Potential For Selling Pay To Win - Page 4

p0intman · 2012-06-04, 07:37 PM

Originally Posted by Virulence

By this logic, selling power is okay because hey the guys you're playing against are going to just buy power too so they can have the same advantages and then everyone is on even footing!

when you talk about the 'raw press of the zerg' please observe that 'the zerg' these days can't capture a tower where they outnumber the occupants 50-to-1. you're starting to actually argue on raw number theory-crafting and demographics which is completely beside the point.

Originally Posted by SpcFarlen

Doesnt really matter what he wants, no offence towards ya p0int. It has been stated it will be f2p, preaching to the choir at this point.

Derp. Don't think I know you, so uh.. can't take offense?

Toppopia · 2012-06-04, 07:37 PM

As long as they don't sell stuff that can't be accessed in game, like a super awesome rocket launcher that shoots 10 rockets that break off into 100 rockets that home on every target in 100 metre radius, but boosters is just people getting somewhere faster, that won't impact my ability to kill them, they will still die to my bullets.

Winfernal · 2012-06-04, 07:41 PM

Originally Posted by elfailo

Whatever they call it is irrelevant. F2P/P2W distinction can be a very grey area (see T:A again, Firefall will probably have same issues). They can say something now, but what will happen a year after launch if their revenue stagnates?

We don't know anything about whats going to happen. Not even at launch.

An mmofps is new to the common gamer today, we can't possibly predict anything until we're seeing it with our own eyes.

Virulence · 2012-06-04, 07:44 PM

Originally Posted by p0intman

when you talk about the 'raw press of the zerg' please observe that 'the zerg' these days can't capture a tower where they outnumber the occupants 50-to-1. you're starting to actually argue on raw number theory-crafting and demographics which is completely beside the point.

You're saying that selling power is okay because when everyone buys the power that's being sold nobody is at an advantage, which completely destroys your initial argument. I have no love for the F2P business model, but I have nothing but disdain for idiots.

Anyway, http://www.slideshare.net/bcousins/paying-to-win

That's a lengthy - and very interesting - presentation about the F2P/P2W business model. It's been proven to be an effective business model for making substantial money off of an online game, regardless of a very vocal outcry against "paying to win" in various aspects. It isn't going to go away and stop being used unless (or until) a more profitable business model is designed, or consumers stop spending money on these companies.

This is why SOE is using it for Planetside 2.

Toppopia · 2012-06-04, 07:45 PM

Originally Posted by elfailo

That's exactly why I'm doubt.

What will happen when Planetside 2 as a F2P with XP boosts game doesn't live up to the expectations of upper management?

Then all hardcore fans will donate $10, if we get the numbers we hope for that is alot of money. Especially if SOE says "Ok, to keep this game F2P, we need a donation."

Then boom, it says F2P, hopefully.

p0intman · 2012-06-04, 07:47 PM

Originally Posted by Virulence

You're saying that selling power is okay because when everyone buys the power that's being sold nobody is at an advantage, which completely destroys your initial argument. I have no love for the F2P business model, but I have nothing but disdain for idiots.

Anyway, http://www.slideshare.net/bcousins/paying-to-win

That's a lengthy - and very interesting - presentation about the F2P/P2W business model. It's been proven to be an effective business model for making substantial money off of an online game, regardless of a very vocal outcry against "paying to win" in various aspects. It isn't going to go away and stop being used unless (or until) a more profitable business model is designed, or consumers stop spending money on these companies.

This is why SOE is using it for Planetside 2.

There has to be a fallacy with that, because thats putting words in my mouth. If I had my way, to be very clear, micro-transactions simply wouldn't exist. period. To say I think any of it is OK is stupid, but kind of like political elections.. some things are worse than others. I'd prefer a few people have a slightly smaller respawn time, and not by much, than an outright advancement boost. But, again.. if it were up to me.. none of it would exist.

Fafnir · 2012-06-04, 07:48 PM

Originally Posted by Toppopia

Then all hardcore fans will donate $10, if we get the numbers we hope for that is alot of money. Especially if SOE says "Ok, to keep this game F2P, we need a donation."

Then boom, it says F2P, hopefully.

That's not going to happen.

EDIT: I meant, that SOE won't ask, not that hardcore fans wouldn't donate.

Originally Posted by p0intman

I'd prefer a few people have a slightly smaller respawn time, and not by much, than an outright advancement boost.

Don't give them ideas such as this, because they may use both at the same time.

Winfernal · 2012-06-04, 07:50 PM

It's either F2P, or no sequel at all. Atleast not with this quality.

Quoting myself here:

I'd imagine them trying to maintain this new game with it's new engine with the old playerbase. That wouldn't work, to say the least. It's to underground.

But if you expected the engine and graphics from the original PS, you'd have all your fun in PS2 with the original playerbase. This is called branching out, or surviving.

I'd guess you PS vets wanted a sequel with updated engine/graphics, right?

Stamping a "15$ per month" sign on sequel of a game many people never even heard of back in the days, that's too much of a risk if you ask me.

= F2P, growing community. Which also equals some "sacrifices", like these micro-transactions.

That's life. Get some, lose some. I'm sure we'll all enjoy PS2. Both vets and newbs.

p0intman · 2012-06-04, 07:52 PM

Originally Posted by Winfernal

It's either F2P, or no sequel at all. Atleast not with this quality.

Quoting myself here:

I'd imagine them trying to maintain this new game with it's new engine with the old playerbase. That wouldn't work, to say the least. It's to underground.

But if you expected the engine and graphics from the original PS, you'd have all your fun in PS2 with the original playerbase. This is called branching out, or surviving.

I'd guess you PS vets wanted a sequel with updated engine/graphics, right?

Hell, I'd have been fine with the same exact gfx and engine. Fuck, don't even make a sequel, just change the engine and shit.

Winfernal · 2012-06-04, 07:54 PM

Originally Posted by p0intman

Hell, I'd have been fine with the same exact gfx and engine.

While you're saying this now (and i'll even believe you.).

I don't think most people would be satisfied with a sequel of Planetside in 2012 with 2003-graphics and gameplay. Wash away some nostalgia first, and tell me again how you'd be fine with the old engine.

p0intman · 2012-06-04, 07:55 PM

Originally Posted by elfailo

It's how F2P can regress into P2W that people are afraid of.

holy fucking shit, someone gets it.

Winfernal · 2012-06-04, 07:58 PM

Originally Posted by elfailo

The issue isn't F2P. Everyone has know it for years now and if they'd really have any problem with it they wouldn't be on this forum, following the game's development. It's how F2P can regress into P2W that people are afraid of.

And this is obvious with every single F2P title out there. Everyone has that fear...

But i'm telling you, it's either back to the original PS, or hoping for no "P2W-factors" in PS2 while it's F2P. A monthly sub wouldn't be enough for the game to survive.

p0intman · 2012-06-04, 07:59 PM

Originally Posted by Winfernal

And this is obvious with every single F2P title out there. Everyone has that fear...

But i'm telling you, it's either back to the original PS, or hoping for no "P2W-factors" in PS2 while it's F2P.

....

*facepalm*

You don't see it do you?

THEY (THE INDUSTRY) HAVE ALREADY STATED THAT THIS IS EXACTLY WHERE THEY WANT TO GO, FULL STOP. ITS BEEN STATED BY MORE THAN ONE PERSON AND ON MORE THAN ONE INSTANCE. THIS IS A PROMISE THAT HIGBY NOR SOE WILL EVER POSSIBLY KEEP. IT IS FALSE TO BELIEVE THEY WILL NOT SELL WEAPONS FOR REAL CASH.

There. its in fucking capslock for you.

Virulence · 2012-06-04, 08:00 PM

Watch that presentation I posted - it covers the progression of a F2P game from just selling boosts, customization, and convenience to a direct P2W game because the game just wasn't making enough money off of the former, and they made their shop significantly more profitable by going P2W.

You can also look at the way LoL has handled it. They haven't released a new champion for less than 6,300 IP in a very long time, and I guarantee that's because they make a significant amount of money off of people buying RP for a new champion that looks really cool that they want to play to pick up that champion on day one, and they don't play enough to save up enough IP to buy that champion with that.

Psi · 2012-06-04, 08:01 PM

So. Anyone have some insight on how I can block Pointman's threads from showing for me? They seem to be a constant waste.