You do get a 50 pledge gets you a copy of the game and some perks? 100 gets you 2 copies of the game + perks + Beta access? Support or dont great part is you don't need to. See you at launch if that's what you want
That is kinda jumping the gun don't u think? There is no guarantee this game will ever come out. Look at shrouds of the avatar.
You do get a 50 pledge gets you a copy of the game and some perks? 100 gets you 2 copies of the game + perks + Beta access? Support or dont great part is you don't need to. See you at launch if that's what you want
That is kinda jumping the gun don't u think? There is no guarantee this game will ever come out. Look at shrouds of the avatar.
So many indie titles I get them confused, but didn't SOTA "launch" meaning they stopped wiping the servers?
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
You do get a 50 pledge gets you a copy of the game and some perks? 100 gets you 2 copies of the game + perks + Beta access? Support or dont great part is you don't need to. See you at launch if that's what you want
That is kinda jumping the gun don't u think? There is no guarantee this game will ever come out. Look at shrouds of the avatar.
So many indie titles I get them confused, but didn't SOTA "launch" meaning they stopped wiping the servers?
Or am I thinking of another game?
Nope. You're smelling the right pile of poop.
People who pledged did so for five episodes. They can't seem to finish number one.
Given the older audience of SotA, most of them will die of old age before the fifth episode becomes a "launch that is not a launch".
Reminds me of a young person who marries an older person hoping they'll die so they can inherit their fortune.
Pathfinder's Pledge - All previous reward tiers PLUS: The first year's
subscription is included, and the subsequent yearly rate is $1.
it not very cost effective to offer lifetime gaming if you plan to have you game running longer then 2 years it a lose, so it was a good value then but not enough agreed for the game to reach 100% funded.
so they put in more work offer lower rewards to offset their cost an now people are coming out woodworks saying they want lifetime sub/better rewards when before they were absent or maybe they just want too troll.
I think the idea is that the game should be good enough to draw those subs after launch. If you are scared of losing founder subs by offering a lifetime sub to them...well, let's just say it doesn't bode well.
Eventually, this genre will die if something doesn't eventually click. New MMOs are mostly trash and the ones that aren't are F2P with P2W cash shop milk machines.
Only truly viable MMO's left with healthy populations
World or Warcraft
Guild Wars 2
Elder Scrolls Online
Final Fantasy XIV: Realm Reborn
wrong. Runescape, BDO, GW2, MapleStory, Revelation Online, TERA, BnS I'm missing some i'm sure. Trove also has a ton of players. What difference does it make though?
I just found it odd that they don't include lifetime sub in 1k or 3k pledge. You're basically spending that to get prealpha testing. Add a lifetime sub to it and more people would find it appealing.
Eventually, this genre will die if something doesn't eventually click. New MMOs are mostly trash and the ones that aren't are F2P with P2W cash shop milk machines.
Only truly viable MMO's left with healthy populations
World or Warcraft
Guild Wars 2
Elder Scrolls Online
Final Fantasy XIV: Realm Reborn
Notice any alarming similarities about these 4 MMOs? Are any of them F2P? Nope. Do any of them have a P2W cash shop milking machine? Nope. Two of them are still subscription based. One of them has a hybrid payment system and the last one is B2P with an unfortunate case of RNG boxes.
QFT. Problem is developers/companies will keep milking the "Founder Package / Kickstarter / DLC" train until it doesn't make money anymore. Why not get easy money from easily convinced masses? Makes sense to me. Does it make great games? Have yet to see one.
Sub will always be better than F2P, that's been a debate for a long time. Seeing as we've seen evidence of how bad F2P can be, probably would be in the best interest for a developer to make a sub game (IMO).
QFT. Problem is developers/companies will keep milking the "Founder Package / Kickstarter / DLC" train until it doesn't make money anymore. Why not get easy money from easily convinced masses? Makes sense to me. Does it make great games? Have yet to see one.
Sub will always be better than F2P, that's been a debate for a long time. Seeing as we've seen evidence of how bad F2P can be, probably would be in the best interest for a developer to make a sub game (IMO).
I've always preferred subs as well, however that last line is a bit simplistic (maybe even overly so). As far as western F2P titles go only a small percentage of them started out that way. The vast majority began with a sub only model. The problem these companies face is that there a bunch of free options to play, secondly there's only so many players to go around.
The nature of the genre, extended play with massive time sinks with progress tied to it. Makes it hard to attract many for the long haul, many simply go back to the game they put the most effort into and have achieved the most in.
I think it's going to be extremely hard for these new indie games to live off a sub model, it's hard for companies that have 100's of millions to finance themselves with. look at a game like ESO, which launched with tons of content. It will be hard to match that amount of content on a shoe string budget, let alone offer a more robust experience. Considering even that wasn't enough to make the sub sustainable. I think it may be wishful thinking that there are enough players to sustain themselves on year after year. I think the biggest cause of decline will be simply not enough content nor fast enough pipeline to fill the gaps.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
One would hope 1k would give you a lifetime sub but guess not.
Wasn't the price for lifetime sub in LotRO, AoC, Champions Online,Star Trek Online etc like 2-3 hundred dollars? And these guys dont even offer it when you pay $1000 lol.
They don't have to offer life time subs. Why do people feel entitled to have them?
Because people have gotten them before on previous games. Definitely doesn't make it the norm. If this is the direction the company wants to go, let them go for it. I don't understand why people want to blast them for the direction they are going.
So a company has to offer lifetime subs because another company did it. Amazing thinking.
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
Lifetime subs is basically sentencing your game to financial death in the long term. You'll have to keep paying maintenance and development costs over time while the customer pays nothing, only ending when your game's life time ends (fititngly enough).
Of course, given that all things die eventually, it might be a prudent business decision to offer life time subs anyways, if only because you know your game's going to die. That.... doesn't really say very good things about the game in question when that's the case, though.
Indeed, if a game is offering life time subs, that's either the company being complete idiots or knowing that their game isn't going to stick it out long enough for it to be a problem. Neither of which speak well for the future of the game in question.
What is the purpose of this thread? To Fund a Game in Development? No. To get another P4F game! And NOT Fund a Game in Development. To fund a game or not, is a personal decision. To come to an open forum to persuade other not to fund a game, is Obstruction of Commerce.
Pardon any spelling errors
Konfess your cyns and some maybe forgiven Boy: Why can't I talk to Him? Mom: We don't talk to Priests. As if it could exist, without being payed for. F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing. Even telemarketers wouldn't think that. It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
What is the purpose of this thread? To Fund a Game in Development? No. To get another P4F game! And NOT Fund a Game in Development. To fund a game or not, is a personal decision. To come to an open forum to persuade other not to fund a game, is Obstruction of Commerce.
Is Obstruction of Commerce a crime, a sin, or both?
Also... wasn't that the gist of Digital Homicide's case against Jim Sterling and why they tried to subpoena user records from Steam?... which Romine brother are you?
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
What is the purpose of this thread? To Fund a Game in Development? No. To get another P4F game! And NOT Fund a Game in Development. To fund a game or not, is a personal decision. To come to an open forum to persuade other not to fund a game, is Obstruction of Commerce.
What the heck does the concept of Obstruction of Commerce have to do with this?
...nevermind, I'll look it up myself.
(a)
Whoever in any way or degree obstructs, delays, or affects commerce or the movement of any article or commodity in commerce, by robbery or extortion or attempts or conspires so to do, or commits or threatens physical violence to any person or property in furtherance of a plan or purpose to do anything in violation of this section shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
......I don't think that term means what you think it means.
The game is going to be made whether regular people fund it or not. it failed it's kickstarter and still going. your money isn't going to what you think it's going to. The game is not going to magically be better because you gave them 1k, 3k, 10k or whatever, you are paying for alpha access and a lifetime sub, that's about it. They can spend the money on whatever the hell they want including blow and motor bikes, and to pay themselves. crowdfunding MMO's has always been a scam and always will be. A Lot of people are slowly learning this as you can see by Smed not being about to reach his kickstarter goal for Heros Song and Brad not being able to reach his goal with Pantheon. Isn't kind of funny how Smed and Brad worked together and both failed their kickstarters. If you haven't noticed Smed and Brad keep using the same live streamer to shill their failed games.
So today presented me with the perfect opportunity to express why I'm so frustrated by the pantheon pledge tiers. Ashes of Creation launched it's pledge today. I've very excited for both pantehon and ashes, but for very different reasons. I want to pledge to both games, but I can only afford to pledge to one.
For a pledge of $135 on ashes I get
Ph2 Alpha access
4 months of game time
mount 2
pet x2
appearance set
costume
1 day head start
forum badge x4
title in game x 4
name in credits
chat perks
name reservation
For a pledge of $150 for pantheon
Beta access
name reservation
title x1
character slot
stack of flasks
backpack
tunic
pet x1
ring
5 item renaming vouchers.
no game time
no mount
no alpha access
which of these games is going to get my pledge? As I said, I can only afford one... To get the same tier of rewards I'm looking at in Ashes, I would have to pledge 300+ to pantheon, twice as much, and even then I'm still getting one month less of sub time and several other things missing.
As someone who bought a lifetime sub for both lotro and tsw, the tiers in pantheon just feel like a slap in the face. Yes, it's my opinion, but that's the wonderful thing about opinions. We're all entitled to them.
Eventually, this genre will die if something doesn't eventually click. New MMOs are mostly trash and the ones that aren't are F2P with P2W cash shop milk machines.
Only truly viable MMO's left with healthy populations
World or Warcraft
Guild Wars 2
Elder Scrolls Online
Final Fantasy XIV: Realm Reborn
Notice any alarming similarities about these 4 MMOs? Are any of them F2P? Nope. Do any of them have a P2W cash shop milking machine? Nope. Two of them are still subscription based. One of them has a hybrid payment system and the last one is B2P with an unfortunate case of RNG boxes.
So, the question is. How does Pantheon compare to any of these 4 MMOs? It is going P2P without a cash shop. So that is a good start. Now you're going to say, well what about WildStar? Nothing was terribly wrong with WildStar. It had some very strong points, but it also had some extremely weak points. On top of that, it buckled into a F2P version to try and recoup their losses.
Pantheon is a spiritual successor. No offense to Brad, but Vanguard was definitely not a spiritual successor. Taking EQ's core mechanics with some minor updated changes, improved graphics and animations and starting over with a new world with new lore and finally adding in some newer mechanics is how you revitalize a classic.
There's a reason I've been playing progressive / vanilla EQ, SWG, DAoC Classic and Vanilla WoW lately. Those games make sense. I don't know why so many great MMOs feel the need to perform drastic changes to their core mechanics. WoW is the biggest culprit of this and while it's still popuplar, it's also at 50% of it's peak population and has been for quite a while. Nothing they've done has brought back the 5 million players they lost.
This argument comes in half a dozen different flavors, but it's usually in defense of a business proposition of... questionable merit.
Somehow, I doubt the genre will die if Pantheon or something doesn't eventually "click"... and yes there are more viable MMOs than WoW, ESO, GW2, and FF.
Total player numbers isn't as impressive as how many players are on any given server, and how those players are allowed to interact. Bandwagon fallacy, much?
Anyhow, here's hoping Pantheon turns out all right, but let's not paint any one title as 'savior of the genre'.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
This is pretty much why I won't support this Kickstarter nonsense. Almost all of them do it; "Give us a ridiculous amount of money, and we'll make sure you get items no one else can ever attain through playing the game." They're greed at its finest, in the form of super deluxe $1k+ collector editions - rather than the $100-200 boxes people were used to.
Part of me hopes that the people who encourage companies to do this crap get burned good when the game actually comes out, and it's a piece of garbage. Not that it's likely to stop them from throwing money at the next company that comes along with a new shiny.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
Ya know I watched the CohhCarnage video he did the devs and lets just say It seemed kinda meh. Pretty much 15 minutes of standing around admiring an empty landscape of vast nothingness and 1 hour of playing multiplayer patty-cake with a few absurdly challenging trash mob NPC. Watching a fight was as fun as watching a download progress bar for a 300mb game demo on 56k.
Looking at the Youtube comments from some of this games rabid commune like worshipers you would think it was like the second coming. I don't get it, but I'm not sure I want to cause I hate koolaid anyways.
I like some of the screenshots I have seen floating around of this game and thought it might actually have some cool features, but all I could hear while watching this video is the sound of a balloon deflating slowly coming from my speakers. I don't understand why people will throw money at anything that bends over and sticks it's big openworld in you face even if it's flat and boring looking, but whatever, it's your money, you just make the rest of the us MMO gamers look bad doing it.
So today presented me with the perfect opportunity to express why I'm so frustrated by the pantheon pledge tiers. Ashes of Creation launched it's pledge today. I've very excited for both pantehon and ashes, but for very different reasons. I want to pledge to both games, but I can only afford to pledge to one.
For a pledge of $135 on ashes I get
Ph2 Alpha access
4 months of game time
mount 2
pet x2
appearance set
costume
1 day head start
forum badge x4
title in game x 4
name in credits
chat perks
name reservation
For a pledge of $150 for pantheon
Beta access
name reservation
title x1
character slot
stack of flasks
backpack
tunic
pet x1
ring
5 item renaming vouchers.
no game time
no mount
no alpha access
which of these games is going to get my pledge? As I said, I can only afford one... To get the same tier of rewards I'm looking at in Ashes, I would have to pledge 300+ to pantheon, twice as much, and even then I'm still getting one month less of sub time and several other things missing.
As someone who bought a lifetime sub for both lotro and tsw, the tiers in pantheon just feel like a slap in the face. Yes, it's my opinion, but that's the wonderful thing about opinions. We're all entitled to them.
Sure Ashes is an option. I have thought of giving them a pledge as well. Only we know nothing but the node system. They says they will release by 2018 but I have not seen one combat video. The thing you spend 80% of your time in any video game. From the few words I have read on combat, sounds like another Twitch game. So they wont be getting my money yet.
This is pretty much why I won't support this Kickstarter nonsense. Almost all of them do it; "Give us a ridiculous amount of money, and we'll make sure you get items no one else can ever attain through playing the game." They're greed at its finest, in the form of super deluxe $1k+ collector editions - rather than the $100-200 boxes people were used to.
Part of me hopes that the people who encourage companies to do this crap get burned good when the game actually comes out, and it's a piece of garbage. Not that it's likely to stop them from throwing money at the next company that comes along with a new shiny.
I don't want anyone to get burned and if it all works out for them great! But (the big butt), it really rips the motivation and curiosity I have for a game that does so.
This is probably the biggest demotivator I have for Shroud (and my system doesn't even run it). I only paid about $30 for it and have fun for what it is, but I can't ever see investing in something like that or the rest of the crowd doing similar things.
On the flip side it's why I've been hanging around Gorgon so long. What they ask from their community is more my speed. Projects like that really grab my interest.
Eventually, this genre will die if something doesn't eventually click. New MMOs are mostly trash and the ones that aren't are F2P with P2W cash shop milk machines.
Only truly viable MMO's left with healthy populations
World or Warcraft
Guild Wars 2
Elder Scrolls Online
Final Fantasy XIV: Realm Reborn
Notice any alarming similarities about these 4 MMOs? Are any of them F2P? Nope. Do any of them have a P2W cash shop milking machine? Nope. Two of them are still subscription based. One of them has a hybrid payment system and the last one is B2P with an unfortunate case of RNG boxes.
So, the question is. How does Pantheon compare to any of these 4 MMOs? It is going P2P without a cash shop. So that is a good start. Now you're going to say, well what about WildStar? Nothing was terribly wrong with WildStar. It had some very strong points, but it also had some extremely weak points. On top of that, it buckled into a F2P version to try and recoup their losses.
Pantheon is a spiritual successor. No offense to Brad, but Vanguard was definitely not a spiritual successor. Taking EQ's core mechanics with some minor updated changes, improved graphics and animations and starting over with a new world with new lore and finally adding in some newer mechanics is how you revitalize a classic.
There's a reason I've been playing progressive / vanilla EQ, SWG, DAoC Classic and Vanilla WoW lately. Those games make sense. I don't know why so many great MMOs feel the need to perform drastic changes to their core mechanics. WoW is the biggest culprit of this and while it's still popuplar, it's also at 50% of it's peak population and has been for quite a while. Nothing they've done has brought back the 5 million players they lost.
This argument comes in half a dozen different flavors, but it's usually in defense of a business proposition of... questionable merit.
Somehow, I doubt the genre will die if Pantheon or something doesn't eventually "click"... and yes there are more viable MMOs than WoW, ESO, GW2, and FF.
Total player numbers isn't as impressive as how many players are on any given server, and how those players are allowed to interact. Bandwagon fallacy, much?
Anyhow, here's hoping Pantheon turns out all right, but let's not paint any one title as 'savior of the genre'.
The genre is already dead. It's just twitching in it's death throes. Pantheon is likely the last hope to revive it. After that it will be VR, which will eventually die out for the same reasons if we don't get back to the things that made mmos great to begin with.
Eventually, this genre will die if something doesn't eventually click. New MMOs are mostly trash and the ones that aren't are F2P with P2W cash shop milk machines.
Only truly viable MMO's left with healthy populations
World or Warcraft
Guild Wars 2
Elder Scrolls Online
Final Fantasy XIV: Realm Reborn
Notice any alarming similarities about these 4 MMOs? Are any of them F2P? Nope. Do any of them have a P2W cash shop milking machine? Nope. Two of them are still subscription based. One of them has a hybrid payment system and the last one is B2P with an unfortunate case of RNG boxes.
So, the question is. How does Pantheon compare to any of these 4 MMOs? It is going P2P without a cash shop. So that is a good start. Now you're going to say, well what about WildStar? Nothing was terribly wrong with WildStar. It had some very strong points, but it also had some extremely weak points. On top of that, it buckled into a F2P version to try and recoup their losses.
Pantheon is a spiritual successor. No offense to Brad, but Vanguard was definitely not a spiritual successor. Taking EQ's core mechanics with some minor updated changes, improved graphics and animations and starting over with a new world with new lore and finally adding in some newer mechanics is how you revitalize a classic.
There's a reason I've been playing progressive / vanilla EQ, SWG, DAoC Classic and Vanilla WoW lately. Those games make sense. I don't know why so many great MMOs feel the need to perform drastic changes to their core mechanics. WoW is the biggest culprit of this and while it's still popuplar, it's also at 50% of it's peak population and has been for quite a while. Nothing they've done has brought back the 5 million players they lost.
This argument comes in half a dozen different flavors, but it's usually in defense of a business proposition of... questionable merit.
Somehow, I doubt the genre will die if Pantheon or something doesn't eventually "click"... and yes there are more viable MMOs than WoW, ESO, GW2, and FF.
Total player numbers isn't as impressive as how many players are on any given server, and how those players are allowed to interact. Bandwagon fallacy, much?
Anyhow, here's hoping Pantheon turns out all right, but let's not paint any one title as 'savior of the genre'.
The genre is already dead. It's just twitching in it's death throes. Pantheon is likely the last hope to revive it. After that it will be VR, which will eventually die out for the same reasons if we don't get back to the things that made mmos great to begin with.
I don't think its dead. The market follows the money. We see LoL clones and MMOs trying to be MOBAs. When someone gets the next big hit the market will chase that. Online games will keep evolving long after we are dead. Maybe the next big MMO jump forward will be AR MMO and people will be exploring RL with AR dragons in the park.
Comments
That is kinda jumping the gun don't u think? There is no guarantee this game will ever come out. Look at shrouds of the avatar.
So many indie titles I get them confused, but didn't SOTA "launch" meaning they stopped wiping the servers?
Or am I thinking of another game?
"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
Nope. You're smelling the right pile of poop.
People who pledged did so for five episodes. They can't seem to finish number one.
Given the older audience of SotA, most of them will die of old age before the fifth episode becomes a "launch that is not a launch".
Reminds me of a young person who marries an older person hoping they'll die so they can inherit their fortune.
Gold-digger, I believe they call it.
Shroud of the Avatar: Forsaken Gold-diggers
~~ postlarval ~~
I think the idea is that the game should be good enough to draw those subs after launch. If you are scared of losing founder subs by offering a lifetime sub to them...well, let's just say it doesn't bode well.
wrong. Runescape, BDO, GW2, MapleStory, Revelation Online, TERA, BnS
I'm missing some i'm sure. Trove also has a ton of players.
What difference does it make though?
QFT. Problem is developers/companies will keep milking the "Founder Package / Kickstarter / DLC" train until it doesn't make money anymore. Why not get easy money from easily convinced masses? Makes sense to me. Does it make great games? Have yet to see one.
Sub will always be better than F2P, that's been a debate for a long time. Seeing as we've seen evidence of how bad F2P can be, probably would be in the best interest for a developer to make a sub game (IMO).
I've always preferred subs as well, however that last line is a bit simplistic (maybe even overly so). As far as western F2P titles go only a small percentage of them started out that way. The vast majority began with a sub only model. The problem these companies face is that there a bunch of free options to play, secondly there's only so many players to go around.
The nature of the genre, extended play with massive time sinks with progress tied to it. Makes it hard to attract many for the long haul, many simply go back to the game they put the most effort into and have achieved the most in.
I think it's going to be extremely hard for these new indie games to live off a sub model, it's hard for companies that have 100's of millions to finance themselves with. look at a game like ESO, which launched with tons of content. It will be hard to match that amount of content on a shoe string budget, let alone offer a more robust experience. Considering even that wasn't enough to make the sub sustainable. I think it may be wishful thinking that there are enough players to sustain themselves on year after year. I think the biggest cause of decline will be simply not enough content nor fast enough pipeline to fill the gaps.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
So a company has to offer lifetime subs because another company did it. Amazing thinking.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
Of course, given that all things die eventually, it might be a prudent business decision to offer life time subs anyways, if only because you know your game's going to die. That.... doesn't really say very good things about the game in question when that's the case, though.
Indeed, if a game is offering life time subs, that's either the company being complete idiots or knowing that their game isn't going to stick it out long enough for it to be a problem. Neither of which speak well for the future of the game in question.
Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
As if it could exist, without being payed for.
F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.
Even telemarketers wouldn't think that.
It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
Is Obstruction of Commerce a crime, a sin, or both?
Also... wasn't that the gist of Digital Homicide's case against Jim Sterling and why they tried to subpoena user records from Steam?... which Romine brother are you?
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
What the heck does the concept of Obstruction of Commerce have to do with this?
...nevermind, I'll look it up myself.
(a)
......I don't think that term means what you think it means.
your money isn't going to what you think it's going to. The game is not going to magically be better because you gave them 1k, 3k, 10k or whatever, you are paying for alpha access and a lifetime sub, that's about it. They can spend the money on whatever the hell they want including blow and motor bikes, and to pay themselves.
crowdfunding MMO's has always been a scam and always will be. A Lot of people are slowly learning this as you can see by Smed not being about to reach his kickstarter goal for Heros Song and Brad not being able to reach his goal with Pantheon. Isn't kind of funny how Smed and Brad worked together and both failed their kickstarters. If you haven't noticed Smed and Brad keep using the same live streamer to shill their failed games.
You want to pledge, but seeing that other people pledged more than you want to pledge, makes you not want to pledge?
[mod edit]
It's not far so I'm pouting....
For a pledge of $135 on ashes I get
- Ph2 Alpha access
- 4 months of game time
- mount 2
- pet x2
- appearance set
- costume
- 1 day head start
- forum badge x4
- title in game x 4
- name in credits
- chat perks
- name reservation
For a pledge of $150 for pantheon- Beta access
- name reservation
- title x1
- character slot
- stack of flasks
- backpack
- tunic
- pet x1
- ring
- 5 item renaming vouchers.
- no game time
- no mount
- no alpha access
which of these games is going to get my pledge? As I said, I can only afford one... To get the same tier of rewards I'm looking at in Ashes, I would have to pledge 300+ to pantheon, twice as much, and even then I'm still getting one month less of sub time and several other things missing.As someone who bought a lifetime sub for both lotro and tsw, the tiers in pantheon just feel like a slap in the face. Yes, it's my opinion, but that's the wonderful thing about opinions. We're all entitled to them.
This argument comes in half a dozen different flavors, but it's usually in defense of a business proposition of... questionable merit.
Somehow, I doubt the genre will die if Pantheon or something doesn't eventually "click"... and yes there are more viable MMOs than WoW, ESO, GW2, and FF.
Total player numbers isn't as impressive as how many players are on any given server, and how those players are allowed to interact. Bandwagon fallacy, much?
Anyhow, here's hoping Pantheon turns out all right, but let's not paint any one title as 'savior of the genre'.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
Part of me hopes that the people who encourage companies to do this crap get burned good when the game actually comes out, and it's a piece of garbage. Not that it's likely to stop them from throwing money at the next company that comes along with a new shiny.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
https://www.ashesofcreation.com/ref/Callaron/
Looking at the Youtube comments from some of this games rabid commune like worshipers you would think it was like the second coming. I don't get it, but I'm not sure I want to cause I hate koolaid anyways.
I like some of the screenshots I have seen floating around of this game and thought it might actually have some cool features, but all I could hear while watching this video is the sound of a balloon deflating slowly coming from my speakers. I don't understand why people will throw money at anything that bends over and sticks it's big openworld in you face even if it's flat and boring looking, but whatever, it's your money, you just make the rest of the us MMO gamers look bad doing it.
Sure Ashes is an option. I have thought of giving them a pledge as well. Only we know nothing but the node system. They says they will release by 2018 but I have not seen one combat video. The thing you spend 80% of your time in any video game. From the few words I have read on combat, sounds like another Twitch game. So they wont be getting my money yet.
Have you been a cow yet? I hear it's fun
The genre is already dead. It's just twitching in it's death throes. Pantheon is likely the last hope to revive it. After that it will be VR, which will eventually die out for the same reasons if we don't get back to the things that made mmos great to begin with.
I don't think its dead. The market follows the money. We see LoL clones and MMOs trying to be MOBAs. When someone gets the next big hit the market will chase that. Online games will keep evolving long after we are dead. Maybe the next big MMO jump forward will be AR MMO and people will be exploring RL with AR dragons in the park.