Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Ship Pricing And Earnings Discussion

2456715

Comments

  • azarhalazarhal Member RarePosts: 1,402
    edited August 2016
    rodarin said:

    1) Isnt selling these ships obvious pay to win?
    2) Youre selling (giving for pledges) very advanced ships are you selling progression?
    3) Can people fly every ship they bought day one with no skill requirements?

    1. What is there to win in Star Citizen? It's a space simulation game with 90% of the characters in it being NPCs. Your goal is whatever you set yourself, it doesn't matter what others decide to do (although it can be annoying if they pick "I wanna be a ganker").

     2. Ships don't have progression as MMORPG have gear progression. Ships have roles they fulfill, different looks and different "gameplay" (for lack of a better word, you don't fly a sturdy Terrapin like you fly a racing Mustang Gamma nor is the mining ship Orion supposed to be used as a space fighter). Basically, if you want to compare ships to something in a MMORPG, it would classes.

     3. Depends what you mean by skill requirements. All the larger ships are multi-crew, so unless you are planning to play with a bunch of friends all the time, they will probably harder to get going day one. Also, the huge merchant ship will probably have issue having the cash to fill their cargo hold on day one. Also, flying the ship does require practices, but that is what AC is for (it's a flight sim program in-game). Now here is the kicker, you don't even have to own a ship in Star Citizen. You serve as a crewman in other people multi-crew ships.
  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,328
    rodarin said:
    And anyone who doesnt think that the more money you spend the more advantage you will have are..

    I think that Star Citizen - like all multiplayer and MMO like games - is a game where the more time you spend in-game the more advantages you have.

    If you have time, having money soon becomes a rather trivial concern. If you are long enough in such games you ALWAYS have more money than you can sensibly use   (yes, you can blow any amount of money on collectors items for show in auction houses - thats just for bragging rights).

    Spending real world money has a comparatively small effect compared to the effect of being able to spend 12 hours/day in game. This can be observed in many other (space) games too, e.g. EVE Online or Elite:Dangerous. And is well documented in gaming press articles.

    As Star Citizen is a skill based system where real world skill in flying has a significant effect (as compared to the WoW style system of "lock-target-hit-1-2-3-4....rinse-repeat") something else than time or money can give you an advantage in game. If you are really GOOD at flying, you WILL have an advantage over lesser skilled pilots. Which means you can fly a modest spacecraft and still be able to defeat those pilots in more advanced spacecraft (if you do not believe that, watch skilled Aurora pilots take down Sabre pilots in Battle Royale ... its entertaining to watch).


    Have fun
  • Jonnyp2Jonnyp2 Member UncommonPosts: 243
    Erillion said:
    rodarin said:
    And anyone who doesnt think that the more money you spend the more advantage you will have are..

    I think that Star Citizen - like all multiplayer and MMO like games - is a game where the more time you spend in-game the more advantages you have.

    If you have time, having money soon becomes a rather trivial concern. If you are long enough in such games you ALWAYS have more money than you can sensibly use   (yes, you can blow any amount of money on collectors items for show in auction houses - thats just for bragging rights).

    Spending real world money has a comparatively small effect compared to the effect of being able to spend 12 hours/day in game. This can be observed in many other (space) games too, e.g. EVE Online or Elite:Dangerous. And is well documented in gaming press articles.

    As Star Citizen is a skill based system where real world skill in flying has a significant effect (as compared to the WoW style system of "lock-target-hit-1-2-3-4....rinse-repeat") something else than time or money can give you an advantage in game. If you are really GOOD at flying, you WILL have an advantage over lesser skilled pilots. Which means you can fly a modest spacecraft and still be able to defeat those pilots in more advanced spacecraft (if you do not believe that, watch skilled Aurora pilots take down Sabre pilots in Battle Royale ... its entertaining to watch).


    Have fun
    Yeah dude, you rack up those glad titles by clicking on a target and pressing 1 2 3 4.... No skill at all!  You people are so ridiculous..
  • hfztthfztt Member RarePosts: 1,401
    edited August 2016
    The only thing currently about SC that qualifies as p2w about the preorder ships is the LTI. And the "win" factor of those are supposed to be very low. But it IS an item that you cannot and will not be able to aquire through gameplay means, which give an advantage, even if very small, and thus fully qualify as p2w in the most braodly accepted definition out there. (The definition being: Being able to aquire an item that give gameplay power through real money purchase, that cannot be aquired (realisticly) though normal gameplay.) While purchasing a ship might give you a short term benefit, other player will be fully able to aquire the same ship though normal gameplay, and is thus not p2w.
  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,328
    Jonnyp2 said:
    Yeah dude, you rack up those glad titles by clicking on a target and pressing 1 2 3 4.... No skill at all!  You people are so ridiculous..
    With 11 years personal experience in WoW .... that is what it boils down too.

    WoW is designed to be a game for the lowest common denominator .... computer power wise, player skill wise .... it is all aimed for maximum market coverage.

    There are some rare few parts of the game that are challenging - but only until the first Youtube "How to..." guides come out.

    I like WoW for the humour and story ... not for its design complexity.


    Have fun
  • ShodanasShodanas Member RarePosts: 1,933
    Erillion said:
    Jonnyp2 said:
    Yeah dude, you rack up those glad titles by clicking on a target and pressing 1 2 3 4.... No skill at all!  You people are so ridiculous..
    WoW is designed to be a game for the lowest common denominator .... computer power wise, player skill wise .... it is all aimed for maximum market coverage.

    There are some rare few parts of the game that are challenging - but only until the first Youtube "How to..." guides come out.

    Mythic raiding and high rating competitive PvP DO require skill.

    And no, youtube "how to.." won't get you anywhere in the above situations if you lack the skill.
  • azarhalazarhal Member RarePosts: 1,402
    hfztt said:
    The only thing currently about SC that qualifies as p2w about the preorder ships is the LTI. And the "win" factor of those are supposed to be very low. But it IS an item that you cannot and will not be able to aquire through gameplay means, which give an advantage, even if very small, and thus fully qualify as p2w in the most braodly accepted definition out there. (The definition being: Being able to aquire an item that give gameplay power through real money purchase, that cannot be aquired (realisticly) though normal gameplay.) While purchasing a ship might give you a short term benefit, other player will be fully able to aquire the same ship though normal gameplay, and is thus not p2w.
    LTI is normal hull insurance, it just has a lifetime duration instead of 4 or 6 months (might even go higher for in-game that system isn't 100% locked yet) and was paid in "real money" (although technically it was originally an early backer bonus and not something you bought).
  • Octagon7711Octagon7711 Member LegendaryPosts: 9,004
    edited August 2016
    So if I have a 10K starter pack and my friend has a starter ship, I don't have an advantage over him?  I think I do.  

    I've got a steady income by just renting out my ships to guild mates.  Only management skills required.

    "We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa      "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are."  SR Covey

  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,328
    So if I have a 10K starter pack and my friend has a starter ship, I don't have an advantage over him?  I think I do.  

    I've got a steady income by just renting out my ships to guild mates.  Only management skills required.
    If your friend can play 12 hours a day and you play maybe 2 hours on average ... he has the advantage after a short while. You both can only fly one ship at a time. 

    Your "steady" income from renting out ships will be mostly gone 2-4 weeks after launch day when your guild mates have their own preferred ships. 


    Have fun
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,846
    edited August 2016
    You guys are forgetting one quite important thing. The higher the tier of the ships you have, the higher is the need for other players, that is players to crew your ship.

    So let's go on points:
    1. The players with high tier ships can start doing higher tier content.
    2. As content is said to scale the player with the higher tier ship will get one higher credit revenue.
    3. Higher tier ships and content is set to require  Crew.

    So that means there is a big gap between the credit earning between low and higher tiers. With that:
    1. Player with a lower tier ship can have one alternative of be hired by the higher tier players to be a Crew Member of Fleet member to do higher end content.
    2. Due the higher gap between credit earning between the low and high tiers, let's say 50K UEC might be "nothing" to the high tier player but enough to the low tier player to buy a new ship.

    So i am putting here the cooperative side of SC on the mix, it's like those MMO's on witch at low tiers you spend "100 Credits to Repair your Gear" but the high tier player would spend 1000 credits instead, with the cooperative gameplay the lower tier players can benefit a lot from cooperative gameplay with higher tier players.

    Wouldn't that be something to consider?  ;) 
  • VrikaVrika Member LegendaryPosts: 7,989
    azarhal said:
    hfztt said:
    The only thing currently about SC that qualifies as p2w about the preorder ships is the LTI. And the "win" factor of those are supposed to be very low. But it IS an item that you cannot and will not be able to aquire through gameplay means, which give an advantage, even if very small, and thus fully qualify as p2w in the most braodly accepted definition out there. (The definition being: Being able to aquire an item that give gameplay power through real money purchase, that cannot be aquired (realisticly) though normal gameplay.) While purchasing a ship might give you a short term benefit, other player will be fully able to aquire the same ship though normal gameplay, and is thus not p2w.
    LTI is normal hull insurance, it just has a lifetime duration instead of 4 or 6 months (might even go higher for in-game that system isn't 100% locked yet) and was paid in "real money" (although technically it was originally an early backer bonus and not something you bought).
    According to Star Citizen insurance FAQ the insurance times are 1, 3 or 6 months.

    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/faq/Insurance-FAQ

    Naturally at this point it's still subject to change.
     
  • rodarinrodarin Member EpicPosts: 2,611
    hfztt said:
    The only thing currently about SC that qualifies as p2w about the preorder ships is the LTI. And the "win" factor of those are supposed to be very low. But it IS an item that you cannot and will not be able to aquire through gameplay means, which give an advantage, even if very small, and thus fully qualify as p2w in the most braodly accepted definition out there. (The definition being: Being able to aquire an item that give gameplay power through real money purchase, that cannot be aquired (realisticly) though normal gameplay.) While purchasing a ship might give you a short term benefit, other player will be fully able to aquire the same ship though normal gameplay, and is thus not p2w.
    I hit agree by accident on that nonsense.

    I guess you didnt watch the video. If a person buys ships they have a huge headstart, so how if the player who bought the ships ALSO plays the game will anyone catch up to them?

    The best part of all this is all you suckers who bought these ships for that very reason (to have an advantage) or to resell them to people who will want them, will be the guys complaining the loudest when all those 'exclusive' ships go back on sale again and people buy them and catch up or buy them so you cant sell them.

    Also glad to see people change their definitions of pay to win as it suits them these days.

    Pay to win in its most basic definition is buying something to gain an advantage. Thats it. But now that just about every game has pay to win in it people have to pick and chose how they define it these days because more than likely some game their white knighting is pay to win. So they have to play the semantics game so that game doesnt fall under their carefully worded definition of pay to win.

    Basically if youre paying real money for something that isnt a skin to overlay on something you have to obtain through gameplay then its a ffor of pay to win. and even some skins if they can camouflage or make you harder to detect can even fit the P2W description.

    as far as 'progression'. If you start this or any game 'normally' you start of with ZERO, NOTHING, NADA. If you bought a fleet of ships you start with those. So while the guy who starts with nothing is running around trying to scrape together a few million credits or whatever a guy with a cargo ship that can haul half the galaxy is running NPC missions (assuming they exist) and making enough money in 30 minutes real time to buy 50 of the same ship the poor sap playing 'normally' will have to spend 100 hours acquiring.
  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,328
    And what will he then DO with those 50 ships ? He can only fly one.

    Those he may plan to lend those 50 ships will have ships of their own after 2 days to 4 weeks (depending on what they aim for). They wont NEED any of those 50 ships anymore.


    Have fun
  • rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy Member EpicPosts: 3,502
    edited August 2016
    I just want to throw a comparison into the mix for anyone that thinks this increase for non-buyers is acceptable.

    In Elite most people that decide to do the ship thing aim for the Anaconda, a multi-purpose ship of a similar size to the Reclaimer ($350) that requires no faction reputation. At its cheapest it costs 126 million credits. If you were making 10 million credits over a 3 hour session per night it's about 38 hours.

    What's being proposed for a similar sized ship in Star Citizen would amount to 210 hours of content farming.

    A lot of people moan about the grind in Elite, even when it's self inflicted and this is just 38 hours in comparison.

    Just to put it into perspective.

  • azarhalazarhal Member RarePosts: 1,402
    rodarin said:

    as far as 'progression'. If you start this or any game 'normally' you start of with ZERO, NOTHING, NADA.
    All space sims I played (and I tried all of them except EvE) always made me start with a ship. Star Citizen is no different, the starter package you buy to get the game come with an Aurora MR or a Mustang Alpha.
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,846
    edited August 2016
    A lot of people moan about the grind in Elite, even when it's self inflicted and this is just 38 hours in comparison.

    Just to put it into perspective.

    Well, then i'd as you to put what i said some posts ago into perspective.

    Unlike ED, SC is set to have a big side on cooperative play, specially on the higher tiers of gameplay (aka big expensive ships!). Meaning a player wouldn't forcefully have to grind for X ship with his low tier ship, he could join as crew/fleet and play through high end content and possibly profit more than playing alone (due the big gap on earnings). ;)

    So i think cooperative gameplay will absolutely counter the "grind for ships", specially if you join an organization.
  • rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy Member EpicPosts: 3,502
    MaxBacon said:
    A lot of people moan about the grind in Elite, even when it's self inflicted and this is just 38 hours in comparison.

    Just to put it into perspective.

    Well, then i'd as you to put what i said some posts ago into perspective.

    Unlike ED, SC is set to have a big side on cooperative play, specially on the higher tiers of gameplay (aka big expensive ships!). Meaning a player wouldn't forcefully have to grind for X ship with his low tier ship, he could join as crew/fleet and play through high end content and possibly profit more than playing alone (due the big gap on earnings). ;)

    So i think cooperative gameplay will absolutely counter the "grind for ships", specially if you join an organization.

    Do you all chip your money in together to buy them now? No. Virtually all purchases are solo purchases and there's no reason why that would be any different in game.
    Yes, there's a focus on multicrew but there's also a specific NPC system for people that like to play solo (of which there is a huge proportion in a game's playerbase).

    People have been begging for more solo capability in the bigger ships and this is something that CIG have acknowledged.

  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,846
    edited August 2016
    Yes, there's a focus on multicrew but there's also a specific NPC system for people that like to play solo (of which there is a huge proportion in a game's playerbase).
    People have been begging for more solo capability in the bigger ships and this is something that CIG have acknowledged.

    Not at all. The biggest ships on the game will have AI Crew, yet they need player crew as well, it was said recently as well. One player can't simply "solo with one Idris", the ship wouldn't work at its fullest.

    Specially on the top of gameplay, it's certainly set that the a ship with Player Crew would beat the same ship with AI Crew. It would make no sense having AI playing better than players. To not forget, AI Crew will have its cost, you "hire them" not "buy them".

    So the cooperative and group play aspect is absolutely still there. And they can easily balance it out so higher end players look for player crew, and the lower end players would benefit a lot from it due the big gap on earning the game is said to have.
  • laxielaxie Member RarePosts: 1,122
    edited August 2016
    I've already posted this in another thread. But it is relevant here as well.

    Any game that sells high value pledges will face a challenge. This is more true for games selling in-game items. Star Citizen is a prime example of this, as majority of the crowd funding is based around in-game items (ships).

    You have people that have spent $2500+ on ships, with some individual ships being in the realm of $500+. Middle tier ships are in the realm of $250+. People buying these are the high spenders and generally, businesses try to look after them.


    1. More expensive ships will be more powerful.
    Once the game releases, you will have people flying in starter ships ($40), next to people with $500 ships. Can a super awesome pilot take down a $500 ship with a $40 ship? Perhaps. But in majority of cases, the $500 ship should have an advantage.

    If the people with $500 ships were getting obliterated by starting Auroras, you'd have some very furious backers.

    2. The advantage will last a long time.
    Spending $500 on a ship is a lot of money. The general consensus on the CIG forums is that "buying now is a good deal". The running story by the CIG officials has been that "ships will only get more expensive as time goes".

    It's then easy to see that many high-tier backers expect value out of their purchase. Personally, I suspect it should take many months for a player to get what the $2500 backer has. If this was not true, the backers would be mad.


    I find it bizarre that some people are oblivious to the Pay-to-Win. It's as pay to win as it gets. You spend more money, you get higher tier ships. The higher tier ships will be, on average, "better" than lower tier ships.

    I'm not saying it's good or bad. I'm not bashing the development. It is what it is.

    Let's not pretend it's a level playing field for a $40 backer and a $2500 backer though. It is not.
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,846
    edited August 2016
    laxie said:
    Let's not pretend it's a level playing field for a $40 backer and a $2500 backer though. It is not.
    Then you put to the mix one of biggest focus on SC that its gameplay is said to be (and re-confirmed at GC demo pretty much that is the direction), that is the cooperative gameplay.

    I wouldn't say there is no advantage because better ships are better ships. Yet the game can easily counter this with cooperative gameplay, on witch a 40$ backer could play through high end rewarding content by playing with/for the 2.5K backer.


    The Cooperative aspect is a whole side of the gameplay SC is meant to have that counters the other that you talk about, that is the competitive aspect.

    Because SC at the end is a game where you don't really have to grind for ships. ;)
  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,328
    laxie said:
    I've already posted this in another thread. But it is relevant here as well.

    Any game that sells high value pledges will face a challenge. This is more true for games selling in-game items. Star Citizen is a prime example of this, as majority of the crowd funding is based around in-game items (ships).

    You have people that have spent $2500+ on ships, with some individual ships being in the realm of $500+. Middle tier ships are in the realm of $250+. People buying these are the high spenders and generally, businesses try to look after them.


    1. More expensive ships will be more powerful.
    Once the game releases, you will have people flying in starter ships ($40), next to people with $500 ships. Can a super awesome pilot take down a $500 ship with a $40 ship? Perhaps. But in majority of cases, the $500 ship should have an advantage.

    If the people with $500 ships were getting obliterated by starting Auroras, you'd have some very furious backers.

    2. The advantage will last a long time.
    Spending $500 on a ship is a lot of money. The general consensus on the CIG forums is that "buying now is a good deal". The running story by the CIG officials has been that "ships will only get more expensive as time goes".

    It's then easy to see that many high-tier backers expect value out of their purchase. Personally, I suspect it should take many months for a player to get what the $2500 backer has. If this was not true, the backers would be mad.


    I find it bizarre that some people are oblivious to the Pay-to-Win. It's as pay to win as it gets. You spend more money, you get higher tier ships. The higher tier ships will be, on average, "better" than lower tier ships.

    I'm not saying it's good or bad. I'm not bashing the development. It is what it is.

    Let's not pretend it's a level playing field for a $40 backer and a $2500 backer though. It is not.
    I dispute your statements.

    More "expensive" ships are often of another class. And many not powerful at all weapon-wise, with a small amount of weapons (like the mining ships, the exploration ships, the news bus ships etc.). SC does not have a ship danger progression like EVE has , from the starter fregate to the Titan, all run by a single pilot.

    The "advantage will last a long time" runs counter to experience from every sci fi game of the last 15 years. Players had tons of money within a comparatively short amount of time (millions, billions of in game money). See exhibit A: Elite:Dangerous. See exhibit B: EVE Online. They were able to buy basically all ships offered by the game. Multiple times.

    And if there would be a "consensus" on the official SC forum, then there would be no need for a 485 page thread with tenthousands of posts on that topic.

    https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/212815/katamari-mega-thread-pay-to-win


    Have fun

  • rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy Member EpicPosts: 3,502
    MaxBacon said:
    Not at all. The biggest ships on the game will have AI Crew, yet they need player crew as well, it was said recently as well. One player can't simply "solo with one Idris", the ship wouldn't work at its fullest.

    Specially on the top of gameplay, it's certainly set that the a ship with Player Crew would beat the same ship with AI Crew. It would make no sense having AI playing better than players. To not forget, AI Crew will have its cost, you "hire them" not "buy them".

    So the cooperative and group play aspect is absolutely still there. And they can easily balance it out so higher end players look for player crew, and the lower end players would benefit a lot from it due the big gap on earning the game is said to have.

    But we;re not talking about ships like the Idris. Roberts used the Constellation as an example, I used the Reclaimer simply because it's of a similar size to an Anaconda.

    It's alright arguing that a player crew will trump an NPC crew but that holds true whether you bought a Constellation or whether you spend a long time earning one, so I'm really sure how this fits into the discussion. Just because they can be better when player crewed does not mean that people will group or should group together to earn one. It seems like a bit of a strawman argument.
  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,328

    Do you all chip your money in together to buy them now? No. Virtually all purchases are solo purchases and there's no reason why that would be any different in game.
    That is incorrect. Many orgs have pooled real world resources to buy some of the higher end capital ships like the Javelin together, because they plan to use them as org HQs.

    Undue generalization I call your statement.

    Many people have done solo purchases. Many groups have made group purchases.


    Have fun 
  • rodarinrodarin Member EpicPosts: 2,611
    MaxBacon said:
    laxie said:
    Let's not pretend it's a level playing field for a $40 backer and a $2500 backer though. It is not.
    Then you put to the mix one of biggest focus on SC that its gameplay is said to be (and re-confirmed at GC demo pretty much that is the direction), that is the cooperative gameplay.

    I wouldn't say there is no advantage because better ships are better ships. Yet the game can easily counter this with cooperative gameplay, on witch a 40$ backer could play through high end rewarding content by playing with/for the 2.5K backer.


    The Cooperative aspect is a whole side of the gameplay SC is meant to have that counters the other that you talk about, that is the competitive aspect.

    Because SC at the end is a game where you don't really have to grind for ships. ;)
    So they become a serf or a cling on. Great sales pitch.

    Its the problem all these new games are going ot have as well. where they sell titles and land and all the things that go with those things.

    Perhaps the greatest irony in all this is that it brings their REAL WORLD sense of entitlement and elitism into a virtual world. It used to be the other way around. You went into MMO worlds to be 'better' than you werein reality. It is now just an extension of that and it is as easy to do as dipping into your bank account.
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,846
    But we;re not talking about ships like the Idris. Roberts used the Constellation as an example, I used the Reclaimer simply because it's of a similar size to an Anaconda.

    It's alright arguing that a player crew will trump an NPC crew but that holds true whether you bought a Constellation or whether you spend a long time earning one, so I'm really sure how this fits into the discussion. Just because they can be better when player crewed does not mean that people will group or should group together to earn one. It seems like a bit of a strawman argument.
    It's not a strawman argument, when we're talking about the competitive players and the whole AI Crew vs Player Crew, it becomes clear that for serious play (hardcore content / PvP) this players will be looking for Player Crews.

    That gets on the discussion because it was the point i was making towards cooperative play balancing out what would otherwise be you playing alone grinding for ships with your lower tier ships through lower tier content.

    The aspect of cooperative gameplay would then allow you play through that higher tier content without having higher tier ships.
Sign In or Register to comment.