic merchant trading of currency for goods and services.
Now though, all you get is the option to pay for a chance. So instead of your money equaling a game that equates to play time you're essentially equating money with a chance irrespective of any gametime played.
Conceivably you could pay for loot boxes in a game without ever playing the content (not saying you would). But thats the biggest change here. You don't need to play or be part of the game to pull that slot machine lever.
I know 3 people that spent twice that amount on the fortnite forums and only 1 received a mythic hero. My buddy however got the game for free from me... and he got a mythic hero from an upgrade box he didn't spend any money on. RNG is RNG.
I don't really like the premise of "MMOs were always Casinos but your Money was spent through Time Farming".
It's only partially true in comparison to what we have going on today.
When I used to pay 15 a month to play the game in hopes to find that one special drop, I wasn't paying that money directly for that drop. I was paying for everything in between. It didn't matter if I spent 10 minutes in game or 10 hours, or if I was a guy who wanted a pink helmet or a sparkly ...goblin...foot.
In the end what you spent time on was the entirety of the game, and not a particular item.
But then they gave you the option to spend money on a specific item - only you would always get that item. Basic merchant trading of currency for goods and services.
Now though, all you get is the option to pay for a chance. So instead of your money equaling a game that equates to play time you're essentially equating money with a chance irrespective of any gametime played.
Conceivably you could pay for loot boxes in a game without ever playing the content (not saying you would). But thats the biggest change here. You don't need to play or be part of the game to pull that slot machine lever.
I know 3 people that spent twice that amount on the fortnite forums and only 1 received a mythic hero. My buddy however got the game for free from me... and he got a mythic hero from an upgrade box he didn't spend any money on. RNG is RNG.
yeah i wasnt clear on your post here if you support Casinos in games or not. I am indifferent but I do tend to get triggered when views are not consistent is all
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I don't really like the premise of "MMOs were always Casinos but your Money was spent through Time Farming".
It's only partially true in comparison to what we have going on today.
When I used to pay 15 a month to play the game in hopes to find that one special drop, I wasn't paying that money directly for that drop. I was paying for everything in between. It didn't matter if I spent 10 minutes in game or 10 hours, or if I was a guy who wanted a pink helmet or a sparkly ...goblin...foot.
In the end what you spent time on was the entirety of the game, and not a particular item.
But then they gave you the option to spend money on a specific item - only you would always get that item. Basic merchant trading of currency for goods and services.
Now though, all you get is the option to pay for a chance. So instead of your money equaling a game that equates to play time you're essentially equating money with a chance irrespective of any gametime played.
Conceivably you could pay for loot boxes in a game without ever playing the content (not saying you would). But thats the biggest change here. You don't need to play or be part of the game to pull that slot machine lever.
I know 3 people that spent twice that amount on the fortnite forums and only 1 received a mythic hero. My buddy however got the game for free from me... and he got a mythic hero from an upgrade box he didn't spend any money on. RNG is RNG.
yeah i wasnt clear on your post here if you support Casinos in games or not. I am indifferent but I do tend to get triggered when views are not consistent is all
I don't support the practice, but its a double edges sword. Either I play the game and pay for them if I decide I want something from the box, or I don't play a game I've been looking forward to playing. I haven't bought any other boxes with real money in several days.
I don't really like the premise of "MMOs were always Casinos but your Money was spent through Time Farming".
It's only partially true in comparison to what we have going on today.
When I used to pay 15 a month to play the game in hopes to find that one special drop, I wasn't paying that money directly for that drop. I was paying for everything in between. It didn't matter if I spent 10 minutes in game or 10 hours, or if I was a guy who wanted a pink helmet or a sparkly ...goblin...foot.
In the end what you spent time on was the entirety of the game, and not a particular item.
But then they gave you the option to spend money on a specific item - only you would always get that item. Basic merchant trading of currency for goods and services.
Now though, all you get is the option to pay for a chance. So instead of your money equaling a game that equates to play time you're essentially equating money with a chance irrespective of any gametime played.
Conceivably you could pay for loot boxes in a game without ever playing the content (not saying you would). But thats the biggest change here. You don't need to play or be part of the game to pull that slot machine lever.
I know 3 people that spent twice that amount on the fortnite forums and only 1 received a mythic hero. My buddy however got the game for free from me... and he got a mythic hero from an upgrade box he didn't spend any money on. RNG is RNG.
yeah i wasnt clear on your post here if you support Casinos in games or not. I am indifferent but I do tend to get triggered when views are not consistent is all
I don't support the practice, but its a double edges sword. Either I play the game and pay for them if I decide I want something from the box, or I don't play a game I've been looking forward to playing. I haven't bought any other boxes with real money in several days.
fair enough.
its also why I like to mention to people that the games I play dont have these things. in fact, I think 100% of things people complain about other than 'a survival game' the games I play do not have. One might get the crazy idea to check them out with an open mind.
that said, I gotcha and its fair enough just checking
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I don't mind the fact that games have RNG lootboxes, as long as they don't have crazy gear inside of them. A mount or maybe some cosmetics are perfectly okay with me, and I know a lot of people who get addicted to opening boxes in games to try to get rare skins like in CSGO, but that's their own fault. Nobody is required to buy those boxes if it's cosmetic, and nobody is required to play that game if it's P2W because of box gambling.
I see all the arguments of time, but I agree with Maskedweasel in the sense that if you are using your time to play a game, you usually aren't using it trying to just get one item, you generally are just playing a game you enjoy and one of the tasks you might do in that game is try to get better gear for a while. I mean sure some people spend 100% of their time trying to get the BEST possible gear, and it takes super long, but those people are doing that because it's what they want to do and get enjoyment out of.
Personally I have a job that takes up a lot of my time, but I find I play a lot of games still, and dump plenty of time into games that have RNG loot boxes and I have yet to actually spend money on them, and have no detraction of my play experience because of it.
I don't really like the premise of "MMOs were always Casinos but your Money was spent through Time Farming".
It's only partially true in comparison to what we have going on today.
When I used to pay 15 a month to play the game in hopes to find that one special drop, I wasn't paying that money directly for that drop. I was paying for everything in between. It didn't matter if I spent 10 minutes in game or 10 hours, or if I was a guy who wanted a pink helmet or a sparkly ...goblin...foot.
In the end what you spent time on was the entirety of the game, and not a particular item.
But then they gave you the option to spend money on a specific item - only you would always get that item. Basic merchant trading of currency for goods and services.
Now though, all you get is the option to pay for a chance. So instead of your money equaling a game that equates to play time you're essentially equating money with a chance irrespective of any gametime played.
Conceivably you could pay for loot boxes in a game without ever playing the content (not saying you would). But thats the biggest change here. You don't need to play or be part of the game to pull that slot machine lever.
I know 3 people that spent twice that amount on the fortnite forums and only 1 received a mythic hero. My buddy however got the game for free from me... and he got a mythic hero from an upgrade box he didn't spend any money on. RNG is RNG.
yeah i wasnt clear on your post here if you support Casinos in games or not. I am indifferent but I do tend to get triggered when views are not consistent is all
I don't support the practice, but its a double edges sword. Either I play the game and pay for them if I decide I want something from the box, or I don't play a game I've been looking forward to playing. I haven't bought any other boxes with real money in several days.
I've never bought any in any game. I've opened ones that were given to me as part of promotions (with ESO 1 free one for pre-ordering Morrowind and 5 recently given to ESO+ members for logging in 5 days) or in games like GW2 where some keys to open them also drop in the wild.
Even if I wanted the tings in them - and I typically don't - the odds are just too stacked against you.
OTOH, I'm certainly not above dropping 5 bucks on real life lottery tickets despite their horrendous odds because their pay-off IS something I would want
"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
My view (in more detail) is that loot crates, p2w, p2p is all fine however, it puts into question (for me) what the developer is actually focused on. Is the developer focused on creative monetization or actual game play. Like Electronic Arts said once about a game of theirs 'I guess we innovate to much' the statement was related to how they monetize a clear disconnect in focus for my tastes.
Its been said in business that there is two approaches to the market. 1. make the best you can and worry less about marketing because the product itself will sell itself. 2. plan marketing and monitization far in advance then make something to sell with that instrument.
reality is often a mix between the two. However, when it comes to games it just feels like the developer looses focus on game play when they start doing stuff like that.
This is strickly my opinion
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I don't really like the premise of "MMOs were always Casinos but your Money was spent through Time Farming".
It's only partially true in comparison to what we have going on today.
When I used to pay 15 a month to play the game in hopes to find that one special drop, I wasn't paying that money directly for that drop. I was paying for everything in between. It didn't matter if I spent 10 minutes in game or 10 hours, or if I was a guy who wanted a pink helmet or a sparkly ...goblin...foot.
In the end what you spent time on was the entirety of the game, and not a particular item.
But then they gave you the option to spend money on a specific item - only you would always get that item. Basic merchant trading of currency for goods and services.
Now though, all you get is the option to pay for a chance. So instead of your money equaling a game that equates to play time you're essentially equating money with a chance irrespective of any gametime played.
Conceivably you could pay for loot boxes in a game without ever playing the content (not saying you would). But thats the biggest change here. You don't need to play or be part of the game to pull that slot machine lever.
I know 3 people that spent twice that amount on the fortnite forums and only 1 received a mythic hero. My buddy however got the game for free from me... and he got a mythic hero from an upgrade box he didn't spend any money on. RNG is RNG.
yeah i wasnt clear on your post here if you support Casinos in games or not. I am indifferent but I do tend to get triggered when views are not consistent is all
I don't support the practice, but its a double edges sword. Either I play the game and pay for them if I decide I want something from the box, or I don't play a game I've been looking forward to playing. I haven't bought any other boxes with real money in several days.
I've never bought any in any game. I've opened ones that were given to me as part of promotions (with ESO 1 free one for pre-ordering Morrowind and 5 recently given to ESO+ members for logging in 5 days) or in games like GW2 where some keys to open them also drop in the wild.
Even if I wanted the tings in them - and I typically don't - the odds are just too stacked against you.
OTOH, I'm certainly not above dropping 5 bucks on real life lottery tickets despite their horrendous odds because their pay-off IS something I would want
I guess it really depends on the game. I've spent money on boxes.. sometimes I've spent a lot of money on boxes... but the difference is that it was completely my choice to do so. (as opposed to the game forcing it on me as a progression or must - have tactic)
Many games at least let you earn in game currencies for those boxes and in those games, I'll pitch in some money for boxes as long as I have a choice to obtain them through not paying. It also helps if those boxes actually have things I want in them. Guild Wars 2 never had anything in those boxes I wanted.. and when I did finally get a key I ended up with junk that had no value to me. It never really made me say "wow I should buy more". It was more like... "I'm so glad I didn't pay to open these".
That's pretty much the saving grace in my opinion though, when you can earn them in game.
I don't really like the premise of "MMOs were always Casinos but your Money was spent through Time Farming".
It's only partially true in comparison to what we have going on today.
When I used to pay 15 a month to play the game in hopes to find that one special drop, I wasn't paying that money directly for that drop. I was paying for everything in between. It didn't matter if I spent 10 minutes in game or 10 hours, or if I was a guy who wanted a pink helmet or a sparkly ...goblin...foot.
In the end what you spent time on was the entirety of the game, and not a particular item.
But then they gave you the option to spend money on a specific item - only you would always get that item. Basic merchant trading of currency for goods and services.
Now though, all you get is the option to pay for a chance. So instead of your money equaling a game that equates to play time you're essentially equating money with a chance irrespective of any gametime played.
Conceivably you could pay for loot boxes in a game without ever playing the content (not saying you would). But thats the biggest change here. You don't need to play or be part of the game to pull that slot machine lever.
I know 3 people that spent twice that amount on the fortnite forums and only 1 received a mythic hero. My buddy however got the game for free from me... and he got a mythic hero from an upgrade box he didn't spend any money on. RNG is RNG.
yeah i wasnt clear on your post here if you support Casinos in games or not. I am indifferent but I do tend to get triggered when views are not consistent is all
I don't support the practice, but its a double edges sword. Either I play the game and pay for them if I decide I want something from the box, or I don't play a game I've been looking forward to playing. I haven't bought any other boxes with real money in several days.
I've never bought any in any game. I've opened ones that were given to me as part of promotions (with ESO 1 free one for pre-ordering Morrowind and 5 recently given to ESO+ members for logging in 5 days) or in games like GW2 where some keys to open them also drop in the wild.
Even if I wanted the tings in them - and I typically don't - the odds are just too stacked against you.
OTOH, I'm certainly not above dropping 5 bucks on real life lottery tickets despite their horrendous odds because their pay-off IS something I would want
I guess it really depends on the game. I've spent money on boxes.. sometimes I've spent a lot of money on boxes... but the difference is that it was completely my choice to do so. (as opposed to the game forcing it on me as a progression or must - have tactic)
Many games at least let you earn in game currencies for those boxes and in those games, I'll pitch in some money for boxes as long as I have a choice to obtain them through not paying. It also helps if those boxes actually have things I want in them. Guild Wars 2 never had anything in those boxes I wanted.. and when I did finally get a key I ended up with junk that had no value to me. It never really made me say "wow I should buy more". It was more like... "I'm so glad I didn't pay to open these".
That's pretty much the saving grace in my opinion though, when you can earn them in game.
however, from a game design perspective having a person do actions not related to trade (for one example) in a game to get real life income dings kind of is an immersion killer (at least for me). So for example vBucks in of themselves do not have in world context that makes sense (I am guessing here to be fair) but lets say in something like RimWorld it does because the way you make money is the same way you would if you were in that world, by making and selling goods. So it has a fictional context.
this is how I see it anyway, again not saying its unethical but rather it seems to be a loss of game focus
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
So your issue is that you can't stand that someone who placed more time into the game than you have is ahead of you in terms of power? And your response is that we should abandon the objectively more equitable currency of time to replace it with money?
If you're upset that you keep getting ahead of your friend, then create an alt that you only play when you can't play with your friend. Problem solved.
Whether you think gear, levels, and RNG are boons or banes to the genre has absolutely zero to do with monetization methods.
Replace Witcher 3 with Diablo 3 or any other RPG that includes gear and multiplayer, and your counter-argument falls apart.
Diablo 3 was a terrible game. Largely for precisely the reasons I listed. Largely because it was a straight crap game with very little content. It prettymuch just capitalized on the fame of it's predecessors, which were released in an era long before people got over the whole leveling craze (AKA they were pre-WoW).
That's not my argument at all.
My argument is that the "objectively more equitable currency" of time has already been replaced by gaming companies because if they are going to make games to be most enjoyable to a tiny minority such as no-lifers, that tiny minority should be paying way more than a tiny minority of the bills (And whales pay most of the bills in P2W games.)
I'm not saying it's a better model for someone who belongs to neither of those categories. I'm saying it's an equally good model to someone who belongs to neither of those categories, and a distinctly better model for the companies making the games. Which is why literally every single successful MMOs in 2017 has cash shops and pay-to-win options. PLEX equivalents (The ability to sell game time purchased with cash for in-game currency) are practically a requirement to have a successful MMO.
There are only two options forward whether you like it or not:
A. Make games targeted at a broader audience than no-lifers and whales. B. Recognize whales will own MMOs from here on out.
You can make all the ridiculous arguments you want. Fact is P2W still overtook your golden age of MMOs, it overtook it for a reason, and you play-to-win fantasies will never come true again.
If I was asked to create a monetization approach that created revenue but also engaged a player in a positive way I would find ways for players to make real money aka income (without exploiting) and the company would get a cut of the transactions.
The transactions alone would be plenty of money if the goods or services where in small sizes and traded hands often.
I would not add 'bucks' you gain in the game that would not have context to the world itself, its an immersion killer when that happens in my view
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
If I was asked to create a monetization approach that created revenue but also engaged a player in a positive way I would find ways for players to make real money aka income (without exploiting) and the company would get a cut of the transactions.
The transactions alone would be plenty of money if the goods or services where in small sizes and traded hands often.
I would not add 'bucks' you gain in the game that would not have context to the world itself, its an immersion killer when that happens in my view
If what you are saying is the game company gets a cut of in-game transactions the issue with that is faucets and drains.
Sources that create gold from nothing are a faucet. For instance, if an enemy drops gold when it dies it's a faucet because that gold actually came from nowhere.
A drain is when gold is taken out of the economy. For instance if gold is used to pay a repair bill or buy an item from a vendor that is a drain.
To give in-game gold a value to the company, you have to shut the faucet and drain system down entirely and make it so that the only faucet in the game is players buying in-game cash directly from the company. Otherwise the gold they are draining from the economy will just get replaced by people farming mobs.
While there are games that do this (I'm sure you're aware that's how silver works in Wurm. Infact the apparent faucets are actually pulling from silver people put into their deed upkeep) it does create a scarcity of the currency that makes it very difficult to add any faucets into the game. This is why for instance, coin drops in Wurm are so small and infrequent.
So your issue is that you can't stand that someone who placed more time into the game than you have is ahead of you in terms of power? And your response is that we should abandon the objectively more equitable currency of time to replace it with money?
If you're upset that you keep getting ahead of your friend, then create an alt that you only play when you can't play with your friend. Problem solved.
Whether you think gear, levels, and RNG are boons or banes to the genre has absolutely zero to do with monetization methods.
Replace Witcher 3 with Diablo 3 or any other RPG that includes gear and multiplayer, and your counter-argument falls apart.
Diablo 3 was a terrible game. Largely for precisely the reasons I listed. Largely because it was a straight crap game with very little content. It prettymuch just capitalized on the fame of it's predecessors, which were released in an era long before people got over the whole leveling craze (AKA they were pre-WoW).
That's not my argument at all.
My argument is that the "objectively more equitable currency" of time has already been replaced by gaming companies because if they are going to make games to be most enjoyable to a tiny minority such as no-lifers, that tiny minority should be paying way more than a tiny minority of the bills (And whales pay most of the bills in P2W games.)
I'm not saying it's a better model for someone who belongs to neither of those categories. I'm saying it's an equally good model to someone who belongs to neither of those categories, and a distinctly better model for the companies making the games. Which is why literally every single successful MMOs in 2017 has cash shops and pay-to-win options. PLEX equivalents (The ability to sell game time purchased with cash for in-game currency) are practically a requirement to have a successful MMO.
There are only two options forward whether you like it or not:
A. Make games targeted at a broader audience than no-lifers and whales. B. Recognize whales will own MMOs from here on out.
You can make all the ridiculous arguments you want. Fact is P2W still overtook your golden age of MMOs, it overtook it for a reason, and you play-to-win fantasies will never come true again.
It's become quite apparent you argument stems not from logic, but from an apparent past Jimmy rustling by someone with more time in an MMORPG than you. Boo hoo!
Your condescension also belies your inability to field anything other than a fallacy appeal to popularity to try and defend some grossly erroneous ideal that spending money is the same as spending time, and that you're mad at common RPG tropes not because it isn't your tastes, but because you'd rather pay your way through. Levels are bad, gear is bad, progression is bad!..... Unless I can pay to bypass it all. Good for you!
But hey, continue condescending against whatever argument you ignorantly believe me to be making, because my actual argument still stands, unperturbed. Godspeed!
Time is constant for everyone. Unless you're doing something at close to the speed of light, we all have 24 hours in a day.
What is *not* constant is how we *value* the time we have. Or, more specifically, how much we value the things we spend our time on. This is different for everyone. But in regards to playing an MMO, if you value playing highly enough, then you'll spend your time on it. When you claim that you don't have time to play, what you're really saying is that there are other things you value more highly than playing an MMO and that those things are consuming so much of your time that you haven't much left to spend playing an MMO.
But that is YOUR decision. And it's a decision you're perfectly free to make. But that being said, it doesn't give you the right to reduce or undermine the results of others who are willing to spend more time playing an MMO than you are. If some people are willing to forgo food, sleep, a job, friends, family, or whatever else, and they spend more time playing as a result, that is THEIR choice, which they are also free to make. They *deserve* the fruits of their time investment just as you do for the things you spend your time on. You shouldn't be able to just buy comparative results simply because you chose to spend your time differently.
This is correct. There's a reason we don't generally associate the word "merit" with "who paid the most?"
I've never paid my way past anything in any game. And probably never will. It just doesn't offend me any more deeply than grinding does.
Appeal to popularity? Especially on these boards no-lifers are way over represented and in most games everyone trash talks pay-to-win (Despite the fact that consumers have overwhelmingly shown with their purchasing habits that they will still buy it).
But it's fine. Game companies don't care what you have to say about Pay-To-Win if you can't back it up with cash. And they could really care less if you take your 15$ month and go play somewhere else because the whales will pay them a lot more.
Where are you going to go? To play Diablo 3 for the rest of your life?
So you've already lost the argument against the people who matter. The people making the games (or more like not making the games) you want to play.
I play an MMORPG with no cash shop at all. Loving it, actually. And I've never once raided in an MMORPG, never been at the top of the PvP leaderboards. I'm the definition of a casual MMORPG player, yet I'm not bitching about people playing more than me. Why? Because I have sense enough to know that he's only got as much time as I do in a day, he just chooses to prioritize playing his MMORPG instead of, say, hanging out with his girlfriend.
The fact that you see it as some crime that someone who spends more time playing than you has amassed more power than you, in a modern RPG video game, IS the issue. It's not the same as buying progression or power, and the reasoning has been explained to you ad nauseum. You choose not to see the vital difference because it doesn't support your argument.
As an aside, whether or not I play Diablo 3 is irrelevant. I mentioned it to illustrate the fact that you have an issue with common RPG mechanics, not monetizing content in an MMORPG.
Comments
If I've played Witcher 3 40 more hours than you, my Geralt is highly likely to be more powerful innately, my skill level is likely to be higher than yours as a player, and my Geralt is likely to have higher quality gear. Yet, it's monetized based upon content, without any microtransactions to help boost your progress. Do you despise CD Projekt Red? Is The Witcher 3 monetized poorly? It monetizes content, selling expansion packs that add nothing but more content for the player to complete. Are you telling me this is unfair because a "basement dweller" (psst, your bias is showing) will have a more powerful Geralt than you?
EDIT- As an aside, these two posts wouldn't be necessary had the RPG genre not evolved beyond the roleplaying aspect and more heavily into the progression systems in-game. Now the term can be used generally to refer to both, creating confusion in debates such as these. Evidence to support the argument that generalizing the MMORPG category/definition is foolish!
Similarly I don't mind progression in D&D as much (Though I can say that epic 6 campaigns feel a lot more realistic than 1-20 campaigns) because as my character levels, so does the challenges the DM throws at us. So does everyone else in the party. If we were level 18 and someone else joined us and that DM decided to start them at level 1. Yeah it wouldn't be any fun. They'd get one shot in practically any encounter unless the party babysat the living crap out them.
These things translate poorly into MMO format. They run into issues that are not encountered in an tabletop or single player RPGs. Unfortunately rather than taking the opportunity to back off the leveling system, game companies doubled down on it, because they discovered it was like crack to many people. They got an addiction to watching numbers go up.
Unfortunately that's ALL it provides, and unlike a crack addiction it's an addiction that wears off over time for most people. Now people are bored with it and they are going on to survival games and MOBAs leaving this genre to slowly die people capitalizing on copying the WoW model have made no progress toward making their games compelling in any way other than catering people addicted to the form of crack they were selling.
In terms of making deep, compelling games, it's proven to be a poor mechanic. It should have been left out of MMOs. Sort of like how in D&D there are spells like this and this but they got scratched for video games because developers realized they ruined the fun when implemented in the wrong type of game.
If you're upset that you keep getting ahead of your friend, then create an alt that you only play when you can't play with your friend. Problem solved.
Whether you think gear, levels, and RNG are boons or banes to the genre has absolutely zero to do with monetization methods.
Replace Witcher 3 with Diablo 3 or any other RPG that includes gear and multiplayer, and your counter-argument falls apart.
What is *not* constant is how we *value* the time we have. Or, more specifically, how much we value the things we spend our time on. This is different for everyone. But in regards to playing an MMO, if you value playing highly enough, then you'll spend your time on it. When you claim that you don't have time to play, what you're really saying is that there are other things you value more highly than playing an MMO and that those things are consuming so much of your time that you haven't much left to spend playing an MMO.
But that is YOUR decision. And it's a decision you're perfectly free to make. But that being said, it doesn't give you the right to reduce or undermine the results of others who are willing to spend more time playing an MMO than you are. If some people are willing to forgo food, sleep, a job, friends, family, or whatever else, and they spend more time playing as a result, that is THEIR choice, which they are also free to make. They *deserve* the fruits of their time investment just as you do for the things you spend your time on. You shouldn't be able to just buy comparative results simply because you chose to spend your time differently.
It's only partially true in comparison to what we have going on today.
When I used to pay 15 a month to play the game in hopes to find that one special drop, I wasn't paying that money directly for that drop. I was paying for everything in between. It didn't matter if I spent 10 minutes in game or 10 hours, or if I was a guy who wanted a pink helmet or a sparkly ...goblin...foot.
In the end what you spent time on was the entirety of the game, and not a particular item.
But then they gave you the option to spend money on a specific item - only you would always get that item. Basic merchant trading of currency for goods and services.
Now though, all you get is the option to pay for a chance. So instead of your money equaling a game that equates to play time you're essentially equating money with a chance irrespective of any gametime played.
Conceivably you could pay for loot boxes in a game without ever playing the content (not saying you would). But thats the biggest change here. You don't need to play or be part of the game to pull that slot machine lever.
So even with their allegedly limited gaming time due to their allegedly full, rich lives, they are making choices to spread their time around very thinly.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
its also why I like to mention to people that the games I play dont have these things. in fact, I think 100% of things people complain about other than 'a survival game' the games I play do not have. One might get the crazy idea to check them out with an open mind.
that said, I gotcha and its fair enough just checking
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
I see all the arguments of time, but I agree with Maskedweasel in the sense that if you are using your time to play a game, you usually aren't using it trying to just get one item, you generally are just playing a game you enjoy and one of the tasks you might do in that game is try to get better gear for a while. I mean sure some people spend 100% of their time trying to get the BEST possible gear, and it takes super long, but those people are doing that because it's what they want to do and get enjoyment out of.
Personally I have a job that takes up a lot of my time, but I find I play a lot of games still, and dump plenty of time into games that have RNG loot boxes and I have yet to actually spend money on them, and have no detraction of my play experience because of it.
Even if I wanted the tings in them - and I typically don't - the odds are just too stacked against you.
OTOH, I'm certainly not above dropping 5 bucks on real life lottery tickets despite their horrendous odds because their pay-off IS something I would want
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Its been said in business that there is two approaches to the market.
1. make the best you can and worry less about marketing because the product itself will sell itself.
2. plan marketing and monitization far in advance then make something to sell with that instrument.
reality is often a mix between the two. However, when it comes to games it just feels like the developer looses focus on game play when they start doing stuff like that.
This is strickly my opinion
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Many games at least let you earn in game currencies for those boxes and in those games, I'll pitch in some money for boxes as long as I have a choice to obtain them through not paying. It also helps if those boxes actually have things I want in them. Guild Wars 2 never had anything in those boxes I wanted.. and when I did finally get a key I ended up with junk that had no value to me. It never really made me say "wow I should buy more". It was more like... "I'm so glad I didn't pay to open these".
That's pretty much the saving grace in my opinion though, when you can earn them in game.
this is how I see it anyway, again not saying its unethical but rather it seems to be a loss of game focus
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
That's not my argument at all.
My argument is that the "objectively more equitable currency" of time has already been replaced by gaming companies because if they are going to make games to be most enjoyable to a tiny minority such as no-lifers, that tiny minority should be paying way more than a tiny minority of the bills (And whales pay most of the bills in P2W games.)
I'm not saying it's a better model for someone who belongs to neither of those categories. I'm saying it's an equally good model to someone who belongs to neither of those categories, and a distinctly better model for the companies making the games. Which is why literally every single successful MMOs in 2017 has cash shops and pay-to-win options. PLEX equivalents (The ability to sell game time purchased with cash for in-game currency) are practically a requirement to have a successful MMO.
There are only two options forward whether you like it or not:
A. Make games targeted at a broader audience than no-lifers and whales.
B. Recognize whales will own MMOs from here on out.
You can make all the ridiculous arguments you want. Fact is P2W still overtook your golden age of MMOs, it overtook it for a reason, and you play-to-win fantasies will never come true again.
The transactions alone would be plenty of money if the goods or services where in small sizes and traded hands often.
I would not add 'bucks' you gain in the game that would not have context to the world itself, its an immersion killer when that happens in my view
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Sources that create gold from nothing are a faucet. For instance, if an enemy drops gold when it dies it's a faucet because that gold actually came from nowhere.
A drain is when gold is taken out of the economy. For instance if gold is used to pay a repair bill or buy an item from a vendor that is a drain.
To give in-game gold a value to the company, you have to shut the faucet and drain system down entirely and make it so that the only faucet in the game is players buying in-game cash directly from the company. Otherwise the gold they are draining from the economy will just get replaced by people farming mobs.
While there are games that do this (I'm sure you're aware that's how silver works in Wurm. Infact the apparent faucets are actually pulling from silver people put into their deed upkeep) it does create a scarcity of the currency that makes it very difficult to add any faucets into the game. This is why for instance, coin drops in Wurm are so small and infrequent.
Your condescension also belies your inability to field anything other than a fallacy appeal to popularity to try and defend some grossly erroneous ideal that spending money is the same as spending time, and that you're mad at common RPG tropes not because it isn't your tastes, but because you'd rather pay your way through. Levels are bad, gear is bad, progression is bad!..... Unless I can pay to bypass it all. Good for you!
But hey, continue condescending against whatever argument you ignorantly believe me to be making, because my actual argument still stands, unperturbed. Godspeed!
Appeal to popularity? Especially on these boards no-lifers are way over represented and in most games everyone trash talks pay-to-win (Despite the fact that consumers have overwhelmingly shown with their purchasing habits that they will still buy it).
But it's fine. Game companies don't care what you have to say about Pay-To-Win if you can't back it up with cash. And they could really care less if you take your 15$ month and go play somewhere else because the whales will pay them a lot more.
Where are you going to go? To play Diablo 3 for the rest of your life?
So you've already lost the argument against the people who matter. The people making the games (or more like not making the games) you want to play.
I play an MMORPG with no cash shop at all. Loving it, actually. And I've never once raided in an MMORPG, never been at the top of the PvP leaderboards. I'm the definition of a casual MMORPG player, yet I'm not bitching about people playing more than me. Why? Because I have sense enough to know that he's only got as much time as I do in a day, he just chooses to prioritize playing his MMORPG instead of, say, hanging out with his girlfriend.
The fact that you see it as some crime that someone who spends more time playing than you has amassed more power than you, in a modern RPG video game, IS the issue. It's not the same as buying progression or power, and the reasoning has been explained to you ad nauseum. You choose not to see the vital difference because it doesn't support your argument.