And for subscription based games, like let's use wow for example.
I can certainly agree with the concept of server transfers, renames, and related services requiring a fee. Partially as a deterant since you wouldn't want people abusing these mechanics as well as the fact these are not services pertaining to the development of the game or advancement of the storyline.
Now, as for your comments about the items, I have to disagree a bit. The counter that can be summed up in a simple $15 per month. Yes, I am aware some of that money goes to maintenance, but it is also my understanding that some of that money goes to bug fixing and content development as illustrated by content patches released between expansions. These provide plenty of opportunity for thematic reasoning or, they can just show up on an npc vendor as an easy way out.
In fact, these content patches often contain a good amount of stuff more then just a mount and a pet so there is a bit of precedence as to what players should expect. So, the question comes down to what makes this mount and pet different then those that have been released in content patches and what justifies the cost. My personal opinion is just "because people will pay".
Additionally, the expansion packs, which carry their own price tag also make an excellent opportunity to introduce new mounts, pets, or whatever Blizzard would feel like.
Regarding the rest of the comments about F2P, I don't think it is realistic to expect an F2P game without some form of revenue generator. I don't like the "pay to win" shops as some others have mentioned, but if thats what it takes for the game to survive, and people enjoy it, then so be it.
edit: and just a clarification, this is more of a devil's advocate then a rant against WoW's "pet shop".
-mklinic
"Do something right, no one remembers. Do something wrong, no one forgets" -from No One Remembers by In Strict Confidence
I think the whole discussion is moot. Justification is moot. Results are the only justification.
Take WOW as an example. They started to sell two in-game pets a while back. The fact that they are now doing another one, and also a mount is an indication that the earlier two pets are successful. I have no numbers but presumably not only they make money, they do not see a significant drop in subs to counter the profit from the pets.
It is a free world. Companies can charge their stuff ANYWAY they want. We are ALSO free to decide purchase or NOT to purchase. I don't see a problem.
I BOUGHT every virtual pet/mount blizz put out because a) I like them, and b) i can afford to. Your decisions may be different. Given by the UNscientific sample i have seen in DAL, the mount is quite popular.
There is no need for justification. There is NOTHING blizz is owing you or "should be doing differently" according to you.
I think the whole discussion is moot. Justification is moot. Results are the only justification.
Take WOW as an example. They started to sell two in-game pets a while back. The fact that they are now doing another one, and also a mount is an indication that the earlier two pets are successful. I have no numbers but presumably not only they make money, they do not see a significant drop in subs to counter the profit from the pets.
It is a free world. Companies can charge their stuff ANYWAY they want. We are ALSO free to decide purchase or NOT to purchase. I don't see a problem.
I BOUGHT every virtual pet/mount blizz put out because a) I like them, and b) i can afford to. Your decisions may be different. Given by the UNscientific sample i have seen in DAL, the mount is quite popular.
There is no need for justification. There is NOTHING blizz is owing you or "should be doing differently" according to you.
So, just so I understand what you are saying:
The discussion is moot and justification is moot, but you would like to use a few paragraphs to participate in the discussion and provide justification...got it....
But in response, you certainly can't stop a company trying to make money regardless of anyone's personal view on the matter. It's only when enough customers feel negatively impacted that the company would feel any motivation to change (or ideally, a little before that time). That could probably be applied to many industries besides video games as well though.
-mklinic
"Do something right, no one remembers. Do something wrong, no one forgets" -from No One Remembers by In Strict Confidence
I'm one of those gamers who considers the "aesthetic only" items as having an important impact on a game. For as much as large stat numbers and the like can have a tangible impact on game mechanics, aesthetics still impacts the feel of the game. It's aesthetics that make those hard to obtain rare or epic items feel all the more rare and epic.
Now the problem I have with aesthetic only RMT is that is leeches the atmosphere of the game. Those unique looking, rare or epic items, aren’t so rare when everyone has them. Furthermore, when said item is actually purchased through a cash shop, it completely invalidates any uniqueness or rareness that might have been attached to said item. Afterall, it’s not rare or epic at all when anyone can just pull out a credit card which in-turn results in the game system replicating the item for them.
When I see someone with items that are actually cool looking and difficult to obtain in the game I think, “wow, that looks pretty cool, they must have put a lot of effort into getting that.”
On the other hand, when I see someone wearing aesthetic RMT gear I think, “Oh look, another schmuck who wasted ‘X’ dollars.”
For me personally as a gamer, where immersion is a very important factor in MMO gameplay, even thinking the latter is enough to break that immersion. This is yet another reason why any RMT, even aesthetic RMT, impacts my gameplay negatively. I don’t want to be reminded that I can’t obtain item X, because I have enough sense to not waste my hard earned real life cash on fractions of virtual content that may or may not even be accessible in a year or two.
So yes RMT, any RMT whether it be mechanic impacting or aesthetic only, impacts negatively on my gameplay. You may personally not feel that way, but I do. It cheapens my gameplay experience.
I have no problem with RMT existing in some games in general. F2P games need to make money somehow, of course. I will however, simply avoid those games, because RMT is not for me. I do however, have a huge issue with games that previously had no item malls, suddenly having them forced upon their playerbase.
Why do you care if someone choses to pay for a cosmetic hat? It has absolutely no effect on you, so I fail to see how its an invalid argument.
The dumber argument is the "F2P games are pay to win." In reality all MMOs are pay to win. The top players in P2P games are the ones buying the most gold from China, yet everyone just ignores that. P2P games give the illusion that everyone is equal, in reality the winner is who puts the most time in, and who buys the most 3rd party gold/items.
Interesting, you use an even dumber and more blind argument in order to justify your argument.
First, you assume every illegal gold seller is from China.
Second, you assume every top player in every P2P game has to buy 3rd party gold/items, a competition of spending money in order to achieve. Seems you're trying to place the F2P reality into the P2P genre to justify yourself.
By the way the time argument is only valid initially (as in before people start hitting the level cap), thanks to the linear nature of theme park MMOs and how it makes them extremely fragile in content length. These people with more time will hit the level cap, hit the end game, and complete it, then go around in forums complaining about lack of content for their 24/7 gameplay. At that point the casual will also be there competing with the hardcore player. This environment will take a lot more time to happen in a F2P MMO because of the money factor that does impact gameplay progression in all aspects, not just your assumption of virtual currency.
I wonder how you can progress in a RPG without using time as a measurement though... oh wait, money spent with attribute/equipment enhancers, faster-than-normal progression, consumables and whatever else they sell for that purpose.
@ OP
My opinion is that a cash shop is inherently flawed, it's a twisted usage of the RPG element to use real money as a means of progression and achievement, including cosmetic stuff.
For years WoW has had items that you could only get by playing the card game. Spectral Tiger mount comes to mind.
Why did nobody complain then?
They probably did complain. I probably wasn't paying attention at the time.
There have been complaints as long as the TCG has been around. At least, with the TCG, there is some perceived value to the cards as their own game. So, it can be portrayed more as a product tie in.
That said, the reality seems to be that people buy the cards for the in game items versus getting the in game items as a bonus to their enjoyment of the cards. If this is an accurate portrayal then the "pet store" is just cutting out the middle man and letting the person buy the item they want directly versus a random chance in a pack of cards.
-mklinic
"Do something right, no one remembers. Do something wrong, no one forgets" -from No One Remembers by In Strict Confidence
For years WoW has had items that you could only get by playing the card game. Spectral Tiger mount comes to mind.
Why did nobody complain then?
They probably did complain. I probably wasn't paying attention at the time.
People did, a lot, when it was initially introduced. The only reason why it was tolerated later on was because the items were finite, based upon the finite volume of cards containing codes for these mounts. Obtaining one required getting very lucky with that card game, and was by no means guaranteed. That said, I still don't agree with it, but it was, and even moreso now still is, extremely rare to see someone on one of these mounts in the game.
"The Retard Horse" as many have dubbed it, is infinitely replicated for anyone willing to pull out their credit card and put a $25 charge on it. There is nothing special about it, aside from it's $25 pricetag.
I think the whole discussion is moot. Justification is moot. Results are the only justification.
Take WOW as an example. They started to sell two in-game pets a while back. The fact that they are now doing another one, and also a mount is an indication that the earlier two pets are successful. I have no numbers but presumably not only they make money, they do not see a significant drop in subs to counter the profit from the pets.
It is a free world. Companies can charge their stuff ANYWAY they want. We are ALSO free to decide purchase or NOT to purchase. I don't see a problem.
I BOUGHT every virtual pet/mount blizz put out because a) I like them, and b) i can afford to. Your decisions may be different. Given by the UNscientific sample i have seen in DAL, the mount is quite popular.
There is no need for justification. There is NOTHING blizz is owing you or "should be doing differently" according to you.
So, just so I understand what you are saying:
The discussion is moot and justification is moot, but you would like to use a few paragraphs to participate in the discussion and provide justification...got it....
But in response, you certainly can't stop a company trying to make money regardless of anyone's personal view on the matter. It's only when enough customers feel negatively impacted that the company would feel any motivation to change (or ideally, a little before that time). That could probably be applied to many industries besides video games as well though.
And obviously the MMORPG is no where close to that point that companies want to change. In fact, cash shop is now POSITIVE for them so they would like to build more.
I didn't justify it. I just say people like it enough. There is a big difference.
My opinion is that a cash shop is inherently flawed, it's a twisted usage of the RPG element to use real money as a means of progression and achievement, including cosmetic stuff.
A perfect communist society in which money and power can't buy influence does not exist. So cash shop concept is not flawed. Rather, it's the evolving model that balances time and money nicely while those pure P2P's can't.
A virtual world cannot stand on its own without help from the real world. So trying to make an ideal virtual universe without influence from the real world is fruitless. Time is the ultimate limited commodity needed for both, so one has to give way to another, guess which one has to suffer?
Real advantage goes to those who enjoy the ride without paying. So why complaining about cash shop when you benefit from playing in a more stable server and receiving better updates?? Spend your energy fighting those third-party gold selling sites makes more sense to me than bashing cash shops whose income goes solely to the company.
If some want to pay $$ to keep this "fake" world (only where their winning matters) alive, more power to them. It means zero to those who know better.
My opinion is that a cash shop is inherently flawed, it's a twisted usage of the RPG element to use real money as a means of progression and achievement, including cosmetic stuff.
A perfect communist society in which money and power can't buy influence does not exist. So cash shop concept is not flawed. Rather, it's the evolving model that balances time and money nicely while those pure P2P's can't.
A virtual world cannot stand on its own without help from the real world. So trying to make an ideal virtual universe without influence from the real world is fruitless. Time is the ultimate limited commodity needed for both, so one has to give way to another.
Real advantage goes to those who enjoy the ride without paying. So why complaining about cash shop when you get benefit from playing in a more stable server and receiving better updates?? Spend your energy fighting those third-party gold selling sites makes more sense to me than bashing cash shops whose income goes solely to the company.
Because I would rather myself and everyone simply pay a subscription, and only a subscription, to have access to said virtual world, where all outside influence is mitigated as much as possible. Any and all advances, whether tangible or aesthetic, should be earned within the game, by the player, through ingame effort.
I don't object to MMOs that have RMT from existing. They are a valid revenue model, which has it's own merits. For me however, I detest RMT because I feel it destracts from the overall gaming environment of the virtual world, so I will simply avoid MMOs with RMT.
You can try to justify it from your view as much as you want. You're free to accept RMT. I and others however, are free to detest it and prefer it be kept well away from our P2P MMOs.
And obviously the MMORPG is no where close to that point that companies want to change. In fact, cash shop is now POSITIVE for them so they would like to build more.
I didn't justify it. I just say people like it enough. There is a big difference.
So you're just participating in the discussion you thnk is moot, but not justifying it..gotcha....Semantics these days
-mklinic
"Do something right, no one remembers. Do something wrong, no one forgets" -from No One Remembers by In Strict Confidence
I do think the OP makes a good point concerning the relative meaninglessness or meaningfulness of online"fluff" in cash shops. Although most of these items are cosmetic and don't effect your ability to succeed in PVE or PVP, the "look" of your character is a major factor in enjoying mmorpgs. Combine that with the relative addictiveness and competitiveness of mmoprgs and you can see why the "look" for many, many players is a powerful hook. Factor that "look" into easy-to-purchase - as opposed to hard-to-grind - pets, mounts or costumes and it is easy to see why these cash shops are economically successful.
Noone is denying that it is free market and we are free to buy or not to buy. But that doesn't mean we cannot make judgements on whether this is a healthy or unhleathy development in P2P mmorpgs. We can all accept the basic ABC of the free market and yet still be critical and judge some business practices as more shady or exploitative of greedy than others. This is my retort to those who reply to cash debates with a glib, "It's a free market, nuff said" kinda vibe. We KNOW it's a free market and this isn't the issue being debated.
Now I am usually neutral on cash shops but the valid point that the OP made about how signifiicant the "look" of our characters are to our enjoyment of mmorpgs has swung me more to the anti-cash shop side.
My opinion is that a cash shop is inherently flawed, it's a twisted usage of the RPG element to use real money as a means of progression and achievement, including cosmetic stuff.
A perfect communist society in which money and power can't buy influence does not exist. So cash shop concept is not flawed. Rather, it's the evolving model that balances time and money nicely while those pure P2P's can't.
A virtual world cannot stand on its own without help from the real world. So trying to make an ideal virtual universe without influence from the real world is fruitless. Time is the ultimate limited commodity needed for both, so one has to give way to another, guess which one has to suffer?
Real advantage goes to those who enjoy the ride without paying. So why complaining about cash shop when you benefit from playing in a more stable server and receiving better updates?? Spend your energy fighting those third-party gold selling sites makes more sense to me than bashing cash shops whose income goes solely to the company.
If some want to pay $$ to keep this "fake" world (only where their winning matters) alive, more power to them. It means zero to those who know better.
You are right about money and power needing to exist - and that's why you acquire it in-game using your time playing the game - virtual currency and power. MMORPGs are nowhere near a communist society, you have levels, achievements, reputation, virtual currency, equipment, and a lot other ways that make it NOT communist.
The external interferences affect the game featuring several results that would not exist otherwise. It's like featuring a hereditary society in real life, you will have an extra income and access to better goods and job opportunities depending on your ancestry, that's the effect of real money in RPGs, something that has nothing to do with your "life" in the game affecting it.
I kinda agree with the OP. Have you noticed that many of these f2p games offer next to nothing character's appearence customization at the creating screen and almost everybody seems the same? Do you like that? I don't.
Isn't this thing a common point many people bash p2p games - character customization? I have seen it a lot of times. How it becomes ok for a f2p game?
"Traditionally, massively multiplier online games have been about three basic gameplay pillars combat, exploration and character progression. In Alganon, in addition to these we've added the fourth pillar to the equation: Copy & Paste."
I guess the point I was trying to make is that the people who say rmt is ok for cosmetic only items are essentially aggreeing that rmt in principal is wrong, but its ok for items that don't matter. However its clear by the companies' focus on such items and the revenue created by selling such items, especially in the context of an rpg, the items do indeed matter to quite a lot of people. Thus the argument that they don't matter because they don't effect combat is false, and not only because of the false assumption that the only thing that affects a player in a mmorpg is combat.
Here is an example of how cosmetic rmt can effect play.
Game 1 with No RMT: Player wants a specialty cosmetic item. Player must play, grind and be whatever extent is necessary participating in the game, impacting the game by being in it, playing it.
Game 2 with RMT: Player wants a specialty comsetic item. Player buys it.
Why do you care if someone choses to pay for a cosmetic hat? It has absolutely no effect on you, so I fail to see how its an invalid argument.
The dumber argument is the "F2P games are pay to win." In reality all MMOs are pay to win. The top players in P2P games are the ones buying the most gold from China, yet everyone just ignores that. P2P games give the illusion that everyone is equal, in reality the winner is who puts the most time in, and who buys the most 3rd party gold/items.
Interesting, you use an even dumber and more blind argument in order to justify your argument.
First, you assume every illegal gold seller is from China.
This is an internet forum, I'm not going to waste my time being politically correct. You chose to ignore my argument and arbitrarily attack a petty thing like that. The millons of dollars going into the Chinese gold industry speaks for itself.
Second, you assume every top player in every P2P game has to buy 3rd party gold/items, a competition of spending money in order to achieve. Seems you're trying to place the F2P reality into the P2P genre to justify yourself.
All arguments are based on assumptions. Do you have solid evidence that every top F2P player bought items? The -fact- is that theres a multi-million dollar gold industry for WoW alone. You are choosing to close your eyes and pretend it doesn't exist because it doesn't fit your preconcieved narrative that P2P games have a level playing field. When I read your first sentance I thought you would at least give a single reason why you think this argument is flawed, apparently you just pasted what i wrote and said it was false.
By the way the time argument is only valid initially (as in before people start hitting the level cap), thanks to the linear nature of theme park MMOs and how it makes them extremely fragile in content length. These people with more time will hit the level cap, hit the end game, and complete it, then go around in forums complaining about lack of content for their 24/7 gameplay. At that point the casual will also be there competing with the hardcore player. This environment will take a lot more time to happen in a F2P MMO because of the money factor that does impact gameplay progression in all aspects, not just your assumption of virtual currency.
Again, even powerleveling is a gigantic industry. These companies fill hundreds of orders a day to level characters for money. But I guess my argument is stupid because you choose to ignore these things and live in your fantasy ideal world where P2P is equal. If you have any real evidence to go against the dozens of multi-million dollar P2P item sellers, I'd like to see it. Until then, don't call my arguments dumb or blind then refuse to post anything actually substantial.
I guess the point I was trying to make is that the people who say rmt is ok for cosmetic only items are essentially aggreeing that rmt in principal is wrong, but its ok for items that don't matter. However its clear by the companies' focus on such items and the revenue created by selling such items, especially in the context of an rpg, the items do indeed matter to quite a lot of people. Thus the argument that they don't matter because they don't effect combat is false, and not only because of the false assumption that the only thing that affects a player in a mmorpg is combat.
Here is an example of how cosmetic rmt can effect play.
Game 1 with No RMT: Player wants a specialty cosmetic item. Player must play, grind and be whatever extent is necessary participating in the game, impacting the game by being in it, playing it.
Game 2 with RMT: Player wants a specialty comsetic item. Player buys it.
I think you don't know what Cosmetic/Vanity Items are....nor understand the F2P model either. The part in red is the funniest part.
You claim that the argument that vanity items don't matter because it doesn't affect combat is false because it doesn't only affect combat..... see how what you said doesn't make any sense?
Vanity items are meant to allow more customizations for players to access. There are various types of Vanity items and in no way, shape or form do they affect combat. Do they matter, well if you want to look different, yes they matter. Do you need them to be "Uber" in PvE or PvP? Not at all since these are VANITY items, in other words, they do not affect the gameplay AT ALL, they serve to make you feel a little bit more "unique" as far as character look goes.
That's as far as Vanity/Cosmetic items goes. The argument that Vanity items does NOT affect Gameplay or Combat is 100% true. You do not have to buy them to be at the top, you don't need to buy them at all, it's only a matter of preferences. Heck, more and more F2P MMOs are now slowly allowing players to trade these exact same Cash Shop Vanity items to other players using in-game currency. In other words, even non-cash shop users can access the same content Cash Shop users gets, for the right price.
And obviously the MMORPG is no where close to that point that companies want to change. In fact, cash shop is now POSITIVE for them so they would like to build more.
I didn't justify it. I just say people like it enough. There is a big difference.
So you're just participating in the discussion you thnk is moot, but not justifying it..gotcha....Semantics these days
The discussion is moot with respect to changing the world. Forums don't change the world.
But it is FUN to point that out to people who think arguing against it will make it go away. I am in the thread for the pure entertainment value.
I guess the point I was trying to make is that the people who say rmt is ok for cosmetic only items are essentially aggreeing that rmt in principal is wrong, but its ok for items that don't matter. However its clear by the companies' focus on such items and the revenue created by selling such items, especially in the context of an rpg, the items do indeed matter to quite a lot of people. Thus the argument that they don't matter because they don't effect combat is false, and not only because of the false assumption that the only thing that affects a player in a mmorpg is combat.
Here is an example of how cosmetic rmt can effect play.
Game 1 with No RMT: Player wants a specialty cosmetic item. Player must play, grind and be whatever extent is necessary participating in the game, impacting the game by being in it, playing it.
Game 2 with RMT: Player wants a specialty comsetic item. Player buys it.
I think you don't know what Cosmetic/Vanity Items are....nor understand the F2P model either. The part in red is the funniest part.
You claim that the argument that vanity items don't matter because it doesn't affect combat is false because it doesn't only affect combat..... see how what you said doesn't make any sense?
Vanity items are meant to allow more customizations for players to access. There are various types of Vanity items and in no way, shape or form do they affect combat. Do they matter, well if you want to look different, yes they matter. Do you need them to be "Uber" in PvE or PvP? Not at all since these are VANITY items, in other words, they do not affect the gameplay AT ALL, they serve to make you feel a little bit more "unique" as far as character look goes.
That's as far as Vanity/Cosmetic items goes. The argument that Vanity items does NOT affect Gameplay or Combat is 100% true. You do not have to buy them to be at the top, you don't need to buy them at all, it's only a matter of preferences. Heck, more and more F2P MMOs are now slowly allowing players to trade these exact same Cash Shop Vanity items to other players using in-game currency. In other words, even non-cash shop users can access the same content Cash Shop users gets, for the right price.
You're missing the point.
You're right in that aesthetics and vanity may not have a tangible impact on gameplay. Meaning, that cool looking piece of art isn't going to make your character last longer in a fight, do more damage, move around faster, etc. They do however, add intangible value to the game.
For example... would a game like Dragon Age: Origins have done as well as it did it it was using graphics comparable to games from 2000? No, it wouldn't have, because the aesthetics of the game would not have been very appealing to what many players are used to. Do the graphics directly affect the gameplay? No, they do not, becauset the game mechanics are still the same. There is however, still an impact on the overall quality.
Vanity items follow a similar vein as the above example. They do not directly impact the mechanics of the game itself, but they still add value to the game. The very fact that people are willing to pay extra for these items is proof enough that they add some value, otherwise no one would waste any money on them.
Vanity items offer more options to players, which can help make a game more enjoyable by giving a player a "cool" look, or give them something nicer to look at while they play the game. This does have a varying effect on the utility of enjoyment derived from the game depending on who is consuming it, and therefore it does effect gameplay.
So, simply arguing that vanity items are perfectly acceptable to sell in an item mall because they do not have a tangible effect on the underlying game mechanics, is a flawed arguement. There is significantly more to an MMO than simply it's combat mechanics, and aesthetics is one of these things. So yes, vanity items do impact overall gameplay to a varying degree per how much an individual values such a quality.
As per the whole F2P thing... I'm fairly sure most people posting against RMT widely accept RMT in F2P games. We understand that the developers need some revenue model. What we are, at least I know what I am, arguing against, is RMT being added to P2P subscription games where they are depriving already paying customers from game effecting content unless they pay a lot extra for the little scrap 'vanity' items.
As per the whole F2P thing... I'm fairly sure most people posting against RMT widely accept RMT in F2P games. We understand that the developers need some revenue model. What we are, at least I know what I am, arguing against, is RMT being added to P2P subscription games where they are depriving already paying customers from game effecting content unless they pay a lot extra for the little scrap 'vanity' items.
Obvious your argument is falling on deaf ears. Just look at Blizzard. Their now sold in-game pets/mounts are pretty successful (from casual inspection of how many in-game, and the fact that they are continuing the practice).
Are you going to quit an MMO because of it? If so, are you going to quit the genre if all the games you want to play have it?
Personally i will just BUY the content if i like it and if i can afford it. I won't quit a game just because the developers are trying to sell me pets. Your mileage may vary.
Cash shops are obviously successful. But does success make it right, and for the benefit of the game (and by extension, the gamers)? Well, that depends on exactly what is being sold.
Asking for cash for items that give you an advantage over other players in whatever way (combat items, expanding inventory/house, faster travel etc) would be a deal breaker for me. Why should I get places slower/have less space/get spanked lots when I play the same game as them? Vice versa, if the item brings no advantage over and above the sheer fact of owning it, then so what? So you have a cool hat? So what? So you have a pet I don't, but it doesn't do a damn thing. So what?
Where am I going with this? Ruling a game out purely on the basis that it has a cash shop is nothing short of throwing your toys out of the pram, jumping up and down whilst stamping your feet, and generally acting like a nonce. If the cash shop detracts from your personal game experience, though, then who could argue if you never even spoke of it again?
As per the whole F2P thing... I'm fairly sure most people posting against RMT widely accept RMT in F2P games. We understand that the developers need some revenue model. What we are, at least I know what I am, arguing against, is RMT being added to P2P subscription games where they are depriving already paying customers from game effecting content unless they pay a lot extra for the little scrap 'vanity' items.
Obvious your argument is falling on deaf ears. Just look at Blizzard. Their now sold in-game pets/mounts are pretty successful (from casual inspection of how many in-game, and the fact that they are continuing the practice).
Are you going to quit an MMO because of it? If so, are you going to quit the genre if all the games you want to play have it?
Personally i will just BUY the content if i like it and if i can afford it. I won't quit a game just because the developers are trying to sell me pets. Your mileage may vary.
I'm already toying with the idea of quitting WoW over it. Granted, there are other issues I have with the game, but I was having more fun than not. The more they've been bleeding RMT into the game, the more it saps the fun out of it for me. It frustrates me, and everytime I see someone in game with one of the "vanity" pets or mount, it bothers me because I know I can never obtain them in the game unless I open my wallet. Not that I particularly even want them, I think they're rather useless, but it's the principal of it and the direction the game is headed that bothers me the most. It makes me worry that they will eventually add some items that I will want, and I'll be stuck because I know it's not worth whatever they're tryign to gouge for it.
As per quitting MMOs entirely... well, there are still many MMOs that are P2P sub with no RMT that I can enjoy. If all subscription based games suddenly picked up RMT, then yes, I very likely would stop playing MMOs all together. I play MMOs to partake in the virtual world and community aspect of it, in addition to the gameplay itself. RMT just kills that imerrsion into the virtual world for me, which is why I exclusively play subscription based games, and avoid those with RMT.
Per your personal taste, it's perfectly fine that you may accept vanity items being sold in iether F2P or P2P games. My one warning, is that it is not reasoanble to expect things to just stay at vanity items, which is of course another worry of mine that comes up whenever I see RMT items in a game. It will very likely bleed into game impacting items when the publishers get greedier and try to push the line.
For me, I want my MMOs to be virtual worlds, like they used to be. If they stop being that to me, which is what RMT does for me, then I will walk away. I'm not the only one who feels this way about RMT, I know that.
Where am I going with this? Ruling a game out purely on the basis that it has a cash shop is nothing short of throwing your toys out of the pram, jumping up and down whilst stamping your feet, and generally acting like a nonce. If the cash shop detracts from your personal game experience, though, then who could argue if you never even spoke of it again?
If you willingly play (and pay for) a game that has a cash shop while having no intention of ever buying anything from it, then you are accepting being a second-class citizen in that game.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Cash shops are obviously successful. But does success make it right, and for the benefit of the game (and by extension, the gamers)? Well, that depends on exactly what is being sold.
Asking for cash for items that give you an advantage over other players in whatever way (combat items, expanding inventory/house, faster travel etc) would be a deal breaker for me. Why should I get places slower/have less space/get spanked lots when I play the same game as them? Vice versa, if the item brings no advantage over and above the sheer fact of owning it, then so what? So you have a cool hat? So what? So you have a pet I don't, but it doesn't do a damn thing. So what?
Where am I going with this? Ruling a game out purely on the basis that it has a cash shop is nothing short of throwing your toys out of the pram, jumping up and down whilst stamping your feet, and generally acting like a nonce. If the cash shop detracts from your personal game experience, though, then who could argue if you never even spoke of it again?
RMT, whether it be mechanic effecting, or vanity, ruins the atmosphere of the game for me. It reminds me that I am gated from content unless I buy it, every time I see someone with said items. As such, it considerably impacts my enjoyment of said game.
Why shouldn't I avoid RMT games if it affects my enjoyment of the game? You may not hold the same view of what RMT does and does not impact your enjoyment of the game, but surely you can agree that it's completely reasoanble to not continue to play a game if it's not fun. It's just that simple for me, RMT makes a game unenjoyable for me.
Comments
I can certainly agree with the concept of server transfers, renames, and related services requiring a fee. Partially as a deterant since you wouldn't want people abusing these mechanics as well as the fact these are not services pertaining to the development of the game or advancement of the storyline.
Now, as for your comments about the items, I have to disagree a bit. The counter that can be summed up in a simple $15 per month. Yes, I am aware some of that money goes to maintenance, but it is also my understanding that some of that money goes to bug fixing and content development as illustrated by content patches released between expansions. These provide plenty of opportunity for thematic reasoning or, they can just show up on an npc vendor as an easy way out.
In fact, these content patches often contain a good amount of stuff more then just a mount and a pet so there is a bit of precedence as to what players should expect. So, the question comes down to what makes this mount and pet different then those that have been released in content patches and what justifies the cost. My personal opinion is just "because people will pay".
Additionally, the expansion packs, which carry their own price tag also make an excellent opportunity to introduce new mounts, pets, or whatever Blizzard would feel like.
Regarding the rest of the comments about F2P, I don't think it is realistic to expect an F2P game without some form of revenue generator. I don't like the "pay to win" shops as some others have mentioned, but if thats what it takes for the game to survive, and people enjoy it, then so be it.
edit: and just a clarification, this is more of a devil's advocate then a rant against WoW's "pet shop".
-mklinic
"Do something right, no one remembers.
Do something wrong, no one forgets"
-from No One Remembers by In Strict Confidence
I think the whole discussion is moot. Justification is moot. Results are the only justification.
Take WOW as an example. They started to sell two in-game pets a while back. The fact that they are now doing another one, and also a mount is an indication that the earlier two pets are successful. I have no numbers but presumably not only they make money, they do not see a significant drop in subs to counter the profit from the pets.
It is a free world. Companies can charge their stuff ANYWAY they want. We are ALSO free to decide purchase or NOT to purchase. I don't see a problem.
I BOUGHT every virtual pet/mount blizz put out because a) I like them, and b) i can afford to. Your decisions may be different. Given by the UNscientific sample i have seen in DAL, the mount is quite popular.
There is no need for justification. There is NOTHING blizz is owing you or "should be doing differently" according to you.
So, just so I understand what you are saying:
The discussion is moot and justification is moot, but you would like to use a few paragraphs to participate in the discussion and provide justification...got it....
But in response, you certainly can't stop a company trying to make money regardless of anyone's personal view on the matter. It's only when enough customers feel negatively impacted that the company would feel any motivation to change (or ideally, a little before that time). That could probably be applied to many industries besides video games as well though.
-mklinic
"Do something right, no one remembers.
Do something wrong, no one forgets"
-from No One Remembers by In Strict Confidence
I'm one of those gamers who considers the "aesthetic only" items as having an important impact on a game. For as much as large stat numbers and the like can have a tangible impact on game mechanics, aesthetics still impacts the feel of the game. It's aesthetics that make those hard to obtain rare or epic items feel all the more rare and epic.
Now the problem I have with aesthetic only RMT is that is leeches the atmosphere of the game. Those unique looking, rare or epic items, aren’t so rare when everyone has them. Furthermore, when said item is actually purchased through a cash shop, it completely invalidates any uniqueness or rareness that might have been attached to said item. Afterall, it’s not rare or epic at all when anyone can just pull out a credit card which in-turn results in the game system replicating the item for them.
When I see someone with items that are actually cool looking and difficult to obtain in the game I think, “wow, that looks pretty cool, they must have put a lot of effort into getting that.”
On the other hand, when I see someone wearing aesthetic RMT gear I think, “Oh look, another schmuck who wasted ‘X’ dollars.”
For me personally as a gamer, where immersion is a very important factor in MMO gameplay, even thinking the latter is enough to break that immersion. This is yet another reason why any RMT, even aesthetic RMT, impacts my gameplay negatively. I don’t want to be reminded that I can’t obtain item X, because I have enough sense to not waste my hard earned real life cash on fractions of virtual content that may or may not even be accessible in a year or two.
So yes RMT, any RMT whether it be mechanic impacting or aesthetic only, impacts negatively on my gameplay. You may personally not feel that way, but I do. It cheapens my gameplay experience.
I have no problem with RMT existing in some games in general. F2P games need to make money somehow, of course. I will however, simply avoid those games, because RMT is not for me. I do however, have a huge issue with games that previously had no item malls, suddenly having them forced upon their playerbase.
Interesting, you use an even dumber and more blind argument in order to justify your argument.
First, you assume every illegal gold seller is from China.
Second, you assume every top player in every P2P game has to buy 3rd party gold/items, a competition of spending money in order to achieve. Seems you're trying to place the F2P reality into the P2P genre to justify yourself.
By the way the time argument is only valid initially (as in before people start hitting the level cap), thanks to the linear nature of theme park MMOs and how it makes them extremely fragile in content length. These people with more time will hit the level cap, hit the end game, and complete it, then go around in forums complaining about lack of content for their 24/7 gameplay. At that point the casual will also be there competing with the hardcore player. This environment will take a lot more time to happen in a F2P MMO because of the money factor that does impact gameplay progression in all aspects, not just your assumption of virtual currency.
I wonder how you can progress in a RPG without using time as a measurement though... oh wait, money spent with attribute/equipment enhancers, faster-than-normal progression, consumables and whatever else they sell for that purpose.
@ OP
My opinion is that a cash shop is inherently flawed, it's a twisted usage of the RPG element to use real money as a means of progression and achievement, including cosmetic stuff.
For years WoW has had items that you could only get by playing the card game. Spectral Tiger mount comes to mind.
Why did nobody complain then?
They probably did complain. I probably wasn't paying attention at the time.
Well shave my back and call me an elf! -- Oghren
There have been complaints as long as the TCG has been around. At least, with the TCG, there is some perceived value to the cards as their own game. So, it can be portrayed more as a product tie in.
That said, the reality seems to be that people buy the cards for the in game items versus getting the in game items as a bonus to their enjoyment of the cards. If this is an accurate portrayal then the "pet store" is just cutting out the middle man and letting the person buy the item they want directly versus a random chance in a pack of cards.
-mklinic
"Do something right, no one remembers.
Do something wrong, no one forgets"
-from No One Remembers by In Strict Confidence
People did, a lot, when it was initially introduced. The only reason why it was tolerated later on was because the items were finite, based upon the finite volume of cards containing codes for these mounts. Obtaining one required getting very lucky with that card game, and was by no means guaranteed. That said, I still don't agree with it, but it was, and even moreso now still is, extremely rare to see someone on one of these mounts in the game.
"The Retard Horse" as many have dubbed it, is infinitely replicated for anyone willing to pull out their credit card and put a $25 charge on it. There is nothing special about it, aside from it's $25 pricetag.
And obviously the MMORPG is no where close to that point that companies want to change. In fact, cash shop is now POSITIVE for them so they would like to build more.
I didn't justify it. I just say people like it enough. There is a big difference.
A perfect communist society in which money and power can't buy influence does not exist. So cash shop concept is not flawed. Rather, it's the evolving model that balances time and money nicely while those pure P2P's can't.
A virtual world cannot stand on its own without help from the real world. So trying to make an ideal virtual universe without influence from the real world is fruitless. Time is the ultimate limited commodity needed for both, so one has to give way to another, guess which one has to suffer?
Real advantage goes to those who enjoy the ride without paying. So why complaining about cash shop when you benefit from playing in a more stable server and receiving better updates?? Spend your energy fighting those third-party gold selling sites makes more sense to me than bashing cash shops whose income goes solely to the company.
If some want to pay $$ to keep this "fake" world (only where their winning matters) alive, more power to them. It means zero to those who know better.
Because I would rather myself and everyone simply pay a subscription, and only a subscription, to have access to said virtual world, where all outside influence is mitigated as much as possible. Any and all advances, whether tangible or aesthetic, should be earned within the game, by the player, through ingame effort.
I don't object to MMOs that have RMT from existing. They are a valid revenue model, which has it's own merits. For me however, I detest RMT because I feel it destracts from the overall gaming environment of the virtual world, so I will simply avoid MMOs with RMT.
You can try to justify it from your view as much as you want. You're free to accept RMT. I and others however, are free to detest it and prefer it be kept well away from our P2P MMOs.
So you're just participating in the discussion you thnk is moot, but not justifying it..gotcha....Semantics these days
-mklinic
"Do something right, no one remembers.
Do something wrong, no one forgets"
-from No One Remembers by In Strict Confidence
I do think the OP makes a good point concerning the relative meaninglessness or meaningfulness of online"fluff" in cash shops. Although most of these items are cosmetic and don't effect your ability to succeed in PVE or PVP, the "look" of your character is a major factor in enjoying mmorpgs. Combine that with the relative addictiveness and competitiveness of mmoprgs and you can see why the "look" for many, many players is a powerful hook. Factor that "look" into easy-to-purchase - as opposed to hard-to-grind - pets, mounts or costumes and it is easy to see why these cash shops are economically successful.
Noone is denying that it is free market and we are free to buy or not to buy. But that doesn't mean we cannot make judgements on whether this is a healthy or unhleathy development in P2P mmorpgs. We can all accept the basic ABC of the free market and yet still be critical and judge some business practices as more shady or exploitative of greedy than others. This is my retort to those who reply to cash debates with a glib, "It's a free market, nuff said" kinda vibe. We KNOW it's a free market and this isn't the issue being debated.
Now I am usually neutral on cash shops but the valid point that the OP made about how signifiicant the "look" of our characters are to our enjoyment of mmorpgs has swung me more to the anti-cash shop side.
Regards
Melmoth
You are right about money and power needing to exist - and that's why you acquire it in-game using your time playing the game - virtual currency and power. MMORPGs are nowhere near a communist society, you have levels, achievements, reputation, virtual currency, equipment, and a lot other ways that make it NOT communist.
The external interferences affect the game featuring several results that would not exist otherwise. It's like featuring a hereditary society in real life, you will have an extra income and access to better goods and job opportunities depending on your ancestry, that's the effect of real money in RPGs, something that has nothing to do with your "life" in the game affecting it.
I kinda agree with the OP. Have you noticed that many of these f2p games offer next to nothing character's appearence customization at the creating screen and almost everybody seems the same? Do you like that? I don't.
Isn't this thing a common point many people bash p2p games - character customization? I have seen it a lot of times. How it becomes ok for a f2p game?
"Traditionally, massively multiplier online games have been about three basic gameplay pillars combat, exploration and character progression. In Alganon, in addition to these we've added the fourth pillar to the equation: Copy & Paste."
I guess the point I was trying to make is that the people who say rmt is ok for cosmetic only items are essentially aggreeing that rmt in principal is wrong, but its ok for items that don't matter. However its clear by the companies' focus on such items and the revenue created by selling such items, especially in the context of an rpg, the items do indeed matter to quite a lot of people. Thus the argument that they don't matter because they don't effect combat is false, and not only because of the false assumption that the only thing that affects a player in a mmorpg is combat.
Here is an example of how cosmetic rmt can effect play.
Game 1 with No RMT: Player wants a specialty cosmetic item. Player must play, grind and be whatever extent is necessary participating in the game, impacting the game by being in it, playing it.
Game 2 with RMT: Player wants a specialty comsetic item. Player buys it.
-------------------------
I think you don't know what Cosmetic/Vanity Items are....nor understand the F2P model either. The part in red is the funniest part.
You claim that the argument that vanity items don't matter because it doesn't affect combat is false because it doesn't only affect combat..... see how what you said doesn't make any sense?
Vanity items are meant to allow more customizations for players to access. There are various types of Vanity items and in no way, shape or form do they affect combat. Do they matter, well if you want to look different, yes they matter. Do you need them to be "Uber" in PvE or PvP? Not at all since these are VANITY items, in other words, they do not affect the gameplay AT ALL, they serve to make you feel a little bit more "unique" as far as character look goes.
That's as far as Vanity/Cosmetic items goes. The argument that Vanity items does NOT affect Gameplay or Combat is 100% true. You do not have to buy them to be at the top, you don't need to buy them at all, it's only a matter of preferences. Heck, more and more F2P MMOs are now slowly allowing players to trade these exact same Cash Shop Vanity items to other players using in-game currency. In other words, even non-cash shop users can access the same content Cash Shop users gets, for the right price.
The discussion is moot with respect to changing the world. Forums don't change the world.
But it is FUN to point that out to people who think arguing against it will make it go away. I am in the thread for the pure entertainment value.
You're missing the point.
You're right in that aesthetics and vanity may not have a tangible impact on gameplay. Meaning, that cool looking piece of art isn't going to make your character last longer in a fight, do more damage, move around faster, etc. They do however, add intangible value to the game.
For example... would a game like Dragon Age: Origins have done as well as it did it it was using graphics comparable to games from 2000? No, it wouldn't have, because the aesthetics of the game would not have been very appealing to what many players are used to. Do the graphics directly affect the gameplay? No, they do not, becauset the game mechanics are still the same. There is however, still an impact on the overall quality.
Vanity items follow a similar vein as the above example. They do not directly impact the mechanics of the game itself, but they still add value to the game. The very fact that people are willing to pay extra for these items is proof enough that they add some value, otherwise no one would waste any money on them.
Vanity items offer more options to players, which can help make a game more enjoyable by giving a player a "cool" look, or give them something nicer to look at while they play the game. This does have a varying effect on the utility of enjoyment derived from the game depending on who is consuming it, and therefore it does effect gameplay.
So, simply arguing that vanity items are perfectly acceptable to sell in an item mall because they do not have a tangible effect on the underlying game mechanics, is a flawed arguement. There is significantly more to an MMO than simply it's combat mechanics, and aesthetics is one of these things. So yes, vanity items do impact overall gameplay to a varying degree per how much an individual values such a quality.
As per the whole F2P thing... I'm fairly sure most people posting against RMT widely accept RMT in F2P games. We understand that the developers need some revenue model. What we are, at least I know what I am, arguing against, is RMT being added to P2P subscription games where they are depriving already paying customers from game effecting content unless they pay a lot extra for the little scrap 'vanity' items.
As per the whole F2P thing... I'm fairly sure most people posting against RMT widely accept RMT in F2P games. We understand that the developers need some revenue model. What we are, at least I know what I am, arguing against, is RMT being added to P2P subscription games where they are depriving already paying customers from game effecting content unless they pay a lot extra for the little scrap 'vanity' items.
Obvious your argument is falling on deaf ears. Just look at Blizzard. Their now sold in-game pets/mounts are pretty successful (from casual inspection of how many in-game, and the fact that they are continuing the practice).
Are you going to quit an MMO because of it? If so, are you going to quit the genre if all the games you want to play have it?
Personally i will just BUY the content if i like it and if i can afford it. I won't quit a game just because the developers are trying to sell me pets. Your mileage may vary.
Nari has a very valid point.
Cash shops are obviously successful. But does success make it right, and for the benefit of the game (and by extension, the gamers)? Well, that depends on exactly what is being sold.
Asking for cash for items that give you an advantage over other players in whatever way (combat items, expanding inventory/house, faster travel etc) would be a deal breaker for me. Why should I get places slower/have less space/get spanked lots when I play the same game as them? Vice versa, if the item brings no advantage over and above the sheer fact of owning it, then so what? So you have a cool hat? So what? So you have a pet I don't, but it doesn't do a damn thing. So what?
Where am I going with this? Ruling a game out purely on the basis that it has a cash shop is nothing short of throwing your toys out of the pram, jumping up and down whilst stamping your feet, and generally acting like a nonce. If the cash shop detracts from your personal game experience, though, then who could argue if you never even spoke of it again?
I'm already toying with the idea of quitting WoW over it. Granted, there are other issues I have with the game, but I was having more fun than not. The more they've been bleeding RMT into the game, the more it saps the fun out of it for me. It frustrates me, and everytime I see someone in game with one of the "vanity" pets or mount, it bothers me because I know I can never obtain them in the game unless I open my wallet. Not that I particularly even want them, I think they're rather useless, but it's the principal of it and the direction the game is headed that bothers me the most. It makes me worry that they will eventually add some items that I will want, and I'll be stuck because I know it's not worth whatever they're tryign to gouge for it.
As per quitting MMOs entirely... well, there are still many MMOs that are P2P sub with no RMT that I can enjoy. If all subscription based games suddenly picked up RMT, then yes, I very likely would stop playing MMOs all together. I play MMOs to partake in the virtual world and community aspect of it, in addition to the gameplay itself. RMT just kills that imerrsion into the virtual world for me, which is why I exclusively play subscription based games, and avoid those with RMT.
Per your personal taste, it's perfectly fine that you may accept vanity items being sold in iether F2P or P2P games. My one warning, is that it is not reasoanble to expect things to just stay at vanity items, which is of course another worry of mine that comes up whenever I see RMT items in a game. It will very likely bleed into game impacting items when the publishers get greedier and try to push the line.
For me, I want my MMOs to be virtual worlds, like they used to be. If they stop being that to me, which is what RMT does for me, then I will walk away. I'm not the only one who feels this way about RMT, I know that.
If you willingly play (and pay for) a game that has a cash shop while having no intention of ever buying anything from it, then you are accepting being a second-class citizen in that game.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
RMT, whether it be mechanic effecting, or vanity, ruins the atmosphere of the game for me. It reminds me that I am gated from content unless I buy it, every time I see someone with said items. As such, it considerably impacts my enjoyment of said game.
Why shouldn't I avoid RMT games if it affects my enjoyment of the game? You may not hold the same view of what RMT does and does not impact your enjoyment of the game, but surely you can agree that it's completely reasoanble to not continue to play a game if it's not fun. It's just that simple for me, RMT makes a game unenjoyable for me.