Are you implying that a game that offers a la carte may limit the type of people that will play?
They still have a full spectrum of people in the game, the crafters, the hunters, the uberfacepwn warriors, the medical people, the entertainers, etc...
In a la carte the devs don't limit you, you limit your own particular activities but can still associate with everyone else.
edit - and you can subscribe direclty to the channels online. Actually many of the channels are free online, and no not illegal stream or torrent sites. E.g CW and CBC
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Win - win is were gamers imputing 100 h a week gametime are = gamers imputing 10-20 $ a month. There are games - that started like that. But unfortunetly, for game market, ended in either P2W or F2P with havy, not healthy CashShops.
Though i`m not a fun but EvE is best example were F2Pgamers benefit from paying customers. And vice verca.
To me the only things that are really unacceptable is somethign that gives someone a significant advantage over another at any particular level. This would be weapons, gear, buffs, hmm maybe mounts that are faster...
XP potions aren't in this. If I am level 30 without a potion and he is lvl 30 with a potion he doesn't kill things any easier faster than I do, he will just get to 31 faster. But all higher levels will be have an advantage over a lower level so IMO this is a non issue.
Bags? I have to admit I'm conflicted about. It doesn't make fighting any easier, but does considerably lessen the amount of times you need to go to town to off load loot and so possibly gives that person more coin for that particular level. It's a close one.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
I guess I'm saying I'd rather pay for a great game that pleases many people, as compared to paying a bit less for a game that tries to sell a portion of the game population something. Developers should develop with all of our playstyles in mind, not just the segments that will pony up the most cash per man hour of work. Will there be pieces I don't care for? Sure. But the rest of the world might enjoy those things so my personal enjoyment can be put aside a bit, as long as the game itself gets better for it. I don't have kids, but I'll vote for taxes to make better schools because it makes my neighborhood better. It's an MMO, remember we should support those around us with differing ideas of fun. Massively equals a lotta different people, and even if you are a total pvp warrior, your world is better with those of us who aren't.
Originally posted by jandrsn I guess I'm saying I'd rather pay for a great game that pleases many people, as compared to paying a bit less for a game that tries to sell a portion of the game population something. Developers should develop with all of our playstyles in mind, not just the segments that will pony up the most cash per man hour of work. Will there be pieces I don't care for? Sure. But the rest of the world might enjoy those things so my personal enjoyment can be put aside a bit, as long as the game itself gets better for it. I don't have kids, but I'll vote for taxes to make better schools because it makes my neighborhood better. It's an MMO, remember we should support those around us with differing ideas of fun. Massively equals a lotta different people, and even if you are a total pvp warrior, your world is better with those of us who aren't.
How does a la acarte change that though? All those things are still in the game world you are playing. You just don't access them if you don't pay for it. You not paying for crafting, doesn't mean crafting doesn't exist in the game, other people are doing it just not you.
You not going to x area, doesn't mean that area doesn't exist, it just means you don't access it.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Well, point me to a game that appeals to crafters, warriors, entertainers, newbs, hunters, and vets then. Where is it? Too many of us need armor, but we can't be bothered to pay for a world armorers can enjoy. Need a great sword? Ehh, no game world can be bothered to develop weaponmaking as a part of the game, cause they don't microtransaction nearly as much as a fighter would! Can we get a game world, and not a system designed to funnel us into a cash shop? My real life town would be poorer if Wong, the mostly crazy gas station owner got pushed out by a corporation that wanted every last red cent. People talk of faction pride, but I bet a lot of them don't realize how many people who suck at pvp would be willing to support their side. Rosie the Riveter and all.
Originally posted by jandrsn Well, point me to a game that appeals to crafters, warriors, entertainers, newbs, hunters, and vets then. Where is it? Too many of us need armor, but we can't be bothered to pay for a world armorers can enjoy. Need a great sword? Ehh, no game world can be bothered to develop weaponmaking as a part of the game, cause they don't microtransaction nearly as much as a fighter would! Can we get a game world, and not a system designed to funnel us into a cash shop? My real life town would be poorer if Wong, the mostly crazy gas station owner got pushed out by a corporation that wanted every last red cent. People talk of faction pride, but I bet a lot of them don't realize how many people who suck at pvp would be willing to support their side. Rosie the Riveter and all.
What you are saying is valid about a game but has nothing to do with p2p vs a al carte.
The decision to include those things or not is the game design not the payment. You can have all of them or none of them with p2p or a la carte.
And the only one that most games don't have is the entertainer. They all crafting, warriors, newbs, hunters, vets.... many like them, many don't.
A game world might not have all those. Many old games didn't have entertainers, many modern gamers don't.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Meh, I'd rather pay fifteen for a complete world. How many pay to play games seem to linger in our minds after they go away? How many stick in our brains? Not many, because if you design your game as a cash shop that's all it can ever be. It can never be DAoC, SWG, AO, EQ, CoH, etc. It'll be a cash shop game, not a living world you can escape into. I'd rather pay fifteen a month instead of finding out I need to pay three dollars eight times to get the games content.
I think OP is playing devil's advocate. DDO was a nice game until you reached the upper levels. I would have paid for an account if I could have with a game card. No giving credit card or phone number online. They have a game card but it was for buying one dungeon at a time. That was silly. F2p's work best if they sell pets and mounts. But don't let em sell your momma.
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
This would actually be the game model where people pay for the actuall content, and the more content they add, the more money they can make...
So give us a free to play game where people pay for new classes, new races, extra character slots, and unlocking new content....
Which would mean the game would be like a free trial with one character to level 20 and for all other zones after that, you´d have to pay an acess/unlock fee. Now as i write this, i realise that this model is allready available in DDO... How silly of me, but that model is just awesome.
Last I knew DCUO also used this model.
I also can't imagine it working well for a AAA game that wants to continue to be percieved as being AAA. The development costs are too high to forgo box sales, from $10-50 million to the ridiculous $100-300 million. And without the predictable stream of revenue from a monthly subscription they would have no incentive to work on anything besides what market research says players want for future content. Things like balance, server backend and client improvements, and complex bug fixes never get more than minor attention because they can't be sold unless you're willing to sell patches and create new game version shards that people have to pay to be on.
This was LOTRO's original F2P model, wasn't it? I guess it didn't work out so well for them, given how increasingly desperate they've gotten with their cash-grabs.
Comments
Are you implying that a game that offers a la carte may limit the type of people that will play?
They still have a full spectrum of people in the game, the crafters, the hunters, the uberfacepwn warriors, the medical people, the entertainers, etc...
In a la carte the devs don't limit you, you limit your own particular activities but can still associate with everyone else.
edit - and you can subscribe direclty to the channels online. Actually many of the channels are free online, and no not illegal stream or torrent sites. E.g CW and CBC
Win - win is were gamers imputing 100 h a week gametime are = gamers imputing 10-20 $ a month. There are games - that started like that. But unfortunetly, for game market, ended in either P2W or F2P with havy, not healthy CashShops.
Though i`m not a fun but EvE is best example were F2Pgamers benefit from paying customers. And vice verca.
To me the only things that are really unacceptable is somethign that gives someone a significant advantage over another at any particular level. This would be weapons, gear, buffs, hmm maybe mounts that are faster...
XP potions aren't in this. If I am level 30 without a potion and he is lvl 30 with a potion he doesn't kill things any easier faster than I do, he will just get to 31 faster. But all higher levels will be have an advantage over a lower level so IMO this is a non issue.
Bags? I have to admit I'm conflicted about. It doesn't make fighting any easier, but does considerably lessen the amount of times you need to go to town to off load loot and so possibly gives that person more coin for that particular level. It's a close one.
How does a la acarte change that though? All those things are still in the game world you are playing. You just don't access them if you don't pay for it. You not paying for crafting, doesn't mean crafting doesn't exist in the game, other people are doing it just not you.
You not going to x area, doesn't mean that area doesn't exist, it just means you don't access it.
What you are saying is valid about a game but has nothing to do with p2p vs a al carte.
The decision to include those things or not is the game design not the payment. You can have all of them or none of them with p2p or a la carte.
And the only one that most games don't have is the entertainer. They all crafting, warriors, newbs, hunters, vets.... many like them, many don't.
A game world might not have all those. Many old games didn't have entertainers, many modern gamers don't.
I live in LA. Also, min doesn't mean max. Derp.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
Last I knew DCUO also used this model.
I also can't imagine it working well for a AAA game that wants to continue to be percieved as being AAA. The development costs are too high to forgo box sales, from $10-50 million to the ridiculous $100-300 million. And without the predictable stream of revenue from a monthly subscription they would have no incentive to work on anything besides what market research says players want for future content. Things like balance, server backend and client improvements, and complex bug fixes never get more than minor attention because they can't be sold unless you're willing to sell patches and create new game version shards that people have to pay to be on.
This was LOTRO's original F2P model, wasn't it? I guess it didn't work out so well for them, given how increasingly desperate they've gotten with their cash-grabs.