I can't see a point where playing AA will actually cost me a penny past this point.
Think about what you just said there... if they truly offered an experience no one had to pay a penny for past this point, they'd go under in a matter of months.
OFC I have thought about what I have said.
I have never said that time poor people don't pay to be on an even keel with more hardcore players. Because that's all in reality buying stuff like labour pots for real money really offers.
My point is that you don't create a game where a good percentage of your players can play for free if you are 'greedy'.
Actually, in pretty much every F2P game, 90% of the revenue is provided by like, 10% of the players. They're still greedy as hell. An executive of a company that has lots of F2P games even basically said as much in a business presentation that you can find on the net if you search (Search R2Games).
You DO create a game "where a good percentage of your players can play for free" if you are greedy and if that's how you make bigger profits. There's a reason why F2P is taking over as the premier business strategy with the exception of WoW and maybe FFIV:ARR
First, I see that you have fallen for the received wisdom that F2P is 'taking over'. It's clear to anyone looking, that in the West hybrid payment models have been taking over. Subs are still VERY much of the landscape and their enduring appeal is obvious, for both the player and the dev. The sub is still there and strong because it still generates a huge portion of their reliable monthly revenue.
That aside, are you getting cash shops on their own as a concept being greedy confused with games that just charge to play them being greedy? I am unclear as to what you consider a fair price to play a game each month, and at which point they become 'greedy', because you don't say.
Would I prefer a straight sub and no cash shop? Sure, yes, always. One existing, when everything in it is available to gain through play, doesn't make a dev 'greedy' though. This kind of childish labeling helps no one.
Originally posted by LoktofeitI don't think the game is poorly thought out. I think it's got a heavy emphasis on the gamification of the business model. As for my views of the game, I don't think i have expressed any really outside of my dislike for the whole "and then at 30 everything is PVP" thing, however the game is designed such that crafters, farmers and merchants can regulate their exposure to the PVP to suit their personal comfort levels. I kinda like that.
Um...
One example: Labor points and F2P.
The game allowed for offline LP accumulation which is highly exploitable in F2P environment - you just make alts and farm LP effortlessly.
Despite the bandaid being applied so that only patron status accounts gain LP offline, it is still design flaw and as shown, people just get around by AFKing.
If that isn't a poor design, I do not know what is...and the list can go on.
How exactly can crafters limit their exposure to PVP when land is limited and all taken?
That's the way pay2win games work. The aim of thse games is to give you constantly the feeling that if you'd pay a tiny bit more you'd have a much better experience. If at any point you have a perfect game without spending additional money, the game failed.
Land in prime areas in real life doesn't sell for a premium? I must be mistaken, my bad.
Yes, you are mistaken - not all land in RL is premium.
He didn't say all land. He said land in prime areas.
Land near beaches and other hotspots will sell for more than land in the middle of nowhere. In ArcheAge's case, the prime land tends to be near cities/crafting areas with specialty workbenches.
Originally posted by jdizzle2k13 He didn't say all land. He said land in prime areas.Land near beaches and other hotspots will sell for more than land in the middle of nowhere. In ArcheAge's case, the prime land tends to be near cities/crafting areas with specialty workbenches.
When I look at this game, I like many of the concepts. I could even get used to LP, IF it applied to all players evenly without being able to buy around it. Everyone who is claiming this game was poorly designed, keep this in mind. When you look at the design, remember it was originally done so with the idea of a subscription model. NOT F2P. The design didn't consider F2P accounts and cash shop usages. What was poorly implemented, was the F2P conversion. I would probably be playing this game, but I will not support this business model. I do not want the game itself to fail, but I do want the monetization model to. It needs to, If other publishers see this game making profits to make it worth implementing, it will have even more negative impacts on our games in the future. Imagine an MMO with the same monetization but with full on cash grab game designs from the start. It would be even worse than AA.
I can't see a point where playing AA will actually cost me a penny past this point.
while people may overreact, posts like this are ridiculous.
Just because you take advantage of the fact that other people pay for things for you doesn't change the fact that the labor point system is a shitty monetization tool. The game would be better off without it. There are better ways to do what XL claims it does, but XL is full of shit because one can have unlimited LPs if they choose to jump through the hoops for it.
Im all for there being a harsh barrier between free and patron, and LP would be acceptable if patrons got unlimited LP while free players had to make due or chug potions.
Comments
Please stop making real life comparisons. Do you also fly around on upside down glider and shoot fireballs out of your hand in real life?
First, I see that you have fallen for the received wisdom that F2P is 'taking over'. It's clear to anyone looking, that in the West hybrid payment models have been taking over. Subs are still VERY much of the landscape and their enduring appeal is obvious, for both the player and the dev. The sub is still there and strong because it still generates a huge portion of their reliable monthly revenue.
That aside, are you getting cash shops on their own as a concept being greedy confused with games that just charge to play them being greedy? I am unclear as to what you consider a fair price to play a game each month, and at which point they become 'greedy', because you don't say.
Would I prefer a straight sub and no cash shop? Sure, yes, always. One existing, when everything in it is available to gain through play, doesn't make a dev 'greedy' though. This kind of childish labeling helps no one.
Yes, you are mistaken - not all land in RL is premium.
...it's F2P, you can have as many accounts as you want.
Um...
One example: Labor points and F2P.
The game allowed for offline LP accumulation which is highly exploitable in F2P environment - you just make alts and farm LP effortlessly.
Despite the bandaid being applied so that only patron status accounts gain LP offline, it is still design flaw and as shown, people just get around by AFKing.
If that isn't a poor design, I do not know what is...and the list can go on.
How exactly can crafters limit their exposure to PVP when land is limited and all taken?
Let's play Fallen Earth (blind, 300 episodes)
Let's play Guild Wars 2 (blind, 45 episodes)
He didn't say all land. He said land in prime areas.
Land near beaches and other hotspots will sell for more than land in the middle of nowhere. In ArcheAge's case, the prime land tends to be near cities/crafting areas with specialty workbenches.
Land in ArcheAge is a premium service.
while people may overreact, posts like this are ridiculous.
Just because you take advantage of the fact that other people pay for things for you doesn't change the fact that the labor point system is a shitty monetization tool. The game would be better off without it. There are better ways to do what XL claims it does, but XL is full of shit because one can have unlimited LPs if they choose to jump through the hoops for it.
Im all for there being a harsh barrier between free and patron, and LP would be acceptable if patrons got unlimited LP while free players had to make due or chug potions.