Should camo be obtainable without money?

[erunion]

Originally Posted by The Degenatron

These two comments give me hope that people can be reasonable.

"A few basics" is exactly what I'm talking about:

1 Jungle
1 Desert
1 Arctic

No thanks. I want to keep empire colors, not have everyone in the same camo.

[jepaul]

Originally Posted by meiam

but don't want to be labelled as payer,

Did he, what?



What does labelled as a payer mean?

If they offered a $500 camo I would buy it. Just to be made fun of and simply because I could. For no other reason. Absolutely they need to charge. I hope they charge for a lot more. This game needs cash to sustain itself and maintain everything. If you love this game so much spend $10 freaking dollars to support it. I bet you are between the ages of 16-27. Am I correct. I need to use this example of what is wrong with that generation for a lesson plan.

[The Degenatron]

Originally Posted by Littleman

Here's an idea: RMTed camo is permanent.

In-game purchased camo is essentially a temporary side grade, good only for that life, and expensive.

Through really, I'd prefer to tell the freebies to pay up or man up. People will cry foul over the tiniest things when they lose because they're the best the world has to offer in their minds, so it's not that they suck...

I'd prefer to see faction colors over camos on a majority of the soldiers in the field. I also expect most skins in the shop will be patterns in faction colors. Actually, I expect a lot more in the way of physical, attachable bits from a cosmetic shop than mere skins. Examples include helmets, armor pieces for arms, legs, chest, shoulders, faceplates, etc. Ye ol' cycler (both PS1's and the early PS2 cycler.) The cash shop won't sustain PS2 with a paltry selection of camo options even with a price as high as $10 a pop.

That's a pretty cool idea. Although, I'm with you: people SHOULD pay up to get the good stuff.

Maybe even split the difference: Only the 3 basic camo would be availible for the "one life purchase". As long as they are cheap enough (on par with grenades), then why not? That seems great.

But all the really cool stuff, you have to pay for.

Originally Posted by erunion

No thanks. I want to keep empire colors, not have everyone in the same camo.

Well, it's too late for that. The camos are most certainly going to be in the game.

And really? You're against the idea of your platoon getting their arctic gear on for an assault on Ceryshen? That seems...odd.

[erunion]

Originally Posted by The Degenatron

And really? You're against the idea of your platoon getting their arctic gear on for an assault on Ceryshen? That seems...odd.

Its planetside2. What game play advantage does usable camouflage give that out weighs that big a deviation from planetside-ness?

If there is an unlockable skin that is an upgrade over default faction colors, faction colors would go extinct.

[AzK]

If the game is good i'll buy everything, not just camos but even those weapon and vehicle unlocks that will allow it, so i can spare more personal resource to spawn more vehicles use more medikits more grenades etc.

Will people get mad and start babbling about how i'm shit because i buy things etc when i'll kill them? Sure. Do i care? Nope. They always come up with something anyway. If you pay you're an ebayer, if you don't pay but still win you only play in unfair conditions, if you're not paying and also play with even odds you are probably straight up cheating.

That's a big if anyway, it will be a while before they convince me (if they convince me) that the bf3 gameplay and classes system aren't terrible compared to how the original game was. The idea that only 1 class can heal only 1 class can repair is beyond madness from my point of view, those are just the 2 main things, but it applies to everything really. The lack of inventory is also pretty sad, looting stuff the way you did in ps1 was cool not to mention weapon switching, nade switching etc etc. Game got simply dumbed down to appeal to cod/bf3 people, and i'm not sure i want to pay a single cent to a company that turned a great game into something that has anything to do with those 2 titles. If they prove me wrong, i'll pay.

[AzK]

Originally Posted by The Degenatron

And really? You're against the idea of your platoon getting their arctic gear on for an assault on Ceryshen? That seems...odd.

Well, i am too to be honest, camos only foster camping and detract greatly from the empire theme thingy, it's not that strange that some people are against it.

I absolutely HATED camos the very moment they were announced, i would have rather they sold different patterns/themes but ALWAYS with the empire colors say like br 7 14 25 differences, or visual stuff like the pads from command ranks in ps1. Visor colors, sunglasses, no helmet, berets, hats whatever, but not SHARED camos.

Having nc tr vs persons with the same camo looking exactly the same color wise, and differing only for their "silhouettes" like they called them at e3, is a pretty big deal. Hate that shit.

So to the OP question: no, i'd rather not have camos unlockable in other ways, for the same reason someone else mentioned, empire colors would go extinct.

[Flaropri]

Originally Posted by meiam

I understand the idea that camo being only obtainable with money will finance part of the system, and that making it money only you'll supposedly get more money, but I've been thinking that maybe it's counterproductive. Two things:

1) Some people might want to play with camo, but don't want to be labelled as payer, so having some way to obtain camo without money would allow them to buy them will still leaving doubt in other people that maybe they just got theirs without paying.

2) They might actually give advantage, I'd rather have a desert camo than being bright blue/pink in a desert fight.

I think it would be good if some camo would be obtainable with just exp like the gear/cert and have some that would be brought only with money. Also maybe have some that you could get trough special achievement/event but also be brought with money.

1: That's a stupid argument. There's no shame in paying for something, especially not camo. As long as PS2 marketers stay true to not selling power, it's not a problem. Anyone that tries to insult people for paying for something is a tool, probably jealous, and on that topic at least should be ignored.

2. This I actually agree with, but only with specific camo. Obviously, Zebra, Giraffe, "Bacon MAX" and similar "camouflage" isn't actually that useful (unless we get a Zebra continent, even in the snow areas Zebra camo isn't going to be effective), but desert camo or jungle camo could be very easily useful... as long as your nameplate doesn't show up floating over your head all the time when otherwise visible (such as only when "spotted" or whatever).

That said, it is such a relatively small pool of camo that's actually useful, I think it's not a problem to pay for them even if you pay for nothing else, particularly since getting SC doesn't necessarily require a credit card in many regions.

It would be very neat if they figured they could afford to let those few useful camo be earned in game, but I can understand if they decide against it.


Side note: As I understand faction colors are woven into the camo sets, so they are still there, if not necessarily as prominent. I don't think that is too much of a concern.

[Purple]

Originally Posted by jepaul

I bet you are between the ages of 16-27. Am I correct. I need to use this example of what is wrong with that generation for a lesson plan.

dont put us all in the same boat. i already have $150 in SOE cash for this game.

[MrKWalmsley]

Originally Posted by meiam

I really doubt camo will be there primary source of income, someone mentioned tribes, played 10-20 hour of it, never saw a single camo, so either tribes is not making any money, or most player are buying weapon with money.

Right, are you actually a troll? Because in order to make such a claim in comparison to planetside you have to either be a troll, or a dribbling idiot. The reason why the majority of tribes income comes from new weapons is because they are gameplay mechanics, and give you extra power.

HOWEVER! On every single occasion that they have had the chance, the devs have repeatedly said that they WILL NOT be selling in game items, or weapons for real cash. ONLY cosmetics, therefore, their primary source of income will be camo, since there will be nothing game-play wise to dominate the market!

So lets say tribes took all gameplay items off the market, what would happen? The primary source of income through that means would become camo and other cosmetics. You cannot be serious when you make this argument!

If you are serious then it's likely you have an ulterior motive, so stop beating around the bush and just come out with the true cruz of your argument (shown lurking in the passage I quoted) and just state outright that your true purpose for this thread is to promote a pay-to-win market. Because only then would it be likely that camo would step down from being a primary source of income, and only then would your idea be valid. Either that, or you did not know that PS2 will not have a P2W income model, in which case, do just the slightest bit of research next time before you start threads regarding your ideas to drastically change the way SOE intends to make money from this game.

[Exmortius]

nope. basic colors for people who don't pay. you can see right away who the premium supporters are then. you will be able to tell which guys are the true hardcore supporters. the ones who truly keep the servers up and the game alive. f2p is great for keeping the pops up and making it easy to get friends involved but you want the really show support visually make em bust out the wallet for camos, lights, logos, etc. just my opinion. i would like to know when i'm fighting a guy in camo i know who the die hard players are.

[Shlomoshun]

I think at some point, the argument gets down to one of splitting hairs and not worth really worrying about too much. While I get that from a purely logical perspective, there is no way that all equipment/skins/sidegrades can actually be totally equal, in terms of balance, they are so nearly equal that they basically round up to it.

Sure, cammo may offer a tiny advantage, but it's really not measurable in any particular matchup. Sure, over thousands of kills, and hundreds of hours of gameplay, it might amount to a 1% advantage, for a 50.5%/49.5% kill ratio, all other things being equal....

but on an instant by instant, 1v1, constantly changing battlefield, there is no measurable difference within the confines of a game where all things, in fact, are not equal.

That said, I actually do see where the OP is coming from. Some people aren't going to pay squat to play, it's that simple. But even if they don't, they are still integral to the success of the game, becasue they give the players with money someone to kill/team up with. SO you still need them to continue to play over a long period of time. How can you do that? By offering them some sort of carrot on a stick. A few minor things like basic cammos or some of the pretty standard sidegrades are a great carrot to keep them playing long enough to let your paying customers kill them several times with the variety of sidegrades they continue to purchase...

there are lots of financial models for MMO's, but the one thing that kills all of them regardless of the financial model is the lack of a player base.

[Meriv]

Originally Posted by Shlomoshun

I think at some point, the argument gets down to one of splitting hairs and not worth really worrying about too much. While I get that from a purely logical perspective, there is no way that all equipment/skins/sidegrades can actually be totally equal, in terms of balance, they are so nearly equal that they basically round up to it.

Sure, cammo may offer a tiny advantage, but it's really not measurable in any particular matchup. Sure, over thousands of kills, and hundreds of hours of gameplay, it might amount to a 1% advantage, for a 50.5%/49.5% kill ratio, all other things being equal....

but on an instant by instant, 1v1, constantly changing battlefield, there is no measurable difference within the confines of a game where all things, in fact, are not equal.

That said, I actually do see where the OP is coming from. Some people aren't going to pay squat to play, it's that simple. But even if they don't, they are still integral to the success of the game, becasue they give the players with money someone to kill/team up with. SO you still need them to continue to play over a long period of time. How can you do that? By offering them some sort of carrot on a stick. A few minor things like basic cammos or some of the pretty standard sidegrades are a great carrot to keep them playing long enough to let your paying customers kill them several times with the variety of sidegrades they continue to purchase...

there are lots of financial models for MMO's, but the one thing that kills all of them regardless of the financial model is the lack of a player base.

I totaly agree just wanted to point out that 1% is quite a lot in a MMO, in Wot french tanks have been nerfed just because they had a 3-4% more average winning rate in average of all players.

Edit: the 1% note isn't to say that the advantage done by camos is too big but just the number would be lower

[Haro]

Given the direction this thread has taken, I feel like this image is totally appropriate.


<img src="http://ballsontheline.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/ali.jpg" width="513" height="342" >

[CorvicM]

Originally Posted by Haro

Given the direction this thread has taken, I feel like this image is totally appropriate.


<img src="http://ballsontheline.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/ali.jpg" width="513" height="342" >

OMG i cant see the bush its wearing too good of camo

[jepaul]

Originally Posted by Purple

dont put us all in the same boat. i already have $150 in SOE cash for this game.

Touche, I stand corrected and I should not stereotype. But on average, that age bracket has a sense of entitlement. You sir are the exception.