Definition of 'Selling Power'

[p0intman]

IMO INCLUDES:
increased damage for anything ever
increased rate of fire
increased cone of fire
incresed character run/movement speed
increased training time/speed
increased/free skillpoints/experience/bep/cep/outfit exp/squad exp
increased ammo count per clip
incresed armor
increased shields
increased shield regen
increased shield repair speed/amount
increased health
increased health regen amount
increased health regen speed
increased healing speed/amount for medics
increased rate of vehicle pulling
increased spawn rate
increased spawn location count
increased spawn location deployment speed
increased repair amount/speed for engineers
increased stamina
increased turn rate
increased agility
increased damage absorbtion
increased resources
increased resource gathering amount/speed/variety
increased vehicle passenger count
increased outfit member count
increased squad/platoon count
increased item aquisition speed/amount
increased vehicle health
increased vehicle damage absorbtion
increased vehicle repair amount/speed
increased deployable count
increased deployable rof/cof
increased deployable repair speed/amount
increased deployable damage
increased character slots per account
unlocking second/third empires per account
unlocking new vehicles/weapons/weapon types/vehicle types
unlocking new maps/game areas/game mechanics
unlocking new outfit bonuses
unlocking new outfit base types/areas/modules/structures
increased ... ... ... ...

tl;dr: imo, its anything other than a different skin/color for anything (Vanity). all of the above is considered, again imo, selling power for real cash. period.

[MasterChief096]

agreed.

[Zulthus]

I agree. While I am personally against any sort of cash shop at all, I have come to terms with the fact that no amount of hate for it will change the fact that it will be there. So, like I did, if you can't beat 'em, join 'em.

[p0intman]

i updated the list just to be extra-clear on some other stuff, because i figured people would find loopholes with my list.

[Sirisian]

agreed. I think they might have been trying to use the increased training time/speed as a loophole. What about increased experience or did you want that one?

[p0intman]

agreed. I think they might have been trying to use the increased training time/speed as a loophole. What about increased experience or did you want that one?

covered under skillpoints/training time/speed stuff. same exact thing.


increased training time/speed
increased/free skillpoints

changed to...
increased training time/speed
increased/free skillpoints/experience/bep/cep/outfit exp/squad exp

and then to be double-sure ive gone and added...
increased character slots per account
unlocking second/third empires per account
unlocking new vehicles/weapons/weapon types/vehicle types
unlocking new maps/game areas/game mechanics
unlocking new outfit bonuses
unlocking new outfit base types/areas/modules/structures

[CutterJohn]

You won't fund the game just selling skins. That's a fact. They're going to have to sell power and/or some serious convenience. How much depends on how much people are willing to spend on lesser things.

[p0intman]

You won't fund the game just selling skins. That's a fact. They're going to have to sell power and/or some serious convenience. How much depends on how much people are willing to spend on lesser things.

do one and you open up a huge slippery slope to all of that. careful what you wish for.

[Zulthus]

You won't fund the game just selling skins. That's a fact. They're going to have to sell power and/or some serious convenience. How much depends on how much people are willing to spend on lesser things.

Sad, but true. I much prefer the sub fee to a F2P model. I don't know, free MMOs just feel... "cheap". In many senses. The whole "$15 is expensive for a game" argument is terrible anyway... it's not hard at all to acquire. If you don't have a job, go mow a lawn. There's one month of gaming time.

[p0intman]

if you dont have 15 bucks, im wondering how you can afford to pay your internet and phone bills.

I should point out that selling convenience/power in a game like STO/SWG/WoW isn't as huge of a deal because you can avoid PVP altogether.

A game like PS is PVP centric - YOU CANNOT AVOID IT, and it is therefore a magnified issue and anything introduced can be abused a million times worse than in other MMO types. The safest route, is infact to not sell power period. The can of worms remains closed that way. Same with convenient things

[Zulthus]

if you dont have 15 bucks, im wondering how you can afford to pay your internet and phone bills.

I should point out that selling convienence/power in a game like STO/SWG/WoW isn't as huge of a deal because you can avoid PVP altogether.

A game like PS is PVP centric - YOU CANNOT AVOID IT, and it is therefore a magnified issue and anything introduced can be abused a million times worse than in other MMO types. The safest route, is infact to not sell power period. The can of worms remains closed that way.

Exactly... many people don't seem to know the difference.

[Crator]

Not sure I agree with the ones on the list that can be obtained by just playing the game, without buying them with real money. If someone wants to pay for something I would have to spend time on in the game otherwise, I don't think I really care.

[p0intman]

Not sure I agree with the ones on the list that can be obtained by just playing the game, without buying them with real money. If someone wants to pay for something I would have to spend time on in the game otherwise, I don't think I really care.

the important part is that it gives an IMMEDIATE advantage to anyone buying it right there and then, as opposed to doing the footwork anyone else would have to do to get it.

[Crator]

Yeah, I know. But so what. If they want to pay their hard earned money for it, let em'. Perhaps they justify it because they don't pay a subscription. Perhaps subscribers who pay monthly will get free xp bonuses from the cash shop where f2p subs don't.

[p0intman]

Now, consider this as an evolution of that slippery slope:

You and I are both the same battle rank and we're both using the same type of es-specific weapon, a shotgun of some sort. You DIDNT buy a clip extension of only 10-15 shells. Because its JUST ten or fifteen shells extra, right? No big deal.

Well, your squad comes up against mine, we have this upgrade while you don't. We send you to the cloner because while you're reloading, we're still shooting. You may be better skilled, but you still died because you got caught reloading.

is that convenient or is that power? Where do you draw that line?

NOTE: The problem being illustrated here is that it becomes less about player versus player, and more about player versus credit card balance the further you go with it.

Be very, very careful about what you ask for.

[Crator]

Ok, but your not talking about "selling power" anymore. You're now talking against the game mechanic itself, the one they are building into the game. There's no info. on how they plan to implement it to any depth so no way to tell if that scenario you described is what will actually be in the game.

[p0intman]

Ok, but your not talking about "selling power" anymore. You're now talking against the game mechanic itself, the one they are building into the game. There's no info. on how they plan to implement it to any depth so no way to tell if that scenario you described is what will actually be in the game.
I am talking about selling power and convenient things. Thats the exact situation you open yourself up to by using such a scheme. Its a hypothetical situation, but it exists none the less.

Same type of situation exists with every item on that list, because the same outcome is possible with each. I bought a method to potentially win in a situation where I might otherwise not. The smallest of increases are magnified a thousand times in a PVP situation.

The point is if I can:

Shoot faster than you
move faster than you
turn faster than you
shoot straighter than you
shoot more than you
shoot harder shells than you
stab you harder than you can stab me
absorb more damage than you can

... I win any of those situations.

[Sirisian]

Didn't they say it cost resources to upgrade weapons and vehicles? So if you can purchase those upgrades and use them every time or purchase resources that changes things compared to a person that has to play for an hour to get the necessary resources.

[p0intman]

Didn't they say it cost resources to upgrade weapons and vehicles? So if you can purchase those upgrades and use them every time or purchase resources that changes things compared to a person that has to play for an hour to get the necessary resources.

Does it matter? Buying upgrades of any kind for real money is bad for the exact situation I've mentioned. Its an example and I can probably think up hundreds of others like it.

It is the act of selling a win that can be applied in a situation where they otherwise might have not won because they were outskilled/outnumbered/outplayed.

[CutterJohn]

NOTE: The problem being illustrated here is that it becomes less about player versus player, and more about player versus credit card balance the further you go with it.

If this bugs you, pay for the game you are playing. This is what I find odd about these discussions.

Subscription = Ok, I'll pay $15 a month to play in order to be able to play at all.

microtransactions = Ok, but don't have anything of power because I shouldn't be expected to pay.

I don't want enemies to be pushovers, or the fights to be overly unfair, but if you can't be bothered to pay a roughly equivalent amount to be at 100% vs 80-90% or something.. I just don't get it.

Money has to change hands to keep the game going. And to do that, there is going to have to be incentive to pay. Fancy colors and hats are fine, but they will not be enough to keep the books in the black.

Or maybe they will be. God knows TF2 loves its hats.

[Lonehunter]

I think they've all ready stated multiple times they won't sell power. They'll sell cosmetics or "Sidegrades"

If we both have the same gun, but mine has a purchased upgrade that increases the clip size but lowers the damage, we're still equal, just different.

[p0intman]

I think they've all ready stated multiple times they won't sell power. They'll sell cosmetics or "Sidegrades"

If we both have the same gun, but mine has a purchased upgrade that increases the clip size but lowers the damage, we're still equal, just different.
There are many instances where Sony has said it has intentions to only do one thing, but has later on gone completely against that without warning or explaination mid game development. That statement just isn't worth its weight in anything. Actions in the past speak far louder than any words anyone can say.

Again, be exceedingly careful what you ask for. It opens slippery slopes that are magnified thousands of times in a PVP mmo.

[Sirisian]

I think they've all ready stated multiple times they won't sell power. They'll sell cosmetics or "Sidegrades"

If we both have the same gun, but mine has a purchased upgrade that increases the clip size but lowers the damage, we're still equal, just different.
Are you? What if that sidegrade costs 1000 auraxium and you can only get it once a day since the most you can get per hour is 200? Also what if that sidegrade increases damage but lowers accuracy. Suddenly just by using a sidegrade you've created a weapon that can kill players faster than any other gun close range. And on top of that you have a player purchasing these sidegrades (or the resources for them) every time they spawn? You're equal right? I mean it's just a sidegrade. Then again what's the point of a sidegrade if it doesn't do anything noticeable? Why purchase them? Reworded, what if no one purchases them since they do nothing? SOE will put out mystery buffs for them to make them more tempting? 20% is hard to calculate when you're adding and subtracting properties of a weapon so the playerbase won't be the wiser. ;)

If this bugs you, pay for the game you are playing. This is what I find odd about these discussions.

Subscription = Ok, I'll pay $15 a month to play in order to be able to play at all.

microtransactions = Ok, but don't have anything of power because I shouldn't be expected to pay.

I don't want enemies to be pushovers, or the fights to be overly unfair, but if you can't be bothered to pay a roughly equivalent amount to be at 100% vs 80-90% or something.. I just don't get it.

Money has to change hands to keep the game going. And to do that, there is going to have to be incentive to pay. Fancy colors and hats are fine, but they will not be enough to keep the books in the black.

Or maybe they will be. God knows TF2 loves its hats.
That's the fun thing about F2P. There has to be an incentive. Where SOE sees there isn't an incentive they'll add one. Like you said the game has to pull in money. I'm expecting some interesting choices that will be subtle at first to playerbase and entice them to purchase because they're at a disadvantage. The most obvious will be sidegrades on vehicles on weapons as soon as they realize they can't get enough resources just playing for free to get them legitimately. This is going to be interesting for those who have never played a F2P game and suddenly noticing the game has subtle pay to win mechanisms buried inside of it.

[p0intman]

That's the fun thing about F2P. There has to be an incentive. Where SOE sees there isn't an incentive they'll add one. Like you said the game has to pull in money. I'm expecting some interesting choices that will be subtle at first to playerbase and entice them to purchase because they're at a disadvantage. The most obvious will be sidegrades on vehicles on weapons as soon as they realize they can't get enough resources just playing for free to get them legitimately. This is going to be interesting for those who have never played a F2P game and suddenly noticing the game has subtle pay to win mechanisms buried inside of it.

and suddenly we see the reasoning for this being in my OP:
increased resources
increased resource gathering amount/speed/variety

I wonder if people can pick out the less obvious reasons for some of the others...

[Zulthus]

Money has to change hands to keep the game going. And to do that, there is going to have to be incentive to pay.


The game itself should be enough incentive to pay. If you feel you aren't getting enough of an experience from the game without a Chaingun of Power from the cash shop, something is wrong with you.

EDIT: Wait... did I post what I meant to say... I dunno, it's really late

[Lonehunter]

I think y'all are just getting a lil too carried away, lol. We have very little to go off of right now, I'm trying to only focus on what's been said, not what we're afraid to hear.

[dsi]

The game itself should be enough incentive to pay. If you feel you aren't getting enough of an experience from the game without a Chaingun of Power from the cash shop, something is wrong with you.
When RichMan99 kills you and your entire platoon with the Chaingun of Power what do you think?

OP should add "Increased flexibility" to his list. A player who can do more is more powerful than a player who can't do as much, as simple as that.

[Zulthus]

When RichMan99 kills you and your entire platoon with the Chaingun of Power what do you think?

OP should add "Increased flexibility" to his list. A player who can do more is more powerful than a player who can't do as much, as simple as that.

Exactly. All guns should be the same, and there should not be variants that I.E reduce clip size for more damage. It's still an advantage at closer range with the same gun, and we can't have that. You thought PS1 was a balance nightmare? Wait until they start throwing in those guns

[Aractain]

I fail to see the difference between a BR1 new player and a maxed out veteran verses the whole "shotgun with extra magazine" thing? But thats not a point.

Selling power is having something ONLY available through the cash shop that gives you direct improvement in gameplay mechanics. So clipsize = power? probably, but more ammo not so much.

Generally cash shop should be a short cut, turning money into time and of course non gameplay stuff (like cosmetics).

[p0intman]

When RichMan99 kills you and your entire platoon with the Chaingun of Power what do you think?

OP should add "Increased flexibility" to his list. A player who can do more is more powerful than a player who can't do as much, as simple as that.

I dont normally respond to such bait or personal attacks, but I found this highly amusing and so I'll bite.

I'd like to start off by informing you that the last time I seriously turned my back on planetside and SOE, I did so for four and a half years because of the free trials and hackers. If you honestly believe I care for a game I've basically decided is fucked up enough to the point where I simply wont play it or invest time in it... I have land to sell you in the Saraha Desert that won't try to kill you.

Secondly, I'm doing this out of amusement to poke titan sized holes (http://www.flickr.com/photos/aehric/3866285507/) in Smedleys latest plans at this point.

You get no points or respect from me and I won't add something to the list that should be in it for everyone period because I regard it as a superior improvement. If you're going to try to troll me, at least try harder.

-10 points out of a possible 10.

I fail to see the difference between a BR1 new player and a maxed out veteran verses the whole "shotgun with extra magazine" thing? But thats not a point.

Selling power is having something ONLY available through the cash shop that gives you direct improvement in gameplay mechanics. So clipsize = power? probably, but more ammo not so much.

Generally cash shop should be a short cut, turning money into time and of course non gameplay stuff (like cosmetics).

my example is one of hundreds of potential examples. take it for what it is, an example.

[Vancha]

Character slots and training speed seem like good things for them to sell imo. I said it in another thread but I'll say here too that, depending on the prices, we could end up being able to buy perks each month for less than the price of a Planetside subscription fee. If $15 a month is so inconsequential to you, then spend that each month on the cash shop.

[Zulthus]

Because cash shops are trash imo. I'd rather pay $15 directly to play the game than waste it on some gun with more damage and less accuracy, or some XP boost (which have no place in PS imo) The only thing I would ever want to see in a cash shop are different skins/cosmetic upgrades.

By selling guns with less RoF but more Damage, they WILL be selling power, as the person with that modified gun will have the obvious advantage in CQC.

[Vancha]

Because cash shops are trash imo. I'd rather pay $15 directly to play the game than waste it on some gun with more damage and less accuracy, or some XP boost (which have no place in PS imo) The only thing I would ever want to see in a cash shop are different skins/cosmetic upgrades.

By selling guns with less RoF but more Damage, they WILL be selling power, as the person with that modified gun will have the obvious advantage in CQC.
What if PS2 had a $15 subscription fee but incorporated the reserves system, where instead of a BR cap, free players had reduced level speed, character slots and weapon options? :rolleyes:

Come to think of it, when the reserves program existed for the original Planetside, every subscriber was buying a monthly level cap increase from the cash shop that was the subscription screen. I'm guessing you'd consider buying a higher level cap (with it's extra cert points and implant slots) as "buying power" too, right? Because that's exactly what every subscriber during the reserves program was doing.

[Raymac]

Not quite sure the point of this thread when they've been pretty clear that customization will have trade offs. Personally, I think it's a really cool concept with a vast amount of deep options, but it wouldn't be the first time I was wrong about something. Increase rate of fire but decrease damage, increase speed but decrease armor. They've said (many times) they will keep the combat skill based, so you're saying either they're lying or they're incompetent.

[DOUBLEXBAUGH]

As I said in another thread. If they have to have the shop, I'd prefer a vanity only shop with a cheap sub, like $5-$10 a month.

[Crator]

What if PS2 had a $15 subscription fee but incorporated the reserves system, where instead of a BR cap, free players had reduced level speed, character slots and weapon options? :rolleyes:

This is a good point. Restrict the F2P players but offer ways out of the restrictions in the cash shop. Player with paid monthly subs don't have any of these restrictions.

[Vancha]

Crator, I can't tell if you're serious or just playing along.

[FIREk]

A monthly fee for Premium services (most likely limited to a 50-100% faster skill training rate in PS2) is essentially a monthly sub, since everyone buys it eventually, if they play a game at least semi-seriously or regularly. The free component serves only as an advertisement - a trial mode, if you will. There's a reason as to why Freemium games are said to make more money per player than subscription-only games.

I'm always surprised by this forum's ability to worry about nothing. Every single one of you will have a Premium account anyway, so everyone will be on equal footing in terms of skill training. All our e-peens are therefore safe, since if we get killed, it's not because player X has got more skills trained - it's either because he was better, more lucky, or had trained skills that were more convenient for the situation.

As for selling guns, Smed did mention that their current vision is that there will be a "drop system", possibly similar to that in TF2, so you'll have a random chance of unlocking a Yellow Heavy Barrel Gauss Rifle, with less recoil and lower RoF, for instance. Also, yellow.
The guns available in the cash shop, and unlocked randomly, are supposed to be the same guns, only they'll get rotated in and out of both the cash shop and the random drop pool. Think of it as a shortcut if you don't want to wait 2 years until you just happen to unlock one of 100 weapon variants.
So, again, it's selling convenience, not power.

Finally, gimping new, not-yet-paying players with restrictions is the worst thing you can do in a Freemium game. A new player is more likely to give you $15 a month if you tell him it's more convenient, rather than "you're a piece of crap, until you pay us $15 like all the cool kids". It's all about choice, not creating divisions and forcing people to join the cool kids.

[Crator]

Crator, I can't tell if you're serious or just playing along.

Playing along? I'm just stating how I feel about the idea.

[p0intman]

so you're saying either they're lying or they're incompetent.
I would not be the first person to suggest either, and I certainly won't be the last.

[Hamma]

I disagree that extra character slots or increased skill training is selling power.

The other things are pretty spot on though.

Like it or not non-cosmetic things will be sold. This is a business remember, they do have to still make money.

[p0intman]

If this bugs you, pay for the game you are playing. This is what I find odd about these discussions.

Subscription = Ok, I'll pay $15 a month to play in order to be able to play at all.

microtransactions = Ok, but don't have anything of power because I shouldn't be expected to pay.

I don't want enemies to be pushovers, or the fights to be overly unfair, but if you can't be bothered to pay a roughly equivalent amount to be at 100% vs 80-90% or something.. I just don't get it.

Money has to change hands to keep the game going. And to do that, there is going to have to be incentive to pay. Fancy colors and hats are fine, but they will not be enough to keep the books in the black.

Or maybe they will be. God knows TF2 loves its hats.
You idiot. You know why subscriptions for this work?

Because a typical subscription doesn't typically give you an advantage over any other subscriber. At worst, one of us MIGHT be 10-100ms closer to the server depending on what side of the world you are on geographically speaking. That is at worst a 1 second lag for one of us.

Again, you don't get points for that argument since its rather idiotic to compare a standard sub with someone who pays to a cash shop.

When you buy into a cash shop, you are paying for the right to use whatever you bought immediately and in the future more or less without restrictions versus someone who hasn't.


Try harder, John, we both know you're smarter than that.

[Senyu]

See, this is the problem with F2P model for a game such as Planetside 2 is that there really hasn't been one thats very good. Unless I'm just completly unaware of one, I havent seen any F2P version of games that can easily be a monthly subscription game.

And that worries me, because we don't know of a succesfull way of a F2P that doesnt sell power, have a cash shop, seperate the players, or is just generally poor quality. Perhaps they found a good version and it might be very succesful. But until they come out with the details, we are only speculating what other games have done with their success/fail stories and that can only go so far.

[Vancha]

Playing along? I'm just stating how I feel about the idea.
The idea is exactly the same as a cash shop you spend $15 a month on for increased levelling speed, character slots and weapons you want...

[Crator]

Yes, that's what was said. I thought it a good point you made and decided to back you up on it.

[Zulthus]

What if PS2 had a $15 subscription fee but incorporated the reserves system, where instead of a BR cap, free players had reduced level speed, character slots and weapon options?


Yes, this is one I can agree with. Instead of giving the subscription-based players an upgrade on training time/BR, you just restrict the non-sub players. It's much better than a cash shop...

[Vancha]

Yes, this is one I can agree with. Instead of giving the subscription-based players an upgrade on training time/BR, you just restrict the non-sub players. It's much better than a cash shop...
Again, can't tell if serious. :bang:

[Zulthus]

Again, can't tell if serious. :bang:

Heh, I am. I'm aware you were being sarcastic, but you rolled a good idea in nonetheless.

[CutterJohn]

Again, can't tell if serious. :bang:

My guess is serious. Not joking at all. Its incredibly aggravating, and shows that people are mainly just hating on the name, not the idea.

Anytime fodderside is mentioned, well its perfectly fine for them to have restrictions, because they are not paying!

[Senyu]

How is paying 15 a month removes restrictions that players who play for free any different than other F2P models that have buy to win? You have to buy just to get the rest of the game that way.

[Talek Krell]

I suppose it's nice for it to at least be straightforward that way.

[Vancha]

How is paying 15 a month removes restrictions that players who play for free any different than other F2P models that have buy to win? You have to buy just to get the rest of the game that way.
Bingo.

There's barely any difference between subscription and the F2P proposed...It's all marketing. The F2P is framed in such a way to make the game more appealing to the free players. If you like the idea I proposed, then you like F2P with a cash shop that sells experience boosts and character slots. Just pretend it's still a subscription model.

[Zulthus]

How is paying 15 a month removes restrictions that players who play for free any different than other F2P models that have buy to win? You have to buy just to get the rest of the game that way.

So that we could avoid a cash shop altogether while still funding the game. If people are just going to spend $15/mo on the cash shop anyway, why not just pay a sub instead?

[Crator]

Plus, it gives people the option to pay less then $15 if they want to. More freedom with payment options in hopes they can also dangle a pretty skin or cool looking weapon attachment that doesn't do any but make it look cool. I believe Smed did mention something about drops with + stats and - stats that would also be available via the cash shop. So for instance you as a player may be more inclined to pick up one of the variant weapons because you put yourself in different situations that require perhaps more range, for example.

[Traak]

Making rich dweebs insta-gods isn't going to sell this game.

[Hamma]

Rich?

They aren't going to be charging 1500$ for items or anything.. :lol:

[Crator]

A microtransaction is a financial transaction involving a very small sum of money and usually one that occurs online

[Senyu]

What you proposed is still the same thing though. It's still a system of players can pay to be better. Your just on the otherside of the fence and approve of it when just a short bit ago you all hated the fact people can buy and get more benifits than people do don't buy.

There shouldn't be any buying that can make your character better in any way.

[Zulthus]

What you proposed is still the same thing though. It's still a system of players can pay to be better. Your just on the otherside of the fence and approve of it when just a short bit ago you all hated the fact people can buy and get more benifits than people do don't buy.

There shouldn't be any buying that can make your character better in any way.

I'd really just prefer an amazing game with no subscription and no cash shop. Both can make your character better. It seems every MMO coming out nowadays has a cash shop though... as if the game itself isn't enough to keep people playing.

[Crator]

Can't blame companies for trying new things to produce more revenue. I just have an issue with it when it is setup in a way that would give an unfair advantage to others who may not be able to spend as much as someone else.

[Graywolves]

What's going to be sold for variety is going to be in rotation to be accessible in-game anyways.

[Zulthus]

Doesn't matter. If at any point a gun is only accessible by buying it from the shop, it is selling power.

[MasterChief096]

Umm, a cash shop is not the same as a monthly subscription, you should think about that argument before making it.

With a cash-shop, I can go ape-shit crazy and purchase 30 dollars worth of upgrades if I want to, and provided I have the income to do that (nope).

With requiring a subscription, everyone is playing the game the same way, and grinding the same amount of time to achieve certain upgrades.

IMO: Cash shop sells bad ass cosmetics. Subscription ONLY provides the ability to progress to battle ranks 11-20. F2P exists in the form of reserves except it allows you to achieve up to BR10. There are no experience bonuses or extra goodies associated with a subscription, just the increased level cap. BR10 is a high enough BR to allow for enough plenty of fun with the game without paying if you don't want to, especially with the "depth" of the cert trees.

Associating the reserves and subscription model that PS used in the past with a cash shop is complete rubbish. As a subscription player, I couldn't drop 5 dollars on a gun sidegrade and be better than a free player. Sure I might have been BR25, and could drive a tank as well as go indoors for combat, but that's the ONLY power difference I had. And that power difference is hardly noticeable, even more so now that you will be able to switch seamlessly between classes each death or at a terminal.

Quite frankly I'm disgusted with some of the people on these forums. I made a thread about power differentiation and get shut down by some of you on the basis that, "customization with trade-offs isn't customization at all," and now some of those same people are spouting shit like, "its no big deal, customization will have trade-offs anyways" because Smedley said that it must be a good idea now? It wasn't a good idea when I proposed it because SOE explained their option to you?

Get a grip people.

Edit: If you aren't convinced that reserves + a subscription are enough I can personally name about 20 players that I know just on my own that played the game during reserves and purchased subscriptions because they wanted more options.

[Captain1nsaneo]

Doesn't matter. If at any point a gun is only accessible by buying it from the shop, it is selling power.

Smed gave the example of a gun that would only be available through the store and another only through resources and after a period of time the two would switch. So the question becomes are you ok with them selling weapons through the store if they are only temporarily there before distribution?

[Minigun]

A perfect example of selling power is APB and its model, that games fun and all and player skill has a HUGE factor in the game.... until you run into people using no tactics running out in the open with 2x damage 4x reload speed 5x rate of fire and 20x normal health.... how fun is that, that model goes against anyone trying to be a better player and takes tactics right out of the game.

yes these people your trying to kill obviously suck and maybe needed a little handicap but how are they ever going to get better if they can do the same things they failed at before just because they bought godmode with a credit card. it takes away from a pleasant playerbase because all that makes people want to do is smash their head in their keyboard and runs off anyone who likes a fair competitive challenge.

don't sell power, learn from the mistakes of other games. I will PROMISE you if PS2 slips up and does this in anyway its as good as dead 6 months after release.

[Graywolves]

They made a big point in emphasizing "sidegrades" rather than "upgrades"

[p0intman]

Smed gave the example of a gun that would only be available through the store and another only through resources and after a period of time the two would switch. So the question becomes are you ok with them selling weapons through the store if they are only temporarily there before distribution?

If at any point a gun/weapon system/whatever else is exclusively available only through real cash, it is selling power. period. no exception.

[Vancha]

So that we could avoid a cash shop altogether while still funding the game. If people are just going to spend $15/mo on the cash shop anyway, why not just pay a sub instead?
Seriously?

Which do you think is more appealing to a free player? A subscription game where they can play for free with restrictions, or a F2P game where people can buy bonuses?

Those of us paying 15/mo are basically unaffected. The only difference is we get more free players playing, and thus not only more people to play with, but more people who could potentially get drawn into paying for the odd cash shop item, which is good for all of us.

[Raymac]

1. Planetside 2 needs a f2p option in order to keep player populations up.
2. Planetside 2 will need to bring in income. So if some players play for free, others will have to pay.
3. There will be a gap in power between those players that pay, and those that don't. That power can come in many different forms such as access to higher ranks, as has been done in Planetside 1.

It's extremely simply logic really. Whether it's done by subscription, cash shop, or some wacky hybrid, the players that pay will be in a power class above those that don't. It's just the way it is, so this crusade is silly considering there is no alternative.

The only question that remains is, what will this power gap look like, but that information is likely nowhere near complete enough to be released to the public, so until then chill. We can argue about something once we know what to argue about.

[CutterJohn]

Associating the reserves and subscription model that PS used in the past with a cash shop is complete rubbish. As a subscription player, I couldn't drop 5 dollars on a gun sidegrade and be better than a free player. Sure I might have been BR25, and could drive a tank as well as go indoors for combat, but that's the ONLY power difference I had. And that power difference is hardly noticeable, even more so now that you will be able to switch seamlessly between classes each death or at a terminal.

They were limited to BR6/CR2. Soo.. You had the advantage of..

16 cert points(and I doubt reserves were eligible for the yearly perks).
EMP/OS/And iirc reveal enemies
2 implants
Berets

Hardly noticeable? Thats pretty massive.

[Sirisian]

Seriously?

Which do you think is more appealing to a free player? A subscription game where they can play for free with restrictions, or a F2P game where people can buy bonuses?

Those of us paying 15/mo are basically unaffected. The only difference is we get more free players playing, and thus not only more people to play with, but more people who could potentially get drawn into paying for the odd cash shop item, which is good for all of us.
What a loaded question. :lol: What would a free player want? One that won't pay a subscription? I have no idea how they think other than either "I get to play without using my parent's CC" or "I can't wait to buy an advantage".

I personally don't feel like playing against F2P players with a disadvantage caused by the cash shop. I'm already fairly good at FPS games so from a competitive standpoint I don't like knowing I won/lost because of some cash shop advantage.

[Vancha]

I'm already fairly good at FPS games so from a competitive standpoint I don't like knowing I won/lost because of some cash shop advantage.

How did you feel about killing Planetside reserves?

[Sirisian]

How did you feel about killing Planetside reserves?
Felt bad for them since I'd be sitting and healing/repairing and really enjoying all the aspects the game had to offer while they were seeing a small slice of it. This was especially true when I saw them foot zerging places. You have to understand that SOE is taking the game in a different direction than I wanted. I prefer where BR is simply a training period and getting the maximum BR takes around a month of play-time or less. SOE has turned it into a core gameplay mechanic along with other measures to slowly feed a reward model found in other MMO games.

From a business standpoint it makes sense, but from what I'm seeing they're sacrificing gameplay and a level playing field (you might not view it this way currently) for a system that encourages exploiting microtransactions.

So yeah my idea of a perfectly balanced system would be a subscription only system where resources are used to purchase upgrades/vehicles and other features (without unlocking them via an off-line training system) with a purely aesthetic only cash shop. The BR system would go up to BR 20 with a set number of BR points (like 2-5 for each BR) focusing on unlocking special upgrades (that can then be purchased with earned resources. Putting more points makes things cheaper) for vehicles or weapons. This would use SOE's vision of skill trees for everything. Kind of a pipe dream though judging from how many people have latched onto the idea F2P.

I will also point out that the idea of a credit card granted trial account for 7 days is not something I'm against. I just feel it shouldn't be limited in anyway. If the user wants to continue playing they can sign up for a subscription.

[Aractain]

The problem with your idea of a perfectly balance playing field is that no one will play it. Not enough to justify the cost.

Same reason no one has even tried another real MMOFPS in 8 damn years! I want a game to play, and I want to play with friends and that means F2P. (Not to mention that a well done F2P is no different in balance than a sub, especcialy one with a free trial).

[Sirisian]

The problem with your idea of a perfectly balance playing field is that no one will play it. Not enough to justify the cost.

Same reason no one has even tried another real MMOFPS in 8 damn years!
MMOFPS games are inherently more risky than MMORPG systems (debatable). To assume that there is even a demand for an MMOFPS is kind of speculating. Why won't people play it with what I suggested? Because it has no reward model designed into it? (Other than the resources). Or because no one would pay to play an FPS game like they would an RPG?

You do realize that in the F2P system there's going to be an incentive to purchasing things. Or are you hoping the game will just be 100% free with no catches? I mean it's a wonderful system that worked amazingly for that 8 player game called Guild Wars.

Anyway speculating why no one has released an MMOFPS in 8 years is pointless. Everyone will have their own opinions. My opinion is lack of advertisement and they just weren't interesting to some people. I've had friends play Battleground Europe and Planetside and go "I didn't find it very fun. I'm going back to CS:S". (Though SOE seems to have noticed that trend and are making the necessary changes it seems to get those people interested).

Also while I can easily afford any subscription cost I'd be willing to go to 10 USD as a subscription as would others (from other threads) to keep the corruption of an item mall out of the game.

[Aractain]

You say its risky which is the same thing as I said, not enough return on investment to risk trying it.

As long as whatever they sell is basically the same as stuff you get from playing (not grinding out some side thing but acttualy PLAYING) then they can sell anything they want there. Items that dosn't effect gameplay can be exclusive to the store. They DO need to get paid after all. As long as stuff is cool and well priced I will buy stuff (different skin patterns for vehicles being primary on my list of desires).

I don't see the difference between someone who bought everything and someone who spent 50 hours grinding everything out. As long as the base game is good and balanced we will all have fun.

[Crator]

You say its risky which is the same thing as I said, not enough return on investment to risk trying it.

Every good business should take some risks sometime. SOE has done risky things in the past (PS1 anybody?) because they do try to be innovative.

[Raymac]

I don't see the difference between someone who bought everything and someone who spent 50 hours grinding everything out. As long as the base game is good and balanced we will all have fun.

You hit the nail right on the head. There is absolutely no difference. What you describe is not "selling power", it's simply "selling convenience", and I don't see anything wrong with that. It will just help make the "time poor / cash rich" player reach an equal footing with the "time rich / cash poor" player.

[Sirisian]

You hit the nail right on the head. There is absolutely no difference. What you describe is not "selling power", it's simply "selling convenience", and I don't see anything wrong with that. It will just help make the "time poor / cash rich" player reach an equal footing with the "time rich / cash poor" player.
Why didn't the EVE players see it like that?

Also I will point out I'm in the time rich / cash rich category so this will be interesting. :)

[NapalmEnima]

Also I will point out I'm in the time rich / cash rich category so this will be interesting. :)

I think I can speak for many of us here when I say:

We Hate You.

[Raymac]

Why didn't the EVE players see it like that?

Also I will point out I'm in the time rich / cash rich category so this will be interesting. :)

Because EVE is a completely different game, so you are comparing apples to imaginary oranges. (they're imaginary because we have no clue what the payment format will be for PS2 at this time) Try using those critical thinking skills instead of some snide comment about a totally different game.

Also, I'm happy that you are rich in both time and money with probably tons of pussy sprinkled in there as well. And you are right, it would be interesting because you would have the choice to spend your time or your money or a combination of both.

[Hamma]

Everyone be sure to hit up Sirisian for loans when the game starts he is apparently rich.

Also PSU is accepting donations.

:lol:

[Sirisian]

I think I can speak for many of us here when I say:

We Hate You.
I doubt that. A lot of people I knew that played PS1 were in the same category. My friends that played it all have jobs with a lot of free time after work. I mean I've already said I'll put a limit of like 50 dollars a month which is fairly reasonable compared to what I heard some people are willing to pay in D3 (25 USD for an item etc).

I was mostly just pointing out a flaw that not everyone fits into Raymac's black and white world.

Because EVE is a completely different game, so you are comparing apples to imaginary oranges. (they're imaginary because we have no clue what the payment format will be for PS2 at this time) Try using those critical thinking skills instead of some snide comment about a totally different game.
I was just pointing out how angry a community got when they started to talk about selling convenience. Not everyone is as happy about such a strategy. (Note I'm not a fan of the training system so I'm not arguing to keep it pure).

[Raymac]

I was mostly just pointing out a flaw that not everyone fits into Raymac's black and white world.

It's not a flaw. It just means you have the choice to spend your time or your money whereas many people in today's economy don't have your luxury.

[MasterChief096]

They were limited to BR6/CR2. Soo.. You had the advantage of..

16 cert points(and I doubt reserves were eligible for the yearly perks).
EMP/OS/And iirc reveal enemies
2 implants
Berets

Hardly noticeable? Thats pretty massive.

Yes, its hardly noticeable. When I ran into a BR6 with a JH and a medkit and I had a JH and a medit and we were both rexo, it did not matter that I healed myself 20 seconds ago, or that I bailed out of a mossie, or that I could OS if I was outside. When that encounter happened (provided neither of us had any help) it was my skill versus his skill. I did not have a 5 dollar weapon attachment that gave my JH an advantage over his. If I won, and I was able to heal/repair myself, that's another thing.

If you think power needs to be sold in addition to higher battle ranks having more options, then something is seriously wrong with you.

[SgtMAD]

yea the idea of dropping $50 in a month being a big deal is funny,if the game is fun and I spend hundreds of hours playing every month,the $50 would represent a huge savings for me

shit,I am buying a new 55 inch to play PS2 on,$50 is nothing if you love the game.

now all that aside, I am a believer in a monthly sub,SOE got 60K ppl to pay a sub for over a year,what screwed it all up was the shit they added to the game,things that got nerfed and no promotion and this was in 2003/'05,before the MMO really hit its stride.

I think there are a shitload of ppl that gladly pay a sub for a game that saw regular updates and didn't let crying on the forums dictate the direction of the nerfs/buffs

[Crator]

I was just pointing out how angry a community got when they started to talk about selling convenience. Not everyone is as happy about such a strategy. (Note I'm not a fan of the training system so I'm not arguing to keep it pure).

Didn't realize they discussed that at one point in time for EvE. Too bad they didn't do it cause I may have gone back to the game if they had. Oh well.

[Crator]

Yes, its hardly noticeable. When I ran into a BR6 with a JH and a medkit and I had a JH and a medit and we were both rexo, it did not matter that I healed myself 20 seconds ago, or that I bailed out of a mossie, or that I could OS if I was outside. When that encounter happened (provided neither of us had any help) it was my skill versus his skill. I did not have a 5 dollar weapon attachment that gave my JH an advantage over his. If I won, and I was able to heal/repair myself, that's another thing.

If you think power needs to be sold in addition to higher battle ranks having more options, then something is seriously wrong with you.

Yes, but the situation described by Smed was that you would also be able to obtain this side-grade through the game, without needing to buy it at the cash shop. The difference between the two being it may take time to get it without buying it at the cash shop. We still don't have much info on it really so don't want to talk too far into lala land about it.

[Talek Krell]

I was just pointing out how angry a community got when they started to talk about selling convenience. Not everyone is as happy about such a strategy. (Note I'm not a fan of the training system so I'm not arguing to keep it pure).

The EVE community was/is angry because CCP are spending all of their time and money from EVE creating $70 virtual eyeware and making games that aren't EVE. That and the prospect of "premium ammo". Convenience has never been on the market.

[Baron]

Here is why they are doing a cash shop versus a subscription:

1) The cash shop will make more money

Period.

We can discuss some of the psychology behind purchasing habits, impulse buying, microtransactions, etc... if you guys want. However the cash shop will allow for more players exposed to be the game and ultimately more revenue generated, per user, than a monthly subscription.

[cellinaire]

Here is why they are doing a cash shop versus a subscription:

1) The cash shop will make more money

Period.

We can discuss some of the psychology behind purchasing habits, impulse buying, microtransactions, etc... if you guys want. However the cash shop will allow for more players exposed to be the game and ultimately more revenue generated, per user, than a monthly subscription.


...And the games like Planetside need to have many many players in it's game world anytime to be interesting, so F2P isn't THAT bad deal for SOE I guess. We will see whether SOE is going to piss off playerbase once again or not :rolleyes:

[Vancha]

Yes, its hardly noticeable. When I ran into a BR6 with a JH and a medkit and I had a JH and a medit and we were both rexo, it did not matter that I healed myself 20 seconds ago, or that I bailed out of a mossie, or that I could OS if I was outside. When that encounter happened (provided neither of us had any help) it was my skill versus his skill.
Enh targetting? PShield? Darklight against reserve cloakers?

I did not have a 5 dollar weapon attachment that gave my JH an advantage over his.
I don't think anyone's suggested selling weapon upgrade attachments. "Sidegrade" seems to be the word of the day.

[MasterChief096]

Enh targetting? PShield? Darklight against reserve cloakers?


I don't think anyone's suggested selling weapon upgrade attachments. "Sidegrade" seems to be the word of the day.

Someone explain to me the difference between a sidegrade that increases your weapons RoF by 4% versus a weapon attachment that does the same thing?

Or a sidegrade that reduces weapon CoF by 3% versus an attachment that does the same thing?

It doesn't matter if what you buy in the cash shop can be attained in the game:

1. It takes you longer to get it in-game
2. You are still selling power in the cash shop. "We will by no means sell power in the cash shop."

[FastAndFree]

Someone explain to me the difference between a sidegrade that increases your weapons RoF by 4% versus a weapon attachment that does the same thing?

Or a sidegrade that reduces weapon CoF by 3% versus an attachment that does the same thing?

I think it boils down to:

X% increased ROF <--- Upgrade
X% increased ROF, Y% worse COF <--- Sidegrade

[Zulthus]

I think it boils down to:

X% increased ROF <--- Upgrade
X% increased ROF, Y% worse COF <--- Sidegrade

Say the player bought a gun like this:

10% increased Damage
+10% CoF

This gun will have a major advantage in CQC. That is not a sidegrade, that is a different gun, more powerful that they'd be selling.

[Vancha]

It doesn't matter if what you buy in the cash shop can be attained in the game:

1. It takes you longer to get it in-game
2. You are still selling power in the cash shop. "We will by no means sell power in the cash shop."
I doubt they expected their renaming of "subscription" to "cash shop" would cause us to define "selling power" so stringently.

You state you didn't notice a difference between reserves and subscription players in Planetside, well guess what? With the difference the skill trees will probably make, I very much expect that even if they did sell weapons, the people who'd spent time to get them and the people who'd spent money to get them would be indistinguishable. Meanwhile, SOE would have extra money to improve both my and your playing experience.

Say the player bought a gun like this:

10% increased Damage
+10% CoF

This gun will have a major advantage in CQC. That is not a sidegrade, that is a different gun, more powerful that they'd be selling.
Indeed, but say the player bought a gun like this:

0.001% Increased Damage
+0.001% CoF

This gun wouldn't even warrant existence.

Oh look, I do believe we've just discovered the flaw in pulling values out our ass for a cash shop that we don't even know is going to sell any weapons.

[Firefly]

The EVE community was/is angry because CCP are spending all of their time and money from EVE creating $70 virtual eyeware and making games that aren't EVE.
Yes, because CCP is a company that should focus strictly on EVE instead of, oh I don't know, developing games because it's a game developer.

Perish the thought. :rolleyes:

[CutterJohn]

Say the player bought a gun like this:

10% increased Damage
+10% CoF

This gun will have a major advantage in CQC. That is not a sidegrade, that is a different gun, more powerful that they'd be selling.

This gun will have a major disadvantage in medium range combat. That is not a sidegrade, that is a different gun, less powerful. Are we really going to accept them selling weakness?

[basti]

All the debate, hmm.

Lets have a simple idea here: Sony, i know you guys read, so forward this to your marketing guys:

Instead of just going and sell stuff at the shop, tell us what you want to sell before you actually do it. This way you get feedback before you accidently put something overpowered into the shop and generate a rage.

[CutterJohn]

Its the forums. They could announce they are giving away free kittens and people will bitch. :D

[Bags]

Fuck, now I need to buy kitty litter.

Slap in the face, SOE.

[Gandhi]

I don't mind selling convenience, other than cosmetic changes that's about the only thing you can safely sell in a store without players going berserk. What I hate is the proposed random drop system. It makes no sense in the Planetside context (don't even try work it into the game lore) and basically requires a trading system.

I'd rather spend resources or BEP or something to access weapon variants and sidegrades than just have them randomly "drop" at the rate of x per week.

Also saw the EVE store mentioned, it really has nothing to do with this. People were upset about that for a number of reasons (the lack of communication, the outrageous prices, the leaked internal memos), but none of those things are being repeated here (I hope...)

[NapalmEnima]

Say the player bought a gun like this:

10% increased Damage
+10% CoF

This gun will have a major advantage in CQC. That is not a sidegrade, that is a different gun, more powerful that they'd be selling.

That is a gun that is more powerful in a SPECIFIC SITUATION (CWC), and less powerful outside it.

We don't know how many guns a given loadout will be able to carry. It may be "one". So if you can lull that player into a situation where their weapon isn't so potent, you've turned the tables.

Yes, a base defender fighting in corridors will probably want to go heavy on the CQC-style weapons, and with good reason. But even within the bases of PS1, there are places where you can engage the enemy at 15+ meters were CQC-style weapons are even or weaker than assault rifles.

And given the shortened Time To Kill of PS2, I don't think we'll notice much of a difference, really. If someone toting the original version of that weapon gets the drop on someone with the CQC version, they're still going to win. The one or two shots they take might hurt a little more, but the other guy's still pushin' up the daisies.

Not particularly worried.

Oh, I admit: The Proof Is In The Pudding. I could be wrong, and the only way to be sure is to Actually Play. I eagerly await the opportunity to be proven wrong. ;)

[Raymac]

It doesn't matter if what you buy in the cash shop can be attained in the game


I'd have to vigorously disagree with this statement. I'd also like to say if you are committed to this idea, then you are likely bound to be disappointed. So start preparing yourself for that eventuality.

MasterChief, you really need to understand that for PS2 to be successful at all, it must have a f2p option.

It's simple to understand by just looking at the percentage of fps games that have a subscription. The number is so low, that you need to realize that to attract the amount of players PS2 needs to simply survive, it must be f2p. That's the bottom line.

So since it must have a f2p option, you really have to sell more than just vanity items because in order for PS2 is generate income (which is the point of any product) then the sheer volume of vanity items needed would mean that everyone would be running around looking like Lady Gaga.

Now the question sitll remains, what exactly will be sold? It seems the devs still don't have the answer to that question, but they have committed many times to not sell power. Though it seems you disagree, if they are selling something that you can acquire or unlock without having to buy it, then they are not "selling power".

[Sirisian]

Ignoring the obvious unbacked opinions you're making about F2P being the only way I'll look at this:
Now the question sitll remains, what exactly will be sold? It seems the devs still don't have the answer to that question, but they have committed many times to not sell power. Though it seems you disagree, if they are selling something that you can acquire or unlock without having to buy it, then they are not "selling power".
They're playing off the word upgrade and trying to call them "sidegrades" so that people like yourself will be fooled into thinking they aren't going to sell power. It will start to make sense when you realize how their system works. You'll play for 10 hours to get a sidegrade that gives you a minor advantage. However you can just purchase this sidegrade instantly if you wish. Is that selling power? Personally I think it is. If I can jump into the game on day one and throw money to gain an advantage in certain situations it's selling power. I'll have this advantage 24/7 and you'll get it every once in a while if you want to use resources for that instead of something else.

The only possible way to keep this game on a level playing field for everyone and remove any incentive is to keep the cash shop for only aesthetic items. SOE knows this F2P system won't work so they're doubling back and realizing they need to sell incentives to players without them realizing it (http://www.slideshare.net/bcousins/paying-to-win). They're a business so it's hard to blame them for their decision, but you're deluding yourself if you think this sacrifice will make the game better in the long run.

[p0intman]

SOE knows this F2P system won't work so they're doubling back and realizing they need to sell incentives to players without them realizing it (http://www.slideshare.net/bcousins/paying-to-win).
I was going to link that, except in the context that SOE can't live up to the promise of never selling power. Which is also true.

Ie: They've set themelves up to lie to the playerbase. Countdown to rage by players:

?? years, ?? months, ?? days

Also, cue my comment about agreeing with the suggestion that I implied smed/matt/soe/whoever else is incompetent, etc.

[basti]

I was going to link that, except in the context that SOE can't live up to the promise of never selling power. Which is also true.

Ie: They've set themelves up to lie to the playerbase. Countdown to rage by players:

?? years, ?? months, ?? days

Also, cue my comment about agreeing with the suggestion that I implied smed/matt/soe/whoever else is incompetent, etc.

You are still here? Didnt you make clear that you hate all and everything about Planetside 2, and wont play it anyway?

Lets make this clear: It propably has to be F2P To get enough people in to actually live. 2000 per cont, lets say 6 conts for release, means the game world supports up to 12k people, and need at least 8k during prime time to feel alive really. Getting those numbers in a FPS with a subscription is a much harder task than having it F2P.

Now, they obviously need to sell something in order to make a living. We all agree that selling stuff that just looks different is fine, as long as it stays within the game world (no wizard hats). But now, you guys come along and create a definition for "power" that is absoluty, and i repeat myself here, ABSOLUTY retarted and wrong.

Selling power means that you, the player, can go to the cash shop, buy something for whatever price, and just go raping everyone else. THAT is selling power, NOTHING ELSE!
Selling something that saves someone time may be a bit of power at release, but just weeks after release, its completly pointless, because all of us that play since day one are further ahead than those who just came in, even if we didnt buy the time saving thing but the new guys did. Ofc, if you play since day one and always get the time save thingy, you are the most advanted one, but that doesnt matter, because you STILL CANT RAPE ANYBODY! You may have a slight, really slight BASIC advancement in some situations with your +10 damage + 10 COF thing, but that still doenst mean you are automaticly winning. Theres a lot more in that equation, like the situation, range between you and him, what weapon he got, what weapon you got, etc. Its a long list of stuff.

The only thing they need to make sure they do is that those items in the cash shop are really just something that safes time. Not because it would be selling power otherwise, no, because of balance reasons. Selling something in the cash shop that you cant get ingame without cash means that you cant just change stats there. If you would try to change something after someone bought it, they would want their cash back if the change affected the item to much (like nerfing a unitentional overpowered item).

[p0intman]

Ragey emotional stuff

Did you watch the presentation in its entirety?

[Bags]

I was going to link that, except in the context that SOE can't live up to the promise of never selling power. Which is also true.

Ie: They've set themelves up to lie to the playerbase. Countdown to rage by players:

?? years, ?? months, ?? days

Also, cue my comment about agreeing with the suggestion that I implied smed/matt/soe/whoever else is incompetent, etc.

Well, if a horrible company like RIOT can avoid selling power for two years I would hope SOE would be able to.

[basti]

yes p0int, 6 month ago, when it actually came out.
And it has little to do with planetside.

[CutterJohn]

They're playing off the word upgrade and trying to call them "sidegrades" so that people like yourself will be fooled into thinking they aren't going to sell power. It will start to make sense when you realize how their system works. You'll play for 10 hours to get a sidegrade that gives you a minor advantage. However you can just purchase this sidegrade instantly if you wish. Is that selling power? Personally I think it is. If I can jump into the game on day one and throw money to gain an advantage in certain situations it's selling power. I'll have this advantage 24/7 and you'll get it every once in a while if you want to use resources for that instead of something else.

The only possible way to keep this game on a level playing field for everyone and remove any incentive is to keep the cash shop for only aesthetic items. SOE knows this F2P system won't work so they're doubling back and realizing they need to sell incentives to players without them realizing it (http://www.slideshare.net/bcousins/paying-to-win). They're a business so it's hard to blame them for their decision, but you're deluding yourself if you think this sacrifice will make the game better in the long run.

I know exactly what they'll be selling. I don't mind. I will probably buy some extra stuff I really don't care about on top of the stuff I want just because I want to support the game. Depends on the prices I imagine.

This 'sacrifice'(how melodramatic) will make the game better in the long run.

[NapalmEnima]

Edit: Can a word be ignorant? haha..

Only if it's spelled I G N O R A N T.

[p0intman]

yes p0int, 6 month ago, when it actually came out.
And it has little to do with planetside.

Then I think you completely miss the point: It has nothing to do with planetside or battlefield heros.

It has everything to do with economics of business models. The implication is that Sony cannot live up to the idea that they can get away with not selling power. Microtransactions are a model used to hinder third party RMT, which hurts 'traditional' RPG/Sandbox type worlds with farmers and such. Its effective for what it does and is designed to do both on a business level and a game design level for those games (Example: WoW, others).

Reference before I go on:
Learning from Korea (http://planetside-universe.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=147&stc=1&d=1315944594)

What I've said before (http://planetside-universe.com/forums/showpost.php?p=590704&postcount=15) is that the implications of advantages are magnified in a shooter. Even Korean studios apparently might agree with me from the standpoint of balance. If it isnt secret, there are problems. In order for it to be kept secret, it needs to be hard to discern to people who do the research of how to best min/max your setup. People do that in every MMO, planetside included.

please review what has been said from an economic and balance standpoint before attacking me personally again.

[Bags]

LoL is still running and they don't sell power.

[FIREk]

In all honesty, EQ as pat best pretty popular, then Blizz copied it and made MMORPGs Massive. ;) SOE made a lot of good stuff, like EQ, SQG and PS1, and can't be considered incompetent. Quite often just a single person with power can screw things up, though - like whoever thought NGE were a good idea for SWG. ;) Let's hope such people have left, or grown beyond micromanagement and thinking their ideas are great, just because they're theirs. ;)

[Sirisian]

Selling power means that you, the player, can go to the cash shop, buy something for whatever price, and just go raping everyone else. THAT is selling power, NOTHING ELSE!
You may have a slight, really slight BASIC advancement in some situations with your +10 damage + 10 COF thing, but that still doenst mean you are automaticly winning.
:huh: So you're whole argument is based on drawing an imaginary line where any advantage isn't game breaking. You see I don't want any cash shop pay to win advantages. I get that you and CutterJohn don't care if you can buy situational advantages, but some of us just want a fair game where the cash shop doesn't even play into if you got the kill. I don't want to know I got a kill because I bought an upgrade at the shop so that I could kill people further away or closer or anything.

LoL is still running and they don't sell power.
Why do people keep bringing up this 10 person multiplayer game? I'm confused. Do you know what other small games don't sell power. Even though it costs money for the box Starcraft 2 along with thousands of other small multiplayer/co-op games. I really don't follow your logic at all.

Also I find their selling of experience boosts in that game completely retarded. As my friends described you can boost your account experience to get summoner skills which directly affect the core gameplay indirectly buying power. "Runes give you extra stats in matches, masteries give you more stats per level and stuff." It's nice because as my friend put it the community doesn't connect the two. :lol:

[Talek Krell]

Yes, because CCP is a company that should focus strictly on EVE instead of, oh I don't know, developing games because it's a game developer.

Perish the thought. :rolleyes:
Whether they subscribers are right to be upset is irrelevant. I was simply pointing out that they'd been misrepresented.



What Sony has presented does not worry me. If my opponent has purchased a situational advantage then I will simply find a more favorable situation.

[Bags]

Why do people keep bringing up this 10 person multiplayer game? I'm confused. Do you know what other small games don't sell power. Even though it costs money for the box Starcraft 2 along with thousands of other small multiplayer/co-op games.

I really don't follow your logic at all.
Well then you're an idiot. LoL is a F2P game with millions of players that does F2P right.

Also I find their selling of experience boosts in that game completely retarded. As my friends described you can boost your account experience to get summoner skills which directly affect the core gameplay indirectly buying power. "Runes give you extra stats in matches, masteries give you more stats per level and stuff." It's nice because as my friend put it the community doesn't connect the two. :lol:

I don't really care if a level 10 has an advantage over a level 8, because it took all of two weeks (this is a conservative estimate. It took me a week) to be level 30. A level 8 and 10 are going to both suck so bad at the game what runes or summoner spells they have won't make a lick of difference. And I'm pretty sure I've never had a game that came down to runes being the deciding factor between who won. When you are level 30 everyone has full rune pages, masteries, and summoner spells. It's an 100% even playing field after a week of playing as low levels do not get matched with high levels.

The only legitimate complaint is some champions (like Nocturne) cannot jungle without runes, but you didn't even make that argument.

Play the game before you spout bullshit here, okay?

[Crator]

They're playing off the word upgrade and trying to call them "sidegrades" so that people like yourself will be fooled into thinking they aren't going to sell power. I

If I can jump into the game on day one and throw money to gain an advantage in certain situations it's selling power. I'll have this advantage 24/7 and you'll get it every once in a while if you want to use resources for that instead of something else.

Good points however Smed said the weapon would be given a + in one stat and a - in another stat. I don't see this as a bad compromise to the system.

They can fix the day one thing by simply not allowing the side-grades to be purchased until the in-game population has obtained them by playing the game, without spending money.

[CutterJohn]

SOE knows this F2P system won't work so they're doubling back and realizing they need to sell incentives to players without them realizing it (http://www.slideshare.net/bcousins/paying-to-win).

Having just watched this, I actually now find it laughable that anyone has issues with this model. I particularly enjoyed the part about how forum rage was just forum rage, and how few of them actually put their money where their mouth is.

[Raymac]

I'm going to start calling 7-11 a "power store" because p0intman and Sirisian have now taught all of us that convenience = power.

Also, have fun playing that other new mmofps that just uses the subscription only payment model.

[p0intman]

I'm going to start calling 7-11 a "power store" because p0intman and Sirisian have now taught all of us that convenience = power.

Also, have fun playing that other new mmofps that just uses the subscription only payment model.

Argument from ignorance much?

Convinence IRL is fine, but in a shooter it isnt.

Sorry... its almost not worth the reply because its so obvious.

[Raymac]

Argument from ignorance much?

Convinence IRL is fine, but in a shooter it isnt.

Sorry... its almost not worth the reply because its so obvious.

Pot call kettle black much?

I'm sure you have an example you can point to of convenience being sold in an mmofps and completely ruining the game. No?

Ah, so since we have no precedent, we have to use critical thinking skills. Speaking of shooters, what percentage of fps games charge a subscription?

[p0intman]

Pot call kettle black much?

I'm sure you have an example you can point to of convenience being sold in an mmofps and completely ruining the game. No?

Ah, so since we have no precedent, we have to use critical thinking skills. Speaking of shooters, what percentage of fps games charge a subscription?

Direct subscriptions from the dev companies themselves? Almost none, though the platform networks (Xbox online, playstation online, steam etc) give a portion of their profits from sales/subscriptions to the dev companies anyway or they make their money through box sales. Thats usually sufficent if they're popular enough. If it isnt, they release new map packs for small amounts of cash. Typically though those games aren't bigger than 32/32 or 64/64 setups.

They don't sell ingame advantages as far as I am aware.

[Raymac]

Direct subscriptions from the dev companies themselves? Almost none.

And this is the fundamental issue here. If Planetside 2 doesn't have enough players, it's going to be dead on arrival. Thats why I believe, partially due to the success of Planetside Reserves, that Planetside 2 must have a free to play option.

I'm just trying to keep an open mind on how a free 2 play option would work with Planetside 2. I could very well be wrong, but I get the perception that this isn't even factoring into your thoughts at all.

You think any of us want a cash shop because we love shopping so damn much? Of course not. I'm just trying to imagine different ways for Planetside 2 to NOT repeat mistakes the previous game made and actually support a large player base for years and years.

[p0intman]

And this is the fundamental issue here. If Planetside 2 doesn't have enough players, it's going to be dead on arrival. Thats why I believe, partially due to the success of Planetside Reserves, that Planetside 2 must have a free to play option.

I'm just trying to keep an open mind on how a free 2 play option would work with Planetside 2. I could very well be wrong, but I get the perception that this isn't even factoring into your thoughts at all.

You think any of us want a cash shop because we love shopping so damn much? Of course not. I'm just trying to imagine different ways for Planetside 2 to NOT repeat mistakes the previous game made and actually support a large player base for years and years.

I personally can't take IRL comparisons to digital entertainment developers seriously, like your argument of a 7-11 comparison... just doesn't hold water for me.

And call me a purist, but no I don't think anyone wants it... I just refuse to entertain the idea of supporting a game that has one because I find it offensive to the equilibrium of the game itself. I'd rather such a game be stillborn than prosper.

[Raymac]

I personally can't take IRL comparisons to digital entertainment developers seriously, like your argument of a 7-11 comparison... just doesn't hold water for me.

And call me a purist, but no I don't think anyone wants it... I just refuse to entertain the idea of supporting a game that has one because I find it offensive to the equilibrium of the game itself. I'd rather such a game be stillborn than prosper.

OK, I'll fully admit that my 7-11 comment was a bit bitchy and not an accurate comparison.

However, you are still turning a blind eye to the simple reality that shooters don't have subscriptions. Now, if Planetside 2 could support the large player base it needs with only subscriptions, I'd be all for it. Unfortuntely, that didn't happen for Planetside 1, and it won't happen for Planetside 2.

Simple obvious current example, just look at how many more people played Planetside during the recent free 45 days. As soon as they needed to pony up that "minor" $15, POOF they were gone. Another example is the influx of players from the Reserves program I mentioned earlier.

It's clear you care more about being an advocate against "cash shops", which is fine. Everybody is entitled to being an activist, but that last line you just said that I bolded...how you'd rather see Planetside 2 fail, well I just have 1 thing to say about that....:fu:

[p0intman]

OK, I'll fully admit that my 7-11 comment was a bit bitchy and not an accurate comparison.

However, you are still turning a blind eye to the simple reality that shooters don't have subscriptions. Now, if Planetside 2 could support the large player base it needs with only subscriptions, I'd be all for it. Unfortuntely, that didn't happen for Planetside 1, and it won't happen for Planetside 2.

Simple obvious current example, just look at how many more people played Planetside during the recent free 45 days. As soon as they needed to pony up that "minor" $15, POOF they were gone. Another example is the influx of players from the Reserves program I mentioned earlier.

It's clear you care more about being an advocate against "cash shops", which is fine. Everybody is entitled to being an activist, but that last line you just said that I bolded...how you'd rather see Planetside 2 fail, well I just have 1 thing to say about that....:fu:
I made my opinion known to CCP in the rather large threadnought about microtransactions when it was initially discussed and I've played it since 2005. I can love the game and franchise, but if it must descend into selling power... I'd rather they close it down permanently and admit defeat.

Same goes for planetside.

[CutterJohn]

10 bucks says point still plays and buys the weapons.

[Raymac]

I made my opinion known to CCP in the rather large threadnought about microtransactions when it was initially discussed and I've played it since 2005. I can love the game and franchise, but if it must descend into selling power... I'd rather they close it down permanently and admit defeat.

Same goes for planetside.

I can't comprehend how you don't understand that shooters don't survive with subscriptions.

Well, now that I know that you are basically the equivilent to some intellectually dishonest political activist on a crusade to do away with cash shops in any way shape or form, I (and hopefully the devs) can just ignore your closed minded comments.

There's no point in discussing nuances of an option when you are just going to be completely closed minded to the concept.

Personally, I'd rather see Planetside 2 have tons of players with a cash shop that sells items you can grind for as well, than cling to some out dated business model which will inevitably fail.

[p0intman]

Well, now that I know that you are basically the equivilent to some intellectually dishonest political activist on a crusade to do away with cash shops in any way shape or form, I (and hopefully the devs) can just ignore your closed minded comments.


Is that supposed to be an insult? I'd apologise for it doing nothing but making me laugh, but I can't even find it amusing. Its an ad-hominem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem) argument at best.

Edit: I'd also reply to the rest of your argument, but its mostly opinion.. and anything left you nullified with the personal attack/ad-hominem argument.

[fbiCougar]

If there are "weapons of mass destruction" in the store I refuse to buy them... That is to say unless "the sword of a thousand truths" is an option :D lmao

[Sirisian]

I'm just trying to keep an open mind on how a free 2 play option would work with Planetside 2. I could very well be wrong, but I get the perception that this isn't even factoring into your thoughts at all.
That's the thing, most of us that have p0intman's stance are open minded enough to realize that a F2P system can't function without getting players to pay money. Now the difference is that we realize, as do you and every other F2P person, that this will involve selling some form of power, but we view that as a poor way to support a game.

Honestly if the game can't sustain itself without selling things that affect the core gameplay then the business model has no place in Planetside 2.
You think any of us want a cash shop because we love shopping so damn much? Of course not. I'm just trying to imagine different ways for Planetside 2 to NOT repeat mistakes the previous game made and actually support a large player base for years and years.
A subscription allows this and keeps out a destructive item mall system. As long as the game is genuinely fun people will play it. You're looking at the wrong reasons why Planetside didn't succeed. You're misguided if you continue down that path of trying to relate Planetside's failures to the business model it used.

Simple obvious current example, just look at how many more people played Planetside during the recent free 45 days. As soon as they needed to pony up that "minor" $15, POOF they were gone.
Yeah that wasn't the reason. I can tell you how it went for me since I logged in like 3 times during the 45 days free. "I shouldn't do this since the game has shown its age, and I'm just going to be disappointed". Yeah it just me remember why I stopped playing. The game gets repetitive and there's nothing new after you've played it on and off for years. Assuming the 15 USD was the reason they didn't come back is laughable at best. Even my friends only logged on a few days to see if anything changed.

Ignore this. Speaking of my friends I was at the pub and one of them said they won't play a F2P Planetside game since it's for failed games. I'm not supporting his view, but I found it interesting. That and now I have to see if my other friends will at least try it. We used to all play Planetside when it released.

[Zulthus]

A subscription allows this and keeps out a destructive item mall system. As long as the game is genuinely fun people will play it. You're looking at the wrong reasons why Planetside didn't succeed. You're misguided if you continue down that path of trying to relate Planetside's failures to the business model it used.


Yeah that wasn't the reason. I can tell you how it went for me since I logged in like 3 times during the 45 days free. "I shouldn't do this since the game has shown its age, and I'm just going to be disappointed". Yeah it just me remember why I stopped playing. The game gets repetitive and there's nothing new after you've played it on and off for years. Assuming the 15 USD was the reason they didn't come back is laughable at best. Even my friends only logged on a few days to see if anything changed.



Exactly. People don't pay a sub fee for Planetside anymore because it isn't worth it anymore. $15 truly is a minor cost, but still? Why waste money on a boring game? My sub just ended and while I realize it's the only game of its kind, it just isn't fun for me anymore.

If Planetside 2 proves to be a fun game with even more features than its predecessor, then people will gladly pay a sub fee for it. Right now, it sounds like SOE thinks the game can only survive if it has a cash shop. It just does not fit in a game like this. Custom skins should be unlocked in-game somehow; you shouldn't have to pay a dime.

Anyway, PS2 should be able to survive on its own without the mangled crutch that is a cash shop.

[basti]

Sir, grab your friend that said F2P is for fail games, and punch him in the face, will ya? Because that guy is an idiot.

Granted, there are LOTS of bad F2P games out there, and a lot of them even just sell power for the sake of getting money, but there are also good ones, very good ones.
Now, on the other hand, there are LOTS of bad subscription model games, but they dont sell power (how could they?). There are alos good ones.

Means, the business model has nothing to do with the quality of the game.



Lets cut to the core here:

What we need is players. But not the usual MMO player that is used to paying a box price and a monthly subscription, what we need is the FPS player. And as we all know, there arent exactly much FPS out there that let you pay bucks each month to be able to play. Just hop onto a random FPS gaming forum and ask them if they would pay each month to play a game. Guess what, you would be laughed at for asking such a question.
Thats why planetside 2 is going to be free to play, to actually get US the players so we actually have a game full of people, instead of a wasteland.

Could the game still work without a shop but with subscription? Uhm, pretty sure it could, yes, but not to the level it would need to.
According to that chinese interview, Sony spend 50 million us Doller on Planetside 2. No way to prove it right now, but im just guessing its somewhat accurate. 50 million means The game needs to sell about 900k copies to be equal at release. And if you know http://mmodata.blogspot.com/ , then you know this isnt a number they will get easy.
So, instead of trying the harder thing and getting FPS players to pay a subscription, they go for the easy thing, let them play, and hopefully get them to pay some cash.

I would still prefer a subscription with no cash shop, because i also fear the effect it could have on the game, but most FPS players simply wont pay a monthly sub.

And if i have to choose between a succesful game with lots of players and ongoing development, and an empty game, then i rather choose the game with players, because i know what happens when they screw the cash shop stuff up: we will drill them a new hole. So its in their interrest as much as in our interrest to now screw this up, so no need to worry.

[jollytraveller]

See, this is the problem with F2P model for a game such as Planetside 2 is that there really hasn't been one thats very good. Unless I'm just completly unaware of one, I havent seen any F2P version of games that can easily be a monthly subscription game.

And that worries me, because we don't know of a succesfull way of a F2P that doesnt sell power, have a cash shop, seperate the players, or is just generally poor quality. Perhaps they found a good version and it might be very succesful. But until they come out with the details, we are only speculating what other games have done with their success/fail stories and that can only go so far.

The World of Tanks F2P model works perfectly I think.

There are very, very few things in the game that you can pay for that you cannot earn for free. Granted it takes a little longer to level yourself, but not dramatically so.

The crucial difference is that to actually play your high level tanks consistantly requires investing real money into a premium account in order for you to afford the repairs to your vehicles. If you choose not to pay for a premium account, yes you can still play tier 10 tanks...... just not all the time. You are obliged to drop down to lower level tiers in order to save the money up to play your larger vehicles.

I'm not saying this system should be applied to Planetside, although I'm usre something could be created. A system where each weapon and vehicle has a credit value and you can either pay real cahs for credits or build them up in game. The key is that the weapon itself cannot be bought it needs to be earned. How much you then use it is dependant on other factors.

I am personally nervous about F2P models but my point is that there are systems out there that don't work too badly and don't affect balance that much. Ultimately, subscription fees are considered an out-dated approach to generating profits so like it or not PS2 is almost sure to generate it's revenue in other ways. I don't think micro-transactions have to been seen as the ultimate evil if they are implemented correctly.

[Gandhi]

The World of Tanks F2P model works perfectly I think.

Really? I think it's a perfect example of what not to do. You buy "gold" for real money, then spend that gold on premium ammo and tanks. Outside of the store gold is only available through special events and contests. That's basically selling power, because you make gold so hard to come by through other means.

Whether this could work in Planetside depends on how easy it is to earn "credits" by playing the game. If you make it too hard then you're really blurring the line between selling convenience and selling power. I think that line is already blurry enough to begin with. IMO best thing to do would be to tie it to BEP, balancing the cost of new content is something that will have to be done through testing.

[ECM]

I have to agree with what basti is saying. He is making the most sense on this thead by far and I mean far. We haven't even seen what is for sell in the cash shop, so don't go crying about it, please.

I am also not a fan of a cash shop/ microtransactions as well. PS2 needs numbers and with SOE you gotta do what you gotta do.

http://th00.deviantart.net/fs6/150/i/2005/035/f/1/You_Gotta_Do_What_You_Gotta_Do_by_lukeroberts.jpg

I do know the "FPS" player is not going to like a subscription, but is cool with making microtransactions. Just look at all the map packs and pre-order bling that comes with just about every FPS today. Those all cost extra, BAM!

[Brusi]

imagine you bought an 03 lasher for $15, then they nerfed it...

[Crator]

Shit happens. I think I'd have same reaction if I didn't purchase it and gained it in-game. Plus, there is a notice before entering the game that says "Content is suspect to be changed upon developers wishes."

[jollytraveller]

Really? I think it's a perfect example of what not to do. You buy "gold" for real money, then spend that gold on premium ammo and tanks. Outside of the store gold is only available through special events and contests. That's basically selling power, because you make gold so hard to come by through other means.

Whether this could work in Planetside depends on how easy it is to earn "credits" by playing the game. If you make it too hard then you're really blurring the line between selling convenience and selling power. I think that line is already blurry enough to begin with. IMO best thing to do would be to tie it to BEP, balancing the cost of new content is something that will have to be done through testing.

Gold buys you premium tanks which are absolutely terrible and just for novelty. And yes, you can buy premium ammo but firstly it's not great and secondly it is ridiculously expensive to the point that very, very few people buy it, especially when coupled with the fact that the miss rate in WoT can be quite high making wastage of "paid for" ammo annoying. I play with a dozen other friends and literally not one of them has ever spent any gold on ammo.

In order to level through the tanks that 90% of the playerbase use 90% of the time and to buy all the good modules / consumables you only need silver which can be made by playing the game....... for free. Personally, beyond buying $20 worth of gold to get me started I'd never put more money into it. For me it's now a free game that I can play to a pretty high level.

[Talek Krell]

Really? I think it's a perfect example of what not to do. You buy "gold" for real money, then spend that gold on premium ammo and tanks.
Premium ammo is for chumps. There is no situation in which it is not a waste of money. Premium tanks are almost exclusively target practice. The Lowe is the only notable exception and that's mostly because it's a higher tier than the others. Most WoT gold is spent on buying the "Premium Account" at a price of about $10 for 30 days.

[SKYeXile]

Really? I think it's a perfect example of what not to do. You buy "gold" for real money, then spend that gold on premium ammo and tanks. Outside of the store gold is only available through special events and contests. That's basically selling power, because you make gold so hard to come by through other means.

Whether this could work in Planetside depends on how easy it is to earn "credits" by playing the game. If you make it too hard then you're really blurring the line between selling convenience and selling power. I think that line is already blurry enough to begin with. IMO best thing to do would be to tie it to BEP, balancing the cost of new content is something that will have to be done through testing.

in world of tanks, yeas gold ammo is essentially power, i always carry some rounds for if im ina situation where i cant penerate a glacis with regular ammo and i cant maneuver to penetrate the side. But PS2 does not need to sell ammo or "premium" items, world of tanks makes most of there money by people transfering XP and upgrading to a premium account.

no reason why PS2 cant use Satation cash for those 2 things...earn XP with a HA...transfer that XP to a reaver...you still earnt the XP...you're just paying a transfer fee.

[Talek Krell]

no reason why PS2 cant use Satation cash for those 2 things...earn XP with a HA...transfer that XP to a reaver...you still earnt the XP...you're just paying a transfer fee.
That's probably not a workable example, but applying the idea would be interesting. I had forgotten about the free XP.

I would like to point out one other thing about WoT's premium ammo. If you can't get through an enemy's armor with standard shells, even from the front in most cases, then it is probably because he completely outclasses you. Even in this situation you can always switch to HE rounds. They will not only do damage, but also break his equipment, which often spells certain doom. I cannot count the number of times I have tracked somebody way out of my league and watched him get disassembled by artillery and friendly heavies.

[SKYeXile]

That's probably not a workable example, but applying the idea would be interesting. I had forgotten about the free XP.

I would like to point out one other thing about WoT's premium ammo. If you can't get through an enemy's armor with standard shells, even from the front in most cases, then it is probably because he completely outclasses you. Even in this situation you can always switch to HE rounds. They will not only do damage, but also break his equipment, which often spells certain doom. I cannot count the number of times I have tracked somebody way out of my league and watched him get disassembled by artillery and friendly heavies.

perhaps your right on that, i forgot that Planetside system plans to be time base and not use based. anyhoo.

as for the ammo, i drive an E50, its impossible to penetrate an E75 glacis with standard ammo, unless your attack angle is extremely favourable, in that case i switch to gold ammo, you can penerate a maus if you hit it in the right spot, but the E75 has no machine gun and the veiwport is pretty hard to hit. HE just does not do enough damage in that case. for sure though, tracking somebody in the open when you have arts is win, even if you don't sometimes, just tracking them and having them spinout so you can side or rear penetrate is win.

[exLupo]

The EVE thing is weird. The community is violently against selling power. However, at the same time, dual boxing is so prevalent that CCP runs sales on secondary accounts. 33% off. What's that get you? Most importantly a second character. Your main trains combat skills, your alt trains financial skills to fund it. Your main trains combat. Your alt trains combat. You run them concurrently. There's a guy in our corp that does 3 combat toons at once, it's crazy. None of this even touches on the way alts are used to circumvent the "one universe" reputation currency. Spy, scam and thief alts abound.

No no, don't sell power in the cash shop. Doubling simultaneous skill availability and combat power tho, that's ok. Just as long as it isn't in the skill shop. The threads against system upgrades that negatively impact dual(or more) boxing are just as heated as any discussion of ships for cash.

Not all games are dual box friendly but EVE is one of the best for it and players have been buying power there for years. Nothing to do with PS2 but all of these "EVE players hate power sales!" are, when viewed on the whole, incorrect. There's some serious hypocrisy rolling on the EVE official forums when it comes to buying a leg up on the opposition.

[CutterJohn]

In the EVE players defense, I can understand the thought that maybe CCP is getting a bit greedy. Its already virtually required to have 2 or more accounts to compete in the game. If you happen to be a capital ship pilot, especially a titan or mothership pilot, you will want even more than that.

To add a money store on top of all the extra subs they are buying is a bit much. Sadly this argument is rarely used, its mostly just a knee jerk 'DONT SELL POWER!!!!11' that ignores the elephant sitting there on the couch munching your snacks.