|
Since I already have 4 accounts, this would be good. I only play zerg and have no interest in the campaign... with the current model I would be paying for 2 units, 2 abilities, and rocks that can spawn more rocks.
But with f2p model, I would be willing to spend some bucks on customisation of my units (badass roach skin).
Aslo would be awesome to see Teams (like EG) using banners or uniforms on their units. Some people pay to have t-shirts of soccer teams u know? not a surprise that many people would personalise their units as those from proTeams.
|
Canada13389 Posts
On September 25 2012 01:22 KillingVector wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2012 00:46 Darneck wrote:On September 25 2012 00:45 Souldrinkah wrote: There will be a ton of smurfers if Starcraft will be free to play. And? It's not like that would ruin the game You are right. People who like to constantly play dramatically uneven matches would really like this change.
I doubt people are going to make an account to play dramatically uneven matches.
You still need to lose or you will be promoted. So you could play 15 or so games on each account just to troll players?
I doubt most people would have the energy to do this.
As for the issue of hackers being brought up by people:
Blizzard already does very little about it and the bans are temp bans anyway for the most part so nothing would change there.
Unless you are at least OK at the game, the hack won't necessarily help you. At best you will see more diamond players get promoted to masters using hackers than you would see a deterioration of general gameplay at the lower levels of play.
|
On September 25 2012 01:26 Thrasymachus725 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2012 01:01 Darneck wrote:On September 25 2012 00:51 Achaia wrote: So if they did a "free to play" model would that mean that LAN would be a viable option for the game? That would essentially eliminate the pirating concern right? If they're generating their money through in game purchases I don't see how adding LAN mode would hurt, shoot I would even pay a few bucks to get that feature at that point. Just a thought, haven't seen anyone else mention it. Depends on if the things you could buy with microtransactions would be ripped to that version but yea, LAN definitely should be a possibility if it goes F2P. Oh god, again with the LAN... I thought we were done with this... I guess we will never be done with this...
This is a completely different concern than just complaining that there's no LAN. F2P would eliminate almost every concern they had when deciding to remove LAN...and you wouldn't have professional players dropping at major tournaments.
All that being said, it's really sad that people are so against the idea of paying for a game now that this is what the market is coming to.
|
They should make a new casual focused monobattle league that runs separately from normal ladder. People start off with only one unit or set of tier 1 units to choose from. Winning gets you points to unlock more units and abilities.
|
Canada13389 Posts
On September 25 2012 01:47 Sixer wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2012 01:26 Thrasymachus725 wrote:On September 25 2012 01:01 Darneck wrote:On September 25 2012 00:51 Achaia wrote: So if they did a "free to play" model would that mean that LAN would be a viable option for the game? That would essentially eliminate the pirating concern right? If they're generating their money through in game purchases I don't see how adding LAN mode would hurt, shoot I would even pay a few bucks to get that feature at that point. Just a thought, haven't seen anyone else mention it. Depends on if the things you could buy with microtransactions would be ripped to that version but yea, LAN definitely should be a possibility if it goes F2P. Oh god, again with the LAN... I thought we were done with this... I guess we will never be done with this... This is a completely different concern than just complaining that there's no LAN. F2P would eliminate almost every concern they had when deciding to remove LAN...and you wouldn't have professional players dropping at major tournaments. All that being said, it's really sad that people are so against the idea of paying for a game now that this is what the market is coming to.
I'm not against it, but when you think of real sports the most popular and widely played sports are those that need the least money to be involved in.
Soccer you need a ball. Played everywhere by everyone.
Hockey, or American Football: lots of gear, and special space to play it.
With SC2, most computers should be able to run it reasonably well nowadays. So most people have the tools. And then when the option is play SC2 and buy the game and all the expansions, or play LoL for free the choice is made for some people. The thing with LoL is you can spend whatever free cash you have whenever you want.
With SC2 you need to have a minimum of X dollars and invest them. So for some markets or groups the initial investment is a problem whereas the odd microtransaction isn't.
|
On September 25 2012 01:22 KillingVector wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2012 00:46 Darneck wrote:On September 25 2012 00:45 Souldrinkah wrote: There will be a ton of smurfers if Starcraft will be free to play. And? It's not like that would ruin the game You are right. People who like to constantly play dramatically uneven matches would really like this change.
They can go something similar to D2 route and have two separate ladders. Rather than be segregated by Open (local account storage) and Closed (Blizz servers), it would obviously be free SC2 and paid. This wouldn't change your ladder experience at all.
|
I say keep it the way it is.
|
On September 25 2012 01:47 ZeromuS wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2012 01:22 KillingVector wrote:On September 25 2012 00:46 Darneck wrote:On September 25 2012 00:45 Souldrinkah wrote: There will be a ton of smurfers if Starcraft will be free to play. And? It's not like that would ruin the game You are right. People who like to constantly play dramatically uneven matches would really like this change. I doubt people are going to make an account to play dramatically uneven matches. You still need to lose or you will be promoted. So you could play 15 or so games on each account just to troll players? I doubt most people would have the energy to do this.
Or they would just do as smurfs do now. You occasionally lose a game on purpose. With a F2P system, there would be more accounts and more reports. Blizzard's current track record at handling this type of stuff would indicate that you could do it for a while before you need to make another account.
On September 25 2012 01:55 ssxsilver wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2012 01:22 KillingVector wrote:On September 25 2012 00:46 Darneck wrote:On September 25 2012 00:45 Souldrinkah wrote: There will be a ton of smurfers if Starcraft will be free to play. And? It's not like that would ruin the game You are right. People who like to constantly play dramatically uneven matches would really like this change. They can go something similar to D2 route and have two separate ladders. Rather than be segregated by Open (local account storage) and Closed (Blizz servers), it would obviously be free SC2 and paid. This wouldn't change your ladder experience at all.
I agree that this would be the best plan if they decide to go for a F2P model, but I suspect that the pay ladder would be much smaller than it is now.
|
Any discussion of custom/different unit skins is just a god awful idea. Maybe main base custom models/skins would be ok. For example i could buy a hatchery that looks differnet or a cc or a nexus, because these are the most impportant aspects of the game yet the least likey to adversely affect other players with confusing skin/animations.
Aside from that it seems quite simple, monitize custom maps. Paid name changes. Paid icons. Paid army banners. paid single player. Maybe paid access to indepth stats, maybe like a sc2gears report. Perhaps buy additional bonus pool, though i dont understnd how rankings work well enough to know if that could cause to dramatic of an inflaation or something.
|
Okay, here's what needs to happen IMO:
Free to play: -can play multiplayer and get placed in leagues -has F2P tag in front of name -can play any melee map (new ones added onto the ladder can be played) -CANNOT play single player campaign, but can still do versus AI -CANNOT do any custom games, period. Only melee. (might have to ad unit preloader to default maps) -CANNOT make custom games or maps
Premium: everyone with a starcraft 2 account already has this. no changes.
I'm sure blizzard will get plenty of money from people wanting to play the campaign, screw around in a custom game, or try their hand at mapmaking. Not that they don't get plenty of money already from WoW.
Please, however. NO PAY TO WIN, NO MONTHLY FEES. I will hunt down and kill anyone who does that to starcraft 2
|
I see a big problem with maphackers/cheaters. Nowadays it would cost a hacker 50$/€ once he get banned. If the game is f2p, the hacker simply could make a new account.
|
Well I really don't care whether I'll end up paying 30 bucks or w/e hots will cost or pay 30 bucks to get all the features in hots. But f2p opens up the game to a wider player base, together with arcade this may bring in a lot of casuals, which is always a good thing so yeah sure why not, as long as it doesn't turn into pay to win... Btw I'm fairly sure AoE online is f2p and there is some f2p c&c or it's coming out, but since I don't care about either of those franchisees I'm not sure.
|
i support this idea 100%. free to play is the future, and this will make the community grow largly. I think this is what we need to compete with LoL over the biggest eSport
|
On September 25 2012 03:01 Fetchystick wrote: Okay, here's what needs to happen IMO:
Free to play: -can play multiplayer and get placed in leagues -has F2P tag in front of name -can play any melee map (new ones added onto the ladder can be played) -CANNOT play single player campaign, but can still do versus AI -CANNOT do any custom games, period. Only melee. (might have to ad unit preloader to default maps) -CANNOT make custom games or maps
Premium: everyone with a starcraft 2 account already has this. no changes.
I'm sure blizzard will get plenty of money from people wanting to play the campaign, screw around in a custom game, or try their hand at mapmaking. Not that they don't get plenty of money already from WoW.
Please, however. NO PAY TO WIN, NO MONTHLY FEES. I will hunt down and kill anyone who does that to starcraft 2
Why would you want the F2P tag in front of name? What practical purpose would that serve, and why would players benefit from having that kind of information in the game?
Other stuff is perfectly fine though.
|
I would love it if it went Free to play. A larger scene meens more money comes into the scene, which will strengten the professional scene. Without new casuals, SC2 will slowly decline (stay relevant for a long time, but get slightly smaller every year).
Free to play: Multiplayer No GM possible (so cheaters cannot get in so easily)
By buying the game you get: Campaign Option to only play vs other paying players (helps against cheaters) Advantage in queing for game Some better looking units like collectors edition thor Cool avatars Choose your players color during laddering (with alternative for equal color for opponent) Clan Tag
Posibility also restricted to game owners: Ultra graphics Stats sheet at the end of the game No advertisment Maybe also cheaper passes for major tournaments. This tournaments all need to be sanctioned by Blizzard, so maybe Blizzard could make such a deal with them. Game clock Scan range indicator Worker number counter on base and gas
|
As for all the concerns with hacking and such, leauge of legends does a fine job wit its player reorting system which is moderated on a trial by peers/ vote thing. Its pretty ingenious and seems to work well, keeping griefers at a minmum and leavers as well
|
I don't know if it has already been mentioned but I think a "buy additional ladder slots" would be a good micro transaction. (Not only for the free 2 play model) It will basicly give you a new ladder slot with your MMR/points reset to Zero. This way, you could have like 3 slots for each race without having to make new accounts and you can keep your friend list/achievements. Maybe add a name change transaction/private option for each slot.
|
If they wanted SC2 F2P then they could;
F2P multyplayer ladder, zero restrictions
-Paid name changes -paid additional "Smurf" accounts -paid unit potraits and decals -custom decals and portraits (design your own for a small fee) -custom colors: customize your laddering color, add sparkle, shine and glow effects (subtle though) -clan logo's and overlays
Blizzard can host prize tournaments with small entrance fees with monetary rewards to the winner, bonus points for X/Y/Z and goodies for participants!
Player streaming within the battle.net client, players can follow certain players (blizzard gets a small portion)
Mapmakers can make trial and full versions of their maps, trials version are free for people to try, full versions can be bought for a reasonable price .99c each? and blizz takes a small cut for hosting the games.
For a fee SC2 teams can have their own dedciated team pages hosted in the battle.net service where the teams can get more exposure, talk to the community and host their own events, users won't have to minimize SC2 and open a web browser. Major tournaments could also benefit from their own dedicated pages/stream access within battle.net
list goes on 
as for single player, I think breaking it up would be really beneficial for players who prefer to spend a lil here and there with spare change as opposed to buying everything in one go
ex:
players can spend say $1.79 a mission, $8.25 per "Act" (Act 1, Act 2, Act 3, Act 4 Final Act) or $40 for the 30 mission bundle
|
Yeah.. this won't happen any time soon. It's the part of the game with the biggest draw longevity wise, it makes them money and there's the ladder polution and pay to win concerns, to name but two. Unless they come up with an ingenious monetization model, this is the same as Sams saying they're not opposed to a F2P model for WoW. Even if it's a serious idea, considering the speed with which Blizzard implements such it's doubtful it would happen before we're well into LotV. And why would they until then?
|
I don't have a problem with F2P, but even if it did go F2P it wouldn't happen until after LoV.
|
|
|
|