Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Selling In-Game Advantages Destroys Games

cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
This topic has most likely been addressed before multiple times.  However, I'm just so personally appalled at the idea, that I feel the need to adamantly express my disapproval and disdain.  And contempt.  I will never, ever play a game again that sells in-game advantages for monetary contributions*.  Ever.  I want to compete against other players.  I don't want to compete against other player's paychecks, wallets, or bank accounts.  I can do that all day long in the real world if I like.  In-game advantages for founders or development/start-up contributors, free-to-play and cash shops (even if just for cosmetic items) are the bane of anyone who ever wants to play a decent MMORPG.

*Beyond the price of initial purchase and subscription. 
«13

Comments

  • EldurianEldurian Member EpicPosts: 2,736
    edited May 2017
    In a system with vertical progression there are two primary ways to acquire power:

    1. Play more
    2. Pay more

    I find both equally offensive which is why in a MMO industry dominated by play-to-win, I don't see the big deal with play-to-win.

    If your "content" is so boring that people will pay extra money to not have to do it, then that there is the primary problem of your game.

    Play to win just enables people with jobs to compete to people living in their parent's basement. Of course being a full time college student atm I'm screwed on both ends but such is life.
  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
    edited May 2017


    Eldurian said:


    In a system with vertical progression there are two primary ways to acquire power:

    1. Play more
    2. Pay more

    I find both equally offensive which is why in a MMO industry dominated by play-to-win, I don't see the big deal with play-to-win.

    If your "content" is so boring that people will pay extra money to not have to do it, then that there is the primary problem of your game.

    Play to win just enables people with jobs to compete to people living in their parent's basement. Of course being a full time college student atm I'm screwed on both ends but such is life.




    Yes, a person being able to dominate in a game because he or she has no life and spends most of his or her time playing it is equally stupid.

    If a game can't earn enough money from monthly subscription fees alone, that just means it is not a good game.
  • AAAMEOWAAAMEOW Member RarePosts: 1,617
    Ya but there is a reason so many games choose that monetary methods.  Because the game company believes they can make more money that way.
  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775





    Eldurian said:



    In a system with vertical progression there are two primary ways to acquire power:

    1. Play more
    2. Pay more

    I find both equally offensive which is why in a MMO industry dominated by play-to-win, I don't see the big deal with play-to-win.

    If your "content" is so boring that people will pay extra money to not have to do it, then that there is the primary problem of your game.

    Play to win just enables people with jobs to compete to people living in their parent's basement. Of course being a full time college student atm I'm screwed on both ends but such is life.





    ....
    If a game can't earn enough money from monthly subscription fees alone, that just means it is not a good game.


    there is a lot of wisdom in that statement right there.

    although..I did like Fallen Earth which is now F2P

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 44,060


     I will never, ever play a game again that sells in-game advantages for monetary contributions*.  Ever.  

    *Beyond the price of initial purchase and subscription. 


    I hear you can still buy Monopoly and Life over at Toys R Us. :)

    A new, modern MMORPG that doesn't offer to sell any advantages including cosmetics? That ship sailed long ago so I guess you're moving on to another genre? 

    We'll leave the light on. B)


    "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






  • DibdabsDibdabs Member RarePosts: 3,239


    This topic has most likely been addressed before multiple times...


    Many, many, many, many times.
  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
    edited May 2017


    AAAMEOW said:


    Ya but there is a reason so many games choose that monetary methods.  Because the game company believes they can make more money that way.




    I understand that.  But I know from experience that free-to-play is horrible.  One of the worst ideas ever.  Usually, the game is designed to incentivize paying (and paying more) to grind less.  Grinding doesn't and never did belong in a game that calls itself a role-playing game in

    my opinion.  The vast majority of MMORPGs nowadays are actually Monstrously Monotonous Online Repeat-Pay Grinds rather than Massively Multi-player Online Role-Playing Games.  Role-playing called and said to stop slandering its name.  These games have little to no role-playing involved or required.  They are mostly just solider/mercenary simulators.  Players are tourists in a theme park, deluded prisoners that don't understand they're living in a gilded cage.

    Back to free-to-play.  The other big part of this payment model is that you're asking the haves and the wills to pay for the have-nots and the will-nots.  Socialism in action.
    Post edited by cantankerousmage on
  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
    @SEANMCAD - I had never heard of that one.  But I'm not into games set in the future. 

    "Difficult to see.  Always in motion is the future." - Yoda
  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
    edited May 2017



    Kyleran said:











     I will never, ever play a game again that sells in-game advantages for monetary contributions*.  Ever.  

    *Beyond the price of initial purchase and subscription. 








    I hear you can still buy Monopoly and Life over at Toys R Us. :)

    A new, modern MMORPG that doesn't offer to sell any advantages including cosmetics? That ship sailed long ago so I guess you're moving on to another genre? 

    We'll leave the light on. B)





    I've already quit playing MMORPGs for now.  The only game I actually want to play is the one I've been trying to come up with.  It'll probably never get made though.  Chronicles of Elyria sounds close, but not quite.  And who knows for sure if that one is going to see the light of day?

    But maybe if more players stopped putting up with, playing and paying for the nonsense we keep getting shoved at us, the current course of MMORPGs could be changed for the better.  You can't sell garbage if no one buys it.
  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member EpicPosts: 6,601
    Maybe. Just maybe. Many of them like the games that are out and are not just putting up with it.
    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
    @VengeSunsoar - There's no accounting for taste.
  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member EpicPosts: 6,601
    That answer swings both ways.
    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
    True enough.  I did have fun in the past, but experience has cured me of my delusions.
  • laxielaxie Member RarePosts: 1,123
    edited May 2017
    I think the equality of subscription models is really nice. It leaves everyone on an equal footing. Having players tiered by monetization breaks the immersion a fair bit for me personally.

    That said, the thought that subscriptions are a profitable model for well-done games is probably misleading. Even in early 2000s, when there was relatively little competition, most games were not doing that great. With the exception of WoW, MMOs managed to barely stay afloat through regular expansions on top of the subscription, combined with backing by big publishers. In many cases, even this was not enough.

    It's got to be a lot more difficult today. The market is oversaturated, so building up any sort of large community is tricky. You can't count on capturing a large chunk of the pie - and most importantly, can't count on maintaining it over a long period of time. Any model that allows a single person to spend without a cap needs a much smaller pie to begin with.

    On top of that, from what I've read on these forums, cosmetic cash shops don't tend to sell that well. Selling items that give some sort of a gameplay benefit make several times more.

    I'm not saying I am a fan of the free-to-play model. Just saying it's possible that even if a game is great, it might not survive on a subscription model alone.
  • Asm0deusAsm0deus Member EpicPosts: 4,618

    Eldurian said:

    ...snip....

    Play to win just enables people with jobs to compete to people living in their parent's basement. Of course being a full time college student atm I'm screwed on both ends but such is life.


    I see this argument often.

    I think it begs the question of SHOULD someone that's living the good life, has a really well paying job, has a family, goes out often or any combination thereof be able to compete, or expect to, with someone that gives all that up to live in his parent's basement?

    Kinda seems like some people want everything to bend to their will so they can have it all NOW and eat their cake too...so to speak.


    Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.





  • WizardryWizardry Member LegendaryPosts: 19,332
    Well sadly there is a large community to exploit and one that doesn't care.

    Luckily i am able to avoid those games and that type of community.I am also a very knowledgeable gamer that i can spot such black marks in games and very quickly.Sadly things can go wrong AFTER we are entrenched with hours/days /weeks/months of gaming so we can do nothing but complain and hope to see the developer get rid of it.
    I actually quit FFXI and came back after i saw some effort was being done,most developers show NO EFFORT or need to make an announcement when they make a small effort for good publicity.

    I see what is going on out there,the industry is sliding downhill and badly,gaming passion tossed out the window,everything is about exploiting people for money now.Maybe it was always like this but we were too young and naive to see it in the early years.
    At least we got to see gaming evolve and quickly,NOW it seems extremely stagnant to getting worse.

    Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.

  • k61977k61977 Member EpicPosts: 1,526


    This topic has most likely been addressed before multiple times.  However, I'm just so personally appalled at the idea, that I feel the need to adamantly express my disapproval and disdain.  And contempt.  I will never, ever play a game again that sells in-game advantages for monetary contributions*.  Ever.  I want to compete against other players.  I don't want to compete against other player's paychecks, wallets, or bank accounts.  I can do that all day long in the real world if I like.  In-game advantages for founders or development/start-up contributors, free-to-play and cash shops (even if just for cosmetic items) are the bane of anyone who ever wants to play a decent MMORPG.

    *Beyond the price of initial purchase and subscription. 


    I am with you until you say cosmetic items.  As those do not in any way shape of form change anything in the game other than the way a person looks.  I believe that is a perfect way to reward people that have contributed to the games success by funding, etc...
  • KonfessKonfess Member RarePosts: 1,667
    Games are made, to make people money.  If they don't want to spend money, then I suggest going to their public library and reading a book.  The lesson here is that video games are not for them.  No matter how Loud they yell, "MAKE US AN ABSOLUTELY FREE GAME", no developer will.  This Monetization is placed there to tell them, this game is not for them and they should leave.  If they have no intention of spending money, then they are not the developers customers, and they wont be listened to.  If they do spend money they are free to post on the games website and be listened to.  Only non-customers come here and cry about not being heard.

    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.

  • JacobinJacobin Member RarePosts: 1,009
    While P2W is good for a quick ROI it destroys the game population because even the hardcore grinders become second class plebs. The game just hollows out to a few whales and a casual population that is in constant churn. There is no room for people who just want to play legit and make an honest effort.

    The genre cannibalized itself which is why only a few games remain healthy and only a small number of non-Asian big companies are interested in the genre.

    MMOs are mostly just sad online casinos filled with slot machine addicts. The genres that have actually embraced legit competition (MOBAs, FPS, RTS, Fighting, Survival) have exploded in popularity and are thriving.
  • KopogerooKopogeroo Member UncommonPosts: 18
    edited May 2017
    It's all about choices. Many want many things out of life and usually because they want to be great/successful simultaneously at so many things it's why they are mediocre. At the end not all play MMORPG's for the same goal. It's the experience what counts and a well done MMORPG can offer a great experience for someone who roleplays a thief, begger, peasant, etc.

    Bottom line, as long as I can CHOOSE and have equal chance at winning (and not against the best of the best, but against those who have less skill as well as put less effort/dedication than me) then its even ground and the game is worth playing. I'm all fine people to be able to buy things from others via ingame $ to win in that game. I would totally like that option to choose if I want to win more in-game or in real life. The future of gaming and MMORPG's is about allowing players to make big $ out of investing their precious time in them, something today is rarely available due to greedy companies, bots, hacks, etc, etc. which is why January 11th, 2011 was the last time a new game took my $.

    Post edited by Kopogeroo on
  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992

    laxie said:

    I think the equality of subscription models is really nice. It leaves everyone on an equal footing. Having players tiered by monetization breaks the immersion a fair bit for me personally.

    That said, the thought that subscriptions are a profitable model for well-done games is probably misleading. Even in early 2000s, when there was relatively little competition, most games were not doing that great. With the exception of WoW, MMOs managed to barely stay afloat through regular expansions on top of the subscription, combined with backing by big publishers. In many cases, even this was not enough.

    It's got to be a lot more difficult today. The market is oversaturated, so building up any sort of large community is tricky. You can't count on capturing a large chunk of the pie - and most importantly, can't count on maintaining it over a long period of time. Any model that allows a single person to spend without a cap needs a much smaller pie to begin with.

    On top of that, from what I've read on these forums, cosmetic cash shops don't tend to sell that well. Selling items that give some sort of a gameplay benefit make several times more.

    I'm not saying I am a fan of the free-to-play model. Just saying it's possible that even if a game is great, it might not survive on a subscription model alone.


    Which MMORPG has ever truly been great?  I can't think of one.
  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992

    k61977 said:





    This topic has most likely been addressed before multiple times.  However, I'm just so personally appalled at the idea, that I feel the need to adamantly express my disapproval and disdain.  And contempt.  I will never, ever play a game again that sells in-game advantages for monetary contributions*.  Ever.  I want to compete against other players.  I don't want to compete against other player's paychecks, wallets, or bank accounts.  I can do that all day long in the real world if I like.  In-game advantages for founders or development/start-up contributors, free-to-play and cash shops (even if just for cosmetic items) are the bane of anyone who ever wants to play a decent MMORPG.

    *Beyond the price of initial purchase and subscription. 




    I am with you until you say cosmetic items.  As those do not in any way shape of form change anything in the game other than the way a person looks.  I believe that is a perfect way to reward people that have contributed to the games success by funding, etc...

    Because if they make a cash shop for cosmetic items, eventually they'll want to start selling other things there that aren't merely cosmetic.  The majority of the time.  People that contribute money to the success of a project should get paid back their money or get a share of the profits.
  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
    edited May 2017


    Konfess said:


    Games are made, to make people money.  If they don't want to spend money, then I suggest going to their public library and reading a book.  The lesson here is that video games are not for them.  No matter how Loud they yell, "MAKE US AN ABSOLUTELY FREE GAME", no developer will.  This Monetization is placed there to tell them, this game is not for them and they should leave.  If they have no intention of spending money, then they are not the developers customers, and they wont be listened to.  If they do spend money they are free to post on the games website and be listened to.  Only non-customers come here and cry about not being heard.


    ...
    Post edited by cantankerousmage on
  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992

    Kopogeroo said:

    It's all about choices. Many want many things out of life and usually because they want to be great/successful simultaneously at so many things it's why they are mediocre. At the end not all play MMORPG's for the same goal. It's the experience what counts and a well done MMORPG can offer a great experience for someone who roleplays a thief, begger, peasant, etc.

    Bottom line, as long as I can CHOOSE and have equal chance at winning (and not against the best of the best, but against those who have less skill as well as put less effort/dedication than me) then its even ground and the game is worth playing. I'm all fine people to be able to buy things from others via ingame to win in that game. I would totally like that option to choose if I want to win more in-game or in real life. The future of gaming and MMORPG's is about allowing players to make big $ out of investing their precious time in them, something today is rarely available due to greedy companies, bots, hacks, etc, etc. which is why January 11th, 2011 was the last time a new game took my $.



    I don't know of any well done MMORPGs.
  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
    @Konfess - If people just want to make money, there are a lot easier ways to do it than making mmorpgs.  If developers aren't trying to innovate or improve the genre, they should go home.
Sign In or Register to comment.