the main issue i hav e with some of the p2w system is this:some asian game made some item very hard to get (often trough random luck crafting.they say you take this and this and you get x(x being the item)then you can upgrade this to +1,+2,+3 but there are always chance it could drop a level but you WILL NEED do do this process to get the +20 elite watchemacallit gem.
a lot of player are ex-casino player and dont see arm in this till it is too late the player spend 1000 $ on gem till he finally +20 almost all his item ,why almost?because he ran out of money for the last 3 piece lol
Not too different than the "Power-Play to Win" models of today, where many need to be able to sit in a chair for 2-hours, uninteruppted, to complete a Raid in pursuit of the best gear.
However, I prefer a balanced game-development approach, where I can accomplish / attain or progress towards accomplishing / attaining anything in 1-hour increments, combined with a non-power influenced item shop, that actually doesn't turn a game into a "Pay-to-Win" environment.
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.
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".
Not too different than the "Power-Play to Win" models of today, where many need to be able to sit in a chair for 2-hours, uninteruppted, to complete a Raid in pursuit of the best gear.
However, I prefer a balanced game-development approach, where I can accomplish / attain or progress towards accomplishing / attaining anything in 1-hour increments, combined with a non-power influenced item shop, that actually doesn't turn a game into a "Pay-to-Win" environment.
I wish I could play football at a professional level, but I don't want to take the time or effort to build an atheletic body and practice playing it constantly, if only I could play football at a professional level by practicing for 15 minutes a week.
I wish I could speak every language in the world, but I don't feel like making any effort to learn any of them. There needs to be some computer program that automatically makes me speak every language at native level without studying any of them.
I wish I could be a champion at Scrabble, but I don't want to memorize Q words, acceptable 2 and 3 letter combinations, startegy, or increase my vocabulary.
Why do casuals feel there should be no discrepancy between non-casuals? Someone who invests more time in a hobby are rewarded as such, if I half-ass any hobby I can't be expected to be anywhere near professionals or serious enthusiasts in any of those hobbies. Games are no exception. Stop asking for equality, if we devote more time into something we deserve the best possible gear we can get. If the best gear was handed out in hour play sessions than people will burn through the content extremely quickly and players would leave a MMO in droves. You can get into just about any hobby from a casual or hardcore level, but I never heard anyone complain they can't master their hobby like an ethusiast can because they can't devote enough time into that hobby like casual MMO gamers consistently do.
Freeloaders will decide which P2W is good and which to avoid. I always find it funny that certain sub proponents love to thumb nose at freeloaders, and yet they hate being nickeled and dimed by game companies. In my opinion, the moment you accept to pay to play a game, you deserve to get nickedl and dimed by all parties. All games are P2W, even for subscription games. If you can't afford the sub and box fee, you can't even play let alone winning.
Freeloaders are the reason F2P thrive and will be the ultimate judge in deciding whose cash shop is fair. No game player likes to be disadvantaged from the start. It's time recongize their decisive presence.
Ask yourself this question: when was the last time you saw a poor African country winning most gold medals in Olympics?
Not every football player is a pro. That's why there are different levels of competition. I wouldn't complain about not being able to play in their league but I don't want to see them across the scrimmage line in the community league either. Developers can build games only pros can play and go broke or they can even it out some. It's that simple. Yeah I'm talking about "dumbing down" games.
That's exactly what happens though. The hardcore players move on the new raid content and the previous raid content is either dumbed down or made more accessible by giving casuals more options to get gear (like raid equivalent gear being made available through single group content). Do you want the professional league removed entirely? Then what are us hardcore suppose to do? Even Blizzard tries to seperate the casuals and hardcore players with the arena ranking systems. PvP is difficult to implement in a MMO because of this, but typically hardcore don't play in the same playground as casuals in MMOs anymore in a PvE environment, that's what instances are for.
I agree seperation is needed (especially in PvP), but I think what a lot of casuals ask for is complete equality despite not investing equal playtime which simply cannot happen. I have a right to better gear/harder content because I devote more hours into the game, if you removed raid content or dumbed it down to the point where it can be done in very short play sessions then the hardcore base will leave. It's true the hardcore base makes up a very small percentage of paying subscribers, but hardcore make the game feel healthier overall by being generally more active, testing and tweaking content which casuals may eventually experience, and making everything more balanced due to constant activity in various aspects of the game. Having the hardcore leave will put a significant hit in subscription numbers over a period of time.
If you can propose a happier medium between the two than by all means do so, but as far as I'm concerned "dumbing down" everything to the point anyone with a small amount of playtime and skill (knowledge level) of the game can do it isn't a decent solution to the problem.
EDIT: I realize I'm going offtopic a bit here, sorry. I don't think P2W provides a reasonable solution either. If I have to pay to win at a game I might as well just have someone play it for me, because at that point it's no longer a game, but a matter of who can shell out the most cash to become the most powerful. I honestly fail to see how anyone can find that entertaining, and that's what games are suppose to be about: fun.
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!
"I think it ruins what the Free to Play movement is all about. Making quality games available for everyone." Seriously? Are you selling? Or drinking the kool-aid? No one is really this niave are they?
F2P is about making money. Making more money off customers -- not less. It is most definitely not a charity movement.
Personally, one of my favorite games is pay to win.
Now, I LOVE games where pay to win can be bested by raw skill or just lots and lots of time, but this isn't that kind of game:
Conquer Online (pre-2.0)
In this game the only way to match pay to win, or even come close is to bot multiple accounts all day long, but if you HAVE the money to spend it is AWESOME.
I have softened my stance on P2W lately, simply because if players are enjoying the game enough to buy upgraded gear and weapons they are supporting the game they like by doing so..
However depending on the way the game is structured it could have a negative effect on new players that havent decided if they want to pay to play yet..
I don't see play to win as a bad thing, Becuase the guys playing are paying the company which keeps the game going, so basicly the people paying are paying for everyone playing.
The hobby comparison is compelling. I suppose it is more realistic for collection-type hobbies, but in my opinion, it goes against everything video games have ever stood for, which is getting better at them through practice. People who build model cars as a hobby can't spend more money and instantly become good at building model cars. You can buy the most expensive kits and paint and and still be an amateur. You could argue that even though you are able to purchase all best gear, you still have to practice to get good at the game, but honestly the best gear does make the games easier. If players (like me) are unable to earn their rewards, the rewards lose value and I lose interest.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
I don't see play to win as a bad thing, Becuase the guys playing are paying the company which keeps the game going, so basicly the people paying are paying for everyone playing.
you dont know where your money is going. that's my problem.
if we'd have guarantees the money goes into development...great. I'll help. But for someone's Ferarri...I'd rather buy one for myself. In 100 years or so.
You have just as much knowledge of where your money is going as in a p2p game. In a p2p you hope it's going to development but until that expansion/patch/maintenance happens you don't know for sure. Same with f2p, you don't know where it's going until something there is a patch/expansion maintenance.
Venge
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
well, yes, Venge but at least you know it's a limited amount and its the same for everyone.
At least you know you're not getting a worst deal than the rest of playerbase and that development will not be centered around putting new stuff in the cash shop.
because eventually the P2W problem will be this:
I buy "sword of 1000 truths". its expensive. its awesome. 2 moths later, "sword of 2000 truths" drops in CS. twice as awesome. Twice as expensive.
you bought the 'best sword in the game". now its not the best sword in the game. and obviously you cant return it for a refund. And the thing is...hey can do this endlessly. every week a new sword of +1 souls. you'd basically be in a ...spending race to stay competitive.
a P2W that gets out of hand would be a lot worst than any other payment model getting 'out of hand'.
I still don't understand. Whats the limited amount? I pay only for what I use. In a ftp I'm paying for the item/area whatever after it's allready developed. I'm getting the exact same thing as all the other people that payed for that thing, no more no less.
Your issues with the sword is what happens to most games after every expansion. I got t3 gear, damnit expansion now there is t4. If you care about competition you are in that same boat with f2p and p2p.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
But that's the thing, if you were receiving the same content (dungeons, quests, etc.) for free, but to have the best armor in the game you have to pay $15.00 per month, it would pretty much be the same as subscription base, no? Yet it's a P2W model. Say you pay 20.00 this month, but next just 10.00, then it's still the same.
On the other hand, if you don't mind to have -10 Strength, or -10 Agility on your chestpiece compared to the next guy, you can play the game for free.
I think the main issue here is you can't be reasonably competitive in most F2P (Pay 2 Win) games on a $15 a month budget like you could in P2P. Buying gear, then enhancing it to become best in slot, often costs hundreds of dollars due to various unsavory practices like lottery boxes, low % chance of success on enchanting, and insanely high pricing (examples: Allods Online, Runes of Magic, Atlantica Online, Forsaken World or pretty much any other popular F2P). F2P games that aren't Pay 2 Win using models like League of Legends, Bloodline Champions, and Battlefield Heroes do fine also, so it really looks bad for Pay 2 Win games when you have games you do not have to pay to win for that are extremely successful (especially the League of Legends example here). They are extremely deceptive with marketing and target mostly kids using their parent's credit cards who have no concept of money and worth.
If there is no item mall and everyone is paying a subscription fee then you are always on equal ground with players. Only your time investment, your personal skill/knowledge of the game, and your time management will be factors in how much you progress in the game. In a Pay 2 Win game it's essentially whoever forks over the most money. That completely goes against the very way most games are suppose to work.
I'd also like to point out that I consider myself an advocate of F2P and Microtransactions, but in order for the industry to progress and allow for more F2P to enter the market and be successful they need to start dropping the pay to win concept. A game can manage just fine with no subscription fee by providing various services, vanity items, and possibly a few of what I call convenience items on the item mall and no power buys. There are several examples of games out there, I mentioned a few above, so it's kinda hard to argue that power buys are needed in an item mall for the game to be profitable.
I'd also like to point out that I consider myself an advocate of F2P and Microtransactions, but in order for the industry to progress and allow for more F2P to enter the market and be successful they need to start dropping the pay to win concept. A game can manage just fine with no subscription fee by providing various services, vanity items, and possibly a few of what I call convenience items on the item mall and no power buys. There are several examples of games out there, I mentioned a few above, so it's kinda hard to argue that power buys are needed in an item mall for the game to be profitable.
LOl .. they dont need to .. they are already successful.
IMO P2W is not good, IRL people with more money than you will have a better house, better car, usually better job, better lawyers, so on. People in game that buys everything online will downright beat you if you're on a budget. Get into Need For Speed World and find out for yourself how ridiculously lopsided that damn game is.
P2P is much more fairer, everyone pays the same $14.95/mo, only difference is one that plays 4 hours a week compared to one that plays 100 hours a week and the guy with 100 hours is going to accomplish more in a period.
But once you have it, you have it for life whether you decide to spend another cent in the game or not. With p2p you have it for 30 days tops.
Venge
Most of the item shop thingies in f2p games I tried are either consumable or vanish afte a certain time. So that does not really apply. The permanent ones tend to cost a LOT. Perma weapons in the APB cash shop reaches up to 50-70$. Perma weapons in S4 league typically cost a ton as well because you can only get them through lottery items.
In Sword 2, all the costumes vanish after 30 days after using.
In Asda story, cash shop items last 3 weeks at most for the equipable stuff. So idk where you get the idea that you have them for life o.o
At most I have to say that some let you have them for life but some dont o.o
''/\/\'' 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**
Comments
the main issue i hav e with some of the p2w system is this:some asian game made some item very hard to get (often trough random luck crafting.they say you take this and this and you get x(x being the item)then you can upgrade this to +1,+2,+3 but there are always chance it could drop a level but you WILL NEED do do this process to get the +20 elite watchemacallit gem.
a lot of player are ex-casino player and dont see arm in this till it is too late the player spend 1000 $ on gem till he finally +20 almost all his item ,why almost?because he ran out of money for the last 3 piece lol
Well-written, Neverdyne.
Not too different than the "Power-Play to Win" models of today, where many need to be able to sit in a chair for 2-hours, uninteruppted, to complete a Raid in pursuit of the best gear.
However, I prefer a balanced game-development approach, where I can accomplish / attain or progress towards accomplishing / attaining anything in 1-hour increments, combined with a non-power influenced item shop, that actually doesn't turn a game into a "Pay-to-Win" environment.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I wish I could play football at a professional level, but I don't want to take the time or effort to build an atheletic body and practice playing it constantly, if only I could play football at a professional level by practicing for 15 minutes a week.
I wish I could speak every language in the world, but I don't feel like making any effort to learn any of them. There needs to be some computer program that automatically makes me speak every language at native level without studying any of them.
I wish I could be a champion at Scrabble, but I don't want to memorize Q words, acceptable 2 and 3 letter combinations, startegy, or increase my vocabulary.
Why do casuals feel there should be no discrepancy between non-casuals? Someone who invests more time in a hobby are rewarded as such, if I half-ass any hobby I can't be expected to be anywhere near professionals or serious enthusiasts in any of those hobbies. Games are no exception. Stop asking for equality, if we devote more time into something we deserve the best possible gear we can get. If the best gear was handed out in hour play sessions than people will burn through the content extremely quickly and players would leave a MMO in droves. You can get into just about any hobby from a casual or hardcore level, but I never heard anyone complain they can't master their hobby like an ethusiast can because they can't devote enough time into that hobby like casual MMO gamers consistently do.
Freeloaders will decide which P2W is good and which to avoid. I always find it funny that certain sub proponents love to thumb nose at freeloaders, and yet they hate being nickeled and dimed by game companies. In my opinion, the moment you accept to pay to play a game, you deserve to get nickedl and dimed by all parties. All games are P2W, even for subscription games. If you can't afford the sub and box fee, you can't even play let alone winning.
Freeloaders are the reason F2P thrive and will be the ultimate judge in deciding whose cash shop is fair. No game player likes to be disadvantaged from the start. It's time recongize their decisive presence.
Ask yourself this question: when was the last time you saw a poor African country winning most gold medals in Olympics?
That's exactly what happens though. The hardcore players move on the new raid content and the previous raid content is either dumbed down or made more accessible by giving casuals more options to get gear (like raid equivalent gear being made available through single group content). Do you want the professional league removed entirely? Then what are us hardcore suppose to do? Even Blizzard tries to seperate the casuals and hardcore players with the arena ranking systems. PvP is difficult to implement in a MMO because of this, but typically hardcore don't play in the same playground as casuals in MMOs anymore in a PvE environment, that's what instances are for.
I agree seperation is needed (especially in PvP), but I think what a lot of casuals ask for is complete equality despite not investing equal playtime which simply cannot happen. I have a right to better gear/harder content because I devote more hours into the game, if you removed raid content or dumbed it down to the point where it can be done in very short play sessions then the hardcore base will leave. It's true the hardcore base makes up a very small percentage of paying subscribers, but hardcore make the game feel healthier overall by being generally more active, testing and tweaking content which casuals may eventually experience, and making everything more balanced due to constant activity in various aspects of the game. Having the hardcore leave will put a significant hit in subscription numbers over a period of time.
If you can propose a happier medium between the two than by all means do so, but as far as I'm concerned "dumbing down" everything to the point anyone with a small amount of playtime and skill (knowledge level) of the game can do it isn't a decent solution to the problem.
EDIT: I realize I'm going offtopic a bit here, sorry. I don't think P2W provides a reasonable solution either. If I have to pay to win at a game I might as well just have someone play it for me, because at that point it's no longer a game, but a matter of who can shell out the most cash to become the most powerful. I honestly fail to see how anyone can find that entertaining, and that's what games are suppose to be about: fun.
"I think it ruins what the Free to Play movement is all about. Making quality games available for everyone." Seriously? Are you selling? Or drinking the kool-aid? No one is really this niave are they?
F2P is about making money. Making more money off customers -- not less. It is most definitely not a charity movement.
Personally, one of my favorite games is pay to win.
Now, I LOVE games where pay to win can be bested by raw skill or just lots and lots of time, but this isn't that kind of game:
Conquer Online (pre-2.0)
In this game the only way to match pay to win, or even come close is to bot multiple accounts all day long, but if you HAVE the money to spend it is AWESOME.
I have softened my stance on P2W lately, simply because if players are enjoying the game enough to buy upgraded gear and weapons they are supporting the game they like by doing so..
However depending on the way the game is structured it could have a negative effect on new players that havent decided if they want to pay to play yet..
Playing GW2..
I don't see play to win as a bad thing, Becuase the guys playing are paying the company which keeps the game going, so basicly the people paying are paying for everyone playing.
It puts in the ultimate level of realizm. The ritch dominate the poor. Survival of the fittest, right?
The hobby comparison is compelling. I suppose it is more realistic for collection-type hobbies, but in my opinion, it goes against everything video games have ever stood for, which is getting better at them through practice. People who build model cars as a hobby can't spend more money and instantly become good at building model cars. You can buy the most expensive kits and paint and and still be an amateur. You could argue that even though you are able to purchase all best gear, you still have to practice to get good at the game, but honestly the best gear does make the games easier. If players (like me) are unable to earn their rewards, the rewards lose value and I lose interest.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
You have just as much knowledge of where your money is going as in a p2p game. In a p2p you hope it's going to development but until that expansion/patch/maintenance happens you don't know for sure. Same with f2p, you don't know where it's going until something there is a patch/expansion maintenance.
Venge
I still don't understand. Whats the limited amount? I pay only for what I use. In a ftp I'm paying for the item/area whatever after it's allready developed. I'm getting the exact same thing as all the other people that payed for that thing, no more no less.
Your issues with the sword is what happens to most games after every expansion. I got t3 gear, damnit expansion now there is t4. If you care about competition you are in that same boat with f2p and p2p.
i personally liked battlefield heros stance on item mall. where there is a mall but only for appearence. No added advantages
But that's the thing, if you were receiving the same content (dungeons, quests, etc.) for free, but to have the best armor in the game you have to pay $15.00 per month, it would pretty much be the same as subscription base, no? Yet it's a P2W model. Say you pay 20.00 this month, but next just 10.00, then it's still the same.
On the other hand, if you don't mind to have -10 Strength, or -10 Agility on your chestpiece compared to the next guy, you can play the game for free.
But once you have it, you have it for life whether you decide to spend another cent in the game or not. With p2p you have it for 30 days tops.
Venge
I think the main issue here is you can't be reasonably competitive in most F2P (Pay 2 Win) games on a $15 a month budget like you could in P2P. Buying gear, then enhancing it to become best in slot, often costs hundreds of dollars due to various unsavory practices like lottery boxes, low % chance of success on enchanting, and insanely high pricing (examples: Allods Online, Runes of Magic, Atlantica Online, Forsaken World or pretty much any other popular F2P). F2P games that aren't Pay 2 Win using models like League of Legends, Bloodline Champions, and Battlefield Heroes do fine also, so it really looks bad for Pay 2 Win games when you have games you do not have to pay to win for that are extremely successful (especially the League of Legends example here). They are extremely deceptive with marketing and target mostly kids using their parent's credit cards who have no concept of money and worth.
If there is no item mall and everyone is paying a subscription fee then you are always on equal ground with players. Only your time investment, your personal skill/knowledge of the game, and your time management will be factors in how much you progress in the game. In a Pay 2 Win game it's essentially whoever forks over the most money. That completely goes against the very way most games are suppose to work.
I'd also like to point out that I consider myself an advocate of F2P and Microtransactions, but in order for the industry to progress and allow for more F2P to enter the market and be successful they need to start dropping the pay to win concept. A game can manage just fine with no subscription fee by providing various services, vanity items, and possibly a few of what I call convenience items on the item mall and no power buys. There are several examples of games out there, I mentioned a few above, so it's kinda hard to argue that power buys are needed in an item mall for the game to be profitable.
LOl .. they dont need to .. they are already successful.
IMO P2W is not good, IRL people with more money than you will have a better house, better car, usually better job, better lawyers, so on. People in game that buys everything online will downright beat you if you're on a budget. Get into Need For Speed World and find out for yourself how ridiculously lopsided that damn game is.
P2P is much more fairer, everyone pays the same $14.95/mo, only difference is one that plays 4 hours a week compared to one that plays 100 hours a week and the guy with 100 hours is going to accomplish more in a period.
Most of the item shop thingies in f2p games I tried are either consumable or vanish afte a certain time. So that does not really apply. The permanent ones tend to cost a LOT. Perma weapons in the APB cash shop reaches up to 50-70$. Perma weapons in S4 league typically cost a ton as well because you can only get them through lottery items.
In Sword 2, all the costumes vanish after 30 days after using.
In Asda story, cash shop items last 3 weeks at most for the equipable stuff. So idk where you get the idea that you have them for life o.o
At most I have to say that some let you have them for life but some dont o.o
''/\/\'' 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**