Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Maybe "Pay 2 Win" is not bad.
Neverdyne
Member Posts: 167
Before you burn me on a stick, let me first play Devil's Advocate. We can see this issue in two different contexts, if the MMO is F2P or if it's subscription based.
Free To Play Game
If it is F2P, then a "Pay To Win" cash shop is much more acceptable. Ultimately, the company behind the game has to survive financially, and thus has to make money somehow. It has been shown before that peacock players are few, and that usually vanity-only items won't keep afloat such a game. If buying all the non-vanity items cost the player around $50.00, then you have just basically payed for the box but in the form of micro-transactions. Is this that bad? If the advantages you buy expire, and they cost roughly $15.00 a month to maintain, then you're basically paying a subscription fee.
But, there is an added benefit for the game to have this business model: more players. Even if the serious players all have to pay somehow, there will be a big amount of players that go around without paying for anything, and this can make an MMO much more enjoyable for the paying customers since there will be more people to play with.
Pay To Play Game
But what happens if the game has a subscription fee (or a box sale) and also wants to implement non-vanity items in the cash shop. Let's first consider something, if the MMO has a subscription, then it should be of higher quality and it should be updated with new content more often compared to a F2P MMO. The cost to maintain servers and infrastructure does not warrant a $15.00 subscription, as ArenaNet has demostrated.
Instead, this subscription fee is used to produce new content on a timely basis that the player can experience, which includes dungeons, quests, equipment, etc. So in a sense, a subscription should ensures the player will be entertained for longer. Let's say new content patches are released every month. If the comapny also produces new content destined for the cash shop in addition to this monthly patch, then they are adding something "extra" that the subscription is not covering.
An argument could be made that says this "extra" should've been in the content patch and not in the cash shop, but if the cash shop would not have existed, the company would not be compelled to produce this "extra" content. Thus, it would only have released the base patch, without the extra. I'll give you an example:
Say patch 4.2 of World of Warcraft came out, with its new raid instance, gear, daily quests, etc. But imagine if there was also a cash shop, and so Blizzard is compelled to hire more people and produce extra content, say a new 5-man dungeon, that will be released on the cash shop for $10.00. Is this really that bad? You're basically paying more for more.
On the other hand, let's say this other 5-man dungeon is released in the content patch free, and instead, if a player wants to get the best gear possible in this tier, he has to aquire the items in the raid instance / 5-man dungeon and then buy an "enhancement" that will make them permanently more powerful. Let's say enhancing all your equipment will cost you $10.00. Then again, if there was no cash shop, Blizzard would not win as much and would not have released the 5-man dungeon free, but instead it's indirectly making money through the cash shop to pay for this extra content. Again, you're paying more for more, with the option of not paying more and still getting the 5-man dungeon, but not all the benefits of the new patch.
Final Thoughts
A million comparisons can be made in other hobbies. MMOs are, after all, hobbies. People with more cash will have higher quality golf clubs, yet normal golfers don't complain. They will be able to buy stamps quicker, yet normal stamp collectos don't complain.
Production costs of games rise. Ten years ago a game costing one million dollars to make was huge; now those are destined for the iPhone while full fledged games cost tens of millions of dollars to produce. Games are not made for charity. I'll leave you with a question, would you rather have a cash shop like described above, or see your monthly subscription rise to $20.00-$25.00?
Comments
Pay to win isn't a game, it's a pissing contest of who can piss away the most money to "dominate" other people's pixles.
Looking from development side, if they want to go for it, I have no problem. Actually, I don't see why people are complaining over microtransactions either. Don't do it?
Guild Wars 2's 50 minutes game play video:
http://n4g.com/news/592585/guild-wars-2-50-minutes-of-pure-gameplay
Everything We Know about GW2:
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/287180/page/1
Seriously. There IS no other side of the argument. Pay 2 Win is nothing more than a cheap, middle finger to all your loyal fans. If you implement it, then you deserve to be "burned on a stick".
I'm sure there's research out there that points to a greater increase in revenue for companies when they offer items that give a distinct advantage, but you have to ask yourself if it's morally right. Honestly, I disagree with Pay to Win. I think it ruins what the Free to Play movement is all about. Making quality games available for everyone.
The object of a game isn't to see who can spend the most money. It's to enjoy it.
~Miles "Tails" Prower out! Catch me if you can!
Come Join us at www.globalequestria.com - Meet other fans of My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic!
Pay 2 Win is fine for games like S4 and APB where there isnt much difference and in S4, you can own cash shop users with non cash shop stuff if youre better at shooting.
APB is a slippery slope though because you can get aim bots n stuff to make things easier so idk...
''/\/\'' Posted using Iphone bunni
( o.o)
(")(")
**This bunny was cloned from bunnies belonging to Gobla and is part of the Quizzical Fanclub and the The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club**
Profitable in the short term, but likely not very profitable in the long run.
Once players get sick of losing to people who buy victory and realize that the only way to win is to sink hundreds and in some cases thousands of dollars into the game to even be competitive, then the bulk of the players leave. When they leave, the people who are actually throwing away their money to 'own' everyone else will have no more easy kills, so they'll get bored and leave as well.
On subscription based games you have to keep people interested to keep playing. Wow would be pretty much dead if it wasn`t for new content getting in regularly.
Your already buying expansions, and while they add content patches later too i just feel that it still belongs in that expansion you bought before. Having those go through a cash shop would be absurd.
Pay to win aint good, people with the most money win. That wont hold many people for long.
A cash shop should basically be just time reducing and you have to watch out with it`s balance.
Any player has to be able to get those things through playing. Cash shop items will give people faster travelling, easier upgrading, better exp. While if your not paying you can reach those same things though they just cost more time to reach.
No unfair advantages there. And the games with those types of shops seem to be doing quite well. Else you just scare away the crowd and theres only a few big spenders left which get bored cause theres noone else to play with anymore.
F2P was never some benevolent not for profit idea. Which F2P games were ever released without some form of monotization attached? And regardless the form, there will always be some power/gain for those who choose to spend.
F2P originated because developers wanted to go with a zero-barrier of entry, all it takes is the time to download, and then offer other methods after a player has started to incentivize spending money.
Hell, I'm pretty sure 90% of the F2P games on the market originated from the asian markets, where pay for power is the norm in those games.
People will P2W for things IRL, and enough people P2W in existing F2P games, people will continue to, and many continue to want to, pay to win in future games. It's in our nature.
Lets Push Things Forward
I knew I would live to design games at age 7, issue 5 of Nintendo Power.
Support games with subs when you believe in their potential, even in spite of their flaws.
Dude, most MMO's make their cost back on boxsales alone. The subscriptions are heavily overpriced as they are right now. We pay 13 euros / 15 dollars every month while this actually covers more than a year of server costs and post-release development. In the case of WoW they dare to charge for every single little thing since the community will bear it. Much to Boby's liking, who thinks he might as well squeeze every last dime out of the remaining players of WoW.
Since you decided to bring up WoW. The cost of development and maintenance / server costs for the first four years were actually covered by the boxsales. They have been making nearly a billion dollars of annual profit every year since it was released in 2004. They are overpriced, have a cashshop already, dare to implement premium services, charge HUGE amounts for realm transfers, body changes, race changes and so on.
I think most F2P games you'll find that spending 90 (if not 30) dollars for content is more than enough a year.
How is that more expensive than 180 bucks a year plus ~60 bucks every 12 months or so for an expansion?
none of the payment models are bad... if they were people wouldn't be using them / paying into them.
I just don't think p2w should be in every mmo... because not everybody enjoys p2w games.
I am all for companys making money. Hell am getting an MBA right now. But Pay 2 Win simply makes a game pointless to play for me and most other in the western audience. How will a company make money without players?
By the way I play Magic the Gathering Online and probably blow $100 a month on cards. So I don't mind spending money on games. But honestly, I play an MMO to play it and achieve....
Remember Old School Ultima Online
Well I agree that F2P is a different story, but I find this statement interesting :
"People with more cash will have higher quality golf clubs, yet normal golfers don't complain. They will be able to buy stamps quicker, yet normal stamp collectos don't complain."
I think you're saying this because real life is already pay 2 win !
And this is exactly why it shouldn't be in games IMO.
You're lumping in F2P with P2Win models, and one isn't exclusively the other. There are plenty of F2P MMOs that sell only cosmetic items, but then there are also plenty that sell items that give players a huge advantage so I can forgive the association. But that will never be 'okay'. We already have people willing to spend the money, effectively destroying whatever balance was created in the game in the first place, we certainly don't need the rest of the MMO community becoming complacent about it.
I'm going to have to say 'No' to you.
"Forums aren't for intelligent discussion; they're for blow-hards with unwavering opinions."
your analogies are wrong.
Using the golf analogy, the problem isnt playing in a better or worse club. Its playing in the same golf club against someone poorer, and when that someone is wiping the floor with your ass you pay $500 and voila, your card gets a -5 and that guy may aswell go home, his golf skills mean absolutly nothing against your wallet, you will always win no matter how terrible you are at golf.
You arent playing the game anymore, you are buying the game.
While I don't participate in P2W in games, I find your statement to be rather shallow, as if you're suggesting there's only one right opinion and that is yours.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Hmmm....
Is there even one serious Pay 2 Win MMO in existence that actually has a large player base?
Lolipops !
Yeah, just about every donation based private game server out there. You would be amazed at how much money people will spend, when allowed on these servers, to become king of the hill and bypass actually having to make the climb to the top themselves. As much as I would love to disagree with the OP, there is a large market base out there of the pay to win mentality. It is only a matter of time before more legetimate companies try to tap into it.
"Gypsies, tramps, and thieves, we were called by the Admin of the site . . . "
Your Final Thoughts is maybe true but i won't buy games where those with most money wins its just a way of cheating in my book, you dont play you just buy your way to top, ill NEVER play such games NEVER. So argue what you want but ill play games where its still have a feeling its pure challenge to reach top.
The Golf analogy doesn't work for me.
An MMORPG is like a movie for me, an immersive experience.
Its like you're watching Lord of the Rings, and then Frodo turns to the camera and says "Drink Coke! It's refreshing!"
That's what real life cash is in the game for me.
Here's a sword.
No it's not, it's 3 dollars and 50 cents!
I gained a level.
No you didn't. You gained $7.50 of xp potions.
This is my magic hat that raises mana.
No it isn't. It's 4 dollars and 25 cents of stat increase.
Spend MORE ona hobby?
Sure.
I'd spend 20 dollars instead of 14.95 per month, maybe 25 dollars.
Break the immersion? The game's not fun anymore at any price.
Better golf clubs? Taht's not a cash shop.
Let's say you can hire a Helicopter at teh Golf Course, which will lower you to the hole, adn you drop the ball in.
And peoel are doing taht, while you are swining clubs.
THAT is a cash shop.
I gaurantee you people would complain.
Interesting thoughts OP, but still noooo P2W is not a good idea. Can you imagine to
1. Buy the game
2. Burn lots and lots of time to get where you want to get only to be forced by your addictivity to spend 100's $ just to be at the same level or higher as other players only to zerg them to get tired of it in the end. What is the win? ---> stop playin.
3. lol most of my list got in 2nd point
The entire premise of a pay to win based game is the more money you spend in it, the more you succeed. There's no debating the core design philosophy of that game type, it is what it is.
Whether or not it's enjoyable to someone is personal preference and opinion. But that still does't change the fact that P2W games aren't games of skill, they're contests of who can sink the most money into it to be on top. Whether or not that's fun depends on the individual... but personally I find the entire concept laughable.
^ This.
While I'm a big advocate of F2P gaming, I'm an opponent of Pay2Win gaming. I prefer systems where players can purchase playstyles and content, but where each is balanced with free content.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
The goal of a pay2win F2P is to get as many people as possible to enter a cash shop pissing match. Where the goal is to be the best, and to be the best means buying everything possible to make you better. This is where you hear stories of players spending thousands of dollars to stay competative.
The goal of a P2P is to keep you playing as long as possible.
The goal of a standard F2P is to get you to pay to progress at a reasonable pace, pay to remove designed fustrations, pay to stand out.
So mabey pay2win isnt so bad if your ok with dropping money into a bottomless pit to stay competative, or pay tons of money to make you a good players (basically to compensate for lack of skill). No one can tell you how to spend your own money (yet at least). If this is what you like to do with your hard earned then go for it.