This is the hardest part for people to understand: I"m not worried YOU can buy items, I don't want the game to let ME buy items. Telling me "just don't buy it' doesn't work.
Why do you assume that it's hard for people to understand when someone has no willpower or self-control? That seems like a bit of an odd statement - I'm sure there are quite a few people in the thread who understand that quite well.
It's not about a lack fo self control. It's about making the challenge artificial, not real.
Let's say someone wants a game that is difficult. You COULD play WoW naked, with no gear, and that would make it much more difficult.
So if a person is asking for a more difficult game, would you say they shoujld be satisfied to play WoW naked, which would certainly make it more difficult, and if they do not do that, they lack self control?
It's exactly the same thing.
Yes I COULD group in a game that doesnt' require it, just like I COULD play WoW with no gear to make it harder. But that sounds retarded to me, maybe you would do it and think it was the same has a harder game, but I wouldn't.
So, when you're playing a game that has Easy, Medium, Hard, and God-Help-Me-This-Is-Impossible settings, do you only pick the Easy setting, just because it is there?
I recall playing Fable in the arena, and getting bonuses for going in with no armor. Funny, having that option never upset me.
Perhaps this is an example you can understand.
From my perspective, the "easy" mode is always on. It CANNOT be turned off. If there was a different server to go to with different rules, that would be turning off the easy mode.
What you are saying, is I should play Fable on Easy mode, but then do stupid things to gimp myself so it will be like Hard mode.
Yup, that is obviously exactly what I am saying. Thank you for the brilliant summary.
the unbalance it creates is not from rich to poor, it is from those who have lives outside of gaming and those who do not. Fact: More people play F2P games with RMT than play subscriptions games.
I don't get your sentiment on this. If my mage walks past your mage, and we both have the same sweet staff, how does it hurt you if you spent 10 hours getting it, and I spent 2 dollars?
It really depends on the item, the importance of the items and the other game mechanics. Some of it is simply envy. Some of it is that allowing people to buy the trappings of success cheapens success to an unacceptable level. I mean if anyone can buy it for a couple of bucks what's sweet about it? It's just every day crap. Do you think anyone would want to race in the Indianapolis 500 if you could buy Borg-Warner trophies at Wal-mart for $59.95? Part of the thrill is in doing something not everyone can or is willing to do.
Yes time can be unbalancing in games where time sinks and grinding are prevalent but a certain amount of that is unavoidable in any game. All RMT is avoidable by design.
Whatever trophy they give you for winning the Indy 500, I could have an identical one built. I could buy it, and display it. In fact, some obnoxious race fan has probably done it. Does that take anything away from the person who actually wins it?
If Bob gets joy from having it, and Ed gets his joy from earning it, can't we just let them both enjoy themselves?
Whatever trophy they give you for winning the Indy 500, I could have an identical one built. I could buy it, and display it. In fact, some obnoxious race fan has probably done it. Does that take anything away from the person who actually wins it? If Bob gets joy from having it, and Ed gets his joy from earning it, can't we just let them both enjoy themselves?
Your argument is flawed. If the trophy actually made his car go faster your comparison would make more sense. Gear and loot makes you stronger and makes you survive and kill faster. It's not just the prestige of getting it. That is secondary at best.
Look at it this way. Every race car had to use the exact same engine model. The winner gets to put in a stronge engine..that's the price. That would be a better comparison. Then imagine having that winning price system and somebody just going out and buying a more powerful engine then that system falls apart. People liking the winning price system will naturally get upset.
This is the hardest part for people to understand: I"m not worried YOU can buy items, I don't want the game to let ME buy items. Telling me "just don't buy it' doesn't work.
Why do you assume that it's hard for people to understand when someone has no willpower or self-control? That seems like a bit of an odd statement - I'm sure there are quite a few people in the thread who understand that quite well.
It's not about a lack fo self control. It's about making the challenge artificial, not real.
Let's say someone wants a game that is difficult. You COULD play WoW naked, with no gear, and that would make it much more difficult.
So if a person is asking for a more difficult game, would you say they shoujld be satisfied to play WoW naked, which would certainly make it more difficult, and if they do not do that, they lack self control?
It's exactly the same thing.
Yes I COULD group in a game that doesnt' require it, just like I COULD play WoW with no gear to make it harder. But that sounds retarded to me, maybe you would do it and think it was the same has a harder game, but I wouldn't.
So, when you're playing a game that has Easy, Medium, Hard, and God-Help-Me-This-Is-Impossible settings, do you only pick the Easy setting, just because it is there?
I recall playing Fable in the arena, and getting bonuses for going in with no armor. Funny, having that option never upset me.
Perhaps this is an example you can understand.
From my perspective, the "easy" mode is always on. It CANNOT be turned off. If there was a different server to go to with different rules, that would be turning off the easy mode.
What you are saying, is I should play Fable on Easy mode, but then do stupid things to gimp myself so it will be like Hard mode.
Yup, that is obviously exactly what I am saying. Thank you for the brilliant summary.
It's pretty obvious. You can make faster progress solo. But you should group anyway (gimp yourself) and pretend it's a good grouping game.
Why would anyone gimp themselves, and think that's the same as a challenging game where you don't have to gimp yourself?
I don't want to gimp myself, that's retarded. Let's lower the basket in basketball, and make all the tall guys tie one hand behind their backs. It's exactly the same right? Uh, no, it isn't.
That's the same as, let's make it solo friendly, but if you want to gimp yourself and group you can. That's the same as a good grouping game right? Uh, no, it isn't.
the unbalance it creates is not from rich to poor, it is from those who have lives outside of gaming and those who do not. Fact: More people play F2P games with RMT than play subscriptions games.
I don't get your sentiment on this. If my mage walks past your mage, and we both have the same sweet staff, how does it hurt you if you spent 10 hours getting it, and I spent 2 dollars?
It really depends on the item, the importance of the items and the other game mechanics. Some of it is simply envy. Some of it is that allowing people to buy the trappings of success cheapens success to an unacceptable level. I mean if anyone can buy it for a couple of bucks what's sweet about it? It's just every day crap. Do you think anyone would want to race in the Indianapolis 500 if you could buy Borg-Warner trophies at Wal-mart for $59.95? Part of the thrill is in doing something not everyone can or is willing to do.
Yes time can be unbalancing in games where time sinks and grinding are prevalent but a certain amount of that is unavoidable in any game. All RMT is avoidable by design.
Whatever trophy they give you for winning the Indy 500, I could have an identical one built. I could buy it, and display it. In fact, some obnoxious race fan has probably done it. Does that take anything away from the person who actually wins it?
If Bob gets joy from having it, and Ed gets his joy from earning it, can't we just let them both enjoy themselves?
Actually you can't. They'll confiscate it an everything else you own after you lose the court case from the 5,000 lawyers they'll put on your ass. It is a unique historical artifact. It literally cannot be bought at any price. Even the people who win the race never get ownership of it. That's what makes it so special. Even if you could buy it everyone would know you didn't earn it and that would make it worthless.
If Ed buying it cheapens Bob's joy of getting it no they can't both enjoy it. :Let me put it this way. If everyone is special no one is.
Then perhaps Bob needs to make some personal decisions about where he is gaining his self worth. If he is always basing it on the actions of others, Bob will never be happy.
Bob needs to learn to just take some satisfaction in a job well done.
So, when you're playing a game that has Easy, Medium, Hard, and God-Help-Me-This-Is-Impossible settings, do you only pick the Easy setting, just because it is there?
I recall playing Fable in the arena, and getting bonuses for going in with no armor. Funny, having that option never upset me.
Perhaps this is an example you can understand.
From my perspective, the "easy" mode is always on. It CANNOT be turned off. If there was a different server to go to with different rules, that would be turning off the easy mode.
What you are saying, is I should play Fable on Easy mode, but then do stupid things to gimp myself so it will be like Hard mode.
Yup, that is obviously exactly what I am saying. Thank you for the brilliant summary.
It's pretty obvious. You can make faster progress solo. But you should group anyway (gimp yourself) and pretend it's a good grouping game.
Why would anyone gimp themselves, and think that's the same as a challenging game where you don't have to gimp yourself?
I don't want to gimp myself, that's retarded. Let's lower the basket in basketball, and make all the tall guys tie one hand behind their backs. It's exactly the same right? Uh, no, it isn't.
That's the same as, let's make it solo friendly, but if you want to gimp yourself and group you can. That's the same as a good grouping game right? Uh, no, it isn't.
All I'm really getting out of this conversation is an aura of selfishness. Game developers, tailor your game to exactly what I want, but don't give anyone else what they want if it's different than what I want. It's a selfish and unrealistic stance to take. Most businesses are not going to cater to just one group if they don't think that group is large enough to give them the success they desire.
There are a lot of leaps of logic above, including the "gimping" that are hard to make when speaking in generalities rather than about specific games. The bottom line is, if you don't like someone else having options that you personally don't want to choose, you really need to examine your motivations for playing. The game and/or the genre may just not be for you, and that's ok.
the unbalance it creates is not from rich to poor, it is from those who have lives outside of gaming and those who do not. Fact: More people play F2P games with RMT than play subscriptions games.
I don't get your sentiment on this. If my mage walks past your mage, and we both have the same sweet staff, how does it hurt you if you spent 10 hours getting it, and I spent 2 dollars?
It really depends on the item, the importance of the items and the other game mechanics. Some of it is simply envy. Some of it is that allowing people to buy the trappings of success cheapens success to an unacceptable level. I mean if anyone can buy it for a couple of bucks what's sweet about it? It's just every day crap. Do you think anyone would want to race in the Indianapolis 500 if you could buy Borg-Warner trophies at Wal-mart for $59.95? Part of the thrill is in doing something not everyone can or is willing to do.
Yes time can be unbalancing in games where time sinks and grinding are prevalent but a certain amount of that is unavoidable in any game. All RMT is avoidable by design.
Whatever trophy they give you for winning the Indy 500, I could have an identical one built. I could buy it, and display it. In fact, some obnoxious race fan has probably done it. Does that take anything away from the person who actually wins it?
If Bob gets joy from having it, and Ed gets his joy from earning it, can't we just let them both enjoy themselves?
Actually you can't. They'll confiscate it an everything else you own after you lose the court case from the 5,000 lawyers they'll put on your ass. It is a unique historical artifact.
Someone is obviously not a juris doctor. I've agreed with your posts before, Zymu, but this is just silly and wrong on so many counts.
Then perhaps Bob needs to make some personal decisions about where he is gaining his self worth. If he is always basing it on the actions of others, Bob will never be happy. Bob needs to learn to just take some satisfaction in a job well done.
Maybe it's Ed that needs to learn that rewards for any endeavor are not bought but earned. Satisfaction for a job well done is the cake. The rewards that job well done earns is is the icing.
Maybe Bob should live his own life, and let Ed do the same.
Then perhaps Bob needs to make some personal decisions about where he is gaining his self worth. If he is always basing it on the actions of others, Bob will never be happy. Bob needs to learn to just take some satisfaction in a job well done.
Maybe it's Ed that needs to learn that rewards for any endeavor are not bought but earned. Satisfaction for a job well done is the cake. The rewards that job well done earns is is the icing.
Maybe Bob should live his own life, and let Ed do the same.
Maybe human beings should stop being human? I don't think that will ever happen nor should it.
Yes, and they should never evaluate themselves and their faults, and they should certainly never try to better themselves. That can only lead to bad things.
I don't understand what you get out of buying your way to the top in a video game. Isn't the idea of a game to actually play it? I really hope RMT doesn't turn MMORPG's into a collector hobby.
Let's say I started a new game with RMT, I go out and buy a max level character with all the best items in the game. Now what?
In most P2P PvE games that's the point I unsubscribe and move onto another game.
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own. -- Herman Melville
Actually you can't. They'll confiscate it an everything else you own after you lose the court case from the 5,000 lawyers they'll put on your ass. It is a unique historical artifact.
Someone is obviously not a juris doctor. I've agreed with your posts before, Zymu, but this is just silly and wrong on so many counts.
It's literally protected by law. You can look it up. It's trademarked, copywrited, and registered as a Indiana State and National treasure and God knows what else. You can't even use a picture of it without permission.
Use in what context? That's what you really need to know. It's copyright, by the way, and where the heck does the concept of a "national treasure" factor into discussion regarding a trophy? You're just making stuff up. Telling people to look up stuff you've made up is kind of silly, don't you think? That's something you ought to do before spouting it as a fact.
Actually you can't. They'll confiscate it an everything else you own after you lose the court case from the 5,000 lawyers they'll put on your ass. It is a unique historical artifact.
Someone is obviously not a juris doctor. I've agreed with your posts before, Zymu, but this is just silly and wrong on so many counts.
It's literally protected by law. You can look it up. It's trademarked, copywrited, and registered as a Indiana State and National treasure and God knows what else. You can't even use a picture of it without permission.
Use in what context? That's what you really need to know. It's copyright, by the way, and where the heck does the concept of a "national treasure" factor into discussion regarding a trophy? You're just making stuff up. Telling people to look up stuff you've made up is kind of silly, don't you think? That's something you ought to do before spouting it as a fact.
Look it up, seriously. It has every protection under law the Statue of Liberty does and then some. You can't commercially use the words Borg-Warner Trophy without permission. Not the name not the likeness nothing. In nearly any context. Look up the legal protections accorded to National Treasures.
Who said anything about commercial use? Read the first question I posted directly above. Sorry, but the discussion fails at this point.
Actually you can't. They'll confiscate it an everything else you own after you lose the court case from the 5,000 lawyers they'll put on your ass. It is a unique historical artifact.
Someone is obviously not a juris doctor. I've agreed with your posts before, Zymu, but this is just silly and wrong on so many counts.
It's literally protected by law. You can look it up. It's trademarked, copywrited, and registered as a Indiana State and National treasure and God knows what else. You can't even use a picture of it without permission.
Use in what context? That's what you really need to know. It's copyright, by the way, and where the heck does the concept of a "national treasure" factor into discussion regarding a trophy? You're just making stuff up. Telling people to look up stuff you've made up is kind of silly, don't you think? That's something you ought to do before spouting it as a fact.
Look it up, seriously. It has every protection under law the Statue of Liberty does and then some. You can't commercially use the words Borg-Warner Trophy without permission. Not the name not the likeness nothing. In nearly any context. Look up the legal protections accorded to National Treasures.
Who said anything about commercial use? Read the first question I posted directly above. Sorry, but the discussion fails at this point.
You guys are straying further and further away from the original discussion just so you can win an argument. Why not take that argument to PMs?. I doubt anybody on the forums will read it and go..yeah that guy is right and play referee.
Let's get this discussion back on topic instead of having it derailed by battling egos.
Imo, if you dont have a huge amount of freetime, MMO's aren't for you anyways. At least I stopped playing when I got a new job and work at least 12h/day (like to read about some games when i come home tho).
Yes... but no. Yes, differences in time to play are un-balancing BUT there is a difference between imbalance due to the circumstances of life, and imbalance created, fostered and encouraged by the company that runs the game.
For example, in a race, one runner is faster than the other. That doesn't mean its ok for the race organizer to sell head-starts.
Actually you can't. They'll confiscate it an everything else you own after you lose the court case from the 5,000 lawyers they'll put on your ass. It is a unique historical artifact.
Someone is obviously not a juris doctor. I've agreed with your posts before, Zymu, but this is just silly and wrong on so many counts.
It's literally protected by law. You can look it up. It's trademarked, copywrited, and registered as a Indiana State and National treasure and God knows what else. You can't even use a picture of it without permission.
Use in what context? That's what you really need to know. It's copyright, by the way, and where the heck does the concept of a "national treasure" factor into discussion regarding a trophy? You're just making stuff up. Telling people to look up stuff you've made up is kind of silly, don't you think? That's something you ought to do before spouting it as a fact.
Look it up, seriously. It has every protection under law the Statue of Liberty does and then some. You can't commercially use the words Borg-Warner Trophy without permission. Not the name not the likeness nothing. In nearly any context. Look up the legal protections accorded to National Treasures.
Who said anything about commercial use? Read the first question I posted directly above. Sorry, but the discussion fails at this point.
You guys are straying further and further away from the original discussion just so you can win an argument. Why not take that argument to PMs?. I doubt anybody on the forums will read it and go..yeah that guy is right and play referee.
Let's get this discussion back on topic instead of having it derailed by battling egos.
RMT is a whole other issue that can't be compared with time. Time for most of us is free..money isn't. A gamer that can't put in the hours to get better gear than those that can shouldn't be able to obtain the same level of gear period.
I don't know what world you live in, but my time is far more valuable then money. Obviously you take your time for granted, you must have an abundance of free time, lucky you.
Yes... but no. Yes, differences in time to play are un-balancing BUT there is a difference between imbalance due to the circumstances of life, and imbalance created, fostered and encouraged by the company that runs the game.
What is the balance that you desire, and what would it benefit the maker of the game to have that particular kind of balance? I can only hypothesize as to what the balance you're looking for is, but if I do understand it correctly, there are a lot of games that are quite successful and allow for what you are calling an imbalance.
Do people really want a "level playing field" in a game, and if so, why? Is it just an idealistic sense of egalitarianism, or are they looking for something they don't feel they're getting out of real life?
RMT is a whole other issue that can't be compared with time. Time for most of us is free..money isn't. A gamer that can't put in the hours to get better gear than those that can shouldn't be able to obtain the same level of gear period.
I don't know what world you live in, but my time is far more valuable then money. Obviously you take your time for granted, you must have an abundance of free time, lucky you.
I have as much time as the next guy. I just choose to spend my recreational time in games. When I'm off work my time does not = money
As for RMT. There is a place for it. I believe in having options for everybody..just not necessarily in the same game. We should have games with RMT and we should have games without. The problem is when the most anticipated games announce they will include RMT then us that have looked forward to the title and want no part in a game with RMT will face a major letdown. Do we really need RMT for a game to be fun? MMORPGS have been fun way before RMT came along.
Actually you can't. They'll confiscate it an everything else you own after you lose the court case from the 5,000 lawyers they'll put on your ass. It is a unique historical artifact.
Someone is obviously not a juris doctor. I've agreed with your posts before, Zymu, but this is just silly and wrong on so many counts.
It's literally protected by law. You can look it up. It's trademarked, copywrited, and registered as a Indiana State and National treasure and God knows what else. You can't even use a picture of it without permission.
Use in what context? That's what you really need to know. It's copyright, by the way, and where the heck does the concept of a "national treasure" factor into discussion regarding a trophy? You're just making stuff up. Telling people to look up stuff you've made up is kind of silly, don't you think? That's something you ought to do before spouting it as a fact.
Look it up, seriously. It has every protection under law the Statue of Liberty does and then some. You can't commercially use the words Borg-Warner Trophy without permission. Not the name not the likeness nothing. In nearly any context. Look up the legal protections accorded to National Treasures.
Who said anything about commercial use? Read the first question I posted directly above. Sorry, but the discussion fails at this point.
Read the paragraph. Nearly any context. For the specifics you'll have to consult the applicble laws.
The point is, again, that anything anyone can simply buy ff the shelf for a nominal price is in no way special. Things that are earned through extraordinary skill or effort are. To sell such things to those who did not earn them devalues them in everyone's eyes.
. If you feel a portion of it applies to this discussion, feel free to link it. Why do you feel the playing field has to be leveled in game in the way that you desire? There are a lot of games out there where it isn't, and they're quite successful.
Yes... but no. Yes, differences in time to play are un-balancing BUT there is a difference between imbalance due to the circumstances of life, and imbalance created, fostered and encouraged by the company that runs the game.
What is the balance that you desire, and what would it benefit the maker of the game to have that particular kind of balance? I can only hypothesize as to what the balance you're looking for is, but if I do understand it correctly, there are a lot of games that are quite successful and allow for what you are calling an imbalance.
Do people really want a "level playing field" in a game, and if so, why? Is it just an idealistic sense of egalitarianism, or are they looking for something they don't feel they're getting out of real life?
I'd edited my original post so maybe you didn't see it, but I added this: For example, in a race, one runner is faster than the other. That doesn't mean its ok for the race organizer to sell head-starts.
I'm not looking for a universal playing field, but the game organizer/provider should offer a level playing field for the players. Any imbalance that comes after that from the players own circumstances is just life.
Yes... but no. Yes, differences in time to play are un-balancing BUT there is a difference between imbalance due to the circumstances of life, and imbalance created, fostered and encouraged by the company that runs the game.
What is the balance that you desire, and what would it benefit the maker of the game to have that particular kind of balance? I can only hypothesize as to what the balance you're looking for is, but if I do understand it correctly, there are a lot of games that are quite successful and allow for what you are calling an imbalance.
Do people really want a "level playing field" in a game, and if so, why? Is it just an idealistic sense of egalitarianism, or are they looking for something they don't feel they're getting out of real life?
I'd edited my original post so maybe you didn't see it, but I added this: For example, in a race, one runner is faster than the other. That doesn't mean its ok for the race organizer to sell head-starts.
I'm not looking for a universal playing field, but the game organizer/provider should offer a level playing field for the players. Any imbalance that comes after that from the players own circumstances is just life.
But this is not a race, and there are no winners.
How about a Golf analogy? We're just factoring in player handicaps!
RMT is a whole other issue that can't be compared with time. Time for most of us is free..money isn't. A gamer that can't put in the hours to get better gear than those that can shouldn't be able to obtain the same level of gear period.
I don't know what world you live in, but my time is far more valuable then money. Obviously you take your time for granted, you must have an abundance of free time, lucky you.
I have as much time as the next guy. I just choose to spend my recreational time in games. When I'm off work my time does not = money
This is off topic and seriously you guys wasted a whole page on RMT debate when the topic is about TIME and not RMT.
Anyways, the average American spends 9 hours working (+lunch), 8 hours sleeping, 1 hour commute to work and back, 1 hour dinner (prep/eating/cleanup), 1 hour hygiene, 1 hour of unwind time, that leaves 4 hours in the day, which you can choose to do something productive such as errands/chores/homework or recreations like TV and games. I could use 4 more hours in my day and I bet many a working man would agree with me.
If that's the case then you just made a point against RMT. Why have RMT since there is no competition. People shouldn't feel a need to buy themselves to the top since that epic geared warrior is not in competition to you.
Comments
Why do you assume that it's hard for people to understand when someone has no willpower or self-control? That seems like a bit of an odd statement - I'm sure there are quite a few people in the thread who understand that quite well.
It's not about a lack fo self control. It's about making the challenge artificial, not real.
Let's say someone wants a game that is difficult. You COULD play WoW naked, with no gear, and that would make it much more difficult.
So if a person is asking for a more difficult game, would you say they shoujld be satisfied to play WoW naked, which would certainly make it more difficult, and if they do not do that, they lack self control?
It's exactly the same thing.
Yes I COULD group in a game that doesnt' require it, just like I COULD play WoW with no gear to make it harder. But that sounds retarded to me, maybe you would do it and think it was the same has a harder game, but I wouldn't.
So, when you're playing a game that has Easy, Medium, Hard, and God-Help-Me-This-Is-Impossible settings, do you only pick the Easy setting, just because it is there?
I recall playing Fable in the arena, and getting bonuses for going in with no armor. Funny, having that option never upset me.
Perhaps this is an example you can understand.
From my perspective, the "easy" mode is always on. It CANNOT be turned off. If there was a different server to go to with different rules, that would be turning off the easy mode.
What you are saying, is I should play Fable on Easy mode, but then do stupid things to gimp myself so it will be like Hard mode.
Yup, that is obviously exactly what I am saying. Thank you for the brilliant summary.
It really depends on the item, the importance of the items and the other game mechanics. Some of it is simply envy. Some of it is that allowing people to buy the trappings of success cheapens success to an unacceptable level. I mean if anyone can buy it for a couple of bucks what's sweet about it? It's just every day crap. Do you think anyone would want to race in the Indianapolis 500 if you could buy Borg-Warner trophies at Wal-mart for $59.95? Part of the thrill is in doing something not everyone can or is willing to do.
Yes time can be unbalancing in games where time sinks and grinding are prevalent but a certain amount of that is unavoidable in any game. All RMT is avoidable by design.
Whatever trophy they give you for winning the Indy 500, I could have an identical one built. I could buy it, and display it. In fact, some obnoxious race fan has probably done it. Does that take anything away from the person who actually wins it?
If Bob gets joy from having it, and Ed gets his joy from earning it, can't we just let them both enjoy themselves?
Your argument is flawed. If the trophy actually made his car go faster your comparison would make more sense. Gear and loot makes you stronger and makes you survive and kill faster. It's not just the prestige of getting it. That is secondary at best.
Look at it this way. Every race car had to use the exact same engine model. The winner gets to put in a stronge engine..that's the price. That would be a better comparison. Then imagine having that winning price system and somebody just going out and buying a more powerful engine then that system falls apart. People liking the winning price system will naturally get upset.
Why do you assume that it's hard for people to understand when someone has no willpower or self-control? That seems like a bit of an odd statement - I'm sure there are quite a few people in the thread who understand that quite well.
It's not about a lack fo self control. It's about making the challenge artificial, not real.
Let's say someone wants a game that is difficult. You COULD play WoW naked, with no gear, and that would make it much more difficult.
So if a person is asking for a more difficult game, would you say they shoujld be satisfied to play WoW naked, which would certainly make it more difficult, and if they do not do that, they lack self control?
It's exactly the same thing.
Yes I COULD group in a game that doesnt' require it, just like I COULD play WoW with no gear to make it harder. But that sounds retarded to me, maybe you would do it and think it was the same has a harder game, but I wouldn't.
So, when you're playing a game that has Easy, Medium, Hard, and God-Help-Me-This-Is-Impossible settings, do you only pick the Easy setting, just because it is there?
I recall playing Fable in the arena, and getting bonuses for going in with no armor. Funny, having that option never upset me.
Perhaps this is an example you can understand.
From my perspective, the "easy" mode is always on. It CANNOT be turned off. If there was a different server to go to with different rules, that would be turning off the easy mode.
What you are saying, is I should play Fable on Easy mode, but then do stupid things to gimp myself so it will be like Hard mode.
Yup, that is obviously exactly what I am saying. Thank you for the brilliant summary.
It's pretty obvious. You can make faster progress solo. But you should group anyway (gimp yourself) and pretend it's a good grouping game.
Why would anyone gimp themselves, and think that's the same as a challenging game where you don't have to gimp yourself?
I don't want to gimp myself, that's retarded. Let's lower the basket in basketball, and make all the tall guys tie one hand behind their backs. It's exactly the same right? Uh, no, it isn't.
That's the same as, let's make it solo friendly, but if you want to gimp yourself and group you can. That's the same as a good grouping game right? Uh, no, it isn't.
It really depends on the item, the importance of the items and the other game mechanics. Some of it is simply envy. Some of it is that allowing people to buy the trappings of success cheapens success to an unacceptable level. I mean if anyone can buy it for a couple of bucks what's sweet about it? It's just every day crap. Do you think anyone would want to race in the Indianapolis 500 if you could buy Borg-Warner trophies at Wal-mart for $59.95? Part of the thrill is in doing something not everyone can or is willing to do.
Yes time can be unbalancing in games where time sinks and grinding are prevalent but a certain amount of that is unavoidable in any game. All RMT is avoidable by design.
Whatever trophy they give you for winning the Indy 500, I could have an identical one built. I could buy it, and display it. In fact, some obnoxious race fan has probably done it. Does that take anything away from the person who actually wins it?
If Bob gets joy from having it, and Ed gets his joy from earning it, can't we just let them both enjoy themselves?
Actually you can't. They'll confiscate it an everything else you own after you lose the court case from the 5,000 lawyers they'll put on your ass. It is a unique historical artifact. It literally cannot be bought at any price. Even the people who win the race never get ownership of it. That's what makes it so special. Even if you could buy it everyone would know you didn't earn it and that would make it worthless.
If Ed buying it cheapens Bob's joy of getting it no they can't both enjoy it. :Let me put it this way. If everyone is special no one is.
Then perhaps Bob needs to make some personal decisions about where he is gaining his self worth. If he is always basing it on the actions of others, Bob will never be happy.
Bob needs to learn to just take some satisfaction in a job well done.
So, when you're playing a game that has Easy, Medium, Hard, and God-Help-Me-This-Is-Impossible settings, do you only pick the Easy setting, just because it is there?
I recall playing Fable in the arena, and getting bonuses for going in with no armor. Funny, having that option never upset me.
Perhaps this is an example you can understand.
From my perspective, the "easy" mode is always on. It CANNOT be turned off. If there was a different server to go to with different rules, that would be turning off the easy mode.
What you are saying, is I should play Fable on Easy mode, but then do stupid things to gimp myself so it will be like Hard mode.
Yup, that is obviously exactly what I am saying. Thank you for the brilliant summary.
It's pretty obvious. You can make faster progress solo. But you should group anyway (gimp yourself) and pretend it's a good grouping game.
Why would anyone gimp themselves, and think that's the same as a challenging game where you don't have to gimp yourself?
I don't want to gimp myself, that's retarded. Let's lower the basket in basketball, and make all the tall guys tie one hand behind their backs. It's exactly the same right? Uh, no, it isn't.
That's the same as, let's make it solo friendly, but if you want to gimp yourself and group you can. That's the same as a good grouping game right? Uh, no, it isn't.
All I'm really getting out of this conversation is an aura of selfishness. Game developers, tailor your game to exactly what I want, but don't give anyone else what they want if it's different than what I want. It's a selfish and unrealistic stance to take. Most businesses are not going to cater to just one group if they don't think that group is large enough to give them the success they desire.
There are a lot of leaps of logic above, including the "gimping" that are hard to make when speaking in generalities rather than about specific games. The bottom line is, if you don't like someone else having options that you personally don't want to choose, you really need to examine your motivations for playing. The game and/or the genre may just not be for you, and that's ok.
It really depends on the item, the importance of the items and the other game mechanics. Some of it is simply envy. Some of it is that allowing people to buy the trappings of success cheapens success to an unacceptable level. I mean if anyone can buy it for a couple of bucks what's sweet about it? It's just every day crap. Do you think anyone would want to race in the Indianapolis 500 if you could buy Borg-Warner trophies at Wal-mart for $59.95? Part of the thrill is in doing something not everyone can or is willing to do.
Yes time can be unbalancing in games where time sinks and grinding are prevalent but a certain amount of that is unavoidable in any game. All RMT is avoidable by design.
Whatever trophy they give you for winning the Indy 500, I could have an identical one built. I could buy it, and display it. In fact, some obnoxious race fan has probably done it. Does that take anything away from the person who actually wins it?
If Bob gets joy from having it, and Ed gets his joy from earning it, can't we just let them both enjoy themselves?
Actually you can't. They'll confiscate it an everything else you own after you lose the court case from the 5,000 lawyers they'll put on your ass. It is a unique historical artifact.
Someone is obviously not a juris doctor. I've agreed with your posts before, Zymu, but this is just silly and wrong on so many counts.
Maybe it's Ed that needs to learn that rewards for any endeavor are not bought but earned. Satisfaction for a job well done is the cake. The rewards that job well done earns is is the icing.
Maybe Bob should live his own life, and let Ed do the same.
This is the best statement right from the first page.
Time = Money
I'd say this is true for many markets... and is really only becoming an issue now as MMO's become a larger market.
Time = Money
but remember... money != experience
Maybe it's Ed that needs to learn that rewards for any endeavor are not bought but earned. Satisfaction for a job well done is the cake. The rewards that job well done earns is is the icing.
Maybe Bob should live his own life, and let Ed do the same.
Maybe human beings should stop being human? I don't think that will ever happen nor should it.
Yes, and they should never evaluate themselves and their faults, and they should certainly never try to better themselves. That can only lead to bad things.
I don't understand what you get out of buying your way to the top in a video game. Isn't the idea of a game to actually play it? I really hope RMT doesn't turn MMORPG's into a collector hobby.
Let's say I started a new game with RMT, I go out and buy a max level character with all the best items in the game. Now what?
In most P2P PvE games that's the point I unsubscribe and move onto another game.
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own.
-- Herman Melville
Someone is obviously not a juris doctor. I've agreed with your posts before, Zymu, but this is just silly and wrong on so many counts.
It's literally protected by law. You can look it up. It's trademarked, copywrited, and registered as a Indiana State and National treasure and God knows what else. You can't even use a picture of it without permission.
Use in what context? That's what you really need to know. It's copyright, by the way, and where the heck does the concept of a "national treasure" factor into discussion regarding a trophy? You're just making stuff up. Telling people to look up stuff you've made up is kind of silly, don't you think? That's something you ought to do before spouting it as a fact.
Someone is obviously not a juris doctor. I've agreed with your posts before, Zymu, but this is just silly and wrong on so many counts.
It's literally protected by law. You can look it up. It's trademarked, copywrited, and registered as a Indiana State and National treasure and God knows what else. You can't even use a picture of it without permission.
Use in what context? That's what you really need to know. It's copyright, by the way, and where the heck does the concept of a "national treasure" factor into discussion regarding a trophy? You're just making stuff up. Telling people to look up stuff you've made up is kind of silly, don't you think? That's something you ought to do before spouting it as a fact.
Look it up, seriously. It has every protection under law the Statue of Liberty does and then some. You can't commercially use the words Borg-Warner Trophy without permission. Not the name not the likeness nothing. In nearly any context. Look up the legal protections accorded to National Treasures.
Who said anything about commercial use? Read the first question I posted directly above. Sorry, but the discussion fails at this point.
Someone is obviously not a juris doctor. I've agreed with your posts before, Zymu, but this is just silly and wrong on so many counts.
It's literally protected by law. You can look it up. It's trademarked, copywrited, and registered as a Indiana State and National treasure and God knows what else. You can't even use a picture of it without permission.
Use in what context? That's what you really need to know. It's copyright, by the way, and where the heck does the concept of a "national treasure" factor into discussion regarding a trophy? You're just making stuff up. Telling people to look up stuff you've made up is kind of silly, don't you think? That's something you ought to do before spouting it as a fact.
Look it up, seriously. It has every protection under law the Statue of Liberty does and then some. You can't commercially use the words Borg-Warner Trophy without permission. Not the name not the likeness nothing. In nearly any context. Look up the legal protections accorded to National Treasures.
Who said anything about commercial use? Read the first question I posted directly above. Sorry, but the discussion fails at this point.
You guys are straying further and further away from the original discussion just so you can win an argument. Why not take that argument to PMs?. I doubt anybody on the forums will read it and go..yeah that guy is right and play referee.
Let's get this discussion back on topic instead of having it derailed by battling egos.
Imo, if you dont have a huge amount of freetime, MMO's aren't for you anyways. At least I stopped playing when I got a new job and work at least 12h/day (like to read about some games when i come home tho).
Yes... but no. Yes, differences in time to play are un-balancing BUT there is a difference between imbalance due to the circumstances of life, and imbalance created, fostered and encouraged by the company that runs the game.
For example, in a race, one runner is faster than the other. That doesn't mean its ok for the race organizer to sell head-starts.
Someone is obviously not a juris doctor. I've agreed with your posts before, Zymu, but this is just silly and wrong on so many counts.
It's literally protected by law. You can look it up. It's trademarked, copywrited, and registered as a Indiana State and National treasure and God knows what else. You can't even use a picture of it without permission.
Use in what context? That's what you really need to know. It's copyright, by the way, and where the heck does the concept of a "national treasure" factor into discussion regarding a trophy? You're just making stuff up. Telling people to look up stuff you've made up is kind of silly, don't you think? That's something you ought to do before spouting it as a fact.
Look it up, seriously. It has every protection under law the Statue of Liberty does and then some. You can't commercially use the words Borg-Warner Trophy without permission. Not the name not the likeness nothing. In nearly any context. Look up the legal protections accorded to National Treasures.
Who said anything about commercial use? Read the first question I posted directly above. Sorry, but the discussion fails at this point.
You guys are straying further and further away from the original discussion just so you can win an argument. Why not take that argument to PMs?. I doubt anybody on the forums will read it and go..yeah that guy is right and play referee.
Let's get this discussion back on topic instead of having it derailed by battling egos.
Agreed.
I don't know what world you live in, but my time is far more valuable then money. Obviously you take your time for granted, you must have an abundance of free time, lucky you.
What is the balance that you desire, and what would it benefit the maker of the game to have that particular kind of balance? I can only hypothesize as to what the balance you're looking for is, but if I do understand it correctly, there are a lot of games that are quite successful and allow for what you are calling an imbalance.
Do people really want a "level playing field" in a game, and if so, why? Is it just an idealistic sense of egalitarianism, or are they looking for something they don't feel they're getting out of real life?
I don't know what world you live in, but my time is far more valuable then money. Obviously you take your time for granted, you must have an abundance of free time, lucky you.
I have as much time as the next guy. I just choose to spend my recreational time in games. When I'm off work my time does not = money
As for RMT. There is a place for it. I believe in having options for everybody..just not necessarily in the same game. We should have games with RMT and we should have games without. The problem is when the most anticipated games announce they will include RMT then us that have looked forward to the title and want no part in a game with RMT will face a major letdown. Do we really need RMT for a game to be fun? MMORPGS have been fun way before RMT came along.
Someone is obviously not a juris doctor. I've agreed with your posts before, Zymu, but this is just silly and wrong on so many counts.
It's literally protected by law. You can look it up. It's trademarked, copywrited, and registered as a Indiana State and National treasure and God knows what else. You can't even use a picture of it without permission.
Use in what context? That's what you really need to know. It's copyright, by the way, and where the heck does the concept of a "national treasure" factor into discussion regarding a trophy? You're just making stuff up. Telling people to look up stuff you've made up is kind of silly, don't you think? That's something you ought to do before spouting it as a fact.
Look it up, seriously. It has every protection under law the Statue of Liberty does and then some. You can't commercially use the words Borg-Warner Trophy without permission. Not the name not the likeness nothing. In nearly any context. Look up the legal protections accorded to National Treasures.
Who said anything about commercial use? Read the first question I posted directly above. Sorry, but the discussion fails at this point.
Read the paragraph. Nearly any context. For the specifics you'll have to consult the applicble laws.
The point is, again, that anything anyone can simply buy ff the shelf for a nominal price is in no way special. Things that are earned through extraordinary skill or effort are. To sell such things to those who did not earn them devalues them in everyone's eyes.
Here's a link to the Illinois statutes -
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs.asp. If you feel a portion of it applies to this discussion, feel free to link it. Why do you feel the playing field has to be leveled in game in the way that you desire? There are a lot of games out there where it isn't, and they're quite successful.
What is the balance that you desire, and what would it benefit the maker of the game to have that particular kind of balance? I can only hypothesize as to what the balance you're looking for is, but if I do understand it correctly, there are a lot of games that are quite successful and allow for what you are calling an imbalance.
Do people really want a "level playing field" in a game, and if so, why? Is it just an idealistic sense of egalitarianism, or are they looking for something they don't feel they're getting out of real life?
I'd edited my original post so maybe you didn't see it, but I added this: For example, in a race, one runner is faster than the other. That doesn't mean its ok for the race organizer to sell head-starts.
I'm not looking for a universal playing field, but the game organizer/provider should offer a level playing field for the players. Any imbalance that comes after that from the players own circumstances is just life.
What is the balance that you desire, and what would it benefit the maker of the game to have that particular kind of balance? I can only hypothesize as to what the balance you're looking for is, but if I do understand it correctly, there are a lot of games that are quite successful and allow for what you are calling an imbalance.
Do people really want a "level playing field" in a game, and if so, why? Is it just an idealistic sense of egalitarianism, or are they looking for something they don't feel they're getting out of real life?
I'd edited my original post so maybe you didn't see it, but I added this: For example, in a race, one runner is faster than the other. That doesn't mean its ok for the race organizer to sell head-starts.
I'm not looking for a universal playing field, but the game organizer/provider should offer a level playing field for the players. Any imbalance that comes after that from the players own circumstances is just life.
But this is not a race, and there are no winners.
How about a Golf analogy? We're just factoring in player handicaps!
I don't know what world you live in, but my time is far more valuable then money. Obviously you take your time for granted, you must have an abundance of free time, lucky you.
I have as much time as the next guy. I just choose to spend my recreational time in games. When I'm off work my time does not = money
This is off topic and seriously you guys wasted a whole page on RMT debate when the topic is about TIME and not RMT.
Anyways, the average American spends 9 hours working (+lunch), 8 hours sleeping, 1 hour commute to work and back, 1 hour dinner (prep/eating/cleanup), 1 hour hygiene, 1 hour of unwind time, that leaves 4 hours in the day, which you can choose to do something productive such as errands/chores/homework or recreations like TV and games. I could use 4 more hours in my day and I bet many a working man would agree with me.
If that's the case then you just made a point against RMT. Why have RMT since there is no competition. People shouldn't feel a need to buy themselves to the top since that epic geared warrior is not in competition to you.