Why wouldn't you be able to be competitive if you're not there at the first day? Is it pointless to start playing a mmorpg which has launched more that a few days ago? Is it pointless to start play an mmorpg if you have a real life and can't spend 20 hours online each day?
You won't be competitive if you don't start the first day and play 20 hours a day. This has been true of almost every MMORPG I've ever played, those with much more free time than me always have a big advantage and I've learned to carve out my fun within this system.
One big reason I play EVE is the skill system is level capped so I can train (on or offline) to the same level as any veteran who may have started years before.
Despite starting 3 years after the games launch no one has better mining skills than I do, and there are many combat ships that I am the equal of anyone in.
That said, one of my corp mates owns 4 person Titans, the value of each about equal to my entire net worth in game, and I'm considered wealthy by most player standards.
More amazing is he pays for 4 subs (with PLEX I'm sure) for each of those accounts because once you sit a pilot in a Titan, it is all he can ever do as he cannot leave the ship as it can't be docked.
This is just now changing with the addition of Citadels, but it will cost my alliance 80B ISK just for the blueprint, nevermind the massive amount of mined ore and PI components we'll have to farm to stand one up.
So it will be interesting to me to see if the designs COE puts in place allows a similar situation to not feel like 2nd class citizens for players who can't spend their entire lives in game.
Yeah onto the eve topic. Except I am sure you haven't anything on many decade players. At best your mad crazy mining skills are like alt 54 for some of us. Some alts which were started pre-goon craziness low sec nightmare fun. (Ie ultra padded).
And maybe just MAYBE mining may be all grand but what else is?
You can't say "I am equal to a 10 year but I'm a 7".
No those of us who started eve at it's start have had so many more chances and choice moments to really get looted up etc. SP is a small part of the eve universe. It certainly doesn't equalize things.
Time matters. That's all that truly matters in a mmo. How much time ahead of the "other fish" you have. How much time you can create a buffer for. People who act humble about their mmo experience are cute but also liars. We all play to compete in some way. All of us do. Those who don't are most likely dead.
3 months in a modern mmo is equal to about half a decade of work in a older mmo.
Facts are the only reason you'd of matched anyone 3 years late to the party is the fact they buffed sp gain.
EVE has skill caps so I can fly dozens of ships up to carriers and dreads at same level as any player in the game.
I earn enough in the game to buy any of those ships many times over and in fact I have far more liquid ISK than the corp mate with 4 Titans.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
This idea that the headstart breaks the game is honestly laughable. If this were true then no game would gain new players after it launches. Does it give them an advantage, sure its wrong to say it doesnt. Does it make it so those that join on launch day will never compete, not even close. In a game that is not gear or level based and is focused on player skill for so many things, a 3 month headstart is FAR from god mode or anything like that.
There is a reason why NO, ZERO, NONE, open world PvP game has garnered any sort of success. And dont start with "Ultima Online" nonsense. Add that fail concept to the fact that apparently this game is going ot have finite resources nd it becomes worse. Of course the finite resources is a lie because it cant work, so they will implement meteors or floods or whatever they think they can justify to replenish ore and other non renewable resources in the game somehow.
These new 'survival' games with open world PvP sort of work for a few NON MMO reasons, like private servers, wiping servers every few months, differing rule sets (most which include no open world PvP which is sort of ironic), sliding buffs to certain gains, mods, different maps, and more.
Having a static open world PvP game world with no safe zones (apparently) where its a mob mentality and having the biggest group with the most toys makes you top tier its not going to be a game that 'works' because like I said with Life is Feudal (which sort of works on a small level) it takes A LOT of players to make the WAY the game is SUPPOSED to work actually work. The numbers wont be there due to the very nature of the system.
Hey I am an old school PvP guy but these days that doesnt exist so without MAJOR rules (and not just monetary ones) then open PvP will never ever work. Because to a man every developer underestimates the desire for griefers to ruin the world for everyone, or the sociopath to get his jollies just being a douche.
There is probably no 'perfect' system but a system that has safe zones and voluntary PvP would be a start.
But there is really no way shape or form a 3 month headstart makes any sense at all. That is why I would bet any amount of money that if the game gets that far EVERYONE will have the opportunity to join the game during that headstart period, for the price of 120 bucks that is. So then it becomes the obvious reason...money.
This idea that the headstart breaks the game is honestly laughable. If this were true then no game would gain new players after it launches. Does it give them an advantage, sure its wrong to say it doesnt. Does it make it so those that join on launch day will never compete, not even close. In a game that is not gear or level based and is focused on player skill for so many things, a 3 month headstart is FAR from god mode or anything like that.
This is kinda weird. You say you can't compare CoE to all of the blah blah games already out. That CoE is no blah blah MMO.
Yet when people are apprehensive about this whole 3 month advantage, you sit here saying "No worries folks this wasn't a big deal in all those blah blah MMOs"
I always find it amusing that the 'fans' of this game are allowed to compare to those blah blah MMOs whenever they feel like it, but a critic is never allowed to compare to those blah blah MMOs, cuz you know CoE is a breath of fresh air in the blah blah MMO market.....
-Archeage was extremely limited in housing space -Archeage had limitless resources -Archeage had limitless gold farming
Apples and oranges
Next
We dont know what the housing mechanic will be for this game so cant debate it.
This game will supposedly have finite resources which makes a head start in this game monumentally more important. With organization and no PvP people could potentially harvest 50% of the total (non renewable) resources in the game, of course depending on the amount in the game, in the very least these people will be able to discover (and camp) every known resource node and make it virtually impossible for new people to obtain them. Especially when its the new thing in MOs to have the 'US' versus 'THEM' mentality where the founders, headstart, early access people join forces against the people who didnt 'support' the game initially and only came in after 'they' made it possible to make the game. The myopia entitlement of the head start players is generally off the charts. Which also makes the idea that many will be the benevolent souls who are doing it to build towns and infrastructure to help the general release players a completely laughable one.
We dont know anything beyond its a 'closed economy' so we dont know anything about gold farming, but you can rest assured that with the hording of raw materials and control f key points on the map that head start players will control the economy long before the 3 month period ends. Because I have yet to see any game developer make an actual economy that works, even Eves is not nearly as good as people think it is.
We dont know what the housing mechanic will be for this game so cant debate it.
This game will supposedly have finite resources which makes a head start in this game monumentally more important. With organization and no PvP people could potentially harvest 50% of the total (non renewable) resources in the game, of course depending on the amount in the game, in the very least these people will be able to discover (and camp) every known resource node and make it virtually impossible for new people to obtain them.
The world will be a lot bigger than that. During exposition players will settle some resource nodes and start mining them. They will try and secure those resource nodes from other players. When new players come, some will try and steal those resource away from the first players, others will explore the wild and settle at other resource nodes. That is the gameplay of CoE. If resource where unlimited, nobody would fight over them.
-Archeage was extremely limited in housing space -Archeage had limitless resources -Archeage had limitless gold farming
Apples and oranges
Next
We dont know what the housing mechanic will be for this game so cant debate it.
**SNIP!**
Ah Rodarin, you do go on, don't you?
Finite resources... Camping established nodes...
I have to ask, and I do this for my information and not to disparage as I find little benefit in that effort...Have you read any of the Q&A's or Developer Journals? Because the surety of your posts suggest a strong familiarity with the game concepts while the specifics of your opinions indicate only a cursory awareness. The surety and lack of familiarity is an unfortunate combination that has us in essence discussing...some game that is not Chronicles of Elyria. That's an interesting discussion, I suppose, but for the present, could we not discuss the game at hand?
There is no "gold farming" in CoE. There are no endless mob camps dropping silver or gold. If you kill an npc, that's it - they're gone, forever. In fact its likely the first npcs will have no gold or silver currency to begin with.
There is no guaranteed storage or safe zone banks. Anything gathered or horded in the first 3 months is just as vulnerable to pillaging after release.
You can't cherry-pick details from the game without the context of other mechanics in mind - finite economy in the context of a world without safe-zones means a 3 month headstart has no promised long-term advantage, only a short-term advantage. Everything can be lost if you're not careful.
"It's notably difficult to do that when there's potentially people attempting to tear it down. The point of Exposition is to exit with a world fully developed, not smoldering in ashes."
Is that some play on reverse psychology or they really that naive to go after a pvp player base and not expect that behaviour?
They already got over 1.5k people over the price for the 3 months EA and they expecting them all to be carebearing, city builder, storytellers? lol.
Not all of them, thats the point. BECAUSE there will be some who will just want to wreck havoc from day one, they now implemented the pvp block. So that the carebears can build up stuff for everyone else to enjoy later.
Imagine for a sec there was no headstart. Launchday. Everyone creates a character. ...select gender ...select starting family. Hm,what about a worker family, from the south, expierienced with mining? ...no results. Well then what about...or this? Or that? ...no results ...no results. Because everyone is just starting, there are no villages, no player families no nothing yet.
The world building headstart is required by design. Unless SBS wants to add a year (just a random guess) to dev time building dozens and dozens of families and citys, villages, etc. Or everyone from the "first generation" has o be a warden ...
The last 3 comments are all based on best case scenarios. As in they implement exactly what they claim in the exact way they claim it and it evolves in the most optimistic way.
As far as currency its all based on something, whether there is a faucet or not is irrelevant. Or even if there is actual currency, I imagine there will be eventually but all materials will have a value. Hoarding the most scarce and limited will logically mean having the most 'wealth'.
Now comes another issue. Offline raiding and theft. Another thing that is so popular that everyone simply accepts it. And every other game that allows it has no issues. So yeah I see what you mean. Going offline and coming back and having everything you own or collected or built stolen, or burned to the ground wont be a problem whatsoever. What was I thinking?
The last 3 comments are all based on best case scenarios. As in they implement exactly what they claim in the exact way they claim it and it evolves in the most optimistic way.
As far as currency its all based on something, whether there is a faucet or not is irrelevant. Or even if there is actual currency, I imagine there will be eventually but all materials will have a value. Hoarding the most scarce and limited will logically mean having the most 'wealth'.
Now comes another issue. Offline raiding and theft. Another thing that is so popular that everyone simply accepts it. And every other game that allows it has no issues. So yeah I see what you mean. Going offline and coming back and having everything you own or collected or built stolen, or burned to the ground wont be a problem whatsoever. What was I thinking?
I feel like you are assuming worst case scenario. We don't know what will be the exact effect. I think it will be a mixture of both, some people will try and destroy it and others will try and defend it. We can't know exactly how this will work until it actually happens. So I think it's a bit soon to try and say you are assuming, when everyone is assuming how something will happen.
Help me Bioware, you're my only hope.
Is ToR going to be good? Dude it's Bioware making a freaking star wars game, all signs point to awesome. -G4tv MMo report.
The last 3 comments are all based on best case scenarios. As in they implement exactly what they claim in the exact way they claim it and it evolves in the most optimistic way.
As far as currency its all based on something, whether there is a faucet or not is irrelevant. Or even if there is actual currency, I imagine there will be eventually but all materials will have a value. Hoarding the most scarce and limited will logically mean having the most 'wealth'.
Now comes another issue. Offline raiding and theft. Another thing that is so popular that everyone simply accepts it. And every other game that allows it has no issues. So yeah I see what you mean. Going offline and coming back and having everything you own or collected or built stolen, or burned to the ground wont be a problem whatsoever. What was I thinking?
Well you cant really hoard wealth like in other games. By just dropping ten houses, 50 cows, tons of flowers and 10.000 Iron ore into the inventory of your mule, have it 100% safe there for all eternity. So wealth can be ...uh..."redistributed." Aka stolen, yes, even while offline. But you can just steal it back. What you are discribing, that everything is gone and burned etc is the worst case scenario btw. Can it happen? Yes. Will it happen? Yes, to some, sometimes.
Please understand this ia a player driven world and everything in it will be player made. If you take a good look at the tiers most of the 3 month head starts are the nobles. They will be responsible for the castles, keeps, roads and towns. These things do not spring up over night so a little head start for these projects is welcome.
Please understand this ia a player driven world and everything in it will be player made. If you take a good look at the tiers most of the 3 month head starts are the nobles. They will be responsible for the castles, keeps, roads and towns. These things do not spring up over night so a little head start for these projects is welcome.
Ah so the game's "Nobles" will be those who pay for their titles.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
The last 3 comments are all based on best case scenarios. As in they implement exactly what they claim in the exact way they claim it and it evolves in the most optimistic way.
As far as currency its all based on something, whether there is a faucet or not is irrelevant. Or even if there is actual currency, I imagine there will be eventually but all materials will have a value. Hoarding the most scarce and limited will logically mean having the most 'wealth'.
Now comes another issue. Offline raiding and theft. Another thing that is so popular that everyone simply accepts it. And every other game that allows it has no issues. So yeah I see what you mean. Going offline and coming back and having everything you own or collected or built stolen, or burned to the ground wont be a problem whatsoever. What was I thinking?
Well you cant really hoard wealth like in other games. By just dropping ten houses, 50 cows, tons of flowers and 10.000 Iron ore into the inventory of your mule, have it 100% safe there for all eternity. So wealth can be ...uh..."redistributed." Aka stolen, yes, even while offline. But you can just steal it back. What you are discribing, that everything is gone and burned etc is the worst case scenario btw. Can it happen? Yes. Will it happen? Yes, to some, sometimes.
After seeing how the players who tried other games recently reacted to a bit of EXP loss from deaths, I have little faith the reaction from losing earned items will be any better. You can expect players who lose their items to flow straight to forums, youtube, and streams, while foaming at the mouth throwing tantrums about it. The actual problem for many will be the main "feature" or money making mechanic which is permanent character death, which happens faster the more you die in pvp. I don't think it's really going to go over well.
As far as it being a rare occurrence, that depends on it's profitability versus regular means of earning. If farming/raiding players is more profitable than the normal means of gaining wealth, you can expect players to take the path of least resistance.
As far as a 3 month head start goes, that's odd in my opinion. First impression means a lot, after 3 months launch population already begins to dwindle down. During those months many of the initial players and game reviewers will have already come and gone, the hype will have died down etc. It doesn't sound like a good idea at all to me.
It's all very interesting, but I think it's going to end up staying a very niche game overall.
I see it as if they've doubled down, betting the quality of the gameplay will be such that new players will continue to join even in spite of the fact a number of people had a significant early start. If those early backers don't have at least dozens of "little people" around to witness their greatness, the place will become a ghost town quickly.
I don't think it's a really safe bet, but there's plenty of time in which they might add some "ah ha" component.
Please understand this ia a player driven world and everything in it will be player made. If you take a good look at the tiers most of the 3 month head starts are the nobles. They will be responsible for the castles, keeps, roads and towns. These things do not spring up over night so a little head start for these projects is welcome.
Ah so the game's "Nobles" will be those who pay for their titles.
But theres no pay to win?
Actually from watching the kickstarter video, it seems the strong players in game "nobility," "Kings," and so on will be the players who buy the most souls. They explain that your characters become stronger the more times you've completed through perma-death and get a new soul. So the longer you play, and more you spend, the stronger you will be. Allowing players to possibly intentionally speed up their death times to purchase more souls and become stronger than the rest etc. Sounds like quite a thin line between p2w and fair to me, maybe a little too thin.
I'm interested to see how it all comes together as a playable product, but I'm pretty skeptical currently.
When your character finally perma-dies, your soul gets reincarnated into into a fresh body. A child of yours maybe. Say your previous character had the one-handed swordfighting skill at 100 (totally made up number). Your new char will likelystart with a skill of 0, but will be able to gain skill faster due to previous knowledge of your soul. Kind of a catchup mechanic. Please, anyone correct me if that is not accurate.
Please understand this ia a player driven world and everything in it will be player made. If you take a good look at the tiers most of the 3 month head starts are the nobles. They will be responsible for the castles, keeps, roads and towns. These things do not spring up over night so a little head start for these projects is welcome.
Ah so the game's "Nobles" will be those who pay for their titles.
But theres no pay to win?
What constitutes "winning" in a game like CoE? Is your definition of winning becoming the king? If so, there will be a small percentage of players "winning" the game. However, you can have other goals to strive for in the game such as defeating the strongest monster in the world. This goal doesn't seem likely to accomplish without help from other players who are experienced in weapon making and the like. In that respect, it's not pay to win.
Please understand this ia a player driven world and everything in it will be player made. If you take a good look at the tiers most of the 3 month head starts are the nobles. They will be responsible for the castles, keeps, roads and towns. These things do not spring up over night so a little head start for these projects is welcome.
Ah so the game's "Nobles" will be those who pay for their titles.
But theres no pay to win?
Actually from watching the kickstarter video, it seems the strong players in game "nobility," "Kings," and so on will be the players who buy the most souls. They explain that your characters become stronger the more times you've completed through perma-death and get a new soul. So the longer you play, and more you spend, the stronger you will be. Allowing players to possibly intentionally speed up their death times to purchase more souls and become stronger than the rest etc. Sounds like quite a thin line between p2w and fair to me, maybe a little too thin.
I'm interested to see how it all comes together as a playable product, but I'm pretty skeptical currently.
Actually, there's no buying souls, just sparks of life. Intentionally shortening your character's lifespan does little, including waste valuable money spent on sparks. Your new life won't be automatically stronger than your last one, but you pick up skills faster. This allows you to more easily specialize in skills you've already invested in before and more time to focus on other skills that you haven't been able to learn yet.
Please understand this ia a player driven world and everything in it will be player made. If you take a good look at the tiers most of the 3 month head starts are the nobles. They will be responsible for the castles, keeps, roads and towns. These things do not spring up over night so a little head start for these projects is welcome.
Ah so the game's "Nobles" will be those who pay for their titles.
But theres no pay to win?
Actually from watching the kickstarter video, it seems the strong players in game "nobility," "Kings," and so on will be the players who buy the most souls. They explain that your characters become stronger the more times you've completed through perma-death and get a new soul. So the longer you play, and more you spend, the stronger you will be. Allowing players to possibly intentionally speed up their death times to purchase more souls and become stronger than the rest etc. Sounds like quite a thin line between p2w and fair to me, maybe a little too thin.
I'm interested to see how it all comes together as a playable product, but I'm pretty skeptical currently.
Premature deaths will not speed up your leveling, it would actually slow you down as while you have skill-ramps you still have to level those skills back up and then beyond the ramp. You will actually be at a disadvantaged dying early to level your skills up further.
Visit the Chronicles of Elyria official site and the Official Wiki... an upcoming MMO from Soulbound Studios with real consequences to your actions. Finite Resources, WYSIWYG looting to player created and maintained maps and a deep modular crafting system. So much more that hasn't been said, ask questions! Post your thoughts! Spread the word of COE!
If you haven't yet, register with my referrer code on the official website: B0E240
Actually from watching the kickstarter video, it seems the strong players in game "nobility," "Kings," and so on will be the players who buy the most souls. They explain that your characters become stronger the more times you've completed through perma-death and get a new soul. So the longer you play, and more you spend, the stronger you will be. Allowing players to possibly intentionally speed up their death times to purchase more souls and become stronger than the rest etc. Sounds like quite a thin line between p2w and fair to me, maybe a little too thin.
Most players will only have one soul. You only need a second soul if you play two characters at the same time. When you die your soul reincarnates into a new life. To do that you need a new life spark. When you start a new life you could chose a new soul (i think you get two or three to chose from when you buy the game and you can buy more), but i don't know why you would do that. If you start a life with a soul that has been alive before, then you can level up quicker to the level of where your skills where in your previous life. Dying more often will not level your skill quicker, it will level your skill slower because you still need to relearn them in your next life.
Levelling your skills is easy at first, but get exponentially harder. So people who manage to level up quicker than others wont have a huge advantage.
Any hope of me enjoying this game is tossed out the window...THEIR choice not mine as i cannot accept early advantages given and foolish to think they would think i would. Terribly frustrating watching this industry,one developer after another just does things that are so foolish that there is nothing i want to support and play.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
It's 3 months of people who contributed the most to the game's creation get to stress-test and deal with all the early bugs that occur in the first months. Can you imagine the fucking outbreak of a sicko hierarchy people would be going ham to create if everyone started on the same day. It's a balancing act too. Nothing in this particular MMORPG lasts forever and everyone is subjected to their respective lifespan.
So let me get this straight. Everyone is happy that we finally have a unique sandbox. And everyone is mad because it isnt exactly like all the other failed sandboxes.
Simply put, you don't understand how this game is designed with regards to PvP. That's okay, though. You're not alone.
If it is open world PvP with no restrictions then I know what it will be...a cluster, just like eveyr other game. These games breed griefers and trolls. These games all fail for the siomple reason that everyoe who MIGHT want to play with a little bit of a code is driven off by those that wont, then once the game is empty the griefers and trolls leave. Then all you have is a wasted game siting there, and if peopel do go back so do the griefers. Its a never ending cycle.
ARK is pretty much the blueprint on how to make a SUCCESSFUL game, the irst game in a long time that actually gained people playing it over time and it isnt even released yet. And you know what? The ORIGINAL OFFICIAL version of the game is perhaps the most stupid design ever thought of, and guess what CoE is almost copying it exactly. If your body remains in the world after you log out then it is. BUT even without that everything you own and have 'worked' to collect is completely up for grabs when youre not online. Just like this game, what happened? People all stopped playing on the official servers, even the PvE ones and went to servers that blocked all that nonsense. That move basically saved the game, well that and all the work modders did to help develop the game a little faster than it wold have been by Wild Card.
The reason why i think worst case is because with no rules thats exactly what youre going to get, and it will be even worse than some of the scenarios the fatalists describe because even they dont think like a guy who just wants to ruin the game for everyone else. Basically if it can be done they will do it. That doesnt even count hacks and cheats which will definitely exist, but that is getting way ahead of everything.
The thing is all the guys defending the changes and the head start are using arguments that would serve the other side well or could be turned on their heads. If the world is going to be so huge then what difference does it make how many people start on the same day? Those head start people are still going to want to play and log in( if theyre still playing anyway) so claiming they will not contribute to the log in is false.
There is no reasonable or justifiable explanation anyone can give to not wipe the game before launch. Maybe not even a total and complete wipe, like I said. If they want to keep some player made towns and make them neutral to help set up infrastructure fine, but letting people gain 3 months of 'wealth' and power and defenses is just stupid. If a guild or kingdom or whatever has 5 or 6 guys online all the time they will more than likely be completely impervious to any sort of attacks. If a few of the whales build alliances then those two or three kingdoms could theoretically control the whole game world, no matter the size.
The population of this game will never ever be that big, it just wont so it stands to reason the guys backing it and getting early head start will represent a decent portion, maybe even a majority. That coupled with everything we have said makes it a pretty cut and dry assumption of what the game will be like.
Comments
I earn enough in the game to buy any of those ships many times over and in fact I have far more liquid ISK than the corp mate with 4 Titans.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
These new 'survival' games with open world PvP sort of work for a few NON MMO reasons, like private servers, wiping servers every few months, differing rule sets (most which include no open world PvP which is sort of ironic), sliding buffs to certain gains, mods, different maps, and more.
Having a static open world PvP game world with no safe zones (apparently) where its a mob mentality and having the biggest group with the most toys makes you top tier its not going to be a game that 'works' because like I said with Life is Feudal (which sort of works on a small level) it takes A LOT of players to make the WAY the game is SUPPOSED to work actually work. The numbers wont be there due to the very nature of the system.
Hey I am an old school PvP guy but these days that doesnt exist so without MAJOR rules (and not just monetary ones) then open PvP will never ever work. Because to a man every developer underestimates the desire for griefers to ruin the world for everyone, or the sociopath to get his jollies just being a douche.
There is probably no 'perfect' system but a system that has safe zones and voluntary PvP would be a start.
But there is really no way shape or form a 3 month headstart makes any sense at all. That is why I would bet any amount of money that if the game gets that far EVERYONE will have the opportunity to join the game during that headstart period, for the price of 120 bucks that is. So then it becomes the obvious reason...money.
Yet when people are apprehensive about this whole 3 month advantage, you sit here saying "No worries folks this wasn't a big deal in all those blah blah MMOs"
I always find it amusing that the 'fans' of this game are allowed to compare to those blah blah MMOs whenever they feel like it, but a critic is never allowed to compare to those blah blah MMOs, cuz you know CoE is a breath of fresh air in the blah blah MMO market.....
This game will supposedly have finite resources which makes a head start in this game monumentally more important. With organization and no PvP people could potentially harvest 50% of the total (non renewable) resources in the game, of course depending on the amount in the game, in the very least these people will be able to discover (and camp) every known resource node and make it virtually impossible for new people to obtain them. Especially when its the new thing in MOs to have the 'US' versus 'THEM' mentality where the founders, headstart, early access people join forces against the people who didnt 'support' the game initially and only came in after 'they' made it possible to make the game. The myopia entitlement of the head start players is generally off the charts. Which also makes the idea that many will be the benevolent souls who are doing it to build towns and infrastructure to help the general release players a completely laughable one.
We dont know anything beyond its a 'closed economy' so we dont know anything about gold farming, but you can rest assured that with the hording of raw materials and control f key points on the map that head start players will control the economy long before the 3 month period ends. Because I have yet to see any game developer make an actual economy that works, even Eves is not nearly as good as people think it is.
The world will be a lot bigger than that. During exposition players will settle some resource nodes and start mining them. They will try and secure those resource nodes from other players. When new players come, some will try and steal those resource away from the first players, others will explore the wild and settle at other resource nodes. That is the gameplay of CoE. If resource where unlimited, nobody would fight over them.
There is no guaranteed storage or safe zone banks. Anything gathered or horded in the first 3 months is just as vulnerable to pillaging after release.
You can't cherry-pick details from the game without the context of other mechanics in mind - finite economy in the context of a world without safe-zones means a 3 month headstart has no promised long-term advantage, only a short-term advantage. Everything can be lost if you're not careful.
Imagine for a sec there was no headstart. Launchday. Everyone creates a character.
...select gender
...select starting family. Hm,what about a worker family, from the south, expierienced with mining?
...no results. Well then what about...or this? Or that?
...no results
...no results. Because everyone is just starting, there are no villages, no player families no nothing yet.
The world building headstart is required by design. Unless SBS wants to add a year (just a random guess) to dev time building dozens and dozens of families and citys, villages, etc.
Or everyone from the "first generation" has o be a warden ...
As far as currency its all based on something, whether there is a faucet or not is irrelevant. Or even if there is actual currency, I imagine there will be eventually but all materials will have a value. Hoarding the most scarce and limited will logically mean having the most 'wealth'.
Now comes another issue. Offline raiding and theft. Another thing that is so popular that everyone simply accepts it. And every other game that allows it has no issues. So yeah I see what you mean. Going offline and coming back and having everything you own or collected or built stolen, or burned to the ground wont be a problem whatsoever. What was I thinking?
Help me Bioware, you're my only hope.
Is ToR going to be good? Dude it's Bioware making a freaking star wars game, all signs point to awesome. -G4tv MMo report.
What you are discribing, that everything is gone and burned etc is the worst case scenario btw. Can it happen? Yes. Will it happen? Yes, to some, sometimes.
But theres no pay to win?
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
As far as it being a rare occurrence, that depends on it's profitability versus regular means of earning. If farming/raiding players is more profitable than the normal means of gaining wealth, you can expect players to take the path of least resistance.
As far as a 3 month head start goes, that's odd in my opinion. First impression means a lot, after 3 months launch population already begins to dwindle down. During those months many of the initial players and game reviewers will have already come and gone, the hype will have died down etc. It doesn't sound like a good idea at all to me.
It's all very interesting, but I think it's going to end up staying a very niche game overall.
I don't think it's a really safe bet, but there's plenty of time in which they might add some "ah ha" component.
I'm interested to see how it all comes together as a playable product, but I'm pretty skeptical currently.
When your character finally perma-dies, your soul gets reincarnated into into a fresh body. A child of yours maybe. Say your previous character had the one-handed swordfighting skill at 100 (totally made up number). Your new char will likelystart with a skill of 0, but will be able to gain skill faster due to previous knowledge of your soul. Kind of a catchup mechanic.
Please, anyone correct me if that is not accurate.
Actually, there's no buying souls, just sparks of life. Intentionally shortening your character's lifespan does little, including waste valuable money spent on sparks. Your new life won't be automatically stronger than your last one, but you pick up skills faster. This allows you to more easily specialize in skills you've already invested in before and more time to focus on other skills that you haven't been able to learn yet.
Finite Resources, WYSIWYG looting to player created and maintained maps and a deep modular crafting system. So much more that hasn't been said, ask questions! Post your thoughts! Spread the word of COE!
If you haven't yet, register with my referrer code on the official website: B0E240
Levelling your skills is easy at first, but get exponentially harder. So people who manage to level up quicker than others wont have a huge advantage.
Terribly frustrating watching this industry,one developer after another just does things that are so foolish that there is nothing i want to support and play.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
It's 3 months of people who contributed the most to the game's creation get to stress-test and deal with all the early bugs that occur in the first months. Can you imagine the fucking outbreak of a sicko hierarchy people would be going ham to create if everyone started on the same day. It's a balancing act too. Nothing in this particular MMORPG lasts forever and everyone is subjected to their respective lifespan.
This isn't the kind of game you win at. Ever.
ARK is pretty much the blueprint on how to make a SUCCESSFUL game, the irst game in a long time that actually gained people playing it over time and it isnt even released yet. And you know what? The ORIGINAL OFFICIAL version of the game is perhaps the most stupid design ever thought of, and guess what CoE is almost copying it exactly. If your body remains in the world after you log out then it is. BUT even without that everything you own and have 'worked' to collect is completely up for grabs when youre not online. Just like this game, what happened? People all stopped playing on the official servers, even the PvE ones and went to servers that blocked all that nonsense. That move basically saved the game, well that and all the work modders did to help develop the game a little faster than it wold have been by Wild Card.
The reason why i think worst case is because with no rules thats exactly what youre going to get, and it will be even worse than some of the scenarios the fatalists describe because even they dont think like a guy who just wants to ruin the game for everyone else. Basically if it can be done they will do it. That doesnt even count hacks and cheats which will definitely exist, but that is getting way ahead of everything.
The thing is all the guys defending the changes and the head start are using arguments that would serve the other side well or could be turned on their heads. If the world is going to be so huge then what difference does it make how many people start on the same day? Those head start people are still going to want to play and log in( if theyre still playing anyway) so claiming they will not contribute to the log in is false.
There is no reasonable or justifiable explanation anyone can give to not wipe the game before launch. Maybe not even a total and complete wipe, like I said. If they want to keep some player made towns and make them neutral to help set up infrastructure fine, but letting people gain 3 months of 'wealth' and power and defenses is just stupid. If a guild or kingdom or whatever has 5 or 6 guys online all the time they will more than likely be completely impervious to any sort of attacks. If a few of the whales build alliances then those two or three kingdoms could theoretically control the whole game world, no matter the size.
The population of this game will never ever be that big, it just wont so it stands to reason the guys backing it and getting early head start will represent a decent portion, maybe even a majority. That coupled with everything we have said makes it a pretty cut and dry assumption of what the game will be like.