Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About andre369

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  1. Because words only mean so much. And the game will have economy that involves your wallet. Would rather pay a 100 dollar sub fee for a true MMO world, not some arcade game where I can pay others to do work for me, sanctioned by the developers... Wallet economy, which will impact game features. I will rather back Camelot at this point, a true sub fee game, In the end I am not sure I will back either, but if I had to right now. It would be Camelot.
  2. They must of noticed all the funding for Crowfall were using stolen credit cards !
  3. A lot of people does not have the time anymore, to sink in to a MMORPG. They have lives, kids and several wifes(in some cultures). So do you want Artcraft to let players, real people with lives and family to be able to progress faster if they choose to pay in some form? What do you think?
  4. So paying to progress faster, individually or as a group. Is a thing you want in an MMORPG? As a player, are you seeking to find a game where you can pay to skip content? I fail to see how people can even defend such systems, when all it does is bring previously ban able offences into the game as a system designed to make the company money. It may be working, it may not be totally end of the world. I never claimed it to be. But why do games that are supposed to be about time and effort, aka progression. Why do they have to bring in wallets into the economy? As I have said before, why do this game have to bring in mechanics that make me ask my self. Should I grind out X amounts of enemies/resources or whatever. Or should I just PAY someone else to do it for me?(In the form of selling X item from the company) I just do not understand why someone would defend a system like this, it puts a price tag on the time you invest in the game. So anyone can just buy past that played time, and be at the same step as you. Why do you want this?
  5. Ignorance is bliss. Player A buys 100 Sub tickets > sells to others for in game resources. Wallet economy.
  6. Does that justify that you can buy to skip progression? It is easy to label "people who spend cash for items" as noobs and they always loose. I would like to see the bank receipts of top EVE players, then we can talk about how this is not whatever. I think more of how the game itself will be impacted by this, and how I as a player will have to wage my time spent vs the easy progress I can make to progress faster. If I want to play a game like that, there are plenty of single player games out there. I wonder what CS fans would of say, if valve started selling guns with less recoil. "It is not P2W, you can learn how to control it". Pfft.
  7. Gordon was looking at the thread yes. As others claim it, or try to label this thread as P2W discussion. I label it as Pay to skip, pay to progress. Is it winning? No and yes, depending how big guilds will utilize it. More importantly, why are we even having this discussion if the game is supposed to be an actual world, with consequences. Letting people buy their way up the food chain, by selling X bought with wallet. Is that a feature you would want in your dream MMO? Or would you rather want the time you spend in game matter more?
  8. So that makes the world immersive and meaningful? I can buy gear with my wallet, bypass actual playing the game, making progression and time invested in the game meaningless. Should I farm hard to get that sword? Or should I just pay a few bucks? This whole thing will lead to less pride, less recognition for getting good items. Everyone will just shrug it off, and say, "Oh that guy just bought that". Playing forum "fanboy" right now will not help you enjoy the game when it launches and you realize core systems may be designed around the RMT. I am just saying what I have seen before, legalizing RMT to "counter" gold sellers, leads to core system of most games to be designed around it. And you will not find much pride or joy farming for an item, if the guy next to you can spend a few bucks and get it right of the bat. It doesnt matter if players set the price, the whole system takes away what a MMO should be. Progression, if you give players a way to just skip that, what is the point to actually invest time for it. If I can work for a few hours and bypass 50 hours of playing, knowing that option is there, the game is no longer fun to me. It rips away the soul of the game, the time invested does not matter anymore. That is my take on it, and take it as an opinion, but it is what it is.
  9. I buy membership, and sell to other players. With the resources acquired for sold membership, I buy big shiny armor. More like wallet driven economy if you ask me.
  10. Oh my mistake, I thought you might have tested EQN, maybe I read wrong.
  11. Lets hope so. My fear with CU, is the housing/bases. So little info on it, and I fear it will be just preset keeps. But, lets hope neither of these games end up with that.
  12. Oh so you have played it? Or just judging a "first pass" of of animations from a video? And yes, I think EQN, will be a casual poorly made socks game that will be dumbed down to kindergarten level to be able to go on consoles as well. But unless you have played it, your argument is just bashing a early design video.
  13. Sorry to burst your bubble, but so far it seems only one world will be of this kind.
  14. My worry is that, rather players defining the progress of the campaign. Some arbitrary gift wrapped system will do most of the work. Guess we just have to wait and see. It seems like a system that will progress no matter what the actual state of the battle is. It will come down to who is on top when the system decides the match to be over. That is my impression anyways.
  • Create New...