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


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by panpear

  1. Yeah, I could see the 'tax free' being upkeep free... maybe. Maybe that's why you would charge taxes to people to visit your social world? So you can pay for all that land that is there? That could be a discouragement for not just making your kingdom the biggest. And it would clear up some difference of parcles of land being "You can tax people on this land" versus "If you give someone this land you cannot charge taxes". I'm just a little worried that if you can charge taxes for having lots of land, and you can get land for real money, that you could eventually lure enough people to your place to get you lots of materials that you didn't earn through playing the main game.
  2. I was noting in the Kickstarter rewards that the lands granted were 'tax-free'. If that means you cannot add taxes to those particular parcels of land... I approve! Taxes seemed like the one thing that seemed a bit 'p2w' in the Eternal Kingdoms, but if you have to earn land that can be taxed through in-game means, then it would make sense that you could tax people on those lands and build your giant trade-hub empire. Thoughts on this?
  3. I started with the gold one, but then I went with Amber because I do like physical copies of things, and 5 years VIP isn't bad. Even if I end up not liking the game that much I have made worse starting investments in games before... (Here's looking at you, Champion's Online Lifetime subscription). If there wasn't the Early Bird Amber tier, I think I would have settled at gold, though!
  4. Character slots? AND I can be a Lady? Woot woot. *backed*
  5. Oh, and a comment on the obtaining - I was implying that maybe the market for VIP tickets will be less than you would think with the sub being optional. That's what I would think. However, it may mean that less people want to pay 15 dollars a month 'optionally' and instead trade in resources to get the bonus sub. Not sure what the overall mentality would be. Usually in games with tickets to buy subs, I just pay for the sub normally because I don't want to deal with the market since I don't have time to farm things, but I also don't buy extra tickets because usually I don't feel in the in-game resource amount is really worth the money I'd spend.
  6. Here's hoping that even by throwing tons of money at gear, you still won't completely own people. I think that alone would alleviate quite a few concerns about this but you're right, we don't know enough about it yet. :/ With the worlds having various worldsets, and worlds themselves being not permanent, I could see players in this game having a more 'shrug your shoulders' if you lose gear kind of attitude, rather than 'I'm scared of losing my gear so I should be naked' like in Darkfall. The vibe I've been getting is 'everything but your character is transitory' which is an interesting thought. I was a lot more concerned about gear loss when I thought the worlds were permanent, but when the world is ending who cares about gear? XD
  7. I'm with pang in the way that I don't mind such a system and I don't really see it as an advantage, especially considering the sub is optional (we'll see if it 'feels' optional but technically it is). However, as long as there are efforts to balance any partial or fullblown 'p2w' effects from it, I'm cool with it.
  8. Right, and you can't take a VIP token out of the game and exchange it for real cash (which is what blizz allowed in the D3 AH). Not being able to earn real money for selling items allows for a different dynamic than the old D3 model. Once a VIP token is bought, it's effectively up to the player to determine how to get value (through resources) for that token. I'm not sure what else people would trade subs for other than in-game resources? Unless you meant 'gear' as separate from 'resources'; I think 'resources' in this case would pretty much any in-game item. I do think the model is substantially different than the D3 model (no directly real money, no 'blizz bux' currency as a separate currency stream, no ability to remove money from the in-game system), but it does allow for an outside resource to be put into the game. I agree that could affect economy balance. But since we don't have a good understanding of how the economy will be defined exactly, or when/how you can trade things for VIP tickets, that I still trust that the Crowfall dev team will take all of that into consideration when designing the system. I am also thinking that since gear goes away entirely (rather than just abandoned for even better things), that they are hoping that will keep the demand constant for certain gear/resources, which should definitely help with the economy and prevent people from 'making the best gear at all times' even if they spend all of the money.
  9. Blizzard - a super large company with an army of lawyers to handle that. Plus, currency was Battle.net dollars, which could be taken out in lump sums; I don't recall if they were taxed lump sums. Also - the system was eventually removed (more for gameplay reasons than not. Hey, wait, as if putting in real money directly for items was a bad idea? Of course, D3 items are of a more permanent nature with a final 'this is it' than what I presume the item system will be in Crowfall, due to item destruction/decay). Having the indirect VIP ticket means resources are traded only for subscriptions, and stops money drain from the company as well.
  10. Because if you do that the real life governments will tax the crap out of you. Buying an in-game item that has no 'real money value' (because you can't take it out of the system, technically) avoids some of the complications of saying 'yeah, so this is like ebay, go for it'. Optional subs. It's described in the payment FAQ.
  11. Personally, I think this is because games are not created in a social vacuum. Decisions to create any world, including fantasy worlds with their own lore, are informed by the world we live in. Since we have seen humans, one may infer they are like our human race, which then leads to the question of why aren't more of them diverse? As mentioned previously, not all of them appear to be of the same race, if you will, using our society's terms to explain their appearance (such as the 'asian' or 'middle eastern' one(s)), so why aren't all of them represented in the concept art? Was it intentional or not? Is it something to consider for future designs or to immediately be bashed down as 'that's not 'normal'!' (which I do not see Crowfall team as people to do that). Asking about 'orange' or 'blue' skin are things that we usually don't find in our real world, so that portion, at least, has no backdrop on which to refer itself. And the OP did not write the linked article, so.
  12. Skin color pickers are indeed a standard in almost every MMO. However, this does raise an idea that concept art may not consider darker skintones first for concept art for more 'human' races, just like sometimes concept art of women is done second. (Though on the latter point, Crowfall has been split pretty equal between men and women concepts presented first, which I have definitely approved of). I mean, talking concept art, it's hard to really always go "I had this particular image in mind but I should change their skintone to make things diverse' but if you hadn't made up your mind on skintone, it doesn't hurt to keep this in the back of your mind as to 'why not a different skin tone'?
  13. It may even take longer than that, given the length of campaigns. Maybe if you dig a quick tunnel that is not as structurally sound it could take 30 minutes or something, but would be easier to collapse or spot. Maybe making a secure tunnel would take longer, adding braces and such. And of course, a counter defense would indeed be to add subterranean walls/floors that would be harder to dig through (or at least louder, so you can hear them approach and set up a trap. Or all the traps).
  14. panpear


    Long hair = <3 Maybe the ear length can be customized. Right now in the concept art her shoulderpads balance it out. I don't mind long ears.
  15. Maybe in 1:1 or other encounters without many around, having ranged would be an advantage. But it would have to be selectively used in larger scale comabts, needing to call your shots instead of constant pewpew. Of course, if a world if FFA you don't have to worry about too much friendly fire, right? Tactics! EDIT: For full disclosure, I'm one of those who would FF everyone for sure, if I wasn't aiming poorly somewhere else. >_>;
  16. Of course! This way they are ready to duel by sword or by pistol. A duelist is always prepared. They remind me of Reepicheep, actually. XD Though I'm pretty sure I'm interested in them because they are a specialist class, probably for digging and trading or what have you. Right up my alley. Though I still want to make a centaur... and a frost elf... and...
  17. Excellent update! I love these two archetypes! Frostweavers have long hair - longer than you normally see in MMOs. Cool! And a specialist class? YES. AND THEY ARE SO CUTE. (And probably deadly).
  18. I agree as well. Not only do people cry 'Ack, a sub! I can't afford that!', but in a game like this where they want people to come back to try out those fresh new dying worlds, or to stay in a campaign for awhile and check it out at different times, having to maintain a sub would be a lot. Too much, probably for the populations they want. A good way to keep people cycling around would be the no-sub model, so I still think this is a good compromise. Also, given their FAQ and other updates, I feel like they would go out of their way to make sure that selling VIP tickets wouldn't ruin the economy or give an unfair advantage.
  19. Yeah, definitely. I was also just thinking that if you could sell them in the dying realm, there would definitely be more risk involved too, depending on the ruleset. Just picked up yours and want to go over to the player decided trading zone? Whoops, you got killed, your inventory is gone! The advantage of getting resources in the dying realm to help your current campaign stuff still runs the risk of losing due to people killing you.
  20. I don't think it's been clarified whether VIP ticket trading can happen only in the Eternal Kingdoms, or if you can receive and trade those tickets while you are in a campaign world. On one hand, I think it limits 'advantages' if you can only trade it in the EK, but it also would limit how much money they could make from them, especially right away when no one has any resources. However, even in the dying realms the resources are limited; not everyone is entering them with gear all ready to sell.
  21. Wildstar is close; B2P + required sub + sub for in-game trade. Not sure if they have a cash shop for other things, but from Crowfall's desc., the cash shop isn't too much of a concern (seeing as it's for personal use only).
  22. Also, I see some of the concerns in this post were addressed in dev posts. Mainly: - There will be 'physics' applied to items, so you can't just kick a giant boulder around like it was nothing. - The game will be more focused on destruction than creating. In my mind, this probably alleviates some concerns about griefing, or the building of inappropriate things (at least in the main game worlds. It sounds like the Eternal Kingdoms may allow more building, but since those buildings require materials I could see them being more predefined structures, like Potato is saying). And with the physics, hopefully it will look cooler when you're destroying things (and be more deadly?) They're using Voxel as a tool to make the game, not having the game be defined by Voxel. So, while voxel can 'look like this' in other games, they can do other things with it too. After all, the previously seen screenshots would be with the Voxel stuff already.
  23. Earlier in the thread, it was mentioned that stuff in the videos are just demos of the tech; things in Crowfall will definitely have more physics involved. Devs responded, in fact, so you can use the dev tracker to find their posts (probably!)
  24. Yes; that has been stated before (when the centaur was released). In this case I would think the Elken are gender-locked as well.
  25. It may be that the type of horns on Elken are a type of customization, and not quite a new species. Or maybe they are separate, but close enough for non-Elken to lump them all together as generically 'Sons of that one god whose name I forgot right now'. XD
  • Create New...