Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience"
-
@Jetah said in [Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience"
problem about development is that things previously stated can be redacted.
Why is that a problem? I think it's good the devs are willing to change.
-
@Pwnstar Well I guess that depends on what is being redacted. Its one thing to change a previously stated feature at the behest of the community. Its quite another to change a previous stated core of the game (like 'no pay to win' to 'pay to win') that has won the game the support of the backers. That would be a problem.
-
I think pay to win is also in effect even if you can achieve the same items in the game by playing if the rates of those gains are highly out of balance. If it takes weeks or months to achieve something ingame it shouldn't take the stroke of a key buying it in seconds. Otherwise you highly diminish the accomplishments of players. The game needs active players more than it needs a quick cash grab.
-
@Basileus Well P2W is not that simple or black and white. Paying for getting any kind of advantage can be considered as P2W as well. Depends of the game and the context.
-
@Logain said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
@Jetah said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
(...) I'm not sure they have time. Actually another spotlight is due! the last spotlight was july 2018...
I'd much rather they focus on development right now. The recent conversion was a massive step for them, but one that threw their schedule out of the window.
If they dont communicate ideas they're working on then why would someone join if the last spotlight was over a year ago. we're (the forum community) is at a point where nothing new has been talked about.
Not all the developers are coders or art. Znirf first post said he is a CM, nowhere does it mention he codes. So they have 1 person who could be writing post, letting Prometheus
sign off on it, then posting it. Having Prometheus take 30 minutes to read over the post is much better them him spending 3 hours writing it up.I backed for certain stated ideas. If they revert no lootboxes, for example, then what else would they revert? What if they revert the 'no P2W' statement and start selling grossly OP weapons and armor specific to counter those weapons? What if they revert the 'dress for your destination' by selling gear that works everywhere? What if they revert the 'travel takes times' by selling teleport stone(s)?
I backed because of the statements presented pre and during kickstarter. If they renege on that they I'm out.
@Basileus
Eve has P2W as one faction can buy more ships and gear for alliance wars. There was one guy that spent $70k and his alliance still wasn't winning. which could mean the other alliance spent more.
One counter is how fast you can earn ISK vs using a credit card.
-
Yeah, because they totally have not updated us in over a year. Oh wait... That does not seem right.
Shows october 9th for me, and then august? Sure, they usually give us monthly updates at the very least. And they have, if you consider community pills which I do
I would rather they spend time developing than wasting time meticulously molding content and mincing words for more updates. We already know what the game is going to look like. Giving even more granular insights would be shooting themselves in the foot.
Going forward I would appreciate updates on what is being developed.
-
@Pluto
Feature Spotlight #7 - Towns, Governors & Politics Jul 20, 2018, 6:25 AM • Prometheusspotlights are in depth details about a topic. we haven't had one in over a year.
again, Znirf doesn't code. they could be writing the spotlights and let Prometheus sign them to be published. or Prometheus could post them after Znirf writes them.
we still don't know much about crafting or the expected systems.
-
@Jetah said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
Not all the developers are coders or art. Znirf first post said he is a CM, nowhere does it mention he codes.
That is just an assumption on your part. CM is not his only job in the team: link text Just as Prometheus is not only playing boss
-
@Jetah said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
I backed for certain stated ideas. If they revert no loot boxes, for example, then what else would they revert?
I see your concern and I agree.
-
You can always predict the future, based on how developers stick to their principles and hold to what they promised.
There re few exceptions, where something really needs to be changed due to objective and real, honest reasons (and not because of greediness), but those exceptions are easily visible to anyone with at least moderate IQ.
So far we have nothing to worry about here. By what we have seen so far, everything looks great, and developers have been great in every way!
-
I'd say as long as they keep rolling out the tests and working on fixes then we are doing fine. As issues come up the community can voice its concerns and the devs can take that info into consideration...or not. This is their game and we are just testers of it. Forum population doesn't even represent the whole of the community since many players won't even use forums. I know from experience because a very small portion of my guilds would ever use the forums.
-
@Yitra said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
@Jetah said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
Not all the developers are coders or art. Znirf first post said he is a CM, nowhere does it mention he codes.
That is just an assumption on your part. CM is not his only job in the team: link text Just as Prometheus is not only playing boss
dude could be cleaning toilets then grabbing latte's or lunch from the local cafe (after washing hands of course).
@Farlander
I like that the Foundation gives rewards for being simi-active on the forums. So I give DS a 5/5 stars on that one, right now I'd be Reddit or not paying attention to the game, otherwise.
-
@Jetah said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
@Yitra said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
@Jetah said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
Not all the developers are coders or art. Znirf first post said he is a CM, nowhere does it mention he codes.
That is just an assumption on your part. CM is not his only job in the team: link text Just as Prometheus is not only playing boss
dude could be cleaning toilets then grabbing latte's or lunch from the local cafe (after washing hands of course).
@Farlander
I like that the Foundation gives rewards for being simi-active on the forums. So I give DS a 5/5 stars on that one, right now I'd be Reddit or not paying attention to the game, otherwise.I agree, the foundation has kept me in the forums wich in turn has kept me updated about the game.
Only issue with that is that I need far more infomation fed to me lol
-
@Xzoviac said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
Only issue with that is that I need far more infomation fed to me lol
yep.
I'd like to know more specifics on their intended monetization. Examples would be great.
-
@Yitra said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
@Jetah said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
Not all the developers are coders or art. Znirf first post said he is a CM, nowhere does it mention he codes.
CM is not his only job in the team: link text Just as Prometheus is not only playing boss
Most likely you are right. In small startup companies it is quite normal that employees are doing different tasks and have several roles. That is a bless and curse at the same time.
-
@Tuoni Not really, the meaning was diluted over time by people who didn't know what it meant, so it got applied as a pejorative to anything that monetized a game that certain players didn't like. It's similar to how 'literally' got the opposite meaning to the original word (which means "like literature", instead of "actually" which is how a lot of people use it today), and thus the word now makes no sense whatsoever and can be used to mean both things.
If we define P2W as "Pay to Win", then this must be a situation where a player can pay infinite money to become infinitely better than all other players in the game, and free players should have no avenue to achieve said power. Games that this apply to would be like IRL Magic the Gathering in the Legacy format (or whichever format that lets you play black lotuses, a card that costs thousands of dollars). This would not apply to Magic the Gathering: Arena, the online version where a F2P player can eventually grind out all the cards in the game for free, but a user can pay to buy packs with money instantly.
-
@Basileus Sure the meaning has changed within years (and it is also very regional), but I guess we should talk about the current version, because it is the one which actually matters. It is quite common attitude, especially in west, that people want gaming be as equal as possible without any kind of paid advantages. There is no rule why pay to win should only mean superiour powers and items, and what you can only buy with real money. People uses P2W nowadays more widely than before, but there is not much what we can do about it. It is very hard to say, that those millions of people are wrong. Anyhow, if we leave the etymology behind and examine the current form of P2W, the general message behind it is very clear, no advantages with real money.
-
@Basileus said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
(...)If we define P2W as "Pay to Win"(...)
We could as well discuss pay to get a statistically significant advantage in a local or global competitive situation (P2GSSAL/GCS), but I'd wager most people are too lazy to actually type that and would rather just use "P2W" instead, if they are already too lazy to type out pay to win
-
How I look at it is this, they are interested in horizontal progression meaning even if someone "progresses faster" via some 10% knowledge increase potion or some such nonsense, they are not really getting ahead. They are not stronger than the next person.
Furthermore, I have said it countless times... But all things should be purchase-able by "free" players. It might take a good amount of coin, but thay potion should be available
We do not even know if that is what they mean by convenience items.
-
@Pluto said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
How I look at it is this, they are interested in horizontal progression meaning even if someone "progresses faster" via some 10% knowledge increase potion or some such nonsense, they are not really getting ahead. They are not stronger than the next person.
Furthermore, I have said it countless times... But all things should be purchase-able by "free" players. It might take a good amount of coin, but thay potion should be available
We do not even know if that is what they mean by convenience items.
but diversity is strength. being able to toss a fire down and redo your skills to counter someone is pretty OP.
we dont know what they mean but i've seen other games and it never works as intended.
