Another potential angle to look at things is that P2W may affect one person because they are a competitive gamer. Whereas someone like me, who isn't a competitive gamer and thus P2W doesn't have much influence on me.
Going back to my other post with the $100,000 USD undead wyrm, i'd be fine playing a different char, I don't have to be the best to get my rocks off. I'm perfectly happy, figuring out a goal for myself and reaching it. My days of competitive gameplay are over.
I used to duel in diablo 2 HC servers, no hacks or whatever, I know what PvP is. I don't do it anymore . I used to do mainly 1v1 in starcraft 1 and 2, no hacks of course.
Cryomatrix
Catch me streaming at twitch.tv/cryomatrix You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
Another potential angle to look at things is that P2W may affect one person because they are a competitive gamer. Whereas someone like me, who isn't a competitive gamer and thus P2W doesn't have much influence on me.
Going back to my other post with the $100,000 USD undead wyrm, i'd be fine playing a different char, I don't have to be the best to get my rocks off. I'm perfectly happy, figuring out a goal for myself and reaching it. My days of competitive gameplay are over.
I used to duel in diablo 2 HC servers, no hacks or whatever, I know what PvP is. I don't do it anymore . I used to do mainly 1v1 in starcraft 1 and 2, no hacks of course.
If I log in, and I can enjoy the game, then whatever P2W that exists is not stopping me from enjoying the game, then that is good design, if I log in and need o worry about other players ganking me, killing me or ruining my fun, then no matter how "pure" the game might be, it is bad design.
Hey you are entitled to your opinions. One point though, your statement about players ganking you has absolutely zero to do with P2W. That can happen in any pay model.
Exactly.
See there is nothing special or fair about games without P2W.
P2W adds another tier of ganking. You caught up with the guy who had played longer than you and then he out spends you. Two wrongs do not make a right.
I would not want to play the game if someone who was playing longer then me could gank me to start with, a shitty game is a shitty game, with or without P2W.
As game that has an item shop, but keeps things balanced to the game, is a better game, even with it's vaunted P2W item Mall.
Case in point,if someone could buy a level 100, boost, but then could only fight someone within 10% of their level, while the game may have P2W, with the level boost, but the game is still far more balanced then a game that does not have P2w, but lets a level 100 attack a level 1 player.
Is this sinking in or am I talking to a brick wall?
Over the course of gaming we have had to accept ganking in one form or another. But it was not built in, P2W builds in ganking, and unfairness in other ways too.
We don't agree, there is nothing wrong with that, I am sure you came on here like me to express your opinions, not to create a cheer leading squad. We can agree to differ.
Another potential angle to look at things is that P2W may affect one person because they are a competitive gamer. Whereas someone like me, who isn't a competitive gamer and thus P2W doesn't have much influence on me.
Going back to my other post with the $100,000 USD undead wyrm, i'd be fine playing a different char, I don't have to be the best to get my rocks off. I'm perfectly happy, figuring out a goal for myself and reaching it. My days of competitive gameplay are over.
I used to duel in diablo 2 HC servers, no hacks or whatever, I know what PvP is. I don't do it anymore . I used to do mainly 1v1 in starcraft 1 and 2, no hacks of course.
Cryomatrix
Scot: FFS Cryomatrix step on it!
Not sure we would be perfectly happy just then.
I'd be stepping on it with my heart pounding and neurotransmitter release in my reward centers.
I'm okay with it .
Cryomatrix
Catch me streaming at twitch.tv/cryomatrix You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
If I log in, and I can enjoy the game, then whatever P2W that exists is not stopping me from enjoying the game, then that is good design, if I log in and need o worry about other players ganking me, killing me or ruining my fun, then no matter how "pure" the game might be, it is bad design.
Hey you are entitled to your opinions. One point though, your statement about players ganking you has absolutely zero to do with P2W. That can happen in any pay model.
Exactly.
See there is nothing special or fair about games without P2W.
P2W adds another tier of ganking. You caught up with the guy who had played longer than you and then he out spends you. Two wrongs do not make a right.
I would not want to play the game if someone who was playing longer then me could gank me to start with, a shitty game is a shitty game, with or without P2W.
As game that has an item shop, but keeps things balanced to the game, is a better game, even with it's vaunted P2W item Mall.
Case in point,if someone could buy a level 100, boost, but then could only fight someone within 10% of their level, while the game may have P2W, with the level boost, but the game is still far more balanced then a game that does not have P2w, but lets a level 100 attack a level 1 player.
Is this sinking in or am I talking to a brick wall?
Over the course of gaming we have had to accept ganking in one form or another. But it was not built in, P2W builds in ganking, and unfairness in other ways too.
We don't agree, there is nothing wrong with that, I am sure you came on here like me to express your opinions, not to create a cheer leading squad. We can agree to differ.
P2W has never had an effect on ganking, that was done in sub games like UO, long before P2W ever existed.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
If I log in, and I can enjoy the game, then whatever P2W that exists is not stopping me from enjoying the game, then that is good design, if I log in and need o worry about other players ganking me, killing me or ruining my fun, then no matter how "pure" the game might be, it is bad design.
Hey you are entitled to your opinions. One point though, your statement about players ganking you has absolutely zero to do with P2W. That can happen in any pay model.
Exactly.
See there is nothing special or fair about games without P2W.
P2W adds another tier of ganking. You caught up with the guy who had played longer than you and then he out spends you. Two wrongs do not make a right.
I would not want to play the game if someone who was playing longer then me could gank me to start with, a shitty game is a shitty game, with or without P2W.
As game that has an item shop, but keeps things balanced to the game, is a better game, even with it's vaunted P2W item Mall.
Case in point,if someone could buy a level 100, boost, but then could only fight someone within 10% of their level, while the game may have P2W, with the level boost, but the game is still far more balanced then a game that does not have P2w, but lets a level 100 attack a level 1 player.
Is this sinking in or am I talking to a brick wall?
I don't think Scot is the brick wall.
Use your case in point. You again toss in ganking as some balance to P2W. It's a totally separate discussion.
You can have the exact same rule "no ganking over 10% level difference" without allowing real money to buy the level 100 character. If you want to discuss concepts to limit ganking I think that would make a great (but separate) thread.
You could have the same rule without the P2W.. but then the P2W becomes insignificant to the enjoyment of the game, because its a balanced game.. the money is not the problem, never was, and never will be.
Sinking in yet?
Wow... could not disagree more.
Well., I'll gladly leave you to your unbalanced games then, if that is what makes you happy.
For me, as long as the game is balanced, then it doesn't matter what is for sale in the Item mall. I have no care if someone played the game for their 100 levels or bought the 100 levels. if it bothers you, oh well, no loss on my part.
I plan to play CoE was well, and I am more then happy to enjoy the benefits of those willing to spend money. I heard that someone bought 2 Kingdoms, I might make an effort to be on their lands, as that would make me a citizen of a double sized kingdom, a benefit I plan to enjoy that someone else bought for me. I wager they will invest in good defenses, another benefit I get for free. I love people who are willing to invest into games, they give me a game to play. I love the fact that others can make a better game for me, pity you don't.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
Like I said awhile back I understand why it seemed you were specifically trying to pick a fight with me.
It's OK. It's all good. Like I said repeatedly... I don't wish to stop P2W games. If people enjoy them like you do, GO FOR IT!
I wish the developers would just embrace what they are doing instead of trying to hide behind wordsmithing like "Pay to Build!". I'm just looking for games where your success in game is determined by what happens in game. It appears we have a few prospects coming along. Hopefully one of those work out for those of us who prefer not to participate in 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
Like I said awhile back I understand why it seemed you were specifically trying to pick a fight with me.
It's OK. It's all good. Like I said repeatedly... I don't wish to stop P2W games. If people enjoy them like you do, GO FOR IT!
I wish the developers would just embrace what they are doing instead of trying to hide behind wordsmithing like "Pay to Build!". I'm just looking for games where your success in game is determined by what happens in game. It appears we have a few prospects coming along. Hopefully one of those work out for those of us who prefer not to participate in P2W.
Yup.. yer the kind of player that would say "git gud" knew it all along..
and truth be told, I really with people would stop saying P2W when they are just being too cheap to pay into the game.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
The only one of us that has ever said “git gud” is you... twice so far. You really do seem fixated on ganking and ascribing those characteristics to folks who disagree with you.
I do totally agree that people who just want F2P should not complain about P2W. Luckily I believe there are plenty of folks who are not into P2W and also don’t mind paying for a decent game. I’m hoping that game is one of those on the horizon.
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
Luckily I believe there are plenty of folks who are not into P2W and also don’t mind paying for a decent game. I’m hoping that game is one of those on the horizon.
Industry Trend disagrees with you.
but who knows.. maybe.. just maybe.. that game will happen.
I don't think so, and I am looking into Crowfall as well, which you mentioned, I saw that it was B2P, but I didn't see any mention of a Sub fee. We shall see how that one goes.
Most of the other games have said B2P or F2P, which loosely translates into Item Mall to stay alive.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
I know someone who has racked their credit card up to 15k just exclusively on Boom Beach, Clash Royale, and Clash of Clans. Personally though, I pay to sub, and that's it. I am guilty of one time I bought more station cash for some XP potions.
Make separate servers for paying and non paying players. Paying players can play on f2p servers if they wanna show off how fancy their characters look, without the actual benefits of paid/premium items (eg. bonus stat points).
If I log in, and I can enjoy the game, then whatever P2W that exists is not stopping me from enjoying the game, then that is good design, if I log in and need o worry about other players ganking me, killing me or ruining my fun, then no matter how "pure" the game might be, it is bad design.
Hey you are entitled to your opinions. One point though, your statement about players ganking you has absolutely zero to do with P2W. That can happen in any pay model.
Exactly.
See there is nothing special or fair about games without P2W.
P2W adds another tier of ganking. You caught up with the guy who had played longer than you and then he out spends you. Two wrongs do not make a right.
I would not want to play the game if someone who was playing longer then me could gank me to start with, a shitty game is a shitty game, with or without P2W.
As game that has an item shop, but keeps things balanced to the game, is a better game, even with it's vaunted P2W item Mall.
Case in point,if someone could buy a level 100, boost, but then could only fight someone within 10% of their level, while the game may have P2W, with the level boost, but the game is still far more balanced then a game that does not have P2w, but lets a level 100 attack a level 1 player.
Is this sinking in or am I talking to a brick wall?
I don't think Scot is the brick wall.
Use your case in point. You again toss in ganking as some balance to P2W. It's a totally separate discussion.
You can have the exact same rule "no ganking over 10% level difference" without allowing real money to buy the level 100 character. If you want to discuss concepts to limit ganking I think that would make a great (but separate) thread.
You could have the same rule without the P2W.. but then the P2W becomes insignificant to the enjoyment of the game, because its a balanced game.. the money is not the problem, never was, and never will be.
Sinking in yet?
Wow... could not disagree more.
Well., I'll gladly leave you to your unbalanced games then, if that is what makes you happy.
For me, as long as the game is balanced, then it doesn't matter what is for sale in the Item mall. I have no care if someone played the game for their 100 levels or bought the 100 levels. if it bothers you, oh well, no loss on my part.
I plan to play CoE was well, and I am more then happy to enjoy the benefits of those willing to spend money. I heard that someone bought 2 Kingdoms, I might make an effort to be on their lands, as that would make me a citizen of a double sized kingdom, a benefit I plan to enjoy that someone else bought for me. I wager they will invest in good defenses, another benefit I get for free. I love people who are willing to invest into games, they give me a game to play. I love the fact that others can make a better game for me, pity you don't.
This is partly about your support for a game then, something we have seen so often on here. I won't pretend I am immune to that sort of bias, but I do try to keep things in perspective.
I don't tend to follow games before they are out for two reasons. You can be terribly disappointed and end up thinking you have wasted money on it. But even before you could put money in games pre-launch, I decided that playing beta makes the game old hat before it had launched. To keep the game fresh only play at launch. I wait for reviews and so on, so a few months in is minimum for me.
The idea of passing on P2W benefits to other players is intriguing, there is a P2W balance if players are "covered" by the benefits they get from a player who plays more. But I think in practice it will not work like this, players are notorious for abusing game systems, set up your P2W any way you like and they will exploit it.
But because of how I decide to play games I always reserve judgment until it is out, you get an awful lot of talk about games which is gone with the wind at launch. So good luck in CoE, just don't spend too much!
If I log in, and I can enjoy the game, then whatever P2W that exists is not stopping me from enjoying the game, then that is good design, if I log in and need o worry about other players ganking me, killing me or ruining my fun, then no matter how "pure" the game might be, it is bad design.
Hey you are entitled to your opinions. One point though, your statement about players ganking you has absolutely zero to do with P2W. That can happen in any pay model.
Exactly.
See there is nothing special or fair about games without P2W.
P2W adds another tier of ganking. You caught up with the guy who had played longer than you and then he out spends you. Two wrongs do not make a right.
I would not want to play the game if someone who was playing longer then me could gank me to start with, a shitty game is a shitty game, with or without P2W.
As game that has an item shop, but keeps things balanced to the game, is a better game, even with it's vaunted P2W item Mall.
Case in point,if someone could buy a level 100, boost, but then could only fight someone within 10% of their level, while the game may have P2W, with the level boost, but the game is still far more balanced then a game that does not have P2w, but lets a level 100 attack a level 1 player.
Is this sinking in or am I talking to a brick wall?
I don't think Scot is the brick wall.
Use your case in point. You again toss in ganking as some balance to P2W. It's a totally separate discussion.
You can have the exact same rule "no ganking over 10% level difference" without allowing real money to buy the level 100 character. If you want to discuss concepts to limit ganking I think that would make a great (but separate) thread.
You could have the same rule without the P2W.. but then the P2W becomes insignificant to the enjoyment of the game, because its a balanced game.. the money is not the problem, never was, and never will be.
Sinking in yet?
Wow... could not disagree more.
Well., I'll gladly leave you to your unbalanced games then, if that is what makes you happy.
For me, as long as the game is balanced, then it doesn't matter what is for sale in the Item mall. I have no care if someone played the game for their 100 levels or bought the 100 levels. if it bothers you, oh well, no loss on my part.
I plan to play CoE was well, and I am more then happy to enjoy the benefits of those willing to spend money. I heard that someone bought 2 Kingdoms, I might make an effort to be on their lands, as that would make me a citizen of a double sized kingdom, a benefit I plan to enjoy that someone else bought for me. I wager they will invest in good defenses, another benefit I get for free. I love people who are willing to invest into games, they give me a game to play. I love the fact that others can make a better game for me, pity you don't.
This is partly about your support for a game then, something we have seen so often on here. I won't pretend I am immune to that sort of bias, but I do try to keep things in perspective.
I don't tend to follow games before they are out for two reasons. You can be terribly disappointed and end up thinking you have wasted money on it. But even before you could put money in games pre-launch, I decided that playing beta makes the game old hat before it had launched. To keep the game fresh only play at launch. I wait for reviews and so on, so a few months in is minimum for me.
The idea of passing on P2W benefits to other players is intriguing, there is a P2W balance if players are "covered" by the benefits they get from a player who plays more. But I think in practice it will not work like this, players are notorious for abusing game systems, set up your P2W any way you like and they will exploit it.
But because of how I decide to play games I always reserve judgment until it is out, you get an awful lot of talk about games which is gone with the wind at launch. So good luck in CoE, just don't spend too much!
Spend too much on what?
Did you not read my post.. I haven't spent a cent yet, I am just willing to enjoy the benefits of those that have.
Assuming the game gets made that is.
There is a better then good chance I'll be fully addicted to Crowfall or Conan Exiles, or Anthem, or slew of other MMO's coming out this year (I really have my eye on Dead Matter to be honest) by the time CoE launches, that I most likely won't get around to playing it till it's been out a few months at least or longer.
Unless all the other MMO's turn to shit that is... but I think that's unlikely.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
P2W is a predatory mechanism that has no place in a video game work of art.
Just my 2c.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
It seems that whenever a game is labelled P2W it is basically the death sentence for that game for the majority of players. I think it's because the games profits come from the <5% of "whales" who spend thousands on the game, while the other 95% who don't will end up being completely underpowered.
Do you think there's any plan that could allow P2W to be successful? Perhaps it somehow caters to both average payers and whales? Or is P2W destined to always screw the majority over?
Uh, well, depends. I see many conflicting game elements that can make p2w viable but also not viable at all. If the game sells items that will increase your power via raw stats (strength, precision/accuracy, health/vitality, energy/mana, defense) or modify your damage or defense modifiers directly (+x% crit chance or +x% crit dmg), then that game will have a very unhealthy gameplay environment since those cash shop items are like a 'must have' and that's something I don't encourage (like 9Dragons) because it brings unfairness in both high-end PvE content (raids) and PvP (the most affected scenario).
However, if the game sells those type of items or better skills (Age Of Wushu) but also offers ways to obtain all those items through gameplaying, then I think the p2w level meter decreases by a slightly margin. Of course this wouldn't be possible without a huge old style asian grinding wall but in asian mmorpgs it happens a lot. I really dislike games with paywalls that prevent you from enjoying what it has to offer.
The idea of passing on P2W benefits to other players is intriguing, there is a P2W balance if players are "covered" by the benefits they get from a player who plays more. But I think in practice it will not work like this, players are notorious for abusing game systems, set up your P2W any way you like and they will exploit it.
This practice has been going on for a long time since P2W hit MMO's really.
Let me give an example of my own. I was playing DDO, and in that game guilds had Airships, some you could earn, some you could buy. The ones you could buy offered a little more and looked cooler.
So, when I bought an Airship for my guild, everyone in the guild regardless of how much or little they spent on the game or even played in the game for that matter, gained all the benefits of the additional buffs and pretty atmosphere that the ship I bought provided them.
Equally so there were some buffs for the Airship that I could buy with in-game gold or cash, but, any buff I bought would be shared with everyone in the guild, so if I bought a buff with cash because it wanted the more power or benefit, everyone else in my guild also got the same boons.
Now a lot of MMO's that have the option for buying Guild/Community based stuff often provide this kind of blanket boon to all the people that chose to affiliate or associate with the big spenders, and thus share in the reward or boons for such, even if they paid nothing themselves.
CoE, looks like it does something along these lines, but with more tiers. IE:
Everyone that sides with a specific King gains all the boons that the King buys for their Kingdom.
Everyone that sides with a Baron, would gain all the boons that the Baron buys for their barony.
Etc, etc... so they get the rewards going down.. all the Kingdom Rewards, all the Barony rewards, and down they go.
Like for example,if a Baron buys a full town, with shop keepers, a Smith, Mill, etc.. I get to use all those things, and enjoy what they invested into the game, even if I didn't invest anything, simply by opting to affiliate myself with them.
So.. it happens, some games have better set ups then others.. so I have no idea how CoE will handle this.. they could rock it.. or they could sink it.. we shall see.
But the potential is there.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
The idea of passing on P2W benefits to other players is intriguing, there is a P2W balance if players are "covered" by the benefits they get from a player who plays more. But I think in practice it will not work like this, players are notorious for abusing game systems, set up your P2W any way you like and they will exploit it.
This practice has been going on for a long time since P2W hit MMO's really.
Let me give an example of my own. I was playing DDO, and in that game guilds had Airships, some you could earn, some you could buy. The ones you could buy offered a little more and looked cooler.
So, when I bought an Airship for my guild, everyone in the guild regardless of how much or little they spent on the game or even played in the game for that matter, gained all the benefits of the additional buffs and pretty atmosphere that the ship I bought provided them.
Equally so there were some buffs for the Airship that I could buy with in-game gold or cash, but, any buff I bought would be shared with everyone in the guild, so if I bought a buff with cash because it wanted the more power or benefit, everyone else in my guild also got the same boons.
Now a lot of MMO's that have the option for buying Guild/Community based stuff often provide this kind of blanket boon to all the people that chose to affiliate or associate with the big spenders, and thus share in the reward or boons for such, even if they paid nothing themselves.
CoE, looks like it does something along these lines, but with more tiers. IE:
Everyone that sides with a specific King gains all the boons that the King buys for their Kingdom.
Everyone that sides with a Baron, would gain all the boons that the Baron buys for their barony.
Etc, etc... so they get the rewards going down.. all the Kingdom Rewards, all the Barony rewards, and down they go.
Like for example,if a Baron buys a full town, with shop keepers, a Smith, Mill, etc.. I get to use all those things, and enjoy what they invested into the game, even if I didn't invest anything, simply by opting to affiliate myself with them.
So.. it happens, some games have better set ups then others.. so I have no idea how CoE will handle this.. they could rock it.. or they could sink it.. we shall see.
But the potential is there.
Interesting example, but I don't know of another example on the industry where real cash is spent on group buffs, as opposed to singular benefits to the spender. Certainly, nothing widespread enough to call it a trend.
Microtransactions are easily one of the most cost-effective ways to make money on video games. It's not popular with consumers, it's not incredibly beneficial to the game itself, but it doesn't cost a lot to create a skin one time then sell it 100 times or more for 10 bucks a pop. The secret with microtransactions isn't a yearning from players to play games where they can shop like they're playing "Strip Mall Online," it's that the cost to create MTX items is so minuscule that if only 5% of your total playerbase engages in "Strip Mall Online," you will easily profit off the endeavor on top of box prices paid by your entire playerbase.
The idea of passing on P2W benefits to other players is intriguing, there is a P2W balance if players are "covered" by the benefits they get from a player who plays more. But I think in practice it will not work like this, players are notorious for abusing game systems, set up your P2W any way you like and they will exploit it.
This practice has been going on for a long time since P2W hit MMO's really.
Let me give an example of my own. I was playing DDO, and in that game guilds had Airships, some you could earn, some you could buy. The ones you could buy offered a little more and looked cooler.
So, when I bought an Airship for my guild, everyone in the guild regardless of how much or little they spent on the game or even played in the game for that matter, gained all the benefits of the additional buffs and pretty atmosphere that the ship I bought provided them.
Equally so there were some buffs for the Airship that I could buy with in-game gold or cash, but, any buff I bought would be shared with everyone in the guild, so if I bought a buff with cash because it wanted the more power or benefit, everyone else in my guild also got the same boons.
Now a lot of MMO's that have the option for buying Guild/Community based stuff often provide this kind of blanket boon to all the people that chose to affiliate or associate with the big spenders, and thus share in the reward or boons for such, even if they paid nothing themselves.
CoE, looks like it does something along these lines, but with more tiers. IE:
Everyone that sides with a specific King gains all the boons that the King buys for their Kingdom.
Everyone that sides with a Baron, would gain all the boons that the Baron buys for their barony.
Etc, etc... so they get the rewards going down.. all the Kingdom Rewards, all the Barony rewards, and down they go.
Like for example,if a Baron buys a full town, with shop keepers, a Smith, Mill, etc.. I get to use all those things, and enjoy what they invested into the game, even if I didn't invest anything, simply by opting to affiliate myself with them.
So.. it happens, some games have better set ups then others.. so I have no idea how CoE will handle this.. they could rock it.. or they could sink it.. we shall see.
But the potential is there.
Interesting example, but I don't know of another example on the industry where real cash is spent on group buffs, as opposed to singular benefits to the spender. Certainly, nothing widespread enough to call it a trend.
I'll admit that I don't play a massive variety of MMO's.. my last two long time invested F2P MMOs were GW2 and DDO. And GW2, does not have anything that could be called P2W in it, it's all cosmetics, But that did not stop people from calling selling a mount skin (yes.. just the skin.. no special abilities or features.. just a skin) P2W, because GW2 wanted 20 dollars for it. But moving on from that silly stuff.
GW2 did offer Guild Hall decorations that could be bought, and thus anyone that donated to the decoration would have it contribute to the guild as a whole, so everyone in the guild could enjoy it, even if they donated nothing to the guild as a whole. While, Not a Power Up.. but in a game all about looks.. it was still a way to share the wealth among your guild mates.
Another minor example, is Trove, in Trove guild halls could be seriously tricked out with massive displays and the like, as well as crafting stations, portals, and other things of convenience, that everyone in the guild could enjoy even if they donated nothing to their creation.
So I have no idea what other games do, but often enough, in games with Guild Halls or Shared Guild Boons, there is an inherent shearing of the wealth, no matter the payment method of the boon or hall. Where even those that play little get the rewards of those that play lots, and those that spend little get the rewards of those that spend lots.
But again.. gonna say my sampling and GaF about how some other games do things.. is very limited.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
The idea of passing on P2W benefits to other players is intriguing, there is a P2W balance if players are "covered" by the benefits they get from a player who plays more. But I think in practice it will not work like this, players are notorious for abusing game systems, set up your P2W any way you like and they will exploit it.
This practice has been going on for a long time since P2W hit MMO's really.
Let me give an example of my own. I was playing DDO, and in that game guilds had Airships, some you could earn, some you could buy. The ones you could buy offered a little more and looked cooler.
So, when I bought an Airship for my guild, everyone in the guild regardless of how much or little they spent on the game or even played in the game for that matter, gained all the benefits of the additional buffs and pretty atmosphere that the ship I bought provided them.
Equally so there were some buffs for the Airship that I could buy with in-game gold or cash, but, any buff I bought would be shared with everyone in the guild, so if I bought a buff with cash because it wanted the more power or benefit, everyone else in my guild also got the same boons.
Now a lot of MMO's that have the option for buying Guild/Community based stuff often provide this kind of blanket boon to all the people that chose to affiliate or associate with the big spenders, and thus share in the reward or boons for such, even if they paid nothing themselves.
CoE, looks like it does something along these lines, but with more tiers. IE:
Everyone that sides with a specific King gains all the boons that the King buys for their Kingdom.
Everyone that sides with a Baron, would gain all the boons that the Baron buys for their barony.
Etc, etc... so they get the rewards going down.. all the Kingdom Rewards, all the Barony rewards, and down they go.
Like for example,if a Baron buys a full town, with shop keepers, a Smith, Mill, etc.. I get to use all those things, and enjoy what they invested into the game, even if I didn't invest anything, simply by opting to affiliate myself with them.
So.. it happens, some games have better set ups then others.. so I have no idea how CoE will handle this.. they could rock it.. or they could sink it.. we shall see.
But the potential is there.
Interesting example, but I don't know of another example on the industry where real cash is spent on group buffs, as opposed to singular benefits to the spender. Certainly, nothing widespread enough to call it a trend.
I'll admit that I don't play a massive variety of MMO's.. my last two long time invested F2P MMOs were GW2 and DDO. And GW2, does not have anything that could be called P2W in it, it's all cosmetics, But that did not stop people from calling selling a mount skin (yes.. just the skin.. no special abilities or features.. just a skin) P2W, because GW2 wanted 20 dollars for it. But moving on from that silly stuff.
GW2 did offer Guild Hall decorations that could be bought, and thus anyone that donated to the decoration would have it contribute to the guild as a whole, so everyone in the guild could enjoy it, even if they donated nothing to the guild as a whole. While, Not a Power Up.. but in a game all about looks.. it was still a way to share the wealth among your guild mates.
Another minor example, is Trove, in Trove guild halls could be seriously tricked out with massive displays and the like, as well as crafting stations, portals, and other things of convenience, that everyone in the guild could enjoy even if they donated nothing to their creation.
So I have no idea what other games do, but often enough, in games with Guild Halls or Shared Guild Boons, there is an inherent shearing of the wealth, no matter the payment method of the boon or hall. Where even those that play little get the rewards of those that play lots, and those that spend little get the rewards of those that spend lots.
But again.. gonna say my sampling and GaF about how some other games do things.. is very limited.
GW2 has legit RMT. You can buy in game currency with a CC. This is a problem in any game with an economy.
It seems that whenever a game is labelled P2W it is basically the death sentence for that game for the majority of players. I think it's because the games profits come from the <5% of "whales" who spend thousands on the game, while the other 95% who don't will end up being completely underpowered.
Do you think there's any plan that could allow P2W to be successful? Perhaps it somehow caters to both average payers and whales? Or is P2W destined to always screw the majority over?
hmm .. no one says the devs need to cater to the majority of players. It is a free market. I don't see what is wrong with devs want to cater to the whales. They have no obligation to cater to you, or anything else, right?
"Right" is subjective. What you mean is that you do not like it.
Plus, if the majority of the players are not having fun, why are they playing the game? It is a free world. Quit a game that is not fun for me, particularly of one that is free to you.
The idea of passing on P2W benefits to other players is intriguing, there is a P2W balance if players are "covered" by the benefits they get from a player who plays more. But I think in practice it will not work like this, players are notorious for abusing game systems, set up your P2W any way you like and they will exploit it.
This practice has been going on for a long time since P2W hit MMO's really.
Let me give an example of my own. I was playing DDO, and in that game guilds had Airships, some you could earn, some you could buy. The ones you could buy offered a little more and looked cooler.
So, when I bought an Airship for my guild, everyone in the guild regardless of how much or little they spent on the game or even played in the game for that matter, gained all the benefits of the additional buffs and pretty atmosphere that the ship I bought provided them.
Equally so there were some buffs for the Airship that I could buy with in-game gold or cash, but, any buff I bought would be shared with everyone in the guild, so if I bought a buff with cash because it wanted the more power or benefit, everyone else in my guild also got the same boons.
Now a lot of MMO's that have the option for buying Guild/Community based stuff often provide this kind of blanket boon to all the people that chose to affiliate or associate with the big spenders, and thus share in the reward or boons for such, even if they paid nothing themselves.
CoE, looks like it does something along these lines, but with more tiers. IE:
Everyone that sides with a specific King gains all the boons that the King buys for their Kingdom.
Everyone that sides with a Baron, would gain all the boons that the Baron buys for their barony.
Etc, etc... so they get the rewards going down.. all the Kingdom Rewards, all the Barony rewards, and down they go.
Like for example,if a Baron buys a full town, with shop keepers, a Smith, Mill, etc.. I get to use all those things, and enjoy what they invested into the game, even if I didn't invest anything, simply by opting to affiliate myself with them.
So.. it happens, some games have better set ups then others.. so I have no idea how CoE will handle this.. they could rock it.. or they could sink it.. we shall see.
But the potential is there.
Interesting example, but I don't know of another example on the industry where real cash is spent on group buffs, as opposed to singular benefits to the spender. Certainly, nothing widespread enough to call it a trend.
I'll admit that I don't play a massive variety of MMO's.. my last two long time invested F2P MMOs were GW2 and DDO. And GW2, does not have anything that could be called P2W in it, it's all cosmetics, But that did not stop people from calling selling a mount skin (yes.. just the skin.. no special abilities or features.. just a skin) P2W, because GW2 wanted 20 dollars for it. But moving on from that silly stuff.
GW2 did offer Guild Hall decorations that could be bought, and thus anyone that donated to the decoration would have it contribute to the guild as a whole, so everyone in the guild could enjoy it, even if they donated nothing to the guild as a whole. While, Not a Power Up.. but in a game all about looks.. it was still a way to share the wealth among your guild mates.
Another minor example, is Trove, in Trove guild halls could be seriously tricked out with massive displays and the like, as well as crafting stations, portals, and other things of convenience, that everyone in the guild could enjoy even if they donated nothing to their creation.
So I have no idea what other games do, but often enough, in games with Guild Halls or Shared Guild Boons, there is an inherent shearing of the wealth, no matter the payment method of the boon or hall. Where even those that play little get the rewards of those that play lots, and those that spend little get the rewards of those that spend lots.
But again.. gonna say my sampling and GaF about how some other games do things.. is very limited.
GW2 has legit RMT. You can buy in game currency with a CC. This is a problem in any game with an economy.
Why ?
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
Comments
Going back to my other post with the $100,000 USD undead wyrm, i'd be fine playing a different char, I don't have to be the best to get my rocks off. I'm perfectly happy, figuring out a goal for myself and reaching it. My days of competitive gameplay are over.
I used to duel in diablo 2 HC servers, no hacks or whatever, I know what PvP is. I don't do it anymore
Cryomatrix
You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
Scot: FFS Cryomatrix step on it!
Not sure we would be perfectly happy just then.
Over the course of gaming we have had to accept ganking in one form or another. But it was not built in, P2W builds in ganking, and unfairness in other ways too.
We don't agree, there is nothing wrong with that, I am sure you came on here like me to express your opinions, not to create a cheer leading squad. We can agree to differ.
I'm okay with it
Cryomatrix
You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
For me, as long as the game is balanced, then it doesn't matter what is for sale in the Item mall. I have no care if someone played the game for their 100 levels or bought the 100 levels. if it bothers you, oh well, no loss on my part.
I plan to play CoE was well, and I am more then happy to enjoy the benefits of those willing to spend money. I heard that someone bought 2 Kingdoms, I might make an effort to be on their lands, as that would make me a citizen of a double sized kingdom, a benefit I plan to enjoy that someone else bought for me. I wager they will invest in good defenses, another benefit I get for free. I love people who are willing to invest into games, they give me a game to play. I love the fact that others can make a better game for me, pity you don't.
Like I said awhile back I understand why it seemed you were specifically trying to pick a fight with me.
It's OK. It's all good. Like I said repeatedly... I don't wish to stop P2W games. If people enjoy them like you do, GO FOR IT!
I wish the developers would just embrace what they are doing instead of trying to hide behind wordsmithing like "Pay to Build!". I'm just looking for games where your success in game is determined by what happens in game. It appears we have a few prospects coming along. Hopefully one of those work out for those of us who prefer not to participate in 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
and truth be told, I really with people would stop saying P2W when they are just being too cheap to pay into the game.
I do totally agree that people who just want F2P should not complain about P2W. Luckily I believe there are plenty of folks who are not into P2W and also don’t mind paying for a decent game. I’m hoping that game is one of those on the horizon.
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
but who knows.. maybe.. just maybe.. that game will happen.
I don't think so, and I am looking into Crowfall as well, which you mentioned, I saw that it was B2P, but I didn't see any mention of a Sub fee. We shall see how that one goes.
Most of the other games have said B2P or F2P, which loosely translates into Item Mall to stay alive.
I don't tend to follow games before they are out for two reasons. You can be terribly disappointed and end up thinking you have wasted money on it. But even before you could put money in games pre-launch, I decided that playing beta makes the game old hat before it had launched. To keep the game fresh only play at launch. I wait for reviews and so on, so a few months in is minimum for me.
The idea of passing on P2W benefits to other players is intriguing, there is a P2W balance if players are "covered" by the benefits they get from a player who plays more. But I think in practice it will not work like this, players are notorious for abusing game systems, set up your P2W any way you like and they will exploit it.
But because of how I decide to play games I always reserve judgment until it is out, you get an awful lot of talk about games which is gone with the wind at launch. So good luck in CoE, just don't spend too much!
Did you not read my post.. I haven't spent a cent yet, I am just willing to enjoy the benefits of those that have.
Assuming the game gets made that is.
There is a better then good chance I'll be fully addicted to Crowfall or Conan Exiles, or Anthem, or slew of other MMO's coming out this year (I really have my eye on Dead Matter to be honest) by the time CoE launches, that I most likely won't get around to playing it till it's been out a few months at least or longer.
Unless all the other MMO's turn to shit that is... but I think that's unlikely.
Just my 2c.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
However, if the game sells those type of items or better skills (Age Of Wushu) but also offers ways to obtain all those items through gameplaying, then I think the p2w level meter decreases by a slightly margin. Of course this wouldn't be possible without a huge old style asian grinding wall but in asian mmorpgs it happens a lot. I really dislike games with paywalls that prevent you from enjoying what it has to offer.
Let me give an example of my own. I was playing DDO, and in that game guilds had Airships, some you could earn, some you could buy. The ones you could buy offered a little more and looked cooler.
So, when I bought an Airship for my guild, everyone in the guild regardless of how much or little they spent on the game or even played in the game for that matter, gained all the benefits of the additional buffs and pretty atmosphere that the ship I bought provided them.
Equally so there were some buffs for the Airship that I could buy with in-game gold or cash, but, any buff I bought would be shared with everyone in the guild, so if I bought a buff with cash because it wanted the more power or benefit, everyone else in my guild also got the same boons.
Now a lot of MMO's that have the option for buying Guild/Community based stuff often provide this kind of blanket boon to all the people that chose to affiliate or associate with the big spenders, and thus share in the reward or boons for such, even if they paid nothing themselves.
CoE, looks like it does something along these lines, but with more tiers. IE:
- Everyone that sides with a specific King gains all the boons that the King buys for their Kingdom.
- Everyone that sides with a Baron, would gain all the boons that the Baron buys for their barony.
Etc, etc... so they get the rewards going down.. all the Kingdom Rewards, all the Barony rewards, and down they go.Like for example,if a Baron buys a full town, with shop keepers, a Smith, Mill, etc.. I get to use all those things, and enjoy what they invested into the game, even if I didn't invest anything, simply by opting to affiliate myself with them.
So.. it happens, some games have better set ups then others.. so I have no idea how CoE will handle this.. they could rock it.. or they could sink it.. we shall see.
But the potential is there.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Microtransactions are easily one of the most cost-effective ways to make money on video games. It's not popular with consumers, it's not incredibly beneficial to the game itself, but it doesn't cost a lot to create a skin one time then sell it 100 times or more for 10 bucks a pop. The secret with microtransactions isn't a yearning from players to play games where they can shop like they're playing "Strip Mall Online," it's that the cost to create MTX items is so minuscule that if only 5% of your total playerbase engages in "Strip Mall Online," you will easily profit off the endeavor on top of box prices paid by your entire playerbase.
I'll admit that I don't play a massive variety of MMO's.. my last two long time invested F2P MMOs were GW2 and DDO. And GW2, does not have anything that could be called P2W in it, it's all cosmetics, But that did not stop people from calling selling a mount skin (yes.. just the skin.. no special abilities or features.. just a skin) P2W, because GW2 wanted 20 dollars for it. But moving on from that silly stuff.
GW2 did offer Guild Hall decorations that could be bought, and thus anyone that donated to the decoration would have it contribute to the guild as a whole, so everyone in the guild could enjoy it, even if they donated nothing to the guild as a whole. While, Not a Power Up.. but in a game all about looks.. it was still a way to share the wealth among your guild mates.
Another minor example, is Trove, in Trove guild halls could be seriously tricked out with massive displays and the like, as well as crafting stations, portals, and other things of convenience, that everyone in the guild could enjoy even if they donated nothing to their creation.
So I have no idea what other games do, but often enough, in games with Guild Halls or Shared Guild Boons, there is an inherent shearing of the wealth, no matter the payment method of the boon or hall. Where even those that play little get the rewards of those that play lots, and those that spend little get the rewards of those that spend lots.
But again.. gonna say my sampling and GaF about how some other games do things.. is very limited.
Pay for the game then you can win.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
hmm .. no one says the devs need to cater to the majority of players. It is a free market. I don't see what is wrong with devs want to cater to the whales. They have no obligation to cater to you, or anything else, right?
"Right" is subjective. What you mean is that you do not like it.
Plus, if the majority of the players are not having fun, why are they playing the game? It is a free world. Quit a game that is not fun for me, particularly of one that is free to you.