Lets talk about the ressource system. Right now, its borderline Pay to Win - Page 5

omega four · 2013-06-22, 09:06 PM

In all seriousness, PS2 will never truly be "finished". SOE makes its money by introducing new items, be it weapons, vehicles, camo, etc. on an ongoing basis.

In a sense, SOE is farming all the PS2 gamers for money.

Originally Posted by capiqu

Darn it!!! that's it for me. I'll come back in 15 years when the game is finally finished. T-Ray Jr and M Higby Jr will be around by then.

moosepoop · 2013-06-22, 09:12 PM

Originally Posted by omega four

In all seriousness, PS2 will never truly be "finished". SOE makes its money by introducing new items, be it weapons, vehicles, camo, etc. on an ongoing basis.

In a sense, SOE is farming all the PS2 gamers for money.

so you prefer ps2 to be like bf3, where they get a patch every 4 months. the fuk outta here.

constant updates is something fans of other games can only DREAM of.

Ghodere · 2013-06-22, 09:37 PM

Originally Posted by Varsam

Don't get why people are so surprised that there is a P2W element in this game. Why the hell else would anyone sub? Out of the goodness of their hearts? C'mon.

There are F2P models without any P2W whatsoever. To point to one example, Dota 2- in which the only items purchasable are cosmetic and give no benefit at all, not even changing the silhouette of a character when equipped. Yet Dota 2 is obviously one of Valve's highest grossing titles and is on track to continue to grow. To claim that a F2P games cannot function without P2W is simply false.

Skoorviel · 2013-06-22, 10:39 PM

I like the idea presented in this video. Maybe not completely as the guy puts it, but moving in that direction would be good:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...&v=uganPzKvlIg

Hamma · 2013-06-22, 11:01 PM

Some great discussion in this thread. Good stuff

omega four · 2013-06-22, 11:31 PM

I don't think any one can claim that a F2P game can't function without P2W.

I do think that most for-profit game developers and publishers prefer to introduce P2W elements in F2P games so that they can make money.

Originally Posted by Ghodere

There are F2P models without any P2W whatsoever. To point to one example, Dota 2- in which the only items purchasable are cosmetic and give no benefit at all, not even changing the silhouette of a character when equipped. Yet Dota 2 is obviously one of Valve's highest grossing titles and is on track to continue to grow. To claim that a F2P games cannot function without P2W is simply false.

markoniad · 2013-06-22, 11:44 PM

I think it is just fine the way it is. You are going to have people on both sides of the battle that are subs. So when you have tanks coming to attack to quickly you also have tanks coming quickly to defend. I have no problem with SOE making money. The more money they make the more devs they can keep on the game. I saw a post about killing someone 1vs1 and they comeback with a tank. Its you still being their that got you killed not his tank. I am fine with people paying to have more perks. If you want to pull back to back to back tanks then pay a few bucks for a boost. If not then pay attention to the flow of resources, cap the right bases, and don't over commit your tank. Now on a side note if SOE could bring back boomers to cloakers it would be greatly appreciated.

Falcon_br · 2013-06-23, 03:25 AM

Originally Posted by omega four

I don't think any one can claim that a F2P game can't function without P2W.

I do think that most for-profit game developers and publishers prefer to introduce P2W elements in F2P games so that they can make money.

I do, go play world of tanks, since the last year you can buy anything on the game without having to spend real money on it.

The only thing you cannot but are premium tanks and garage slots.

You can live without garage slots, it is like character slots, but on games like that you like to have several characters, but they aren't necessary, you can always sell one to get another.

All premium tanks are worst that the no premium ones, they sells because people wants to level fast with then, everyone is ok with that.

omega four · 2013-06-23, 12:29 PM

Just because a game allows its players to theoretically buy anything without having to spend real money on it does NOT mean that a game is not P2W.

The key word is "theoretically". If a game's system is such that a gamer must endure a relatively long time of being soundly defeated by others (who do chose to spend real money on stuff) while earning enough XPs to buy something without having to spend real money on it, then I think that game IS P2W in actuality.

It's like saying that theoretically everybody has the ability to become President of the United States so long as they're a US citizen. While that ability theoretically exists, in actuality the chances of doing so are slim unless you have all the readily accepted prerequisites.

Originally Posted by Falcon_br

I do, go play world of tanks, since the last year you can buy anything on the game without having to spend real money on it.

The only thing you cannot but are premium tanks and garage slots.

You can live without garage slots, it is like character slots, but on games like that you like to have several characters, but they aren't necessary, you can always sell one to get another.

All premium tanks are worst that the no premium ones, they sells because people wants to level fast with then, everyone is ok with that.

moosepoop · 2013-06-23, 12:40 PM

Originally Posted by omega four

Just because a game allows its players to theoretically buy anything without having to spend real money on it does NOT mean that a game is not P2W.

I use only default guns on all classes. this game is not p2w. why don't you "boycott" the game like you promised? then maybe the devs would listen to you.

MrMak · 2013-06-23, 12:43 PM

You have no idea what you are talking about.

Right off the top of my head. Team Fortress 2. if you are getting "sundly beaten" you cant realy blame it on what weapons you do or do not have. The default ones are usualy the most versatile and have no downsides or gimmicks.

omega four · 2013-06-23, 12:47 PM

There's no accounting for a gamer's skill in games. That's what you fail to consider.

Originally Posted by MrMak

You have no idea what you are talking about.

Right off the top of my head. Team Fortress 2. if you are getting "sundly beaten" you cant realy blame it on what weapons you do or do not have. The default ones are usualy the most versatile and have no downsides or gimmicks.

MrMak · 2013-06-23, 12:56 PM

First off. Quoted text goes ABOVE your reply. Makes it easier for everyone.

Second. Pay to win sugests tht if oyu pay you have a very significant advantage over those woh didnt and oyu will beat those who didnt most of the time if the skill gap is not to high. And with that game that is simply not the case.

moosepoop · 2013-06-23, 12:58 PM

Originally Posted by MrMak

First off. Quoted text goes ABOVE your reply. Makes it easier for everyone.

Second. Pay to win sugests tht if oyu pay you have a very significant advantage over those woh didnt and oyu will beat those who didnt most of the time if the skill gap is not to high. And with that game that is simply not the case.

the guys a straight up weirdo. none of his posts make sense.

Crator · 2013-06-23, 01:00 PM

The argument here is about resources being P2W, not the guns. I don't think the guns are P2W at all in this game.