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

Tomes P2W Model

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, xaine said:

We'll see. They may test it, or tweak it, and launch isn't exactly around the corner.

I don't think they'll let the game go to poorly made socks over P2W.

Anything is possible I guess, but at this point, seems they are pretty set on systems that will directly or indirectly result in players gaining "power" with cash.

People throw a fit when companies sell things in the cash shop (Archeage/BDO), yet when they are only the middle man, seems it isn't so evil. Two flavors of the same thing to me.

As someone that is interested in no import campaigns where ideally it's player skill vs player skill, people potential paying for stat advantage, be it insignificant or not, isn't something I see adding anything positive to the game or my experience. VIP being expected isn't too bad as I believe players should be giving back to on-going entertainment, but Tomes are a lot more questionable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, APE said:

Anything is possible I guess, but at this point, seems they are pretty set on systems that will directly or indirectly result in players gaining "power" with cash.

People throw a fit when companies sell things in the cash shop (Archeage/BDO), yet when they are only the middle man, seems it isn't so evil. Two flavors of the same thing to me.

As someone that is interested in no import campaigns where ideally it's player skill vs player skill, people potential paying for stat advantage, be it insignificant or not, isn't something I see adding anything positive to the game or my experience. VIP being expected isn't too bad as I believe players should be giving back to on-going entertainment, but Tomes are a lot more questionable.

The issue I have is this is just the beginning, pre-launch. Normally things will just get worse as the game goes on. If things don't change by launch, I'll be looking to sell my CE once it comes in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ironarm said:

The issue I have is this is just the beginning, pre-launch. Normally things will just get worse as the game goes on. If things don't change by launch, I'll be looking to sell my CE once it comes in.

For now I'll see where it goes but seems like it will be a hard sell.

Clearly plenty of people play games many consider to be "P2W" or whatever, but CF lacks the content/support of most of them along with having a heavy loss design. What might let people ignore the model in other games might not translate here.

Maybe I'm just a minority that doesn't find joy in throwing money at videos games to have an edge. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, ironarm said:

The issue I have is this is just the beginning, pre-launch. Normally things will just get worse as the game goes on. If things don't change by launch, I'll be looking to sell my CE once it comes in.

Not necessarily, there have been several MMO's that really screwed up their launch but then redid their business model and made a come back.  Star Wars Old Republic for example was bleeding players just a few months after launch because they had burnt through all the content and didn't see any reason to stick around.  The game went F2P with a subscription model after that and put our regular updates, it's been doing pretty well since then.

When crowfall comes out, if it gets an absolutely crap reception because of how they have designed the game, they devs can always make changes afterwards.  Hopefully we'll be able to properly test the system before launch and get a feel for how it works and see how many problems there may be.  Personally I'm not too worried, sure there is going to be that person in every game who figures out how to break the system.

I saw an article years ago about a player in WoW who managed to hook up a couple dozen computers with scripting so that he could run raids all by himself.  I'm sure there will be a small amount of people that will figure some way to abuse the systems in game but I don't honestly see it affecting the vast majority of players due in part to how everything in crowfall is made to be temporary, so any significant advantage a single player gets is gone whenever he jumps into a new campaign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ClockworkOrange This is probably a bit too late to matter, but I think it's worthwhile to point out anyway - KrakkenSmacken didn't accuse you of supporting your argument with anecdotal evidence; that was just a bad Wikipedia link. The fallacy of misleading vividness is using a small number of dramatic examples to overstate the frequency of an unusual event.

Not taking sides or trying to derail this debate - it's been insightful and interesting to read. Just wanted to make sure everyone was on the same page, even if I'm 5 days late to the party. :P


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle#Pre-alpha <--this is where we are. If your complaint is that the game don't not works good, come back later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, jasta85 said:

several MMO's that really screwed up their launch but then redid their business model and made a come back. 

When crowfall comes out, if it gets an absolutely crap reception because of how they have designed the game, they devs can always make changes afterwards. 

I'm sure there will be a small amount of people that will figure some way to abuse the systems in game but I don't honestly see it affecting the vast majority of players due in part to how everything in crowfall is made to be temporary, so any significant advantage a single player gets is gone whenever he jumps into a new campaign.

While true several AAA games have made changes and are still doing well today, they also had a lot of resources to make that happen. ACE might not be so lucky.

Not sure what they would change that wouldn't further the issue (advantage for sale) or turn the game into something it wasn't meant to be.

You might be right that the majority might not even care about this, but at some point they might and could be too late. CW might be temporary, but stats aren't (thread is about Tomes). Individual power will carry over. On top of that, if someone uses that to win whatever, their rewards large or small will likely impact future gameplay in the same or other CWs as well. No easy fix that doesn't upset someone.

Albion Online is a recent example of a game that sold a lot at release, yet those with a lot of money basically "won" the early game and it has carried over. Not that smaller groups or less paying haven't done things, but the huge advantage at launch and after with cash is pretty obvious. Especially when their are leaderboards for lots of categories.

Clearly plenty of people have no issue with the game that ruined MMOs (WOW), P2W games (AA/BDO/AO), or insert whatever failure terrible game that still has hundreds of thousands/millions playing. :rolleyes:

For me, still hoping that one of these smaller studios actually breaks away from being just another game and figure out how to make a quality experience along with not milking players.

Edited by APE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, jasta85 said:

Not necessarily, there have been several MMO's that really screwed up their launch but then redid their business model and made a come back.  Star Wars Old Republic for example was bleeding players just a few months after launch because they had burnt through all the content and didn't see any reason to stick around.  The game went F2P with a subscription model after that and put our regular updates, it's been doing pretty well since then.

When crowfall comes out, if it gets an absolutely crap reception because of how they have designed the game, they devs can always make changes afterwards.  Hopefully we'll be able to properly test the system before launch and get a feel for how it works and see how many problems there may be.  Personally I'm not too worried, sure there is going to be that person in every game who figures out how to break the system.

I saw an article years ago about a player in WoW who managed to hook up a couple dozen computers with scripting so that he could run raids all by himself.  I'm sure there will be a small amount of people that will figure some way to abuse the systems in game but I don't honestly see it affecting the vast majority of players due in part to how everything in crowfall is made to be temporary, so any significant advantage a single player gets is gone whenever he jumps into a new campaign.

I'll tackle this one part at a time.

1.) SWTOR was bleeding players because they expected people to spend more time with the story aspect of the game, which is just proof developers often don't understand the players. The games F2P model is just to play the story from 1 to 50, its not designed to have people playing F2P at endgame. The game isn't doing pretty well. There use to be 300+ players on fleet with multiple instances on 80% servers at launch, when F2P dropped there was maybe 2-4 servers that were still lively. Now there is 1 RP server that has people and Harbringer that has 150~ on Fleet during prime gaming hours. All the other servers are dead with maybe 20-30 people on fleet. Pot5 had 5-6 people on fleet majority of the time. The game isn't doing "pretty well" its doing pretty bad and its F2P model is only to play the story of the game and not be a part of the end game universe.

 

2.) Crowfall shouldn't be crap when it comes out, with the exception of FFXIV, I don't know of any game that is so terrible at launch and the game magically becomes better. We (or at least I'm not) aren't talking about the IG things, but its the out of game things that will be ruining. Give me an example of a game that implemented P2W aspects into their game and then did a 180.

 

3.) People don't need to hook up a couple dozen computer to cause a problem. They literally just need a decent bank account. People keep saying "things are temporary", yes that is true. Worlds come and go, but so do paychecks. Spending $200/month on a game isn't that outrageous, yet I'm sure it will give plenty of advantages in the game. If gear is temporary, that means the gold prices will be even cheaper. The price of VIP tickets will always go up in price, because a month sub wouldn't lose value when a world dies. Weapons and armor will always lose value with worlds being temporary, so if anything the world being temporary will just mean you can buy more gear with selling less VIP tickets with RL money.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/3/2017 at 9:06 PM, ClockworkOrange said:

We will see. This thread was created to discuss Tomes are their P2W characteristics.

Also, don't be so quick to assume they won't go to a P2W model. This is one of the first games that lets the gamer also become an investor in the game. If I had personally invested in this game, I would look for Crowfall to add as many revenue sources as possible (you will quickly reach P2W for revenue sources).

The investors and gamers don't exactly have the same goals in mind. For a while I kept asking why everyone was so worried about ACE making money, that is their responsibility and we shouldn't have to worry about it right? Then the light bulb hit, so many people care because they are investors. If ACE makes money, they make money. This isn't wrong, just something we aren't used to.


I'm with you, I understand what you're saying.

However, as far as I understand it, half of the point of Kickstarting the game was to ensure a level of control over the design of the game in general that is usually lost when the big money comes in.

Going through the stress of a Kickstarter to just get private investment anyway, and end up in the same situation, seems like an odd move.

Unless the devs really are just spending years designing something, so they launch it and watch it die in less than a year, for the sake of attempting to cash out. In which case, more power to them I suppose.

There have been countless examples of games that have completely gone to poorly made socks because of their pay to win nature. Archeage and BDO were two of the larger ones more recently. When Trion was running Rift back in the day, they were widely liked and respected by the wider MMO community, now everyone thinks they're a joke.

Todd has been around for a while, he's seen the tide come in and out - we have to assume anything going on is very firmly in his plan. If that plan is to turn Crowfall into the next P2W laughing stock, then a large portion of us have been burned.

If he just wanted money, he has enough of a resume to go and work almost anywhere. He's put his name very firmly against this project, he's one of the few notable MMO developers with any real integrity left to his name - he went through the stress of getting this off the ground, and into production...I'm just not sure I can see him watching 5+ years of long weeks and worry, fall apart in less than a year after launch, because he wants more money.

 

 

Edited by xaine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/3/2017 at 6:53 AM, xaine said:

There have been countless examples of games that have completely gone to poorly made socks because of their pay to win nature. Archeage and BDO were two of the larger ones more recently. When Trion was running Rift back in the day, they were widely liked and respected by the wider MMO community, now everyone thinks they're a joke.

Todd has been around for a while, he's seen the tide come in and out - we have to assume anything going on is very firmly in his plan. If that plan is to turn Crowfall into the next P2W laughing stock, then a large portion of us have been burned.

Games might be laughing stocks to some, but last I checked, BDO/AA are still in business and putting out content so someone is playing/paying for them. Same goes for the vast majority of MMOs since the start, few have literally "failed" and shut down despite all the trash people talk or how far populations have dropped.

Todd coming from KI and Wizard101 likely isn't too afraid of going down a particular path that many would probably prefer not to go down. Paywall, Convenience, P2W models are what drive the gaming industry and that isn't going to change.

ACE hasn't been to outwardly against going this route and looking at the store, 3rd party re-sellers, VIP, etc. I won't put it past them to lean towards profits over whatever potential customer base they might lose if at the end of the day they have a live game with paying customers.

 I like that Camelot Unchained and Ashes of Creation have taken a firmer stance against going this route and why I backed them despite favoring CF's concept.

Would be nice if it was really about the product/fans or whatever, but they aren't putting in all the effort for no return. They've already "burned" plenty of backers by this point with various decisions, launch is still a good ways off. As they said, "won't be for everyone."

Edited by APE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, APE said:

Games might be laughing stocks to some, but last I checked, BDO/AA are still in business and putting out content so someone is playing/paying for them. Same goes for the vast majority of MMOs since the start, few have literally "failed" and shut down despite all the trash people talk or how far populations have dropped.

Todd coming from KI and Wizard101 likely isn't too afraid of going down a particular path that many would probably prefer not to go down. Paywall, Convenience, P2W models are what drive the gaming industry and that isn't going to change.

ACE hasn't been to outwardly against going this route and looking at the store, 3rd party re-sellers, VIP, etc. I won't put it past them to lean towards profits over whatever potential customer base they might lose if at the end of the day they have a live game with paying customers.

 I like that Camelot Unchained and Ashes of Creation have taken a firmer stance against going this route and why I backed them despite favoring CF's concept.

Would be nice if it was really about the product/fans or whatever, but they aren't putting in all the effort for no return. They've already "burned" plenty of backers by this point with various decisions, launch is still a good ways off. As they said, "won't be for everyone."

The primary issue here to my mind, is that this game is being generally targeted at displaced pvp players that don't currently have a home.

Of all the segments of the MMO market to target, the ones that like to pvp and consider themselves pvpers, are going to be the ones most against any P2W advantage.

You create a game that focuses around pvp, sieges and politics - and then alienate the people that want that sort of game.

I'm not sure who else is going to come and play this game. The average WoW player is going to look around for the dungeons and quests, find nothing, and leave.

And by the way, your average MMO player is going to take one look at a 'soft launch' without much content, and turn around instantly as well.

This is why I just can't see them making it blatant P2W. I genuinely can't believe that ACE are that short sighted and stupid.

All they have to do is a HALF decent job of making this a siege pvp game with good combat, and they'll be rolling in cash. This type of game is just not being offered elsewhere right now.

I mean look at Rise of Agon. They revived a game with more holes in it than a swiss cheese, and got enough funding to get it off the ground again. Everyone knew it was going to be fun for a month, then it was going to sink back under the waves. But it happened anyway!

People are BEGGING for somewhere to pvp. Literally begging.

Edited by xaine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, xaine said:

Of all the segments of the MMO market to target, the ones that like to pvp and consider themselves pvpers, are going to be the ones most against any P2W advantage.

This is why I just can't see them making it blatant P2W. I genuinely can't believe that ACE are that short sighted and stupid.

All they have to do is a HALF decent job of making this a siege pvp game with good combat, and they'll be rolling in cash.

While I'd like to believe "real" PVPers wouldn't support and take part in a "P2W" like model, looking at all the MMOs that have PVP and all the people that apparently pay for whatever advantage they can to win, the belief goes away quickly.

Pretty much every MMO with PVP has some element of "P2W" based on a loose definition. People like to win and if companies provide an outlet to buy advantage, seems plenty are more than willing.

Would of been great if ACE was going for something different, but so far all signs point to them falling in line with the market.

I agree that a decent game with features lacking in most others would attract a crowd and be it mandatory or "fair" optional sub and a or "fair" cash shop, they could potentially make enough money to keep going.

As is, CF will be P2W, pay for convenience, pay for advantage insert whatever one calls it that allows cash to influence outcomes and performance. People can justify it however and excuse it away, but if someone can input their CC#, buy something from the store that gives them a leg up or turn around and sell it in-game for something that does, it is what it is.

Luckily (or not) looking at the market, it appears games still bring in enough people willing to pay for advantage along with those willing to put up with it. Hopefully CF is decent enough to bring in both groups to have sustainability. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, xaine said:

Of all the segments of the MMO market to target, the ones that like to pvp and consider themselves pvpers, are going to be the ones most against any P2W advantage.

You create a game that focuses around pvp, sieges and politics - and then alienate the people that want that sort of game.

I'm not sure who else is going to come and play this game. The average WoW player is going to look around for the dungeons and quests, find nothing, and leave.

 

I don't think you'er even close here.

Real PvPr's have zero problem with shelling out money.  But it's not really considered Pay to Win by them, it's pay to compete.  Every professional sport, teams will pay for the best gear, the best software, the best training, the best players and the best of pretty much everything they can, in order to win. Heck, some athletes will pay for training and live in high altitude locations for the advantages that gives them.

In our world that's the best rigs, best connections, best mice, best keyboards, best monitors, best headsets, etc etc.

If you can't afford or are unwilling to PAY for those things, well it doesn't really matter what the game developers charge for, you're still not going to be competitive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, KrakkenSmacken said:

I don't think you'er even close here.

Real PvPr's have zero problem with shelling out money.  But it's not really considered Pay to Win by them, it's pay to compete.  Every professional sport, teams will pay for the best gear, the best software, the best training, the best players and the best of pretty much everything they can, in order to win. Heck, some athletes will pay for training and live in high altitude locations for the advantages that gives them.

In our world that's the best rigs, best connections, best mice, best keyboards, best monitors, best headsets, etc etc.

If you can't afford or are unwilling to PAY for those things, well it doesn't really matter what the game developers charge for, you're still not going to be competitive.

This could not be further from the truth.  Real pvpers find p2w setups extremely stupid.  They want their ability to dominate, they don't want bad players with big wallets using those wallets as any sort of crutch.


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, VIKINGNAIL said:

This could not be further from the truth.  Real pvpers find p2w setups extremely stupid.*  They want their ability to dominate, they don't want bad players with big wallets using those wallets as any sort of crutch.

Citation needed*.

This ain't cheap.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-23/inside-a-professional-video-gaming-share-house/9062518

Edited by KrakkenSmacken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, KrakkenSmacken said:

Notice that none that has anything to do with in game purchases.  Do you think professional basketball players would be cool with the richer owner having a larger sized basket?  You are trying to apply analogies that just don't fit at all.

Edited by VIKINGNAIL

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, APE said:

While I'd like to believe "real" PVPers wouldn't support and take part in a "P2W" like model, looking at all the MMOs that have PVP and all the people that apparently pay for whatever advantage they can to win, the belief goes away quickly.

Pretty much every MMO with PVP has some element of "P2W" based on a loose definition. People like to win and if companies provide an outlet to buy advantage, seems plenty are more than willing.

Would of been great if ACE was going for something different, but so far all signs point to them falling in line with the market.

I agree that a decent game with features lacking in most others would attract a crowd and be it mandatory or "fair" optional sub and a or "fair" cash shop, they could potentially make enough money to keep going.

As is, CF will be P2W, pay for convenience, pay for advantage insert whatever one calls it that allows cash to influence outcomes and performance. People can justify it however and excuse it away, but if someone can input their CC#, buy something from the store that gives them a leg up or turn around and sell it in-game for something that does, it is what it is.

Luckily (or not) looking at the market, it appears games still bring in enough people willing to pay for advantage along with those willing to put up with it. Hopefully CF is decent enough to bring in both groups to have sustainability. 

Pvpers are naturally competitive, and so will go for any advantage they can find, you're certainly right there. The point is to create a game where the playing field is level in that regard.

Games such as BDO and Archeage have indeed gone down that path, and done 'well' financially. They also lost the respect of their communities, with a massive amount of people leaving. I'm sorry to say -  BDO and Archeage can't be considered competitive pvp games when your abillity to be effective in pvp directly correlates to how much disposable income you have.

When someone tells me they were Challenger in League of Legends, or a Gladiator in WoW, or GE in CS:GO, or GM in Overwatch - that's carries a certain level of weight.

When someone tells me they were the best pvper on X server in Archeage, or BDO. I wonder how much of that was them being good, and how much was their wallet talking.

The other thing to keep in mind here, is that BDO and Archeage have other content besides pvp - they're both very well rounded, and well designed games.

Crowfall really doesn't have that luxury. It needs to have great game play, and pvp with consequences. If people can pay, and ruin that experience for other people - then there is nowhere else in the game to turn. Goodnight Vienna.

The whole subject is so fragile, and they're already playing with it too much. All this game has is pvp. There are no raids, dungeons, fluff content, boats, world housing.

The moment someone can pay to directly become better at PVP, this game will be dead to the wider PVP community. The wider PVP community is all this game has.





 

Edited by xaine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, xaine said:

When someone tells me they were Challenger in League of Legends, or a Gladiator in WoW, or GE in CS:GO, or GM in Overwatch - that's carries a certain level of weight.

When someone tells me they were the best pvper on X server in Archeage, or BDO. I wonder how much of that was them being good, and how much was their wallet talking.

The other thing to keep in mind here, is that BDO and Archeage have other content besides pvp - they're both very well rounded, and well designed games.

Crowfall really doesn't have that luxury. It needs to have great game play, and pvp with consequences. If people can pay, and ruin that experience for other people - then there is nowhere else in the game to turn. Goodnight Vienna.

The whole subject is so fragile, and they're already playing with it too much. All this game has is pvp. There are no raids, dungeons, fluff content, boats, world housing.

The moment someone can pay to directly become better at PVP, this game will be dead to the wider PVP community. The wider PVP community is all this game has.

I agree.

I also believe there is clear divide between lobby based games and open world MMOs that simply can't be matched.

One goes out of the way to attempt to make a "fair/balanced" experience while the other not so much. Not that lobby games don't have issues, but their companies at least attempt to work on them.

ACE from the start has said they don't want fair/balanced at least design wise. If someone figures out an OP build, so be it (to some point).

All the fluff is what I believe keeps people playing Albion Online, BDO, AA, insert whatever game even if PVP isn't entirely on the up and up. It isn't that bad if there are other things to balance it out. Same goes for things like Zerging. It might suck for some, but if there are smaller arenas or forms of PVP to allow an outlet, people tend to look past it in the open world.

So far, CF looks to support what you are suggesting will be it's downfall or non-start. Paying indirectly for Tomes will make players "better" at PVP. Might not guarantee a win, but it sways the scale for sure. VIP also provides potential advantage in certain paths. These are permanent, non-risk advantages. At least if someone trades 2 VIP for 10000 logs they can lose them, but Tomes are safe.

EVE is clearly an influence and isn't so different in this area. It is also known for players paying a lot and having alts. Seems CF is heading in this direction.

Not sure if they can change things to avoid this path or if they simply prefer to go down it, but in the end, ACE takes the risk and either they'll have a successful game or just another game that people forget. Gamers tend to be a fickle bunch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I guy that dipped in and out of EVE several times and only recently tried to get new players in to it, I'm in favor of this system specifically because of what it doesn't have in common with the EVE system.

I was around when they added injectors to EVE, and there was similar outcry, but the fact of the matter is that when you have a time-based training system it becomes a larger and larger barrier to new players the longer the game has been live. This was exactly the situation I found myself in, only slightly over the "minimum competitive" 5m skill points, trying to bring 10 other people in to the game. I had the money, the industrial accounts, the market knowhow, and generally everything required to bootstrap the small corp I was trying to start. I even had willing pilots eager to learn the game, fly what I told them we needed, etc.

However what those pilots didn't have was a minimal amount of time invested. What I could offer them in terms of fleet ships, and a semi-established player, required a certain level of input in skills to actually fly effectively in pvp and in industry ships and skills to turn a profit.

My ability to add "skill injectors for basic fitting skills" to my budget for each pilot (in ingame money) was what allowed that enterprise to hit the ground running, and ultimately what allowed it to fight off enemies and defend itself.

My only real issue with injectors was that they were too versatile, and that they were an additional cost on top of PLEX (EVE's VIP tickets) for my players that chose to buy their subs with ingame earnings. The crowfall system is a massive improvement in this space, simply because literally anyone can create them, regardless of vip status, and because of their directed nature which makes higher tier skill books necessarily harder to create as a function of needing to train that specific higher skill tier.

The value of EVE injectors was directly related to the value of PLEX because you needed to be using an active sub to train the skills they could extract. However, since those items didn't care where the skill points came from, or where they went other than "you get more DR the more total skill you have" they sat at a price premium that was far higher than their utility. They weren't really useful as a respeccing tool because of the way eve's ship command skill trees worked, and weren't even a good income source for anyone that wasn't either already so highly trained they had no use for training, or was actively paying a sub specifically to farm injectors with.

The EVE system DID let extremely low skill players catch up to a basic competitive level really easily. I know this because I personally spent a lot of my ingame bank account twinking out a bunch of people. However their value in the economy mostly only benefitted people who didn't really need the income from selling them, effectively creating a "rich get richer" system.

The CF system is democratized because someone who just bought the box and never buys VIP can generate and sell these fairly early, because the lower tier books will be far easier to create due to requiring less prerequisite training to access those trees, and because the DR model is extremely restrictive in comparison. This means that their market value will rotate around the lowest cost producers, which are the non-VIP people, and that their value will not be related to the value of VIP tickets (and thus actual cash)

I predict this will make them far more ubiquitious as an export craft among all levels of players, which seems, unlike the EVE version, to make them extremely unappealing as a pay to win method because their cost will be driven even lower as a basic function of the age of the game rather than the length and number of active subs. They'll be harder to create and less appealing earlier on as the overall community skill level won't require them to keep parity, and easier to create and less appealing later on as you start to see more and more normal accounts having reached their self imposed personal training goals, the lower end skill book prices cratering due to lack of overall demand, and the higher end books picking up the slack.

The basic functionality of this specific design is almost self-correcting in terms of pay to win due to the simple fact that they're decoupled from VIP. The longer the game is live, the more desirable they'll become, and their price will only go down as the result of VIPs with extra ques, and non-VIPs who already only train a very specialized set of skills enter the game.

It just doesn't seem pay to win to me for this reason. Any account can generate these, not just VIPs, and that non-VIPs don't have any artifical skill caps which makes them so easy to generate that I can't imagine them not being anything but cheaper the longer the game has been live, and thus, the higher the average player's skills are. Basically, at the point people need basic racial skills and half a race tree to be competitive, the price of those books will be so low I see them being quite easy to obtain with ingame earnings or buy for newbies as a guild leader, and I see that trend continuing to higher and higher levels of skills as time passes.

TLDR: I don't think skill tomes are pay to win simply because unlike EVE people without a sub in CF aren't second class citizens, the cost of making tomes isn't related to the cost of subs, and for these two reasons the cost of skill books can only go down as the average community skill level rises.

Edited by PopeUrban

PopeSigGIF.gif

Rub rock on face and say "Yes food is eaten now time for fight"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, APE said:

I also believe there is clear divide between lobby based games and open world MMOs that simply can't be matched.

One goes out of the way to attempt to make a "fair/balanced" experience while the other not so much. Not that lobby games don't have issues, but their companies at least attempt to work on them.

ACE from the start has said they don't want fair/balanced at least design wise. If someone figures out an OP build, so be it (to some point).

 

I don't mind things being unbalanced if it has something to do with classes, builds, time played, skill.

When it's because someone has thrown money at the game, that's when you lose me.

I'm pretty sure when they said they didn't intend for things to be balanced, I don't think they were talking about some guy buying his way to ultimate power.

I could well be wrong, however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, xaine said:

I don't mind things being unbalanced if it has something to do with classes, builds, time played, skill.

When it's because someone has thrown money at the game, that's when you lose me.

I'm pretty sure when they said they didn't intend for things to be balanced, I don't think they were talking about some guy buying his way to ultimate power.

I could well be wrong, however.

For now I'm waiting to see how it turns out. If cash ends up being a huge factor, I'll likely look elsewhere. I can accept some degree of cash influence, but when it's basically required to stay competitive, no thanks. Still plenty they can do with what they've presented to keep it some what tame. Have to launch to even matter though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...