|
On February 21 2015 08:07 MaestroSC wrote:
I feel like there is no way they can deliver what they are promising. So many titles have advertised/said the same things..until it came time for implementation and they turn it into another typical MMO.
Hope they can deliver tho. Sounds fun.
Although F2P kills MMO's incredibly quickly.. f2p = no repercussions to botting and hacking as you just create a new one and let it go until you are happy or get caught, in which case you start it over.
IDK their payment model/structure will keep a lot of people away, perhaps myself included. Tired of pay-to-win in MMO's. The subscription model still seems to be the best imo.
Its a wait and see game about how much they can actually realize indeed.
Donno why your talking about F2P, Crowfall is confirmed to be B2P like GW2.
Pay to win is wayy to early to talk about. its something to be wary of for sure but come on, there is 0 info other then that there will be a store that they say wont have ingame advantages (how much of the proves to be true ofc reaches back to point 1. Wait and see).
|
On February 21 2015 08:34 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2015 08:07 MaestroSC wrote:
I feel like there is no way they can deliver what they are promising. So many titles have advertised/said the same things..until it came time for implementation and they turn it into another typical MMO.
Hope they can deliver tho. Sounds fun.
Although F2P kills MMO's incredibly quickly.. f2p = no repercussions to botting and hacking as you just create a new one and let it go until you are happy or get caught, in which case you start it over.
IDK their payment model/structure will keep a lot of people away, perhaps myself included. Tired of pay-to-win in MMO's. The subscription model still seems to be the best imo. Its a wait and see game about how much they can actually realize indeed. Donno why your talking about F2P, Crowfall is confirmed to be B2P like GW2. Pay to win is wayy to early to talk about. its something to be wary of for sure but come on, there is 0 info other then that there will be a store that they say wont have ingame advantages (how much of the proves to be true ofc reaches back to point 1. Wait and see).
Yeah I should have used B2P and not F2P.
But ill stand by my point, that i think a subscription model is still better for MMO's, because over the past 5+ years, I cant think of a cash shop that didnt (either slowly or quickly) turn unto a P2W cash shop.
Its just too hard to balance in MMO's. And I know that I personally, and several of my MMO friends, hate cash shops. How about everyone pays the same amount of money, and we all get the same shit as everyone else. Let the differences between players come from their different levels of dedication and play rather than "o he spent more money on the cash shop."
But I guess its a matter of taste.
|
On February 21 2015 08:55 MaestroSC wrote:
But ill stand by my point, that i think a subscription model is still better for MMO's, because over the past 5+ years, I cant think of a cash shop that didnt (either slowly or quickly) turn unto a P2W cash shop.
Its just too hard to balance in MMO's. And I know that I personally, and several of my MMO friends, hate cash shops. How about everyone pays the same amount of money, and we all get the same shit as everyone else. Let the differences between players come from their different levels of dedication and play rather than "o he spent more money on the cash shop."
If you're playing a monthly fee MMO, you're still going to have pay to win, just from 3rd party organizations.
Not only that, but I have no idea what you mean by the implication that every cash shop turned into pay to win; there's plenty that haven't. Some of the most successful games out there that have cash shops are still not pay to win such as DOTA or TF2. What examples are you even talking about that turned into pay to win which weren't originally?
Even monthly fee games have had bonus —typically cosmetic— content that people can get from purchasing another game, expansion pack, or real-life item. Then there's the monthly fee games that are still "pay to win" despite being monthly fee. No matter how slight the advantage one gets in EVE it is an absolute advantage nonetheless that players get by spending additional money on the game. It may need to be a lot of money, and it may not be a ton of help, but it's still help, and it will give a person victory if everything else was equal.
I personally strongly dislike monthly fee games. If one gets really into a game a person ends up spending hundreds of dollars more than otherwise. To me there's not as much incentive to keep playing a game when there's constantly this fee hovering over one's head.
|
Reminds me of the hype for Darkfall which didn't go too well.
The scheduled resets are probably a good idea for world PvP in any game and hopefully will get copied if this game doesn't work out.
|
If they can re-capture the magic of Shadowbane while fixing its flaws, I will play the shit out of their game.
Although, from what I see of character creation, it won't be as deep and rich of a system, which is disappointing. Optimizing builds in Shadowbane was such a pleasure.
|
On February 21 2015 16:20 Xapti wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2015 08:55 MaestroSC wrote:
But ill stand by my point, that i think a subscription model is still better for MMO's, because over the past 5+ years, I cant think of a cash shop that didnt (either slowly or quickly) turn unto a P2W cash shop.
Its just too hard to balance in MMO's. And I know that I personally, and several of my MMO friends, hate cash shops. How about everyone pays the same amount of money, and we all get the same shit as everyone else. Let the differences between players come from their different levels of dedication and play rather than "o he spent more money on the cash shop." If you're playing a monthly fee MMO, you're still going to have pay to win, just from 3rd party organizations. Not only that, but I have no idea what you mean by the implication that every cash shop turned into pay to win; there's plenty that haven't. Some of the most successful games out there that have cash shops are still not pay to win such as DOTA or TF2. What examples are you even talking about that turned into pay to win which weren't originally? Even monthly fee games have had bonus —typically cosmetic— content that people can get from purchasing another game, expansion pack, or real-life item. Then there's the monthly fee games that are still "pay to win" despite being monthly fee. No matter how slight the advantage one gets in EVE it is an absolute advantage nonetheless that players get by spending additional money on the game. It may need to be a lot of money, and it may not be a ton of help, but it's still help, and it will give a person victory if everything else was equal. I personally strongly dislike monthly fee games. If one gets really into a game a person ends up spending hundreds of dollars more than otherwise. To me there's not as much incentive to keep playing a game when there's constantly this fee hovering over one's head.
nothing in EVE's cash shop gives you any advantages, unless you count having a robotic arm for coolness factor an advantage.
|
On February 21 2015 20:06 Skilledblob wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2015 16:20 Xapti wrote:On February 21 2015 08:55 MaestroSC wrote:
But ill stand by my point, that i think a subscription model is still better for MMO's, because over the past 5+ years, I cant think of a cash shop that didnt (either slowly or quickly) turn unto a P2W cash shop.
Its just too hard to balance in MMO's. And I know that I personally, and several of my MMO friends, hate cash shops. How about everyone pays the same amount of money, and we all get the same shit as everyone else. Let the differences between players come from their different levels of dedication and play rather than "o he spent more money on the cash shop." If you're playing a monthly fee MMO, you're still going to have pay to win, just from 3rd party organizations. Not only that, but I have no idea what you mean by the implication that every cash shop turned into pay to win; there's plenty that haven't. Some of the most successful games out there that have cash shops are still not pay to win such as DOTA or TF2. What examples are you even talking about that turned into pay to win which weren't originally? Even monthly fee games have had bonus —typically cosmetic— content that people can get from purchasing another game, expansion pack, or real-life item. Then there's the monthly fee games that are still "pay to win" despite being monthly fee. No matter how slight the advantage one gets in EVE it is an absolute advantage nonetheless that players get by spending additional money on the game. It may need to be a lot of money, and it may not be a ton of help, but it's still help, and it will give a person victory if everything else was equal. I personally strongly dislike monthly fee games. If one gets really into a game a person ends up spending hundreds of dollars more than otherwise. To me there's not as much incentive to keep playing a game when there's constantly this fee hovering over one's head. nothing in EVE's cash shop gives you any advantages, unless you count having a robotic arm for coolness factor an advantage.
I assume he means Plex letting you acquire in game currency for real money.
|
Well I was playing MMOs before f2p even existed apart from free games. But the moment ebay saw the light of day p2w started to go boom, before it was just people pming you and offering you around 50 - 1000 dollar for certain items.
F2pay just switched out who receives the money. Now its the publisher instead of shady ebay guy and his army of 1000 bots. But it changes nothing since there will always be the one that is best buddies with the game masters and who will have get out of jail cards for bug abusing and getting ahead that way or worse.
The always present p2w aspect of MMOs makes a pvp orientation rather risky Imo. The moment the shady people aren't kept in order by the game masters, everyone will start leaving the ship. Same with cash shops and the moment you decide to up the amount of money per month someone has to invest.
Happened in my MMO recently and boy did the player numbers drop, because the guild that is best buddies with the game masters possesses 80% of the new pay a ton to win items. :p (in average you need to pay 200 euro to obtain said item as getting it is luck based)
Sorry for the off topic. Just hate free 2 pay with passion.
|
Literally every online game is P2W to some extent. In every game that has some items / gold / whatever that can be traded, there are people who will do so for real money rather than in game currency, nothing you can do about it. And honestly, as the old saying goes, 'time is money'; if someone prefers to spend 50$ instead of grinding for a couple hours, so what. The only 'real' P2W is when you start selling stuff that can't otherwise be acquired in game and you literally HAVE to spend money to be on equal footing, otherwise who honestly gives a damn whether the guy ahead of you is such because he doesn't have a job and spends all day grinding, or because he does have a job and spent some of his paycheck on the game?
edit: that said, I do think that subscriptions in MMOs aren't a bad thing simply because that gives the developer resources needed to continue updating their game without having to devote too much time on coming up with new 'carrots' to put into the cash shop, but nowadays subscription games are more or less out of style and it's not very likely that they'll be making a big comeback any time soon, so it's kind of pointless lamenting the shittiness of other business models.
|
There's a difference too when the items that you are buying come from the game versus coming from an item shop. With items coming from the game uh someone has to have those items first before they can sell them. If the game has a balanced economy prices should adjust as more players attempt to buy certain goods. Then on top of that anything 'top end' would be moved around rather than adding additional unfairness to the system. If someone has the Sword of Ultimate Decimation and that's something that's going to always defeat you then the game isn't any more or less unfair if person A or person B has it.
|
I don't know much about MMOs or their design but the art itself looks quite promising right here.
I'll be interested in playing this, I guess.
|
|
|
Wow that's interesting that they've decided to grab both Guild vs Guild and fractional based combat.
I like the idea of Order Chaos and Balance though; I think it's interesting that Balance is forced to well keep things balanced.
|
Whoa.
Day 1: over $130k already.
Sheesh. They're going to reach it, and then some.
|
http://crowfall.com/#/faq/54e9503393fc8d634e4d690d
That bloodstone ruleset sounds fun. Defenders cannot just camp in their castle if they want point, they have to get out to cash it with the risk of both losing the bloodstone ( = points) and having less defense in the castle during that time.
I'm really curious to see how this goes in the future.
|
Germany1287 Posts
Lots of new stuff released, agh, can't read now, will update later!
|
I hope their kickstarter is successful because I am interested in this game but MMO's are so dependent on implementation and realization that I cant convince myself to spend money on it now. There are to many things that can very easily turn this into a horrible game.
If they can deliver it will be worth the 50 for the game anyway.
|
Why not I put down a 30 dollar pledge for the game some beta access and a credit thanks.
seems like its going to happen anyway.
|
As appealing as the game looks, I'm too reluctant about crowdfunding and "preordering".
They will reach it for sure though. $300k after less than 24 hours, sick.
We'll see. Maybe I will pledge $60. I'll keep an eye on it in the following days.
I'm still very confused about Eternal Kingdoms.
The FAQ says this:
"24. How do I get an Eternal Kingdom?
Each player account is automatically granted an Eternal Kingdom, the first time they log into the game. This Kingdom will be shared by all characters on that account. As the owner of a Kingdom, you are the Monarch of that World. That means you get to set many of the rules that govern that World and control the land and the structures within it."
It seems so... meaningless? If everyone has a kingdom, then how does the fealty system work? What is the point of giving land to a vassal if they also have a kingdom by default?
|
On February 25 2015 02:57 Spaylz wrote:
As appealing as the game looks, I'm too reluctant about crowdfunding and "preordering".
They will reach it for sure though. $300k after less than 24 hours, sick.
We'll see. Maybe I will pledge $60. I'll keep an eye on it in the following days.
I'm still very confused about Eternal Kingdoms.
The FAQ says this:
"24. How do I get an Eternal Kingdom?
Each player account is automatically granted an Eternal Kingdom, the first time they log into the game. This Kingdom will be shared by all characters on that account. As the owner of a Kingdom, you are the Monarch of that World. That means you get to set many of the rules that govern that World and control the land and the structures within it."
It seems so... meaningless? If everyone has a kingdom, then how does the fealty system work? What is the point of giving land to a vassal if they also have a kingdom by default?
I would assume because of buildings you can build with spoils from the campaigns.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
