Will Fractured upgrade on what Albion Online did


  • TF#4 - EMISSARY

    I know @Prometheus saw Albion as his competition and finds it fun so he must know the pros and cons that game has and not make the same mistakes Sandbox Ent did.

    Pros

    • Addictive Gathering Resources System

    • Purchase Gold with $ (takes out Gold Sellers)

    • Housing System

    • Path of Exile similar skill system map

    • Character Builder on website

    Cons

    • Combat is slow and dull

    • Weak Character Customization

    • Implementation of Reputation created PvE players to taunt Red players lose Rep when they force them to kill them.

    • Separate Bank per Town

    • Horrible Quest System

    • Change Map so many times

    • No Main City near Starter Zone

    • Grind Premium ex. 32,000 points to level up skills.

    • Founder Items just able claim once

    • Not Alt Friendly


  • TF#10 - CONSUL

    @warlunhardt said in Will Fractured upgrade on what Albion Online did:

    we don't know the full details on gathering other than you put stuff in a cart.
    character builder on website wont matter because you have to unlock skills through exploration. but i can see 3rd party doing this.

    Fractured will have separate bank per town!
    slow combat (not fast because they want people to react)
    static map (unless you're on the asteroid)


  • TF#10 - CONSUL

    I love Path of Exile's skill tree system. I hope this game is inspired by a similar system.


  • TF#2 - MESSENGER

    I’m not familiar with Albion, but if you can directly purchase gold for $$$ that would cause an unregulated currency injection. Not really ideal.

    The best way to do it (imho) is to tie it to premium game time tokens. For example, allow players to buy a token of 30 day game time, and make that item trade-able. That way a player can purchase premium time with in game credits, and the supplier can get their gold for mulah. It’s a nice symbiotic relationship. It might work like that in Albion already, like I said... I’ve never played it.

    Other miscellaneous:
    Housing already seems like it’s going to be pretty sick, just off of what the founders rewards are. If the founders rewards are diverse, I can’t imagine what will be in game.

    Grinding for exp, there are no levels in Fractured. Purely knowledge and horizontal progression for a diverse ability set

    One thing I do agree on is having founders items claimable on all characters for an account. It’s always bit me the wrong way when I have a nice cosmetic I can’t use on another character


  • TF#10 - CONSUL

    @Warlunhardt said in Will Fractured upgrade on what Albion Online did:

    Pros

    • Purchase Gold with $ (takes out Gold Sellers)

    That's a con, and a large one. Kills off a huge chunk of community that do not wish to play P2W games.


  • TF#10 - CONSUL

    @Gothix said in Will Fractured upgrade on what Albion Online did:

    That's a con, and a large one. Kills off a huge chunk of community that do not wish to play P2W games.

    You realize this will be happening? It just won't be the devs doing it. It's better if Dynamight does it first so they can benefit from it.


  • TF#2 - MESSENGER

    @Gothix
    Is EVE pay to win?

    The thing about paying for gold in games like these is the endgame isn't really "purchase-able". Some guy isn't going to drop $100,000 to "maybe" retain ownership of a town for a month.

    Most of the purchasing is done by the little guys who don't have strong backing by some mega corporation and don't have time to farm in game.

    “Paying for gold” is rarely benificial to those that actually have the power to “win”

    Just my 2c from an old player of EVE. That’s also assuming we adhere to the fact that paying for gold is even considered paying to win, which I do not. I consider pay to win to be where people buy things not obtainable in game.

    In fact, allowing players to purchase premium game time from other players for gold gets RID of pay to win ;). And that’s assuming we are considering the premium to be pay to win... which I don’t. Bunch of assumptions eh? Gotta love pay2win arguments


  • TF#10 - CONSUL

    For me, it's very simple. I'm tired of this "$ -> gold" conversion madness, and of "people using cash" to gain direct game play benefits that affect, not only their game play, but also game play of others around them. Because in "open PvP world" this does affect others around you.

    So if the game will include this, I will simply not play it, and so will not any of my friends. A huge chunk players is looking (for a long time now) for a good game that offers equality between players in the aspect of success being generated purely by your effort and not by loads of cash influx from your credit card. (These are the players that DO spend the money. They only prefer that money is spent on things that can only affect your personal game play (cosmetics and similar), and not affect game play of others around you.)

    So if you want to play the game with bunch of "wallet warriors" that like to throw cash into the game to gain power, be my guest. I hope you will enjoy it, because I, myself, will not touch such game with 6 foot pole.


    @Pwnstar your argument feels like this for me -- if drugs will get sold anyway (we know they do), it's better to let the state just officially sell it so at least state benefits from it?

    @pluto your argument feels like this for me -- hey not everyone will chose to buy those drugs, because some guy will not drop $100,000 on it to "maybe feel good". Most purchasing will be done by small guys that do not have a lots of cash, and a lots of time to enjoy life in a different way. That's also assuming that buying drugs is even considered bad, perhaps it's only bad when people actually die from it.

    I'm drawing a picture here 🙂 because it's not about who will chose to do that and who will not. The bad thing would be that it is officially available in the first place. Because if it is officially available then more people are gonna do it, and that's a fact.


    An answer to something that's bad is NOT "since few people might attempt it (risking a huge deal in the process), lets just let everyone do it freely".

    An answer IS to try to catch those attempting it and enforce strict punishment (bans), when caught. And if someone gets away with it, hey, at least it was on a rare occasion and at huge personal risk, which is a LOT better then a majority of population doing it, because it's included officially. And in the process ruining what would otherwise be a great game.


    @Specter I know this was discussed 😉 but I'm never the one starting this. I'm always only posting counter arguments to people constantly trying to promote it. (Because if one side is constantly promoting something and other side is silent, It might start to look like no one has anything against the promoted issue, and we definitely do not want things appearing that way). 🙂


  • TF#7 - AMBASSADOR

    We'll see in Alpha 1 if they deliver enough to tell if it's an AO upgrade


  • TF#2 - MESSENGER

    @Gothix

    What direct benefits can a player get by buying gold that a player in the game can not achieve? Just curious.

    If you look at any game with subscription tokens that are trade-able, you will notice that the more aged players will often purchase premium time with in game means. This is because gold is far easier to obtain than the monetary equivalent. Purchasing gold is inherently inefficient late game, in every single game I’ve played. UNLESS you have gold farmers and buy it from them.

    This includes EVE, Wildstar, and Runescape. All of these implemented such a system without being pay to win. In fact, it gave a method for players to obtain premium by in game means, completely eliminating pay to win.

    Having such a system actually attracts players as well. Some people won’t play a game where you can’t get the advantages of a paying player through in game means (this includes premium).

    Although we might lose you, we will also gain other players as well as increased revenue from those players. Even if they aren’t directly purchasing premium. Neither of us knows which is greater, but I honestly don’t think people worry too much about in game subscription tokens for the most part. I’d assume you’re in the minority, but I could be wrong. I also always think the “I won’t play if X” is a pretty weak argument.

    Anywho, I don’t really have a stake in the fight. Thankfully there’s an unlimited premium option at the moment. I probably wouldn’t play Fractured if I couldn’t buy premium through in game means to be honest. “Won’t play with x” argument, I know 😉

    Edit:
    Also, you may not have started it. But you definitely poked it with a big ol’ stick haha 😛


  • TF#10 - CONSUL

    @Pluto said in Will Fractured upgrade on what Albion Online did:

    “Paying for gold” is rarely beneficial to those that actually have the power to “win”

    Great point


  • TF#2 - MESSENGER

    forget about albion its dead


  • TF#8 - GENERAL AMBASSADOR

    I played Albion Online about two years and more when it was still in beta stage. Albion was actually much better game in beta and the last minute major content updates just before launch ruined the game in my opinnion. There was no time to test these changes proberly and results were really bad. Game was partly unplayable for long time and started only getting better after lots of people was already left. Huge part from sandbox was taken off when devs decided to make one major central hub city. That destroyed local living and economies and made the world feel small and other cities fell in bad position with low population. Performance issues were huge, because most of the playerbase was centralized to one city.. my god those decisions were baaad. What it comes to Albion's p2w part, its kind of argued matter, but they are at least sailing somewhere in grey area. You can buy ingame currency with real money and with ingame money you can buy everything.. Its really bad system imho and on top of that lures a lots of gold sellers. Gold sellers managed to even break big guilds and ruin lots of players gaming experiences. I dont even remember all issues what I faced, but the list was quite long. That game had a lot of potential, but finding own identity and bad decisions ruined the game in most parts. Shame actually.. I really hope Dynamight Studios is smart and does not make same kind of bad choises What Sandbox Interactive did.


  • TF#2 - MESSENGER

    gold selling was natural. cos even a shity guilds demand a 8.0 gear minimum for every friking ocation. and there you loose all this gear like easy and if you dont buy gold then you have to stop playing or start begging like some fellas, or endlessly patrol entry aria and get reward for that so you become a patrol slave while everyone grinding in dangeon. or to get silver you have to work like a slave gathering res. so if you dont donate then you have to dedicate all your time to the game. some people do but in rewards they get a lot of silver and then they got banned for selling it. so you either have too much or have nothing. its endless useless grind game.

    forget about it already its dead. zeds dead baby z dead


  • TF#8 - GENERAL AMBASSADOR

    @boogis said in Will Fractured upgrade on what Albion Online did:

    forget about it already its dead. zeds dead baby z dead

    That is actually why we should not forget it. I see its important to rise up all points where Albion possible went wrong. Maybe that could help Dynamight to not make same mistakes. 😉


  • TF#8 - GENERAL AMBASSADOR

    @Pluto said in Will Fractured upgrade on what Albion Online did:

    @Gothix

    What direct benefits can a player get by buying gold that a player in the game can not achieve? Just curious.

    Is that how you define P2W? Just curious. 😉 P2W as a concept is not a black and white matter. People have own opinnions and how they feel what is p2w and what is not. Its more about how people experiences it. P2W does not need to be advantage what you can buy only with real money. It can also be something which progress you faster than others and that way you take the advantage. It is true that those who progress normal pace without help of real money are eventually getting there where this spender was, but when they get to that point, that spender is already way more further. That is why its easy to argue, that paying for faster progression is also P2W. At least we are that point in somewhere grey area depending of the degree of benefits ofc.


  • TF#8 - GENERAL AMBASSADOR

    @Pluto said in Will Fractured upgrade on what Albion Online did:

    In fact, allowing players to purchase premium game time from other players for gold gets RID of pay to win ;). And that’s assuming we are considering the premium to be pay to win... which I don’t. Bunch of assumptions eh? Gotta love pay2win arguments

    You right, that premium time is not necessarily P2W, but it surely can be that too. We could say its a business model. So lets say company advertises to be B2P and with optional premium subscription. Now in most cases if you want to competitive against other players you need to buy this premium time or you fall behind. If there is option to create ALTs, buy several accounts (if number of ALTs / account is restricted) and buy premium to all your characters.. Then we can be in situation where this premium is changing more and more towards P2W. Purely for business point of view this can be really good, but it will put people inquality position, which will cause discord. And no, I am not making these up from my mind, I have actually saw how Albion Online did this.

    @Pluto said in Will Fractured upgrade on what Albion Online did:

    @Gothix
    Having such a system actually attracts players as well. Some people won’t play a game where you can’t get the advantages of a paying player through in game means (this includes premium).

    Although we might lose you, we will also gain other players as well as increased revenue from those players. Even if they aren’t directly purchasing premium. Neither of us knows which is greater, but I honestly don’t think people worry too much about in game subscription tokens for the most part. I’d assume you’re in the minority, but I could be wrong. I also always think the “I won’t play if X” is a pretty weak argument.

    Anywho, I don’t really have a stake in the fight. Thankfully there’s an unlimited premium option at the moment. I probably wouldn’t play Fractured if I couldn’t buy premium through in game means to be honest. “Won’t play with x” argument, I know 😉

    I am pretty sure that people are mostly getting bored with fishy business models and premium time in many cases are part of it. Cash shop works only as long as you can buy just cosmetics from there. Everytime when you can buy somekind of benefits with real money, it will always be loved and hated by players. Optional premium time is just a camouflaged subcription. You dont have to pay it, but in practise you really do, and then games advertises them as B2P or F2P.. sigh

    I would argue, that honest subscription models are what most MMORPG players wants nowadays. People have seen so much crabby business models and are ready to pay something to get rid of every kind of p2w possibilities. Setting whole playerbase equally on the same line is what games really need imho. Take a look at Ashes of Creation. They have announced to be purely subscription based game, not even need to buy the game separately. They will add cash shop on top of that, but only with cosmetic items and skins. And how all the players have taken this? Numbers speaks behalf, people loves it.


  • TF#8 - GENERAL AMBASSADOR

    This is getting quite monologue, but I think the OP deserves also answers (mine are bold). 😄

    @Warlunhardt said in Will Fractured upgrade on what Albion Online did:

    I know @Prometheus saw Albion as his competition and finds it fun so he must know the pros and cons that game has and not make the same mistakes Sandbox Ent did.

    Pros

    • Addictive Gathering Resources System - True, but also very grindy.

    • Purchase Gold with $ (takes out Gold Sellers) - It actually does not, Gold sellers were a huge problem.

    • Housing System - It was nice, but in otherhand it was instanced and not part of open world.

    • Path of Exile similar skill system map - True! That Destiny Board was fantastic.

    • Character Builder on website - True, this was very nice add and helped a lot with theorycrafting.

    Cons

    • Combat is slow and dull - Imo it was ok, because there was also skillshots, which needs to leave possibily to miss and dodge.

    • Weak Character Customization - True.. even I think "weak" is more like high price, it was awful, poor and everybody looked the same.

    • Implementation of Reputation created PvE players to taunt Red players lose Rep when they force them to kill them. - Reputation system had its place in red zones (which can be compared to rules in Syndesia), but it could be implemented better for sure.

    • Separate Bank per Town - This is a PRO. In sandbox games where economy is run by players, its really important keep banks separetely and not ruin local micro economies with combining all banks together.

    • Horrible Quest System - It was.. Never seen so bad before. 😂

    • Change Map so many times - True. They failed too many times to find world map which would actually work.

    • No Main City near Starter Zone - Hmmm.. 🤔 If you talk about central hub Caerleon, it was lil bit far for sure, but all those five biome cities were really close and just few zones away from starting areas.

    • Grind Premium ex. 32,000 points to level up skills. - Not sure what you mean by this..

    • Founder Items just able claim once - Yeah, you could not use these outside of safezones in fear to lose them permanently.

    • Not Alt Friendly - Depends on PoV.. In classless system there is not so much need for ALTs, but in AO those were mandatory if you wanted to be competitive. You got so much benefit to progression if you spread your fame and focus points within different characters. Awful p2w system. So still a CON, but from different reason than yours. 😉



  • Some of those cons man.. Not alt friendly? It couldn't be more the opposite! In short, you needs alts to do anything well and or profitably. Alts = more island, more crafting focus, and more LP. If you're in the 5v5 game, alts = more GVGs..

    A bunch of that list seems opinionated, or misinformed from previous iterations of the game. I worry if Fractured will be subjected to the same judgement of betas past when it finally launches..

    Albion is doing well, it's turned a corner IMO since the founding CEO left. They've had some really solid updates since he left and today's Oberon announcement only further proves that point. Dynamic dungeons, lower barrier of entry to starter weapon unlocks and gathering lines, plus new mobs and bosses among other things.

    I hope Fractured does borrow the best bits of Albion, it took years to make the game what it is. Yeah, there are still things that could be improved.. but it's a start. Fractured will reap the rewards of all the testing phases of AO, content releases, and player feedback. Then with a couple of years work, we could really have something here.


  • TF#2 - MESSENGER

    @Tuoni said in Will Fractured upgrade on what Albion Online did:

    @Pluto said in Will Fractured upgrade on what Albion Online did:

    @Gothix

    What direct benefits can a player get by buying gold that a player in the game can not achieve? Just curious.

    Is that how you define P2W? Just curious. 😉 P2W as a concept is not a black and white matter. People have own opinnions and how they feel what is p2w and what is not. Its more about how people experiences it. P2W does not need to be advantage what you can buy only with real money. It can also be something which progress you faster than others and that way you take the advantage. It is true that those who progress normal pace without help of real money are eventually getting there where this spender was, but when they get to that point, that spender is already way more further. That is why its easy to argue, that paying for faster progression is also P2W. At least we are that point in somewhere grey area depending of the degree of benefits ofc.

    By that definition premium is pay to win. How do you eliminate that p2w? Implementing a method for players to purchase premium by in game means. How do you do that? Implement tokens that a player can buy for $$ that represent premium time. Then allow players to trade these items. It’s a classic case of eliminating p2w, if we go by your definition. I know I’ve said that before, but this all seems to be going in a circle 😉

    Fishy business models, as you state, are implementing loot boxes, enchantment stones, RNG and so forth. People rarely kick and scream when you can purchase premium time via in game currency.

    At the end of the day, I want people to get the same advantage as me if they put time and effort into the game. I paid for a lifetime subscription, but others should reap the same benefits without spending $$ if they put in the effort.

    A lot of OPs other concerns don’t really seem to have relevance here. Dull combat... I don’t think fractured will be dull by any means. Heck, we have abilities that impact the environment around us. The reputation system for Fractured has a lot of documentation, and it’s one thing that has drawn a lot of people.


 

Copyright © 2019 Dynamight Studios Srl | Fractured