I would like to ask a favour of all the CoE community. From now and onwards let's ignore slapshot and Company who constantly slag off CoE and have decent conversations between ourselves and new member to this game / dorm
As far as I have seen Slapshot has only pointed out that some of the backer pledges are p2w; don't understand what all the angst is about since he is clearly correct. Any major publisher would be crucified by the media if they sold perks like this for a game that may or may not be finished some time in the future.
Except there is no pay to win in a game where you can't win and your character dies. Granted, the entire concept of pay-to-win is open to interpretation, but the only interpretation that makes sense to me is where you pay real money to gain advantage to defeating your opponents in the game. That entire concept doesn't apply to Chronicles of Elyria. There's is no winning a virtual world game where your character dies and any adversaries you face also suffer that same fate.
The entire game is about the journey not the destination. Just because you start the game as a King after you paid 10,000 in the kickstarter doesn't mean you "win" Chronicles of Elyria. Your kingdom can be conquered and your character will inevitably die. And no amount of real money you pay can prevent that from happening. You simply can not pay to win in this game.
The game sounds interesting and looks great; your argument about p2w I have heard many times before whenever someone tries to justify paying money for an advantage in a game.
Indie devs are really giving themselves a bad name pushing out this kind of extreme p2w model (even before the game is finished!). It almost makes discussion of p2w in games by mainstream devs moot. The monetization models in games like Archage, Neverwinter, and so forth seem totally tame in comparison.
Winning in MMORPGs is as defined by Charlie Sheen. If you are having fun, you are winning. You aren't supposed to be having fun without using cash shops, because otherwise they wouldn't make money. So all games with cash shops are pay to win or a better term pay to have fun. Stop making the argument "It has a cash shop, but it's not p2w" to defend your latest f2p scam.
Wow, thanks for adding nothing to the conversation while also adding the completely subjective ingredient called ' fun.' I'll also reverse it for you, I have found tons of fun in games with a cash shop without paying a dime. Stop defending your unreasonable hate for in game purchases while also vomiting around hyperboles like 'f2p scam.'
There is ONE MMO out there that has no cash shop anymore as I've previously posted and it is called Ryzom, ALL the others have a cash shop. For you the MMO genre=P2W, you call it a scam so time to leave I would say, you picked the wrong genre to play. But like I've also posted before, stop polluting these threads with absolute subjective nonsense while acting like you know the truth.
ps. Charlie Sheen is a raging junkie, an absolute idiotic moron. He is not winning, he's a massive loser with a serious STD, good example...
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
Also, while I am at it, if anyone from the MMORPG.com crew is reading this, could we get a separate section on the forums called The Slums? It is for those wanting to talk about how much they hate cash shops and how it ruined the genre etc. That way they do not have to join every thread about every game with their complaints and finger pointing and we, the people who are enjoying these games, do not have to wade through their posts.
The Slums, sums it up perfect for me, we could have a winner here
Also, I will stop discussing this matter on this thread, you can agree or not with what CoE is doing but stop spreading misinformation, you are truly ruining it for others who do find enjoyment in just playing and/or supporting their damn games and I will not contribute to that any longer.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
Guys this is why we need to ignore them. They are just trying to make the community seem bad by getting us all posses off at the crap they are spouting. I fell for it once but not anymore.
Just ignore them and if any new players ask about the game direct them to the CoE forums.
Guys this is why we need to ignore them. They are just trying to make the community seem bad by getting us all posses off at the crap they are spouting. I fell for it once but not anymore.
Just ignore them and if any new players ask about the game direct them to the CoE forums.
Don't worry, soon as the KS ends the discussion on this title will skid to a halt here and won't resume until something notable occurs.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I would like to ask a favour of all the CoE community. From now and onwards let's ignore slapshot and Company who constantly slag off CoE and have decent conversations between ourselves and new member to this game / dorm
As far as I have seen Slapshot has only pointed out that some of the backer pledges are p2w; don't understand what all the angst is about since he is clearly correct. Any major publisher would be crucified by the media if they sold perks like this for a game that may or may not be finished some time in the future.
Except there is no pay to win in a game where you can't win and your character dies. Granted, the entire concept of pay-to-win is open to interpretation, but the only interpretation that makes sense to me is where you pay real money to gain advantage to defeating your opponents in the game. That entire concept doesn't apply to Chronicles of Elyria. There's is no winning a virtual world game where your character dies and any adversaries you face also suffer that same fate.
The entire game is about the journey not the destination. Just because you start the game as a King after you paid 10,000 in the kickstarter doesn't mean you "win" Chronicles of Elyria. Your kingdom can be conquered and your character will inevitably die. And no amount of real money you pay can prevent that from happening. You simply can not pay to win in this game.
The game sounds interesting and looks great; your argument about p2w I have heard many times before whenever someone tries to justify paying money for an advantage in a game.
Indie devs are really giving themselves a bad name pushing out this kind of extreme p2w model (even before the game is finished!). It almost makes discussion of p2w in games by mainstream devs moot. The monetization models in games like Archage, Neverwinter, and so forth seem totally tame in comparison.
Sorry, but you're just plain wrong in this instance. If you took the time to get to know the game you'd realize that, but you didn't, so you don't.
I do hope to play this if it is released, it should be a blast. But trying to side-step the p2w issue does not make it magically disappear - although I know it would be convenient for some if it did.
At the moment we can see that players can pay up to $10,000 in one hit for a variety of in game advantages. If the logic used to justify this monetization model is "there is no win so it is not p2w", the door has been opened to add just about anything into the cash shop.
That creates a lot more fear for the future direction of the game than just saying something like- "we have to do it this way because it is the only way we can finance the game" and then giving a firm indication of the stance toward p2w once the game gets underway.
Unfortunately once the devs have started down this slippery slope its difficult to believe they will refrain from implementing a heavily p2w cash shop in game as well, especially if they adopt the line "there is no win so it is not p2w". Anything goes at that point, doesn't it?
I would like to ask a favour of all the CoE community. From now and onwards let's ignore slapshot and Company who constantly slag off CoE and have decent conversations between ourselves and new member to this game / dorm
As far as I have seen Slapshot has only pointed out that some of the backer pledges are p2w; don't understand what all the angst is about since he is clearly correct. Any major publisher would be crucified by the media if they sold perks like this for a game that may or may not be finished some time in the future.
Except there is no pay to win in a game where you can't win and your character dies. Granted, the entire concept of pay-to-win is open to interpretation, but the only interpretation that makes sense to me is where you pay real money to gain advantage to defeating your opponents in the game. That entire concept doesn't apply to Chronicles of Elyria. There's is no winning a virtual world game where your character dies and any adversaries you face also suffer that same fate.
The entire game is about the journey not the destination. Just because you start the game as a King after you paid 10,000 in the kickstarter doesn't mean you "win" Chronicles of Elyria. Your kingdom can be conquered and your character will inevitably die. And no amount of real money you pay can prevent that from happening. You simply can not pay to win in this game.
The game sounds interesting and looks great; your argument about p2w I have heard many times before whenever someone tries to justify paying money for an advantage in a game.
Indie devs are really giving themselves a bad name pushing out this kind of extreme p2w model (even before the game is finished!). It almost makes discussion of p2w in games by mainstream devs moot. The monetization models in games like Archage, Neverwinter, and so forth seem totally tame in comparison.
Sorry, but you're just plain wrong in this instance. If you took the time to get to know the game you'd realize that, but you didn't, so you don't.
@SedrynTyros ; I think people are just frustrated with the payment models today. I can only speak for myself but I feel that any game that does not have a Sub Only option is P2W. I guess that comes from myself and friends who have gotten so tired of the F2P and B2P setups with cash shops and now add to that Kickstarts that give you advantages the more money you give the developers. My circle of friends all feel the same. I am not saying it's right I am just saying this might be the cause of people's frustration.
Just to put it out there, the term "Pay to win" can only be aplied to games, that are otherwise free to play, but has some aspect that requires payment. This game while not being subscription based, is NOT free to play, you do need to buy at least the game itself and a spark of life to be able to play and you DO need to buy a second spark of life once your first character dies of old age or any other reason (though it's highly likely that the game will cost less for you then the average subscription).
So the game is "Pay to PLAY", not "Pay to Win".
The game will not have any kind of Cash Shop, so it cannot be "pay to win" anyway. If any of you are referring to the KS rewards, hell, it is only natural that the people who back the project get something in return, since nothing is free.
I would like to ask a favour of all the CoE community. From now and onwards let's ignore slapshot and Company who constantly slag off CoE and have decent conversations between ourselves and new member to this game / dorm
As far as I have seen Slapshot has only pointed out that some of the backer pledges are p2w; don't understand what all the angst is about since he is clearly correct. Any major publisher would be crucified by the media if they sold perks like this for a game that may or may not be finished some time in the future.
Except there is no pay to win in a game where you can't win and your character dies. Granted, the entire concept of pay-to-win is open to interpretation, but the only interpretation that makes sense to me is where you pay real money to gain advantage to defeating your opponents in the game. That entire concept doesn't apply to Chronicles of Elyria. There's is no winning a virtual world game where your character dies and any adversaries you face also suffer that same fate.
The entire game is about the journey not the destination. Just because you start the game as a King after you paid 10,000 in the kickstarter doesn't mean you "win" Chronicles of Elyria. Your kingdom can be conquered and your character will inevitably die. And no amount of real money you pay can prevent that from happening. You simply can not pay to win in this game.
The game sounds interesting and looks great; your argument about p2w I have heard many times before whenever someone tries to justify paying money for an advantage in a game.
Indie devs are really giving themselves a bad name pushing out this kind of extreme p2w model (even before the game is finished!). It almost makes discussion of p2w in games by mainstream devs moot. The monetization models in games like Archage, Neverwinter, and so forth seem totally tame in comparison.
Sorry, but you're just plain wrong in this instance. If you took the time to get to know the game you'd realize that, but you didn't, so you don't.
@SedrynTyros ; I think people are just frustrated with the payment models today. I can only speak for myself but I feel that any game that does not have a Sub Only option is P2W. I guess that comes from myself and friends who have gotten so tired of the F2P and B2P setups with cash shops and now add to that Kickstarts that give you advantages the more money you give the developers. My circle of friends all feel the same. I am not saying it's right I am just saying this might be the cause of people's frustration.
So may sub games also have cash shops - WoW, Rift (when it was sub only), and I could go on. You do not understand what you are talking about.
P2W is different than a Cash Shop. Example, used to play Allods Online (a long time ago) and that game had boosts and armor you could buy that made your character impossible to kill, unless another player had the same boosts, now that was P2W. A game that has a CS, DOES NOT MEAN IT IS P2W.
Sub games are dead because they have not offered ANYTHING that is/was unique or better than any other game out there. Just having a Sub, also, does not make the game NOT P2W. I mean Allods did have a sub and also had a P2W shop (still does from what I hear). It was unfortunate because the game was unique - a continuation of Rage of Mages, but the company got greedy.
Companies are out to make money, plain and simple. It is what it is but in the long term P2W games die because people end up getting bored or decide to stop putting money into them.
I would like to ask a favour of all the CoE community. From now and onwards let's ignore slapshot and Company who constantly slag off CoE and have decent conversations between ourselves and new member to this game / dorm
As far as I have seen Slapshot has only pointed out that some of the backer pledges are p2w; don't understand what all the angst is about since he is clearly correct. Any major publisher would be crucified by the media if they sold perks like this for a game that may or may not be finished some time in the future.
Except there is no pay to win in a game where you can't win and your character dies. Granted, the entire concept of pay-to-win is open to interpretation, but the only interpretation that makes sense to me is where you pay real money to gain advantage to defeating your opponents in the game. That entire concept doesn't apply to Chronicles of Elyria. There's is no winning a virtual world game where your character dies and any adversaries you face also suffer that same fate.
The entire game is about the journey not the destination. Just because you start the game as a King after you paid 10,000 in the kickstarter doesn't mean you "win" Chronicles of Elyria. Your kingdom can be conquered and your character will inevitably die. And no amount of real money you pay can prevent that from happening. You simply can not pay to win in this game.
The game sounds interesting and looks great; your argument about p2w I have heard many times before whenever someone tries to justify paying money for an advantage in a game.
Indie devs are really giving themselves a bad name pushing out this kind of extreme p2w model (even before the game is finished!). It almost makes discussion of p2w in games by mainstream devs moot. The monetization models in games like Archage, Neverwinter, and so forth seem totally tame in comparison.
Sorry, but you're just plain wrong in this instance. If you took the time to get to know the game you'd realize that, but you didn't, so you don't.
Unfortunately once the devs have started down this slippery slope its difficult to believe they will refrain from implementing a heavily p2w cash shop in game as well, especially if they adopt the line "there is no win so it is not p2w". Anything goes at that point, doesn't it?
I do not think so. Besides the fact, that they have stated, that there will be no cash shop, not even for cosmetic items, its not that hey have fought their conscience and were like "Mhhhh....i´d rather not,...but we´ll do this one exception. God help us." And believe me, IF they add a p2w cash shop later on, because of revenue etc, and dont take other ways to make more money, i will be the first one on here opening a thread, calling them out.
But from everything they say, especially Caspian, the drive and determination to make a rather old shool game, without all that crap that plagues modern mmos is really apparent.
I really hate how a game is either considered pay2win or not-pay2win because it just leads to pages and pages of disagreement between the "Yes's" and the "No's". Is pay to win the same as pay for advantages, technically you have an advantage but would you win from having that advantage...and again what is "winning" in Chronicles of Elyria. What if a tier gives you a combat advantage but you are planning to really only be a crafter and thus that perk has no advantage, the same goes the opposite way; you get a trade cart from a tier but you are combat focused and want to make most of your in-game income as a contract killer...you would get very little advantage from crafting-oriented tier rewards. If we are going to have a broad definition of pay to win, we should have a broad answer...not just yes or no.
If Pay-to-win was truly pay for an advantage, ALL cash shop items in all games would be considered in the pay to win category plus any games that have subscriber benefits vs free players (ie. Runescape), hell you could even say WoW subscribers have an advantage because they aren't paying the thousands of K in gold to play for free (saving in-game time and effort to accumulate that money). Exp% increases, costumes with small stat bonuses, pets that pick up loot before a corpse disappears. These are all now in the category of pay to win if your definition is pay for an advantage - but the question is, are you winning from said advantage? Some people will argue yes and some no, it's going to be an uphill battle for either side to convince the other so from this point on, I'm going to talk about P2W in the form of advantage, as I can't see anyone "winning" COE. That being said, in order to have an adequate answer to such a broad question, people should just scale advantage 1-10...1 being least advantageous to 10 being most advantageous. Again it's all opinion because some (imo crazy) people want to be king and might see the 10k tier as having a 10 ranked "Advantage" - however I would rate it as a 1 because there is no way in hell that I would want that responsibility. So here goes my response to the question posted on this thread.
First off, I'm not going to look at everything because that would take a week to go through each reward. Secondly, here's some notes on cash shops and IP: there will be no "cash shop" there will be a story point shop that nets you free sparks, etc for playing the game (Earn to Play model), IP/influence points are a pre-launch currency for supporting a game that technically doesn't even exist yet - at its core it's rewarding you for taking a risk, much like the game's primary value of of risk = reward.
So lets look at some of the topics on the table. Scaled for advantage 1-10 which would largely depend on the player and their choices. Three-month headstart 4: While some may argue this higher or lower, I think that while initially the 3 month headstart isn't that advantageous, it might become more so on the 2nd or 3rd month after infrastructure is established. That being said, you also die 3 months earlier than release folks, who then have the opportunity to take over top spots in professions, leadership (I doubt anyone wants a 15 year old leading their organization), top assassin, etc.
IP Store 3: While we don't have all of the tiers from the IP store, we have seen the preliminary early tier items which consist of land, tools, and resources. It's important to note that while you get IP from the kickstarter tiers, you also get IP from being an active and dedicated community member who is actively helping the game grow from recruitment or promoting the game through media outlets (youtube, COE wiki authors, websites, bloggers) - there are people who have thousands of IP through recruitment and if those accounts buy the game/support the kickstarter then that IP can be used in the IP store. Therefore the rewards offered in the IP store can be earned via other methods, not just cash. While you do get an advantage from having land & resources from the start of the game, it won't be available forever (you will eventually earn SP instead, which can't be bought with cash), the resources/land and items can be taken by players, and you also have the option to get IP rewards through indirect non-financial related activities.
Status 4: Players can support at different tiers and receive a status according to the tier level to be a King, Duke, Count, etc and with these they receive power, responsibilities, land, etc. So players get an advantage (if looking at them from the perspective of a player who wants the status and sees that a supporter paid for it), which might not be true for all as not everyone even wants the huge risk and responsibility that is involved with running a County or Kingdom. As others have said, you might be paying 10k to put a HUGE bullseye on your back for any assassin that wants to make a bit of money or fame.
I feel like I could probably go on but I would be writing a book, so I'm just going to jump to a TLDR: In my opinion, there is no winning in COE; however, there are obvious advantages that can be earned via cash but you are also being rewarded for taking a risk on a game that is in-development. I ranked the possible advantages from my own opinion and explained my reasoning and tried to be as unbiased as possible. All in all, if we are downgrading winning to advantage, my side on Yes vs No on the literal phrase "pay-to-win" is that I would place myself on the side of "no" - this game is not and will not be a pay to win game as we have seen with other games like the Korean version of BDO or AA.
So yeah, technically any game could be considered Pay2Win depending on your definition. The definition of Pay2Win I chose to go by is, can one player gain a competitive advantage over another player simply by paying more real life money.
Classic MMO's (box fee and monthly subscription) are not Pay2Win, IMHO, because every player must pay equally the same amount to play the game. With the monthly subscription model, a player cannot pay the game studio more money than another player in order to gain an advantage in-game.
So yes, CoE is Pay2Win at least in terms of their fund raising rewards. However, Pay2Win in itself isn't necessarily always bad. The real question becomes to what extent is it Pay 2 Win?
Is it just P2W in the stuff that we know from Kickstarter, or will it include a cash shop where you can buy in-game items and rare resources like ArcheAge? I am fine with the former. Not with the latter.
I agree with this take, I think. I don't know the full context here, but if I'm reading it all right, then this is a "one off" thing.
A ) It is PtW, and those people will have an advantage in the game. After that, there's no more PtW in the design as time moves on. B ) But it also comes with some benefits. Not only can the game be funded, but it starts out with a social structure based around the players. This is much more preferable, in my mind, than a game that starts out with no structure at all, where players have to go through a beginning stage of utter chaos. I do know that my opinion here is debatable and subject to opinion, but that's how I see it.
Its a sad state of affairs that Rich people can buy themselves into the king position because of their status in RL gives them the status in the game as the same. Giving a sort of reminder that poor people will not escape from and therefor removing the aspect of escapism that role playing games stem from. this is a bit of a reach but it is something that's noticeable.
Its a sad state of affairs that Rich people can buy themselves into the king position because of their status in RL gives them the status in the game as the same. Giving a sort of reminder that poor people will not escape from and therefor removing the aspect of escapism that role playing games stem from. this is a bit of a reach but it is something that's noticeable.
Its a sad state of affairs that Rich people can buy themselves into the king position because of their status in RL gives them the status in the game as the same. Giving a sort of reminder that poor people will not escape from and therefor removing the aspect of escapism that role playing games stem from. this is a bit of a reach but it is something that's noticeable.
The thing is. All that gives them is power to tell others what's legal and declare war, that doesn't give them extra fighting power and if those poor people catch him without his help, he better know how to fight because if he loses, he loses I think about 32X the amount of spirit these so called peasants lose when they spirit walk.
The problem with trying to relate this to real life is, I can try and kill the king and fail several hundred times in game. Thus it makes attacks to overthrow them far more viable. Whereas in real life if i try to attack the king just once..My life is basically over.
These titles bought at the start are very very likely to switch hands rather quickly, and as people see kingdoms as the big prize to "win" the kings/queens will have the hardest battle right at the start when they have the least experience.
It's like playing dark souls on very hard difficulty right from the beginning.
Help me Bioware, you're my only hope.
Is ToR going to be good? Dude it's Bioware making a freaking star wars game, all signs point to awesome. -G4tv MMo report.
Bring king is in no way winning in this game. Its not the "goal" of the game. There are only a few kings ever in the world, and they can all be dethroned too.
P2W is a subjective thing. Thats the problem with saying it is or it isnt. Some people view the Kickstart rewards as P2W others dont. One side will say they are obviously right, the other side will say they are obviously right. There will be no convincing the other side that youre right and they are wrong.
I dont think this is P2W because there is nothing anyone can buy with cash that I cant get by just playing. And there is nothing anyone can buy with cash that I cant take away. Not everyone agrees with my view. Thats okay. But, to sit here and say that it is one or the other is wrong. Its a subjective matter.
I would like to ask a favour of all the CoE community. From now and onwards let's ignore slapshot and Company who constantly slag off CoE and have decent conversations between ourselves and new member to this game / dorm
As far as I have seen Slapshot has only pointed out that some of the backer pledges are p2w; don't understand what all the angst is about since he is clearly correct. Any major publisher would be crucified by the media if they sold perks like this for a game that may or may not be finished some time in the future.
Except there is no pay to win in a game where you can't win and your character dies. Granted, the entire concept of pay-to-win is open to interpretation, but the only interpretation that makes sense to me is where you pay real money to gain advantage to defeating your opponents in the game. That entire concept doesn't apply to Chronicles of Elyria. There's is no winning a virtual world game where your character dies and any adversaries you face also suffer that same fate.
The entire game is about the journey not the destination. Just because you start the game as a King after you paid 10,000 in the kickstarter doesn't mean you "win" Chronicles of Elyria. Your kingdom can be conquered and your character will inevitably die. And no amount of real money you pay can prevent that from happening. You simply can not pay to win in this game.
The game sounds interesting and looks great; your argument about p2w I have heard many times before whenever someone tries to justify paying money for an advantage in a game.
Indie devs are really giving themselves a bad name pushing out this kind of extreme p2w model (even before the game is finished!). It almost makes discussion of p2w in games by mainstream devs moot. The monetization models in games like Archage, Neverwinter, and so forth seem totally tame in comparison.
Sorry, but you're just plain wrong in this instance. If you took the time to get to know the game you'd realize that, but you didn't, so you don't.
Unfortunately once the devs have started down this slippery slope its difficult to believe they will refrain from implementing a heavily p2w cash shop in game as well, especially if they adopt the line "there is no win so it is not p2w". Anything goes at that point, doesn't it?
I do not think so. Besides the fact, that they have stated, that there will be no cash shop, not even for cosmetic items, its not that hey have fought their conscience and were like "Mhhhh....i´d rather not,...but we´ll do this one exception. God help us." And believe me, IF they add a p2w cash shop later on, because of revenue etc, and dont take other ways to make more money, i will be the first one on here opening a thread, calling them out.
But from everything they say, especially Caspian, the drive and determination to make a rather old shool game, without all that crap that plagues modern mmos is really apparent.
Funny how people get so animated over a game that does not exist yet and whose mechanisms are yet to be determined.
You can resume this discussion when they have a playable beta, if such ever happens.
Its more a discussion on monetization and what people think about the way indi devs are setting up their kickstarters/funding, which is entirely appropriate to talk about at this point.
I am getting sick of seeing these indi devs selling promises of in game power (on a massive scale like this, star citizen, and some others that have now been discontinued) to fund their game. I find it laughable that people defend it by basically setting up a logic under which anything goes.
and those players who spend $50 that earn the king title will do a better job than the those who Buy into kingship.
Visit the Chronicles of Elyria official site and the Official Wiki... an upcoming MMO from Soulbound Studios with real consequences to your actions. Finite Resources, WYSIWYG looting to player created and maintained maps and a deep modular crafting system. So much more that hasn't been said, ask questions! Post your thoughts! Spread the word of COE!
If you haven't yet, register with my referrer code on the official website: B0E240
You will have to buy sparks after permadeath for a new life, now around $30.00 Average lifespan is 14 months but can be shorter based on what happens to you. This seems to be their sub model.
See that's the kicker isn't it? In a perfect world people would take it for what it is, but in the real world people will start moaning about how their time got cut short due to griefers, or some unknown issue with the game, bugs ect ect....."I want refund" I want time extended" blah blah blah. While it sounds cool, I imagine this game will be an absolute mess.
There is so much information about the game, I haven't had time to read through everything. So please forgive me if this has been asked and answered already.
I've looked through the kickstarter campaign and watched the video, but I haven't seen an answer to my biggest question when it comes to backing a game: Will it have an in-game cash shop or be Pay 2 Win in any way?
I noticed they have the influence store. It wasn't obvious if that is something just for kickstarter and pre-launch or if it will transition into a in-game cash show post launch as well?
If anyone knows the answer to this question or could point me in the direction to where it has already been answered, that would be awesome! Sorry again if this has already been asked.
Not going to answer your text but I will answer the Topic: No!
Don't ask me to link it for you. I KNOW where the info is.
Many Threads are popping up with questions that people are too lazy to look up. Not trying to be rude. Just do some research.
Comments
The game sounds interesting and looks great; your argument about p2w I have heard many times before whenever someone tries to justify paying money for an advantage in a game.
Indie devs are really giving themselves a bad name pushing out this kind of extreme p2w model (even before the game is finished!). It almost makes discussion of p2w in games by mainstream devs moot. The monetization models in games like Archage, Neverwinter, and so forth seem totally tame in comparison.
There is ONE MMO out there that has no cash shop anymore as I've previously posted and it is called Ryzom, ALL the others have a cash shop. For you the MMO genre=P2W, you call it a scam so time to leave I would say, you picked the wrong genre to play. But like I've also posted before, stop polluting these threads with absolute subjective nonsense while acting like you know the truth.
ps. Charlie Sheen is a raging junkie, an absolute idiotic moron. He is not winning, he's a massive loser with a serious STD, good example...
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
The Slums, sums it up perfect for me, we could have a winner here
Also, I will stop discussing this matter on this thread, you can agree or not with what CoE is doing but stop spreading misinformation, you are truly ruining it for others who do find enjoyment in just playing and/or supporting their damn games and I will not contribute to that any longer.
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
Just ignore them and if any new players ask about the game direct them to the CoE forums.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I do hope to play this if it is released, it should be a blast. But trying to side-step the p2w issue does not make it magically disappear - although I know it would be convenient for some if it did.
At the moment we can see that players can pay up to $10,000 in one hit for a variety of in game advantages. If the logic used to justify this monetization model is "there is no win so it is not p2w", the door has been opened to add just about anything into the cash shop.
That creates a lot more fear for the future direction of the game than just saying something like- "we have to do it this way because it is the only way we can finance the game" and then giving a firm indication of the stance toward p2w once the game gets underway.
Unfortunately once the devs have started down this slippery slope its difficult to believe they will refrain from implementing a heavily p2w cash shop in game as well, especially if they adopt the line "there is no win so it is not p2w". Anything goes at that point, doesn't it?
So the game is "Pay to PLAY", not "Pay to Win".
The game will not have any kind of Cash Shop, so it cannot be "pay to win" anyway. If any of you are referring to the KS rewards, hell, it is only natural that the people who back the project get something in return, since nothing is free.
You can resume this discussion when they have a playable beta, if such ever happens.
So may sub games also have cash shops - WoW, Rift (when it was sub only), and I could go on. You do not understand what you are talking about.
P2W is different than a Cash Shop. Example, used to play Allods Online (a long time ago) and that game had boosts and armor you could buy that made your character impossible to kill, unless another player had the same boosts, now that was P2W. A game that has a CS, DOES NOT MEAN IT IS P2W.
Sub games are dead because they have not offered ANYTHING that is/was unique or better than any other game out there. Just having a Sub, also, does not make the game NOT P2W. I mean Allods did have a sub and also had a P2W shop (still does from what I hear). It was unfortunate because the game was unique - a continuation of Rage of Mages, but the company got greedy.
Companies are out to make money, plain and simple. It is what it is but in the long term P2W games die because people end up getting bored or decide to stop putting money into them.
After CoE has 4 more Kickstarters to keep funding coming in and people who've invested in (chasing the dragon) they'll be a playable demo.
Kickstarters are like P2W games, you have to keep feeding the kitty in order to play. I find this whole 'crowdfunding' a little disingenuous at best.
No.
Besides the fact, that they have stated, that there will be no cash shop, not even for cosmetic items, its not that hey have fought their conscience and were like "Mhhhh....i´d rather not,...but we´ll do this one exception. God help us."
And believe me, IF they add a p2w cash shop later on, because of revenue etc, and dont take other ways to make more money, i will be the first one on here opening a thread, calling them out.
But from everything they say, especially Caspian, the drive and determination to make a rather old shool game, without all that crap that plagues modern mmos is really apparent.
If Pay-to-win was truly pay for an advantage, ALL cash shop items in all games would be considered in the pay to win category plus any games that have subscriber benefits vs free players (ie. Runescape), hell you could even say WoW subscribers have an advantage because they aren't paying the thousands of K in gold to play for free (saving in-game time and effort to accumulate that money). Exp% increases, costumes with small stat bonuses, pets that pick up loot before a corpse disappears. These are all now in the category of pay to win if your definition is pay for an advantage - but the question is, are you winning from said advantage? Some people will argue yes and some no, it's going to be an uphill battle for either side to convince the other so from this point on, I'm going to talk about P2W in the form of advantage, as I can't see anyone "winning" COE. That being said, in order to have an adequate answer to such a broad question, people should just scale advantage 1-10...1 being least advantageous to 10 being most advantageous. Again it's all opinion because some (imo crazy) people want to be king and might see the 10k tier as having a 10 ranked "Advantage" - however I would rate it as a 1 because there is no way in hell that I would want that responsibility. So here goes my response to the question posted on this thread.
First off, I'm not going to look at everything because that would take a week to go through each reward. Secondly, here's some notes on cash shops and IP: there will be no "cash shop" there will be a story point shop that nets you free sparks, etc for playing the game (Earn to Play model), IP/influence points are a pre-launch currency for supporting a game that technically doesn't even exist yet - at its core it's rewarding you for taking a risk, much like the game's primary value of of risk = reward.
So lets look at some of the topics on the table.
Scaled for advantage 1-10 which would largely depend on the player and their choices.
Three-month headstart
4: While some may argue this higher or lower, I think that while initially the 3 month headstart isn't that advantageous, it might become more so on the 2nd or 3rd month after infrastructure is established. That being said, you also die 3 months earlier than release folks, who then have the opportunity to take over top spots in professions, leadership (I doubt anyone wants a 15 year old leading their organization), top assassin, etc.
IP Store
3: While we don't have all of the tiers from the IP store, we have seen the preliminary early tier items which consist of land, tools, and resources. It's important to note that while you get IP from the kickstarter tiers, you also get IP from being an active and dedicated community member who is actively helping the game grow from recruitment or promoting the game through media outlets (youtube, COE wiki authors, websites, bloggers) - there are people who have thousands of IP through recruitment and if those accounts buy the game/support the kickstarter then that IP can be used in the IP store. Therefore the rewards offered in the IP store can be earned via other methods, not just cash. While you do get an advantage from having land & resources from the start of the game, it won't be available forever (you will eventually earn SP instead, which can't be bought with cash), the resources/land and items can be taken by players, and you also have the option to get IP rewards through indirect non-financial related activities.
Status
4: Players can support at different tiers and receive a status according to the tier level to be a King, Duke, Count, etc and with these they receive power, responsibilities, land, etc. So players get an advantage (if looking at them from the perspective of a player who wants the status and sees that a supporter paid for it), which might not be true for all as not everyone even wants the huge risk and responsibility that is involved with running a County or Kingdom. As others have said, you might be paying 10k to put a HUGE bullseye on your back for any assassin that wants to make a bit of money or fame.
I feel like I could probably go on but I would be writing a book, so I'm just going to jump to a TLDR:
In my opinion, there is no winning in COE; however, there are obvious advantages that can be earned via cash but you are also being rewarded for taking a risk on a game that is in-development. I ranked the possible advantages from my own opinion and explained my reasoning and tried to be as unbiased as possible. All in all, if we are downgrading winning to advantage, my side on Yes vs No on the literal phrase "pay-to-win" is that I would place myself on the side of "no" - this game is not and will not be a pay to win game as we have seen with other games like the Korean version of BDO or AA.
I don't know the full context here, but if I'm reading it all right, then this is a "one off" thing.
A ) It is PtW, and those people will have an advantage in the game. After that, there's no more PtW in the design as time moves on.
B ) But it also comes with some benefits. Not only can the game be funded, but it starts out with a social structure based around the players. This is much more preferable, in my mind, than a game that starts out with no structure at all, where players have to go through a beginning stage of utter chaos.
I do know that my opinion here is debatable and subject to opinion, but that's how I see it.
Once upon a time....
The problem with trying to relate this to real life is, I can try and kill the king and fail several hundred times in game. Thus it makes attacks to overthrow them far more viable. Whereas in real life if i try to attack the king just once..My life is basically over.
These titles bought at the start are very very likely to switch hands rather quickly, and as people see kingdoms as the big prize to "win" the kings/queens will have the hardest battle right at the start when they have the least experience.
It's like playing dark souls on very hard difficulty right from the beginning.
Help me Bioware, you're my only hope.
Is ToR going to be good? Dude it's Bioware making a freaking star wars game, all signs point to awesome. -G4tv MMo report.
P2W is a subjective thing. Thats the problem with saying it is or it isnt. Some people view the Kickstart rewards as P2W others dont. One side will say they are obviously right, the other side will say they are obviously right. There will be no convincing the other side that youre right and they are wrong.
I dont think this is P2W because there is nothing anyone can buy with cash that I cant get by just playing. And there is nothing anyone can buy with cash that I cant take away. Not everyone agrees with my view. Thats okay. But, to sit here and say that it is one or the other is wrong. Its a subjective matter.
I am getting sick of seeing these indi devs selling promises of in game power (on a massive scale like this, star citizen, and some others that have now been discontinued) to fund their game. I find it laughable that people defend it by basically setting up a logic under which anything goes.
Finite Resources, WYSIWYG looting to player created and maintained maps and a deep modular crafting system. So much more that hasn't been said, ask questions! Post your thoughts! Spread the word of COE!
If you haven't yet, register with my referrer code on the official website: B0E240
Don't ask me to link it for you. I KNOW where the info is.
Many Threads are popping up with questions that people are too lazy to look up. Not trying to be rude. Just do some research.
"Search and Ye shall Find."
"My Fantasy is having two men at once...
One Cooking and One Cleaning!"
---------------------------
"A good man can make you feel sexy,
strong and able to take on the whole world...
oh sorry...that's wine...wine does that..."