mourne

I hope they keep any sort of queuing up for instanced PvP out of this game. You cannot have flourishing open-world PvP AND give people the lazy/easy option of standing still in safety and repetitively queuing for self-contained matches. Too many attempts at offering both options have shown that human laziness (or, more precisely, desire for more instant gratification) always trumps, and the open-world PvP dwindles while everyone stands around queuing.

The obvious counterargument to this is that this is a video game, not a lifestyle (even though some say/act otherwise). There are many players who want to be able to enjoy a game without making it a second career. Also, as has been already pointed out, there is a lot of player skill, both tactically and strategically, in this game. You can have maxed out skill trees and be wiped off the map if you are tactically and strategically inferior to your opponents. Honestly, I think the reason they even have the passive skill system is to give a sense of progression/achievement that persists beyond the lives of the campaign worlds. It appeals to the players that were put-off by the idea of the "world resets" being built into the game.

Ok, I stopped reading this thread around page 8 (and didn't read each post meticulously), so forgive me for addressing the elephant in the room if it's already been addressed... Nyamo, do you mind if I ask how old you are, or what you do for a living? I only ask because I remember thinking very much like you when I was young, with little to no obligations, and a very flexible schedule. This may seem condescending, but I do not wish to be. My point is that the sort of 24/7 system you're advocating is simply unattractive to a majority of working folk that have multiple responsibilities and things to do other than play video games (work, careers that aren't hourly, families, other hobbies that don't involve sitting in front of a screen, the list goes on). Video games are fun, and I completely understand that for some, they're an entire lifestyle. However, the fundamental breakdown in this conversation seems that you feel just because something can be done to appeal to a very small niche of players--ones that want this game Crowfall to be their lives--that it should be done. Many posts have already tried to address the economic implications of this with you, but it is readily apparent you do not have a fundamental understanding of economic principles. I am not trying to belittle you; you would likely have to study these principles in school (or in your free time) to understand notions like opportunity-cost, scarcity, transaction-costs, etc. You are taking positions that make unrealistic presumptions about the way real-life economics bears out in practice. Your suggestions and desires work out just fine on paper, but would not work in reality (for many reasons already pointed out to you, which I will not retread them all). This argument is analogous to Coase's theorems (represented by everyone arguing against you in this thread), and his critique of Pigou's theorems (which you are representing in this thread). The short of it: Pigou's economic models assumed a world of no scarcity of resources, i.e., no zero-sum games, and no transaction costs or opportunity costs. If you don't understand what any of that means, that explains handily why you are not seeing the error in your reasoning. Again, I am not trying to insult you. I understand why you want this 24/7 system. Many, including myself, do not want this system; however, if you truly understood the aforementioned concepts, you yourself would concede that while you desire and wish for a 24/7 system, you understand and realize that it is not viable in reality. If there were enough demand to justify implementing a 24/7 system, the devs would do it. They're in the business of making money. I have not looked into their incorporation structure, but I think they are a closely-held corporation (not publicly traded). Nonetheless, they are fiduciaries to the shareholders, and have a duty to do what is in the best interests of the corporation. Even if they themselves wanted a 24/7 system, if they realize it is, say, a 5% niche of the target audience, allocating resources to that 5% at the expense of 95% of their target audience is not only logically foolish, but going against their obligations to their shareholders. Am I saying it is impossible for them to decide to do as you wish? No, of course not, there are breaches of corporate duties all the time. I am just trying to get across to you that even if ~10 of us in this thread wanted the exact same 24/7 rules as you, most of us realize that it is not viable, and thus probably not going to happen. As Maj already said quite early on, it is not a matter of trying to convince you to want what we want. It's about telling you "don't get your hopes up" because the writing (and hundreds of years of economic theory) is already on the wall.

If you can't even play the game without paying you can't win without paying. But yeah, let's ***** about them not giving us enough for free. People should be happy they can even play without a subscription in the first place. Every MMO I can even think of can be "pay to win" and there isn't a **** thing devs can do about it. I can go buy max level characters in any game I want. I can go buy gold from gold sellers in any game I want. This bandying about "P2W" about everything is garbage. I don't care what generation you personally are from. If you couldn't read between the lines to comprehend what my point was, you're an idiot in any generation. For what it's worth, I think you understood my point and are likely not an idiot. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you just got your panties in a bunch over my snide remark about entitlement generations. If you actually think that issue doesn't exist, our conversation is over.

I will love if there is a guy that will pay CF a zillion dollars. Can you imagine how awesome they could make the game with a zillion dollars? No, it won't bring more gold farmers/sellers, because that is mostly prevalent in games that restrict the ability to sell. It creates a black market. Allowing players to use game mechanics to trade without using a black market and risking being banned reduces gold farmers/sellers. Just like legalizing drugs would cripple the black market for drugs. L2economy.

Games with subscriptions are pay to win because you can't even play the ****ing game without paying. This entitlement generation, I swear...

I agree. I missed that window when they were allowing selling off pieces of your KS bundle for "currency" which could be used to purchase additional accounts. I would have definitely gotten at least 2 more accounts. Now I'm stuck with 1 and a bunch of EK fluff.

ftfy. Also, I want +50% dodge pip regen time.

This is the best MOBA I've played in a while. It's a twist on the typical mechanics, but shares similarities still. It's still 5 v 5, pushing to control points, and to kill the enemies "boss/titan/etc.", but the differences really add a lot to the tactics/strategy imo. You take control of points, and they generate a resource. When you hit 100, your "boss" attacks the enemy "boss" and pins it down. While it's pinned down, you have a limited window to deal enough damage to the helpless enemy "boss." If you do so 3 times, you win. If you die while attacking the enemy boss, it gives it a temporary shield to absorb incoming damage. At each control point, you "summon" a variety of structures, each with its own tactical function: see invis, creating a defensive wall to block off an avenue of attack, aoe heals, aoe stealth, etc... The best part is the combat mechanics. It's very fast paced, and everything is action/twitch. Shooters = third person shooter controls. Fighters and Assassins feel like fighting game character controls (imo these are the highest skill ceiling characters in the game). And then of course there are Mages, Tanks, and Utility type characters that feel more like an action MMO, control-wise. It's $30 to unlock all heroes, and every hero ever released in the future. IMO if you like the game, this is definitely worth it. Each hero can be unlocked with in-game currency, but it takes a long time to save up (pretty grindy if you're relying on these points to unlock things). On the plus side, 90% of the skins can be unlocked with the in-game currency (not just for cash currency), but again, it's a long grind. Considering most other MOBAs do not even allow you to unlock skins for in-game currency at all, I guess it is not so bad. I'd definitely recommend trying this game out for free to see if you enjoy it. If you like games like Battlerite, Smite, Overwatch, or Paladins, you might like this as well. In my opinion, it's better than all of these games I mentioned.

Long story short: abandon character physics, reallocate all of that time and money, and only keep world/object physics.

Haha, tell me about it. Pretty realistic though. Like when playing Day of Infamy and just having your head blown off from an unknown location, or artillery land randomly on your face. Welcome to modernized warfare!

I would play this game if for no other reason than to stare at the amazing ocean graphics. Skull & Bones looks alright for a more realistic take on naval combat, but the inherent coop nature (i.e., multiplayer ships) of Sea of Thieves makes it the winner in my book (neither game being released notwithstanding).

I like Albion in premise, but without playing with a guild of people, I would say don't bother. The game is anything but solo friendly. The combat itself is monotonous and simplistic, but the fun comes into play with PvP/GvG engagements. As a comparison, the combat is less complicated than LoL, though similar in nature.