News: New TotalBiscuit Video on IMPLANTS - Page 11

scroogh · 2012-08-08, 09:00 AM

"I never asked for this."

As long as the timer only goes down when you're actually playing I'm fine with only 24 hours.

Sunrock · 2012-08-08, 09:10 AM

Originally Posted by Scotsh

If everybody pays the same amount every month and some players play like 1-2 hours per day while you play 4-5 hours a day, how exactly is that fair?

Every one have 24 hours to dispose of every day. The rest is up to you and me how we like to spend those hours. But not every one earns $X per hour. That is way it's more fair to pay a fixed price on your games.

Also if you play for 5 hours you still only progress as fast as someone that play for 2 hours if you look at hours spent playing the game. You can't say that about games that sell boosters.

Scotsh · 2012-08-08, 09:18 AM

Originally Posted by Sunrock

Every one have 24 hours to dispose of every day. The rest is up to you and me how we like to spend those hours. But not every one earns $X per hour. That is way it's more fair to pay a fixed price on your games.

I just made the point that you favorite payment model is not fairer than what you described in that posting before. It just suits you more, because you seen to plan on playing alot.
Just to play the devils advocate, paying per hour would be even more fair. But for some reason i believe you wouldnt like that very much, would you?

Sunrock · 2012-08-08, 09:24 AM

Originally Posted by Scotsh

I just made the point that you favorite payment model is not fairer than what you described in that posting before. It just suits you more, because you seen to plan on playing alot.
Just to play the devils advocate, paying per hour would be even more fair. But for some reason i believe you wouldnt like that very much, would you?

Yes actually paying a fixed price per hour played is allot more fair then a monthly fee but a monthly fee is more fair then selling boosters on a cash shop. But buying exp and resource boosters is not the same thing is it? Even though in reality it can have the same effect on my wallet it's not really the same thing.

And yes I would rather pay a fixed price per hour played then buying boosters from a cash shop... Allot more in fact. In fact that was how I payed for Aion when I played on a Chinese server before it was released in Europe and USA. And I thought it would be a very nice compliment to having a monthly sub payment plan. As some times you just want to play a few hours a month after a while and then you could pay per hour instead of monthly.

I would not mind having a payment plan like this.

1h = $0.50
1 week = $5
1 month = $15
3 months = $40
6 months = $80

Klockan · 2012-08-08, 10:07 AM

Originally Posted by Sunrock

You're going to have SC for the resource booster right? Lets say if player A get 100 resources per hour without it and player B 125 with it, it means that after 24h played player A will have 2400 resources to spend on vehicles and grenades and player B that bought a booster got 3000 resources. During a month if both play 50 hours and player A never buys the resource booster and player B always does the difference will be 1250 more resources for player B. For those 1250 player B can have more fun.

But you said that you would have to pay more to have the equal fun, that was the strange thing. Look here:

Originally Posted by Sunrock

Because if the game is pay2skip or pay2win... (same thing different name if you ask me)... I can't have as fun as you if we both spend lets say $25 a month on the game. For me to have as fun as you if you spend $25 means I maybe have to spend $50 a month if I play x2 time then you and I don't see that as fair. If I don't I will find the game more tedious then you.

Since the boosters lasts 24 hours it you pay the same no matter how much you play, why would you pay more?

Originally Posted by Liwen Diamond

Starcraft 2 is a good example of a viable competitive environement. A day 1 player as exactly the same tools as the best player in the world (at least in game tools, hardware is another issue which is pointless to cover at the moment). Sure my odds as a casual player to beat the best player in the world are almost null because he is infinetely more skilled and practiced, but the game at least doesn't go out of it's way to provide playtime based advantages. Most MMOs do. PS2 doesn't have to follow suit with Most MMOs.

If they don't the game would die really quickly. Most likes to have milestones to work for in games. In really competitive games like Starcraft those milestones are ladder ranks, but that doesn't really work for mmo's. You could have only aesthetics as rewards which works for some but others want to work for those tiny specks of power. Humans easily get addicted to constant improvements which is why this gaming model has worked so extremely well.

Originally Posted by Liwen Diamond

Empire numbers is also another area of the game which can be improved upon to provide a fairer play experience. For example if I want to be TR, I'd be totally fine with the idea of not being able to log into servers that have a TR overpopulation at the time I attempt to log in. With overpopulation define as having, say 50 or more TR soldiers than the Empire with the second most soldiers, that way it's not too hard to find a server and server population evens out to a point where this balance issue is nearly nullified. As long as I have my personnal stats and soldier progression linked to my account, and not a specific server the way characters are tied to servers in classic MMORPGs, this is totally doable. We have the technology to do this. I'd be frankly quite skeptical if you told me SOE it not going to take measures similar to this to avoid this problem.

You might be totally fine with that but the average gamer wouldn't feel as lenient when they can't access their main character simply because he was on an overpopulated server. This game lives and dies with its players, as a F2P game they really need massive amounts of players and small inconveniences like that can be a disaster way worse most faction imbalances.

Sunrock · 2012-08-08, 10:22 AM

Originally Posted by Klockan

But you said that you would have to pay more to have the equal fun, that was the strange thing. Look here:

Pay more if I play more to have the the same amount of fun per hour played. Do you understand the difference? If it was a fixed price that you have to pay per hour I could not play at all if I didn't pay. There for I wouldn't have the same amount of fun played per hour as every one else.

Originally Posted by Klockan

Since the boosters lasts 24 hours it you pay the same no matter how much you play, why would you pay more?

I play more then 24 hours per month.... I play between 120 and 150 hours a month in average. More during the first month with a new game though.

If pay more I can perhaps spawn 10 more tanks or air plains to fly and if that is what is fun to me then I will have less fun if I can't spawn as many right?

How was not that clear from what I wrote before?

BillyBob · 2012-08-08, 10:47 AM

Originally Posted by Sifer2

I actually don't like the 24 hour thing. Especially considering how weak they are.

IMO it makes perfect sense that they are a timelimited boost. As for their "weakness", I think the idea is that this would give you just a slight advantage and not break the overall balance. Judging from the side-by-side comparisons in the video, the improvements seem just right to me.

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

With just 3 implant slots I see no reason to not have those implants as permanent.

I'm guessing that the idea behind this is to have these function as a resource sink in the game. It would not only make players spend resources, but it would also encourage collecting them.

Originally Posted by sameer

Im not gonna bother if it stays a 24 hour thing. I want permanent.

If they were permanent, eventually everyone would have them all the time and they would be rendered pretty much moot. Having them temporary and depending on resources will not only make them more difficult to obtain but will also add to the importance of having resources and collecting them.

Originally Posted by Firearms

24hr Auraxian hrs for resources. make them semi/permanent for station cash.
That would sound like a valid model to me

Unless you make them super expensive (in terms of real money), then again everyone will eventually get them which in turn would render them moot. If you do make them super expensive so that not everyone could get them (or would be discouraged from getting them), then you'd basically have made them pay2win. Either scenario is bad IMO.

Personally, I think the way they are described in the video seems perfect.

Judging from the video they are not too poweful to make a huge difference (just enough to give you a slight edge) and they depend on an in-game element such as resources which encourages gameplay in terms of capturing territory to gain them. The fact that they are temporary also adds to the dymamic and forwards motion of the overall game, since you you will always be in need of resources and can never be "done" with buying the implants you want.

All sounds great and very well planned to me.

/BB

Klockan · 2012-08-08, 11:00 AM

Originally Posted by Sunrock

I play more then 24 hours per month.... I play between 120 and 150 hours a month in average. More during the first month with a new game though.

It isn't ingame time, that is for sure. How anyone can believe differently is beyond me. Thus you pay as much as anyone else for the boosts. If you want a weeks worth of boost both have to pay the 24 hour price 7 times.

Edit: To put this into perspective the max level of these implants cost less than two tanks, they are dirt cheap.

SFJake · 2012-08-08, 12:28 PM

Originally Posted by Scotsh

In Pay2Win you MUST pay to get something you need to be competetive.
In Grind2Win + Pay2Skip you have the CHOICE: play a lot or pay some

See the difference?

They're both equally bad.

No, its not too much to ask for games to just BE FAIR for god's sake. Its like the very notion can't be accepted.

Nevermind that so many people in this topic would find it acceptable to pay such a monthly fee as 25$ buck or 0.5$ per hour of booster. Really? For god's sake, what the hell happened to gaming.

I mean god, if these F2P models really want to suck up money for power, can't they just have a "buy the game" fee that gives you eternal booster at 60$ and call it a day at least? Why in all hell is it widely accepted that people should spend 500+$ on a game over X years? (which is the most ridiculous thing you could EVER tell me)

Its such an irony when I WANT to pay for games, but I do NOT want to end up paying hundreds of dollars in a F2P game except thats pretty much what I might have to do because I have a LIFE.

This topic just makes me nauseous.

Blackwolf · 2012-08-08, 12:34 PM

Originally Posted by Klockan

It isn't ingame time, that is for sure. How anyone can believe differently is beyond me. Thus you pay as much as anyone else for the boosts. If you want a weeks worth of boost both have to pay the 24 hour price 7 times.

Edit: To put this into perspective the max level of these implants cost less than two tanks, they are dirt cheap.

Actually Klockan it's a pretty good chance that it's set for play time rather then a strait 24 hours. Anything else would be robbery and/or encouraging people to play for 24 hours strait just to get their monies worth.

BlueSkies · 2012-08-08, 12:36 PM

Originally Posted by SFJake

They're both equally bad.

No, its not too much to ask for games to just BE FAIR for god's sake. Its like the very notion can't be accepted.

Nevermind that so many people in this topic would find it acceptable to pay such a monthly fee as 25$ buck or 0.5$ per hour of booster. Really? For god's sake, what the hell happened to gaming.

I mean god, if these F2P models really want to suck up money for power, can't they just have a "buy the game" fee that gives you eternal booster at 60$ and call it a day at least? Why in all hell is it widely accepted that people should spend 500+$ on a game over X years? (which is the most ridiculous thing you could EVER tell me)

Its such an irony when I WANT to pay for games, but I do NOT want to end up paying hundreds of dollars in a F2P game except thats pretty much what I might have to do because I have a LIFE.

This topic just makes me nauseous.

You don't have to give them 500+$ over X years. You don't have to give them a dime. Its the same game either way.

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

Actually Klockan it's a pretty good chance that it's set for play time rather then a strait 24 hours. Anything else would be robbery and/or encouraging people to play for 24 hours strait just to get their monies worth.

... never played an online game have you?

Scotsh · 2012-08-08, 01:26 PM

Originally Posted by SFJake

They're both equally bad.

No, its not too much to ask for games to just BE FAIR for god's sake. Its like the very notion can't be accepted.

For me Pay2Win breaks a game, with Grind2Win+Pay2Skip it depends how tedious the grind is. In this particular case, is dont see a problem (tho that might change with beta).

Nevermind that so many people in this topic would find it acceptable to pay such a monthly fee as 25$ buck or 0.5$ per hour of booster. Really? For god's sake, what the hell happened to gaming.

That strikes me as you are opposing paying anything for playing PS2. But you are aware that the development is a multimillion investment and that development wont stop after release. There must also a fairly big server infrastructure maintained.

I mean god, if these F2P models really want to suck up money for power, can't they just have a "buy the game" fee that gives you eternal booster at 60$ and call it a day at least? Why in all hell is it widely accepted that people should spend 500+$ on a game over X years? (which is the most ridiculous thing you could EVER tell me)

This is NOT a game which gets released and thats it. Development (beyond bugfixing) will continue. There will be a constant cost for the company maintaining this game.

Its such an irony when I WANT to pay for games, but I do NOT want to end up paying hundreds of dollars in a F2P game except thats pretty much what I might have to do because I have a LIFE.

For PS2 you never have to pay a dime if you want and still will be able to enjoy the game. And if you feel the game deserves money, just buy something. You are the boss of how much you want to spend, set yourself a budget.
The point of F2P games is that you dont have to pay huge amounts. They dont calculate that everyone pays 15$ per month like i.e. WoW charges, they benefit from the fact that the playerbase is much bigger and more people pay smaller sums. That way they generate more money overall.

Now for a thought experiment, consider someone willing to invest 100$ per month in the PS2 shop, while somebody else pays 10$ per month. Given explicit examples, based on what is known about PS2, how big would be the advantage?

Syphus · 2012-08-08, 01:31 PM

The grind is very different in PS2 than in a lot of other games. This would be an issue if you were locked in Light Armor until you got enough XP for Heavy, etc etc. While in this case, on day 1 you can hop in a MAX and mow down people.

Lord Paladin · 2012-08-08, 03:07 PM

Because the Devs have to make money. And no gaming company would go with Free 2 Play if it didn't make them more money than a subscription game.

Really this just goes back to the days of arcades (which I realize many here have never played in).

We're paying quarters to play our games.

This game has to make money somehow. You only buy an aesthetic upgrade once. Unless someone is going to suggest you buy it every 24 hours.

SoE can make money from boosters because people like me, who have money and very little time to play, are willing to spend it in order to remain competitive with people who aren't willing to spend their money but have plenty of time to earn the same thing without having to spend it.

Also remember that there is another trade-off. I socket one of these boosters, that means I -don't- socket a combat implant.

This notion that you're not having as much fun as I am because you're not paying for boosters and therefore not having as much resources as I have is complete and utter rubbish.

First of all: I could enjoy playing infantry (I do) and never buy a vehicle, and I will have TONS more resources and simply never use them. I'm a very happy person, I'm probably gonna have TONS more fun than you will, and I won't even need to buy resource boosters.

Secondly, this is a terrible argument. You cannot compare two situations and say "this isn't fair to me, because he gets to have more fun." Well then, start having more fun! If you aren't enjoying playing the game, you shouldn't play it. You can't look at someone else and say, "this isn't right, he has more than I have." If you're a better player than someone with a resource boosters, you're gonna have more resources than he will.

I -wish- I could play 150 hours a month. You're gonna get to play the game literally 10 times as much as I am.

The purpose of these is to make SoE money. I'm willing to pay for them (hypothetically) because I have less time to play. If someone who has tons of time to play also picks them them, then yes, they will have more resources than someone who also has tons of time to play, but it will not give them an advantage in combat. It will not mean they are going to be able to kill me and not the other way around.

As to whether or not they're having more fun per hour than you are, that's a problem only you (the player) can control. Kids in 3rd world countries without PCs might be having more fun per hour than you, but you sure as hell can't blame SoE resource boosters on that, can you?

Sunrock · 2012-08-08, 03:18 PM

Originally Posted by Scotsh

The point of F2P games is that you dont have to pay huge amounts. They dont calculate that everyone pays 15$ per month like i.e. WoW charges, they benefit from the fact that the playerbase is much bigger and more people pay smaller sums. That way they generate more money overall.

If that was the case they could just lower the sub fee to $9.99 a month to make more money. Way the cash shop is so successful is because allot of players don't want fair play. They just want to pay to win or pay to skip. Hell if there was a I win button that instant kill anyone within 100 meters radios they would even be happier if they where the only one allowed to have it. Way do you think there are so many players that cheat as soon as they think they wont get caught? For the same reason they just love to pay real money for boosters and what not that will give them an edge in the game. IMO SOE though that if you cant beat them join them, witch is a really bad idea.

PS: If you add up what you pay in F2P games you will find that you pay allot more then $15 a month. So its not because $15 is allot of money.