Wicked Mouse Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 For clarity and by definition, anything you can buy in game for real money that improves your performance, ranking, statistics or advancements is pay to win. That includes xp boosters, gold boosters, premium items [...] Here are some examples. take MechWarrior online, whose creators swear its not pay to win. Some mechs cannot be purchased unless bought with MC which can only be obtained by real money - pay to win MechWarrior has significantly nerved the amount of in game revenue obtainable to make levelling a clan set of mechs so expensive that its unreasonable to do it free to play. so you will need to spend money to get the mechs you want in order to level them for max performance on the field. -pay to win If you do buy a much for real money you will get xp bonus and chills bonus over a guy who does not. - pay to win. Of course, play the game long enough and you can theoretically purchase most items in game. But by spending real cash, you can get what you want a lot quicker which is pay to win. So any examples mentioned above which you say are not pay to win, but you can actually advance FASTER with cash than someone without is pay to win. [...] You make this sound like you take a few examples off of one single game to base your entire definition on. Per definition Pay-to-Win is literally paying to win. So by putting down real cash monies in order to have a clear destinguishable advantage over the opponent that would otherwise NOT be able to obtained. One example would be that of the "Gold Ammo" in World of Tanks. In the past this Armour Piercing Composite Rigid ammunition was only obtained through the premium gold currency. This enabled you to generally kill any target, as long as you managed to hit it and nothing the opponent could do other than hiding from your gun. Nowadays this entered into a "grey area", where it can be obtained with silver normal currency, but it's still expensive. Then it's a matter of HOW difficult it would be to obtain the same advantage without using cash. I do not play MechWarrior and so I cannot judge your statements on how much you would be right, or not. However you say "Of course, play the game long enough and you can theoretically purchase most items in game. But by spending real cash, you can get what you want a lot quicker which is pay to win." and with this statement I disagree. Pay-to-advance is not per definition pay-to-win. It entirely depends on how it is implemented into a game, and how destinguishable it is. I'm sorry, bud, but your zealous desire to label anything that has microtransaction as pay-to-win, as I see many people do, I have to disagree with in the way you're arguing it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macross Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 See this is what I was concerned about when asked if there would be game shop stuff with buffs and exclusive content. There are some who have bought game shop items so long that they do not consider most things pay to win, but instead "pay to grind less" or "pay for convenience"... I was looking for another good ship or navy game because the other one I played (nf2) has started selling in game money for real money: 10 dollars = about 100-200 non-premium games worth of game cash. Exp walls are long enough with premium but without its impractical, unreasonable, and almost impossible to advance past a certain point; long sessions aren't enough. Just about every high level ship player got that high through the premium service exp/cash boost. Often you get into stacked games where your team of destroyers and small/weak pre-ww1 ships are up against their overpowering 1 hit kill ww2 battleships, multiple aircraft carriers with waves of torpedo/dive bombers, and more advanced destroyers. Makes more than half the games pointless. I don't want to spend on a game that will just end up like that. :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wicked Mouse Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 First of all this won't be like a Navyfield or World of Tanks or War Thunder where the are matches of team vs team. This will be, from the responses from the development team, more like a sort of Elite Dangerous. The business model would be much similar to Guild Wars 2 (see the quote in my signature). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macross Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 First of all this won't be like a Navyfield or World of Tanks or War Thunder where the are matches of team vs team. This will be, from the responses from the development team, more like a sort of Elite Dangerous. The business model would be much similar to Guild Wars 2 (see the quote in my signature). Yes, I keep hearing people say that it will be like Guild wars 2, but I am not that familiar with that game. If its like the vid link showed and you mean payment is like $40 upfront then $10/month subscription after that then that's enough that I needed to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wicked Mouse Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Yes, I keep hearing people say that it will be like Guild wars 2, but I am not that familiar with that game. If its like the vid link showed and you mean payment is like $40 upfront then $10/month subscription after that then that's enough that I needed to know. No subscriptions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bogusheadbox Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 @kasztelan Firstly, urban dictionary is not a recognised nor official medium for definitions. As for the example you wanted, here goes. In a game, it takes a player who averages "x" amount of game time per month, "y" amount of months to achieve a certain level/ranking/ability Now take a person who has bought xp boosters and gold boosters and we can surmise the following Playing the same amount of time per month "x" this user with boosters will get to said level/ranking/ability much faster than you. therefore in a pvp environment the two guys who have played the same amount of hours will be unbalanced because the first guy with no boost will be much lower ranking/level/ability than the second guy. - pay to win. Add to that currency boosters and the booster guy will not only level faster, but can afford better stuff than non boost person even though they played exactly the same amount of game time. How is that not pay to win? @ wicked mouse. There is nothing over zealous about what I have said, that's a wild and incorrect accusation on your part. in fact, I did say that cosmetics items are not pay to win (and how can they be), so that nullifies you statement there. As for you rebuttal over my example of MechWarrior, I am not asking you to play it. I am asking you to recognise the mechanics I have described (which is pay to win) to which you can apply to almost every free to play mmo. Macros has hit the nail on the head and I totally agree. people have become so accustomed to purchasing convenience items like gold and xp boosters that they cannot recognise a pay to win mechanic. I am not trying to pick any arguments with you wicked mouse or kaszeltan, just stating the obvious and also voicing here that I am very interested in this game, but I will not pre-order or purchase if it has pay to win mechanics. So I hope you both can keep the tone civil as I enjoy a good conversation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mundane Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Free to Play leads to Pay to Win, which we all know is a bad thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toni Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 @kasztelan Firstly, urban dictionary is not a recognised nor official medium for definitions. As for the example you wanted, here goes. In a game, it takes a player who averages "x" amount of game time per month, "y" amount of months to achieve a certain level/ranking/ability Now take a person who has bought xp boosters and gold boosters and we can surmise the following Playing the same amount of time per month "x" this user with boosters will get to said level/ranking/ability much faster than you. therefore in a pvp environment the two guys who have played the same amount of hours will be unbalanced because the first guy with no boost will be much lower ranking/level/ability than the second guy. - pay to win. Add to that currency boosters and the booster guy will not only level faster, but can afford better stuff than non boost person even though they played exactly the same amount of game time. How is that not pay to win? @ wicked mouse. There is nothing over zealous about what I have said, that's a wild and incorrect accusation on your part. in fact, I did say that cosmetics items are not pay to win (and how can they be), so that nullifies you statement there. As for you rebuttal over my example of MechWarrior, I am not asking you to play it. I am asking you to recognise the mechanics I have described (which is pay to win) to which you can apply to almost every free to play mmo. Macros has hit the nail on the head and I totally agree. people have become so accustomed to purchasing convenience items like gold and xp boosters that they cannot recognise a pay to win mechanic. I am not trying to pick any arguments with you wicked mouse or kaszeltan, just stating the obvious and also voicing here that I am very interested in this game, but I will not pre-order or purchase if it has pay to win mechanics. So I hope you both can keep the tone civil as I enjoy a good conversation An example of free to play game is Path of Exile...it only has cosmetic micro transactions and nothing else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bixol Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Also if it is "pay one play forewer" it cannot be seen as a free to play game I hope ot won't be f2p, it shoild be either pay once or a small monthly fee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galileus Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Free to Play leads to Pay to Win, which we all know is a bad thing. Wrong. Pay to win leads to pay to win. There is no internal issue with f2p that defines it to become a p2w scenario. (...) therefore in a pvp environment the two guys who have played the same amount of hours will be unbalanced because the first guy with no boost will be much lower ranking/level/ability than the second guy. - pay to win. Add to that currency boosters and the booster guy will not only level faster, but can afford better stuff than non boost person even though they played exactly the same amount of game time. How is that not pay to win? Dodge this - a guy who pays for his xp boosters needs to get money to get them first, ergo, spent time not playing. XP booster then lets him catch up to a guy who has no monetary income and no time not to play But seriously... at the same level as XP boost is unbalancing the game, real life is. If you want to ban XP boosts because they create unbalance, you would have ban all people who either work and have love life, or ones who doesn't. Otherwise it's an unbalancing factor - a guy with no real life is going to get more powerfull than a guy who needs to get dinner ready for his family. Dinner bans, then? I don't think so. Also, pay 2 win obviously means gaining an uncanny edge over your opponent that allows you to win. That edge needs to be clean enough so that only p2w user can really threaten another p2w user. XP boosts don't work like that. Even if you get ahead, you get NOTHING that could not be gotten by other people. Best case scenario, you reach end game. Holy whoop, there are other end-game users who didn't pay nuthin. And they have more experience and can whoop your ass. How is it P2W if you pay and don't win? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morashtak Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Extra Credits - Doing Free to Play Wrong - How Bad Monetization Harms F2P Games Extra Credits: Microtransactions (Are Good If Done Right) Extra Credits - Free to Play Is Currently Broken - How High Costs Drive Players Away from F2P Games 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greybuscat Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 lock nations to account so if you have a British character the rest of the characters you make must be British. Off-topic, but this I really don't like. If you want to punish players, make it permadeath and one character at a time. This would have the added benefit of keeping the British Navy from having 45000 Vice Admirals a year after launch. It also wouldn't cut off the majority of the game from you, minutes after you start the game. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArlindoBerto Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 I agree with the compleate free to play like LoL, Path of exile and others, and i leave this suggestion: cosmetics like this one, off course its a portuguese one, but you understand what i mean, if its possible.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Tar Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 F2P does not exist and usually ends up costing some players more than the P2P model. Making and running games is a business, like it or not, and as a business it needs to create a cash flow to keep the lights on, just like where you work. Guild Wars 2, and BTW I think that Angry Joe is a Nub, makes the income through game sales. When the sales start to slow down, then through store transactions. As long as they can create enough cash flow through cosmetic items then it does not impact the game, LOL can do this because of the huge player base. Store transactions are also usually the point of contention in most games from the Koreans loving the idea to NA and EU who usually do not. But here is my concern. If you are not willing to pay for a quality product, either through monthly fees or store transactions, then you will not get a quality product. WoW, whether you like it or not as a game, has maintained its level of quality because of the cash flow that Blizzard enjoys. So players need to pay for the pleasure of playing a game some were down the road like it or not or the quality suffers. BTW it has been my experience that F2P can attract some of the worse player base in the game industry. So I am crossing my fingers that it does not happen here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gallex Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 i hope for a p2p......i hope.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mirones Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 i hope for a p2p......i hope.... buy once keep playing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Madoc Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 A monthly P2P system would be a great way to finance the infrastructure for a single shard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now