Originally posted by brutality123 I think the point is is that you cannot compare them because they are too different as you quite rightly pointed out.I'm still not getting this whole I want to pay more stuff people are saying. The company are not doing you any favours putting in a cash shop + sub at all. Why the hell do people want it? I would be much happier with 2 different sub pricing plans.. if that really was necessary. The cash shop is just something that they can work on to continually gain more money from be that through the introduction of "convenience" items like stat increases which may also be avaliable in game or not. Why should someone who cannot be bothered/ does not have time to play the game as much as someone else be as good as someone who does.I like to run.. I don't QQ that I cannot have a gold medal though because I don't have the time to train. That's what games are meant to be.. The minute you start paying for rewards that you should acquire through playing the game stops becoming a game IMO
For the record, Im not a fan of cash shops either. But I have different reasons than most. Bottom line is that we rent mmos for entertainment purposes. They arent important. Theyre not a basic human need. I think its apparent that we all have different definitions of mmos and what we like about them. So its fair to say that what we are willing to pay for in them is also going to be just as varied. To you, it stops becoming a game the minute you start paying for rewards. To others, thats not the case.
Huh? You're free to do anything you want. What you need my acceptance for? Besides I think I had not said that I am not accepting your choice.
Seems you know that already , but I will say that anyway. You realize that by playing a game with vanity CS even if you will never use it and will be persoanlly against it will strenghten P2W cash shops in P2P games in future?
As for ethics , you don't have to say that it is obvious that choice is yours and only yours , whatever the ethics are.
You misunderstand, I was more or less refering to the discussion of this thread in general and the debate going on. Nothing directed at you personally.
I need acceptance from no one for my choices.
I see what you mean about playing games with CS's even if i don't use them, but if everyone abstained from purchasing there wouldn't be any in later games.
Boycotting the whole game is an interesting idea but only if enough players do it. Reality sees it otherwise atm I'm afraid.
Yea that would be true , if game developers & publishers did not know that there always will be certain % of people like you that won't use item shop. Your not spending money in item shop is already accounted for in business model.
That's exactly why game companies are pushing CS more and more , it is because games like movies, music , art and similar things are unique to an extent. It is not like buying a bread , where you can go and find another one that will have exactly or almost exactly same taste but will be better priced, more fresh ,etc.
Games are unique , if you won't play TSW , there is no AAA new game atm that will provide you with same things , like Lovecraft setting in modern world and skill-based system.
Game companies know that many or most people interested in this game won't be able to pass on it becasue of CS they don't like.
Becasue most people think that it does not matter what they personally choose to do (and frequently it really does not) then they swallow their bitter pill and just go buy the game , in effect just strenghtening game developers in their decision , that they have done right with putting CS in game. Becasue people still play it even if they don't like a shop.
There is only two choices. You can buy and play a game , helping Cash Shop establishing in mmorpg genre , or don't buy it and don't play it and putting very tiny brick in wall against CS.
If you think that your choice does not matter at all then you and people with anti-CS opinions but that go and buy game anyway are deceiving themselfves to be very blunt.
I don't know how it works for everyone, but I suspect that for most MMO gamers it's a sum of pros and cons that they do for each (MMO) game, whether that's done consciously or subconsciously.
If the pros outweigh the cons for them individually, then they'l play that game.
I suppose that for some people 1 aspect can be enough to dismiss a game on principle, just like when some guys dismiss a girl almost automatically if she has small breasts or an irritating laugh or votes for an opposite party. That choice is up to everyone themselves, I guess.
Personally, I like to look at the whole of pros and cons, and in that list a cash shop is just 1 detail, and in my list a minor negative aspect.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
A cash shop makes no sense in a game you buy a box and pay monthly for. I don't care if it has server transfers heck I have used server transfers on many occasions so I could play with friends on a different server without having to start new. But a server transfer is where I stop in an MMO with a box + subscription model because it's not a every year thing I pay an extra $25 maybe every other year or longer.
I don't know how it works for everyone, but I suspect that for most MMO gamers it's a sum of pros and cons that they do for each (MMO) game, whether that's done consciously or subconsciously.
If the pros outweigh the cons for them individually, then they'l play that game.
I suppose that for some people 1 aspect can be enough to dismiss a game on principle, just like when some guys dismiss a girl almost automatically if she has small breasts or an irritating laugh or votes for an opposite party. That choice is up to everyone themselves, I guess.
Personally, I like to look at the whole of pros and cons, and in that list a cash shop is just 1 detail, and in my list a minor negative aspect.
I would not say it is on principle. I look for whole pros and cons. I propably could imagine a game with vanity Cash Shop I would tolerate. It would have to incredibly good game , that would have features I am longing for and that could potentially blow my mind. I don't see any game like that though.
It is just one details like for you , just for you it is "minor negative aspect" and for me it is "very major negative aspect".
It is also conscious decision , and not some blind fantatic's ideological decision.
I've been there , done that (I mean cash shop games) , don't like it and it impacts my satisfaction from my game greatly. I don't wanna to go why it is like that again and again. I know that many people don't understand that , I don't understand many people decisions either.
So I really would refrain from differentiating those decisions , that one is on principle only , some kind of ideaological decision and second one is carefully though and logical. Actually it is a little insulting if you write it that way. Just because it is not true.
Err what? Did I wake up in an alternative reality where neutral news take a side and make free ads for Funcom Cash Shops?
When did cash shops stop being evil? Maybe in those 1000 years I was frozen in carbonite?
Read my lips. Cash.Shops.Are.Evil. Especially in pay to play. Yeah yeah, you all will tell me, but what if they are purely cosmetic. Yadda yadda. You see, if it were just cosmetic, but it never STAYS that. Sooner or later, all cash shops begin to add some things, addtional XP, skill powerups asf. And where once it were tiny fancy robes for 5 dollar, we now have monocles for 65 dollars!
Cash shops are evil.
Period.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Well...the usual situation is that gaming companies at launch tie into different box types different game goodies. Here is where it is diferent for Funcom and TSW....
At launch we are talking
1. box/download games probably with avairety of contents and prices (e.g. you might get an extra week early access for $75).
2. Sub (they will take your credit card details folks just to play).
3. Cash Shop...
you want those limited eddition items then you can pay
you want those game enhancing game items you can pay....at the leet end of the game this causes a cash war amngst real players to stay competitive.
Sorry Funcom...this is too far for most mmo gamers.
Well...the usual situation is that gaming companies at launch tie into different box types different game goodies. Here is where it is diferent for Funcom and TSW....
At launch we are talking
1. box/download games probably with avairety of contents and prices (e.g. you might get an extra week early access for $75).
2. Sub (they will take your credit card details folks just to play).
3. Cash Shop...
you want those limited eddition items then you can pay
you want those game enhancing game items you can pay....at the leet end of the game this causes a cash war amngst real players to stay competitive.
Sorry Funcom...this is too far for most mmo gamers.
nobody in their right minds would pay $75 for a game, particularly a P2P MMO.. even $40 is pushing it.. but.. P2P + Cash shop... tbh... i don't care how good a game is.. those features alone are a gamebreaker.. if its relegated to vanity items only.. its just about tolerable.. but i dont see that happening.. already the wording is becoming vague, and open to 'interpretation' thats not a good sign either.
So I really would refrain from differentiating those decisions , that one is on principle only , some kind of ideaological decision and second one is carefully though and logical. Actually it is a little insulting if you write it that way. Just because it is not true.
? I wasn't aware that principles suddenly were some 'ideological' thing, the examples I gave of a guy dismissing a girl bc of too small breasts or an irritating voice or such should make that clear enough that it wasn't - and don't say that this doesn't happen, every guy has had some instant dealbreakers when it came to pickiness regarding girls, but also there were situations where those principles could be overcome.
Everyone has principles, and those principles aren't exactly the same as those principles that other people have. Call it 'strong preferences' if you find the word 'principle' too offensive and have a fanatical taste (which imo it doesn't).
As for how high a cash shop ranks in someone's personal list of pros and cons, well, like I said, for others it might be high, for me personally it doesn't. To each their own.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
I don't know how it works for everyone, but I suspect that for most MMO gamers it's a sum of pros and cons that they do for each (MMO) game, whether that's done consciously or subconsciously.
If the pros outweigh the cons for them individually, then they'l play that game.
I suppose that for some people 1 aspect can be enough to dismiss a game on principle, just like when some guys dismiss a girl almost automatically if she has small breasts or an irritating laugh or votes for an opposite party. That choice is up to everyone themselves, I guess.
Personally, I like to look at the whole of pros and cons, and in that list a cash shop is just 1 detail, and in my list a minor negative aspect.
I would imagine that it is just one con for everyone, but on some people's lists, it just takes one more con to tip the scales. I could understand a company with a more solid reputation gambling on something like this, but I think a lot of people are on the fence with Funcom to begin with. One detail can be enough to push them away.
Especially not when a heavier hitter is going in the opposite direction around the same time. That's bound to make Funcom look even worse to a lot of people.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
Well...the usual situation is that gaming companies at launch tie into different box types different game goodies. Here is where it is diferent for Funcom and TSW....
At launch we are talking
1. box/download games probably with avairety of contents and prices (e.g. you might get an extra week early access for $75).
2. Sub (they will take your credit card details folks just to play).
3. Cash Shop...
you want those limited eddition items then you can pay
you want those game enhancing game items you can pay....at the leet end of the game this causes a cash war amngst real players to stay competitive.
Sorry Funcom...this is too far for most mmo gamers.
nobody in their right minds would pay $75 for a game, particularly a P2P MMO.. even $40 is pushing it.. but.. P2P + Cash shop... tbh... i don't care how good a game is.. those features alone are a gamebreaker.. if its relegated to vanity items only.. its just about tolerable.. but i dont see that happening.. already the wording is becoming vague, and open to 'interpretation' thats not a good sign either.
Look not being nasty dude here...but, we are going to approach limited set games with early acces that break $100 mark in next year or two.
Mark my word the 100 buck limited game box with special early game features is a sure way for gaming companies to make money...they will push this button on us soon.
Games are unique , if you won't play TSW , there is no AAA new game atm that will provide you with same things , like Lovecraft setting in modern world and skill-based system.
There is only two choices. You can buy and play a game , helping Cash Shop establishing in mmorpg genre , or don't buy it and don't play it and putting very tiny brick in wall against CS.
If you think that your choice does not matter at all then you and people with anti-CS opinions but that go and buy game anyway are deceiving themselfves to be very blunt.
Games are unique, and if the game is well made and plays well and is enjoyable..then I'll play it. Why should I sacrifice fun for an ideal of what MIGHT happen. You can say it as many times as you want, only time will tell if will happen that way. It's about the game, not whether there's a CS in it or not.
Do you buy bottled water? Buy organic food? Eat beef? Any of these can easily be used to debate our lack of foresight to mismanagement of our ecology, future health and resources. Too heavy? No kidding. We fight the fights that we deem right and feel strong about. For me, a CS is not that big a deal. I won't get into any of the aforementioned topics I mentioned but informed and activism are totally different and up to the masses. Deluded or not.
Games are unique , if you won't play TSW , there is no AAA new game atm that will provide you with same things , like Lovecraft setting in modern world and skill-based system.
There is only two choices. You can buy and play a game , helping Cash Shop establishing in mmorpg genre , or don't buy it and don't play it and putting very tiny brick in wall against CS.
If you think that your choice does not matter at all then you and people with anti-CS opinions but that go and buy game anyway are deceiving themselfves to be very blunt.
Games are unique, and if the game is well made and plays well and is enjoyable..then I'll play it. Why should I sacrifice fun for an ideal of what MIGHT happen. You can say it as many times as you want, only time will tell if will happen that way. It's about the game, not whether there's a CS in it or not.
Do you buy bottled water? Buy organic food? Eat beef? Any of these can easily be used to debate our lack of foresight to mismanagement of our ecology, future health and resources. Too heavy? No kidding. We fight the fights that we deem right and feel strong about. For me, a CS is not that big a deal. I won't get into any of the aforementioned topics I mentioned but informed and activism are totally different and up to the masses. Deluded or not.
Don't take it so personnal. You're free to do what you want to do.
Me opinion on the matter should not matter to you I think. Correct me if I am wrong.
Don't take it so personnal. You're free to do what you want to do.
Didn't take it personal. Just saying it can easily be turned around and imply others are deluded.
That's the point here. If it happens it happens. Certainly didn't need 19 pages to say some hate CS's and some don't mind but here we are debating. lol
I wanted to play TSW, but not with sub AND cash shop, it's greedy as F***!
That is my opinion, not here to discuss this with anyone, just saying, I don't want any part of this.
I know that you've said that you're not here to discuss this so my comment is not just aimed at you but also towards others who have posted similar comments in this topic.
If you have played any major subscription based MMO in the last 2 or so years, you've already taken part in paying a monthly fee for a game that has a cash shop.
So what's the beef exactly? Virtually every single AAA MMO has some sort of a cash shop and most of the people who are so adamant against cash shops in addition to the subscription fees are probably either currently subscribed or were subscribed to an MMO that has both. Or is it OK for Blizzard, EA, NCSoft, etc. to do that but any new game cannot have it?
I wanted to play TSW, but not with sub AND cash shop, it's greedy as F***!
That is my opinion, not here to discuss this with anyone, just saying, I don't want any part of this.
I know that you've said that you're not here to discuss this so my comment is not just aimed at you but also towards others who have posted similar comments in this topic.
If you have played any major subscription based MMO in the last 2 or so years, you've already taken part in paying a monthly fee for a game that has a cash shop.
So what's the beef exactly? Virtually every single AAA MMO has some sort of a cash shop and most of the people who are so adamant against cash shops in addition to the subscription fees are probably either currently subscribed or were subscribed to an MMO that has both. Or is it OK for Blizzard, EA, NCSoft, etc. to do that but any new game cannot have it?
Whats even funnier is some of those people who crusade against cash shops in a subscription MMO most likely purchased items from a cash shop (be it the WoW pets or Sparkle Pony, or even vanity clothing from EQ2). Thing is they won't ever admit to it. It's kinda like the people who buy gold in games and then complain about gold farmers ruining their MMOs...
As I said before, if there weren't players using these 'features' the devs most likely would never add them. Sadly the players are using them and showing developers that it is profitable, so naturally the devs are going to add them. The spending habits of the many tend to out weigh the complaining of the few.
There are 3 types of people in the world. 1.) Those who make things happen 2.) Those who watch things happen 3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
WoW has a cash shop now, and they're the biggest MMO of all time. They're not going out of business for p2p+cash shop. It seems to be the new business model. And if it's for vanity items only, you don't have to give them any extra money if you don't want to. The "shopping at the mall" reference is correct. We go to the mall to 'blow' money, not to buy stuff we 'need.' The bottom line is, if it;s worth it to you, you'll spend money in the cash shop. I pre-ordered the Collector's Edition of Star Wars: The old Republic for $150 simply for the in-game digital items I get. Although I have never spend real money on WoW's virtual items, I probably would if I still played the game. I love vanity pets and I would be willing to pay real money for them. Quit whining about it and get a real job. Spending and extra $15/mo or whatever is not a lot of money for a hobby you spend many hours per week on. Juts think of other hobbies like model building, bird watching or stamp collecting. They all cost MONEY on a monthly basis but we spend the money because it's fun and we enjoy it. Just because something is virtual doesn't mean it isn't "real" and doesn't hold any real value to us. Maybe I'm just playing Devil's Advocate, but everyone seems to just be complaning about spending a few extra bucks here and there. How much do you spend every month on Starbucks, bottled water/soda, etc...you certainly don't 'need' that stuff either but you do it...
I wanted to play TSW, but not with sub AND cash shop, it's greedy as F***!
That is my opinion, not here to discuss this with anyone, just saying, I don't want any part of this.
I know that you've said that you're not here to discuss this so my comment is not just aimed at you but also towards others who have posted similar comments in this topic.
If you have played any major subscription based MMO in the last 2 or so years, you've already taken part in paying a monthly fee for a game that has a cash shop.
So what's the beef exactly? Virtually every single AAA MMO has some sort of a cash shop and most of the people who are so adamant against cash shops in addition to the subscription fees are probably either currently subscribed or were subscribed to an MMO that has both. Or is it OK for Blizzard, EA, NCSoft, etc. to do that but any new game cannot have it?
I quit WoW and AoC before they had cash shops. So I guess no I don't think it's ok for those older games either. To me Blizzard-Actavision is just as bad as EA now and I will not give them my money.
i dont care about fluff, but the terms "cinvenience items" is pretty large and unclear... i was hoping for a game where i could pay my monthly fee and be done with it, these micro transaction games turn into pay to win games all too often
i still got my eye set on the game, but this is a huge letdown for me, and anything past casual fluff in that shop will probably get me to just give up on this title and go look for a proper game elsewhere.... god i hate the microtransaction concept... and on top of a monthly fee... it better be some damn useless stuff in there or thats it for me...
I still find it amusing that the pro cash shop people keep saying "Well the cash shop is optional, if you don't like it, don't use it!"
Well, the games said cash shops are in are also optional. If I don't like them, for reasons like they have a cash shop, then I choose not to play them.
Funny how that works.
There is nothing wrong with your logic, don't like? Don't play. How simpler can it get?
And again, I am not pro cash shops, I think it's up to the players to vote how games should be by exactly not playing those games they feel are a bad example of what they think an mmo should be.
If the trend is that CS's are popular, who's fault is it? The developer..nope. The player. Dev's only respond to what the demand is.
You're against CS fine, finding it funny others have no problem with it is kind of condescending, let them enjoy it if they want. You really don't have swallow the bitter pill if you so choose to.
What do you think the people who are criticizing the CS here are doing? I don't really see anyone here saying "EA/Funcom you shouldn't be allowed to set the pricing model you want for your game." Most of us appreciate free market economies.
In free market economies, while companies are free to determine how they want to produce and charge for thier producrs....consumers are ALSO free to excersize thier purchasing power by NOT supporting companies and products that impliment practices they disagree with.
Alot of people here (like myself), are simply letting anyone here who is interested in reading that we are voting with our wallets AGAINST cash shops.... for whatever our votes are worth...you have the right to vote differently.
I feel it's important for us to do so.... because it can help provide the decision makers in these companies with data about how much potential revenue they have LOST by deciding to impliment a cash shop. It's very easy for companies to determine how much revenue they pull in from offering something like a cash shop. It's much harder for companies to determine how much potential business they LOST from doing so. If consumers don't let companies WHY they are choosing to NOT buy thier products...then the company will never know that it LOST some opportunity sales.....and those consumers will NEVER see their preferences reflected in future offerings.
Make no mistake that companies DO have market researchers monitor sites like this for feedback about thier product offerings.....and that can help provide them with ideas about what sort of things to do more controled and focused research studies on (i.e. If you don't know that something is POTENTIALY a significant factor in purchasing decisions....then you won't setup a metric to study it buy).
If, as consumers, we consider this a major negative to our preferences, then the absolute WORST thing we can do is stay quiet about it, ignore it, or accept it as inevitable. That is a self-defeating attitude. By clearly stating our preferences in a public venue, we provide companies (including ones that may be considering offering competing products) some clue as to what those preferences are....and ourselves some possibility that thos preferences will be reflected in future product offerings. Doing otherwise is simply a self-defeating excersize.
Note that trends are NOT always just an industries reaction to consumer demands. Companies often try to push trends onto consumers as well.....and it is upto consumers to react to those and push back on them if they find them unacceptable...and sometimes it can take a bit of time for such consumer push-back to become evident. For example, note all the extra fee's that airlines started to tack on to thier services a few years back...Alot of airlines are starting to retrench on those fee's and include such services in thier basic ticket price again....because they've noted that there are strong consumer market segments that dislike said fee's and are willing to factor that into thier decision of which airlines to fly.
Originally posted by CeridithI still find it amusing that the pro cash shop people keep saying "Well the cash shop is optional, if you don't like it, don't use it!"Well, the games said cash shops are in are also optional. If I don't like them, for reasons like they have a cash shop, then I choose not to play them.Funny how that works.
There is nothing wrong with your logic, don't like? Don't play. How simpler can it get?And again, I am not pro cash shops, I think it's up to the players to vote how games should be by exactly not playing those games they feel are a bad example of what they think an mmo should be.If the trend is that CS's are popular, who's fault is it? The developer..nope. The player. Dev's only respond to what the demand is.You're against CS fine, finding it funny others have no problem with it is kind of condescending, let them enjoy it if they want. You really don't have swallow the bitter pill if you so choose to.
What do you think the people who are criticizing the CS here are doing? I don't really see anyone here saying "EA/Funcom you shouldn't be allowed to set the pricing model you want for your game." Most of us appreciate free market economies.In free market economies, while companies are free to determine how they want to produce and charge for thier producrs....consumers are ALSO free to excersize thier purchasing power by NOT supporting companies and products that impliment practices they disagree with.Alot of people here (like myself), are simply letting anyone here who is interested in reading that we are voting with our wallets AGAINST cash shops.... for whatever our votes are worth...you have the right to vote differently.I feel it's important for us to do so.... because it can help provide the decision makers in these companies with data about how much potential revenue they have LOST by deciding to impliment a cash shop. It's very easy for companies to determine how much revenue they pull in from offering something like a cash shop. It's much harder for companies to determine how much potential business they LOST from doing so. If consumers don't let companies WHY they are choosing to NOT buy thier products...then the company will never know that it LOST some opportunity sales.....and those consumers will NEVER see their preferences reflected in future offerings.Make no mistake that companies DO have market researchers monitor sites like this for feedback about thier product offerings.....and that can help provide them with ideas about what sort of things to do more controled and focused research studies on (i.e. If you don't know that something is POTENTIALY a significant factor in purchasing decisions....then you won't setup a metric to study it buy).If, as consumers, we consider this a major negative to our preferences, then the absolute WORST thing we can do is stay quiet about it, ignore it, or accept it as inevitable. That is a self-defeating attitude. By clearly stating our preferences in a public venue, we provide companies (including ones that may be considering offering competing products) some clue as to what those preferences are....and ourselves some possibility that thos preferences will be reflected in future product offerings. Doing otherwise is simply a self-defeating excersize.Note that trends are NOT always just an industries reaction to consumer demands. Companies often try to push trends onto consumers as well.....and it is upto consumers to react to those and push back on them if they find them unacceptable...and sometimes it can take a bit of time for such consumer push-back to become evident. For example, note all the extra fee's that airlines started to tack on to thier services a few years back...Alot of airlines are starting to retrench on those fee's and include such services in thier basic ticket price again....because they've noted that there are strong consumer market segments that dislike said fee's and are willing to factor that into thier decision of which airlines to fly.
It would probably have a lot more impact if it wasn't the same six to ten people posting back and forth.
** edit ** The editor really did a number of the quoted text.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Interesting, by my count I see 78 UNIQUE posters here who give it an UNQUALIFIED negative. Which is FAR in excess of those even giving it qualified support (i.e. "I'm ok with it as long as they don't do X"). Let alone unqualified support.
I'd say that pretty much negates your 6-10 people arguement. Now this site obviously could be an unrepresentative sample....but it's pretty clear to me that a strong majority of the posters on this site STRONGLY disfavor cash shops. You can see that in counting unique posters in pretty much every article here that mentions them.
Comments
For the record, Im not a fan of cash shops either. But I have different reasons than most. Bottom line is that we rent mmos for entertainment purposes. They arent important. Theyre not a basic human need. I think its apparent that we all have different definitions of mmos and what we like about them. So its fair to say that what we are willing to pay for in them is also going to be just as varied. To you, it stops becoming a game the minute you start paying for rewards. To others, thats not the case.
Yea that would be true , if game developers & publishers did not know that there always will be certain % of people like you that won't use item shop. Your not spending money in item shop is already accounted for in business model.
That's exactly why game companies are pushing CS more and more , it is because games like movies, music , art and similar things are unique to an extent. It is not like buying a bread , where you can go and find another one that will have exactly or almost exactly same taste but will be better priced, more fresh ,etc.
Games are unique , if you won't play TSW , there is no AAA new game atm that will provide you with same things , like Lovecraft setting in modern world and skill-based system.
Game companies know that many or most people interested in this game won't be able to pass on it becasue of CS they don't like.
Becasue most people think that it does not matter what they personally choose to do (and frequently it really does not) then they swallow their bitter pill and just go buy the game , in effect just strenghtening game developers in their decision , that they have done right with putting CS in game. Becasue people still play it even if they don't like a shop.
There is only two choices. You can buy and play a game , helping Cash Shop establishing in mmorpg genre , or don't buy it and don't play it and putting very tiny brick in wall against CS.
If you think that your choice does not matter at all then you and people with anti-CS opinions but that go and buy game anyway are deceiving themselfves to be very blunt.
I don't know how it works for everyone, but I suspect that for most MMO gamers it's a sum of pros and cons that they do for each (MMO) game, whether that's done consciously or subconsciously.
If the pros outweigh the cons for them individually, then they'l play that game.
I suppose that for some people 1 aspect can be enough to dismiss a game on principle, just like when some guys dismiss a girl almost automatically if she has small breasts or an irritating laugh or votes for an opposite party. That choice is up to everyone themselves, I guess.
Personally, I like to look at the whole of pros and cons, and in that list a cash shop is just 1 detail, and in my list a minor negative aspect.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
A cash shop makes no sense in a game you buy a box and pay monthly for. I don't care if it has server transfers heck I have used server transfers on many occasions so I could play with friends on a different server without having to start new. But a server transfer is where I stop in an MMO with a box + subscription model because it's not a every year thing I pay an extra $25 maybe every other year or longer.
Guess what I'm trying to say is count me out.
I would not say it is on principle. I look for whole pros and cons. I propably could imagine a game with vanity Cash Shop I would tolerate. It would have to incredibly good game , that would have features I am longing for and that could potentially blow my mind. I don't see any game like that though.
It is just one details like for you , just for you it is "minor negative aspect" and for me it is "very major negative aspect".
It is also conscious decision , and not some blind fantatic's ideological decision.
I've been there , done that (I mean cash shop games) , don't like it and it impacts my satisfaction from my game greatly. I don't wanna to go why it is like that again and again. I know that many people don't understand that , I don't understand many people decisions either.
So I really would refrain from differentiating those decisions , that one is on principle only , some kind of ideaological decision and second one is carefully though and logical. Actually it is a little insulting if you write it that way. Just because it is not true.
Err what? Did I wake up in an alternative reality where neutral news take a side and make free ads for Funcom Cash Shops?
When did cash shops stop being evil? Maybe in those 1000 years I was frozen in carbonite?
Read my lips. Cash.Shops.Are.Evil. Especially in pay to play. Yeah yeah, you all will tell me, but what if they are purely cosmetic. Yadda yadda. You see, if it were just cosmetic, but it never STAYS that. Sooner or later, all cash shops begin to add some things, addtional XP, skill powerups asf. And where once it were tiny fancy robes for 5 dollar, we now have monocles for 65 dollars!
Cash shops are evil.
Period.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Well...the usual situation is that gaming companies at launch tie into different box types different game goodies. Here is where it is diferent for Funcom and TSW....
At launch we are talking
1. box/download games probably with avairety of contents and prices (e.g. you might get an extra week early access for $75).
2. Sub (they will take your credit card details folks just to play).
3. Cash Shop...
you want those limited eddition items then you can pay
you want those game enhancing game items you can pay....at the leet end of the game this causes a cash war amngst real players to stay competitive.
Sorry Funcom...this is too far for most mmo gamers.
nobody in their right minds would pay $75 for a game, particularly a P2P MMO.. even $40 is pushing it.. but.. P2P + Cash shop... tbh... i don't care how good a game is.. those features alone are a gamebreaker.. if its relegated to vanity items only.. its just about tolerable.. but i dont see that happening.. already the wording is becoming vague, and open to 'interpretation' thats not a good sign either.
? I wasn't aware that principles suddenly were some 'ideological' thing, the examples I gave of a guy dismissing a girl bc of too small breasts or an irritating voice or such should make that clear enough that it wasn't - and don't say that this doesn't happen, every guy has had some instant dealbreakers when it came to pickiness regarding girls, but also there were situations where those principles could be overcome.
Everyone has principles, and those principles aren't exactly the same as those principles that other people have. Call it 'strong preferences' if you find the word 'principle' too offensive and have a fanatical taste (which imo it doesn't).
As for how high a cash shop ranks in someone's personal list of pros and cons, well, like I said, for others it might be high, for me personally it doesn't. To each their own.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
I would imagine that it is just one con for everyone, but on some people's lists, it just takes one more con to tip the scales. I could understand a company with a more solid reputation gambling on something like this, but I think a lot of people are on the fence with Funcom to begin with. One detail can be enough to push them away.
Especially not when a heavier hitter is going in the opposite direction around the same time. That's bound to make Funcom look even worse to a lot of people.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
Look not being nasty dude here...but, we are going to approach limited set games with early acces that break $100 mark in next year or two.
Mark my word the 100 buck limited game box with special early game features is a sure way for gaming companies to make money...they will push this button on us soon.
Games are unique, and if the game is well made and plays well and is enjoyable..then I'll play it. Why should I sacrifice fun for an ideal of what MIGHT happen. You can say it as many times as you want, only time will tell if will happen that way. It's about the game, not whether there's a CS in it or not.
Do you buy bottled water? Buy organic food? Eat beef? Any of these can easily be used to debate our lack of foresight to mismanagement of our ecology, future health and resources. Too heavy? No kidding. We fight the fights that we deem right and feel strong about. For me, a CS is not that big a deal. I won't get into any of the aforementioned topics I mentioned but informed and activism are totally different and up to the masses. Deluded or not.
Don't take it so personnal. You're free to do what you want to do.
Me opinion on the matter should not matter to you I think. Correct me if I am wrong.
Didn't take it personal.
Just saying it can easily be turned around and imply others are deluded.
That's the point here. If it happens it happens. Certainly didn't need 19 pages to say some hate CS's and some don't mind but here we are debating. lol
I wanted to play TSW, but not with sub AND cash shop, it's greedy as F***!
That is my opinion, not here to discuss this with anyone, just saying, I don't want any part of this.
I know that you've said that you're not here to discuss this so my comment is not just aimed at you but also towards others who have posted similar comments in this topic.
If you have played any major subscription based MMO in the last 2 or so years, you've already taken part in paying a monthly fee for a game that has a cash shop.
So what's the beef exactly? Virtually every single AAA MMO has some sort of a cash shop and most of the people who are so adamant against cash shops in addition to the subscription fees are probably either currently subscribed or were subscribed to an MMO that has both. Or is it OK for Blizzard, EA, NCSoft, etc. to do that but any new game cannot have it?
Whats even funnier is some of those people who crusade against cash shops in a subscription MMO most likely purchased items from a cash shop (be it the WoW pets or Sparkle Pony, or even vanity clothing from EQ2). Thing is they won't ever admit to it. It's kinda like the people who buy gold in games and then complain about gold farmers ruining their MMOs...
As I said before, if there weren't players using these 'features' the devs most likely would never add them. Sadly the players are using them and showing developers that it is profitable, so naturally the devs are going to add them. The spending habits of the many tend to out weigh the complaining of the few.
There are 3 types of people in the world.
1.) Those who make things happen
2.) Those who watch things happen
3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
WoW has a cash shop now, and they're the biggest MMO of all time. They're not going out of business for p2p+cash shop. It seems to be the new business model. And if it's for vanity items only, you don't have to give them any extra money if you don't want to. The "shopping at the mall" reference is correct. We go to the mall to 'blow' money, not to buy stuff we 'need.' The bottom line is, if it;s worth it to you, you'll spend money in the cash shop. I pre-ordered the Collector's Edition of Star Wars: The old Republic for $150 simply for the in-game digital items I get. Although I have never spend real money on WoW's virtual items, I probably would if I still played the game. I love vanity pets and I would be willing to pay real money for them. Quit whining about it and get a real job. Spending and extra $15/mo or whatever is not a lot of money for a hobby you spend many hours per week on. Juts think of other hobbies like model building, bird watching or stamp collecting. They all cost MONEY on a monthly basis but we spend the money because it's fun and we enjoy it. Just because something is virtual doesn't mean it isn't "real" and doesn't hold any real value to us. Maybe I'm just playing Devil's Advocate, but everyone seems to just be complaning about spending a few extra bucks here and there. How much do you spend every month on Starbucks, bottled water/soda, etc...you certainly don't 'need' that stuff either but you do it...
I quit WoW and AoC before they had cash shops. So I guess no I don't think it's ok for those older games either. To me Blizzard-Actavision is just as bad as EA now and I will not give them my money.
My theme song.
Didn't get this memo, it makes me sick.
*adjusting hype level*
**** Funcom
My brand new bloggity blog.
i find it pretty disapointing
i dont care about fluff, but the terms "cinvenience items" is pretty large and unclear... i was hoping for a game where i could pay my monthly fee and be done with it, these micro transaction games turn into pay to win games all too often
i still got my eye set on the game, but this is a huge letdown for me, and anything past casual fluff in that shop will probably get me to just give up on this title and go look for a proper game elsewhere.... god i hate the microtransaction concept... and on top of a monthly fee... it better be some damn useless stuff in there or thats it for me...
LOL.. hmm actually.....
What do you think the people who are criticizing the CS here are doing? I don't really see anyone here saying "EA/Funcom you shouldn't be allowed to set the pricing model you want for your game." Most of us appreciate free market economies.
In free market economies, while companies are free to determine how they want to produce and charge for thier producrs....consumers are ALSO free to excersize thier purchasing power by NOT supporting companies and products that impliment practices they disagree with.
Alot of people here (like myself), are simply letting anyone here who is interested in reading that we are voting with our wallets AGAINST cash shops.... for whatever our votes are worth...you have the right to vote differently.
I feel it's important for us to do so.... because it can help provide the decision makers in these companies with data about how much potential revenue they have LOST by deciding to impliment a cash shop. It's very easy for companies to determine how much revenue they pull in from offering something like a cash shop. It's much harder for companies to determine how much potential business they LOST from doing so. If consumers don't let companies WHY they are choosing to NOT buy thier products...then the company will never know that it LOST some opportunity sales.....and those consumers will NEVER see their preferences reflected in future offerings.
Make no mistake that companies DO have market researchers monitor sites like this for feedback about thier product offerings.....and that can help provide them with ideas about what sort of things to do more controled and focused research studies on (i.e. If you don't know that something is POTENTIALY a significant factor in purchasing decisions....then you won't setup a metric to study it buy).
If, as consumers, we consider this a major negative to our preferences, then the absolute WORST thing we can do is stay quiet about it, ignore it, or accept it as inevitable. That is a self-defeating attitude. By clearly stating our preferences in a public venue, we provide companies (including ones that may be considering offering competing products) some clue as to what those preferences are....and ourselves some possibility that thos preferences will be reflected in future product offerings. Doing otherwise is simply a self-defeating excersize.
Note that trends are NOT always just an industries reaction to consumer demands. Companies often try to push trends onto consumers as well.....and it is upto consumers to react to those and push back on them if they find them unacceptable...and sometimes it can take a bit of time for such consumer push-back to become evident. For example, note all the extra fee's that airlines started to tack on to thier services a few years back...Alot of airlines are starting to retrench on those fee's and include such services in thier basic ticket price again....because they've noted that there are strong consumer market segments that dislike said fee's and are willing to factor that into thier decision of which airlines to fly.
It would probably have a lot more impact if it wasn't the same six to ten people posting back and forth.
** edit **
The editor really did a number of the quoted text.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Interesting, by my count I see 78 UNIQUE posters here who give it an UNQUALIFIED negative. Which is FAR in excess of those even giving it qualified support (i.e. "I'm ok with it as long as they don't do X"). Let alone unqualified support.
I'd say that pretty much negates your 6-10 people arguement. Now this site obviously could be an unrepresentative sample....but it's pretty clear to me that a strong majority of the posters on this site STRONGLY disfavor cash shops. You can see that in counting unique posters in pretty much every article here that mentions them.