Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience"
-
@Pluto said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
(...)Furthermore, I have said it countless times...(...)
You're not the only one that has said something 'countless times'. 'P2GSSAL/GCS' (chuckles) can be 'balanced' when comparing two single players, but can be horribly skewed soon as you are setting group versus group, simply because time becomes an deciding factor of 'progression' at that scale (being able to stockpile valuable components for massive group battles can make or break your struggle to leadership).
-
I don't follow, unless we are making gross exaggerations. When a newbie can be just as viable in a PvP battle in comparison to a vet... That 10% extra knowledge points is not going to win a battle.
Battles will be won with tactics, numbers, and skill/timing of abilities. Not a 10% knowledge buff, which can be obtained without paying too
I swear these p2w arguments are like crying wolf where p2w is the wolf of course haha.
-
if the group can fully gear new players then the group has the advantage, assuming the other group hasn't paid for anything.
the knowledge needed could be the counter to a meta build the other group is using.
-
@Pluto said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
I don't follow (...)Battles will be won with (...) numbers(...)
That's the point I was trying to highlight that you do not seem to understand. I am not talking about the 10% knowledge gain benefit, but about any 'time saving', because saving time ALWAYS means that you can gather more resources faster than somebody who doesn't have the 'time saving benefit'. Which means you can send more players back onto the battlefield fully equipped. Which means you have a higher number of players. Which (as you agreed on) is a determining factor on winning a guild versus guild conflict.
Quod erat demonstrandum.
-
@Logain QED
-
So someone who has enough money to only work 30 hours a week (thus saving 10 hours to play) is pay to win because they have more time to gear up than another player.
Sorry, being cheeky... But we will just have to agree to strongly disagree. If fractured is pay to win under your stipulations, I am totally fine with it.
DS needs to keep the lights on, which cannot always be done with simple cosmetics
But wait, are cosmetics not pay to win as well? If you have to grind out coin to buy a cloak cosmetic, but someone can just buy it... They can clearly gain an advantage since they have time to gear
Sorry, still being cheeky lol
-
I think this discussion is very important to have, but somewhat premature at this point.
First of all, pay to win / pay for convenience / pay for play — all can have multiple definitions and consequences in different contexts. This is highly dependent on the specific systems in place within the game, as well as how player goals are defined.
Second, it is also a function of the dev team's finances, financial model, and expenses, as well as company policy. How much resources are going to be spent balancing the game? Is there a higher focus on customer service, which has different costs and meshes better with more individual-oriented systems?
In short, we can speculate and put forward opinions based on existing game experiences and company models, but I think ultimately what we need is to keep a very close eye on what's happening inside and around Fractured and keep up a running analysis of that as the baseline.
-
@Syllah said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
I think this discussion is very important to have, but somewhat premature at this point.
First of all, pay to win / pay for convenience / pay for play — all can have multiple definitions and consequences in different contexts. This is highly dependent on the specific systems in place within the game, as well as how player goals are defined.
Second, it is also a function of the dev team's finances, financial model, and expenses, as well as company policy. How much resources are going to be spent balancing the game? Is there a higher focus on customer service, which has different costs and meshes better with more individual-oriented systems?
In short, we can speculate and put forward opinions based on existing game experiences and company models, but I think ultimately what we need is to keep a very close eye on what's happening inside and around Fractured and keep up a running analysis of that as the baseline.
is gameplay fair for everyone? if anyone can pay to skip some time based event, then it isn't fair. if someone can pay to obtain an item not available within the game (via playing) then it isn't fair.
we're wanting a fair game that doesn't allow RL income to dictate who can be more powerful or can last longer in a siege (because of RL funding).
at a certain point, convenience becomes win. maybe not in a direct comparison but if a person can pay to skip RL hours needed to craft then it doesn't favor the p2w side even though it can be considered convenience.
-
@Pluto said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
So someone who has enough money to only work 30 hours a week (thus saving 10 hours to play) is pay to win because they have more time to gear up than another player.
Sorry, being cheeky... But we will just have to agree to strongly disagree. If fractured is pay to win under your stipulations, I am totally fine with it.
DS needs to keep the lights on, which cannot always be done with simple cosmetics
But wait, are cosmetics not pay to win as well? If you have to grind out coin to buy a cloak cosmetic, but someone can just buy it... They can clearly gain an advantage since they have time to gear
Sorry, still being cheeky lol
Love this commend! Nothing cheeky about it, it just reality
To me, the whole P2W discussion is about people who don't have the money or do not want to spend it expect to be on par with people who do spend money. Why would I spend money on things that don't give me anything useful?
-
@Yitra Oh wow have you not played many mmo's where people spend tons of money just to look better than the next person at the community gathering spot such as the bank in UO? lol
-
@Yitra said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
To me, the whole P2W discussion is about people who don't have the money or do not want to spend it expect to be on par with people who do spend money.
I am not personally going to play a game where skill can be replaced with real money. The whole gaming experience takes a hit if someone can buy his way to the top. I also hate the base idea behind this, to milk money out of the players as much as possible, without doing anything good to the game itself, just harm.
Why would I spend money on things that don't give me anything useful?
Many gaming companies do a good amount of money with cosmetics, so I guess most people are fine to buy atleast something, even those won't give any advantages. However, you can do this a pretty shit way too, like in BDO, most of the ingame armors (even the best ones) makes you look like a clown or beggar, and that way pushes you to buy armor cosmetics from cash shop..
-
BDO has convenience items. Heck, doesn't the new anti p2w archeage have convenience items?
-
@Yitra said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
(...)or do not want to spend it expect to be on par with people who do spend money(...)
I already spent money to purchase the game. Have you ever considered that it's not about people being opposed to spending some money, but about people that don't like continuously having to spend ridiculous amounts of money to be on par with their opponents? Remember we are talking about people spending tens of thousands of dollars on a game.
I'd like to be a competitive player, but keep a reasonable money spent on a game ratio.
-
My memory could be wrong, but I cannot remember this kind of discussions where games had a b2p model combined with a monthly fee. Every player was contributing the same amount to the developers of the game. So there was a core flow of money to make the development of a game worthwhile.
Now some people who spend a lot more money make it possible that other people spend a very basic amount in a pure b2p model (or sometimes even spend nothing at all). Is this unfair as those people who spend the money have an advantage to a certain degree? For a game to survive players will need to contribute a certain amount on average. Challenge for a developer is how to get that done. But still, my question is. Why would I spend money if it gives me nothing extra towards people who don't?
@Logain said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
I am not talking about the 10% knowledge gain benefit, but about any 'time saving', because saving time ALWAYS means that you can gather more resources faster than somebody who doesn't have the 'time saving benefit'. Which means you can send more players back onto the battlefield fully equipped. Which means you have a higher number of players. Which (as you agreed on) is a determining factor on winning a guild versus guild conflict.
- Is my lifetime free Carpenter contract now considered P2W because I have more time to gather resources?
- Is my lifetime VIP membership considered P2W? We don't even know what it will give us, but most likely it will save me some time I can spend on gathering resources
- Is my set of crafting stations considered P2W because that will save me some time I can spend on gathering resources?
- Is my mule mount plus wagon considered P2W because I can build faster that way and have more time left to gather resources?
@Logain said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
Have you ever considered that it's not about people being opposed to spending some money, but about people that don't like continuously having to spend ridiculous amounts of money to be on par with their opponents? Remember we are talking about people spending tens of thousands of dollars on a game.
I'd like to be a competitive player, but keep reasonable money spent on a game ratio.This I can totally agree on, as it is the responsibility of the developer to not make this kind of "whaling" even possible or worthwhile for a player.
But in general, I am thankful to all the people who already spend thousands of money yet on a Kickstarter package, which made it possible to get the stretch goals
-
And if those things lend to you having a greater advantage over myself I will be one of the first to quit the game. Your lifetime will have a very short life expectancy if others feel the same and don't have fun because of it. The difference is I will be out less money if the game fails.
-
@Farlander said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
And if those things lend to you having a greater advantage over myself I will be one of the first to quit the game. Your lifetime will have a very short life expectancy if others feel the same and don't have fun because of it. The difference is I will be out less money if the game fails.
Dont think having more time to resource collect or not having to house manage = pay to win, as the difference between no lifeing and making up 2-3 hours because you have a npc tending your house is insane, some of these no lifers, will smash 20 hours in a day, should they be limited too because it's not fair they have more time then the people who work?
-
@Pluto said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
BDO has convenience items. Heck, doesn't the new anti p2w archeage have convenience items?
Yeah BDO has convenience items, but I do not have any knowledge about Archeage. Sorry, but I guess I missed your point.
-
I actually prefer subcription model IF that guarantees totally equal gaming experience without any kind of P2W or P2Advantage stuff.
But what DS has planned so far, I am fine with that too.
-
@Tuoni said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
@Pluto said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
BDO has convenience items. Heck, doesn't the new anti p2w archeage have convenience items?
Yeah BDO has convenience items, but I do not have any knowledge about Archeage. Sorry, but I guess I missed your point.
"Many gaming companies do a good amount of money with cosmetics"
I was just saying this statement is pretty false for mmos. Most have cosmetics and convenience items. Which I think is completely worth it to keep out enchanted equipment and gem rolls haha
Ideally a subscription model would be nice. But since DS started selling packs without requiring a sub, that would be quite the can of worms to open.
-
@Pluto said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
@Tuoni said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
@Pluto said in Rhykker Mention of "Pay for Convenience":
BDO has convenience items. Heck, doesn't the new anti p2w archeage have convenience items?
Yeah BDO has convenience items, but I do not have any knowledge about Archeage. Sorry, but I guess I missed your point.
"Many gaming companies do a good amount of money with cosmetics"
I was just saying this statement is pretty false for mmos. Most have cosmetics and convenience items. Which I think is completely worth it to keep out enchanted equipment and gem rolls haha
Ideally a subscription model would be nice. But since DS started selling packs without requiring a sub, that would be quite the can of worms to open.
The vip is a sub, and if it needed to pull more people in you could always have a little more convenience like a extra crafting bag
