Paying for xtra conts - Page 2

Coreldan · 2012-04-04, 02:15 PM

Originally Posted by Zulthus

Nope. No, no no no, NO. Bad idea. Paying for camo and sidegrades is one thing. Why the hell should we have to pay for maps? Even F2P players need to get them for free. Why limit the amount of people on a continent like that?

While I do agree with you baseline, but I actually find the "entitlement" in your post hilarious. You get the base game of a AAA game for free and you ask why should you pay for maps?

It would be VERY much justified for them to make maps cost, it just probably isnt the best way of doing it.

You do not have the right to anything.

But yes, I do agree with your base reason that no for paid maps, rather have the income somewhere that wont hurt the game, much like this idea probably would for reasons already mentioned many times here.

headcrab13 · 2012-04-04, 02:22 PM

This is something I'd like to see added as part of the 5-year plan. Sure, the majority of the content will be available at launch, but how do you continue to make money for years and years?

There are any number of things they could sell, and I have a feeling that veeery few people will be truly playing for free. You're going to want those awesome new gun mods that your outfit-mates have, you're going to want the armor patches and new camo, the various conveniences that will available on the store, etc.

After a year or two, what's wrong with selling access to a new space station or continent or underwater base/city like Rapture?

I for one will be paying more per month than I did for Planetside, and I have zero issues with that.

Coreldan · 2012-04-04, 02:27 PM

Originally Posted by headcrab13

This is something I'd like to see added as part of the 5-year plan. Sure, the majority of the content will be available at launch, but how do you continue to make money for years and years?

There are any number of things they could sell, and I have a feeling that veeery few people will be truly playing for free. You're going to want those awesome new gun mods that your outfit-mates have, you're going to want the armor patches and new camo, the various conveniences that will available on the store, etc.

After a year or two, what's wrong with selling access to a new space station or continent or underwater base/city like Rapture?

I for one will be paying more per month than I did for Planetside, and I have zero issues with that.

I dont think that many are against the idea per se, it's just that it doesnt really suit Planetside.

I mean, WoW has expansions and if you dont have em, you cant enter the expansions zone. Battlefield has the DLC maps too which you cant enter without em. However with Planetside it would quite strongly interfere with the game. I mean, the game is about massive battles in persistant areas. Like someone said, an outfit decides to switch continents, then they found our their sundy driver doesnt have the map and can't enter. Also, this would radically lower the scale of battles in said areas. Planetside NEEEEEEEDS the big scale numbers, otherwise its nothing but another run of the mill FPS.

Zulthus · 2012-04-04, 02:29 PM

Originally Posted by Coreldan

While I do agree with you baseline, but I actually find the "entitlement" in your post hilarious. You get the base game of a AAA game for free and you ask why should you pay for maps?

It would be VERY much justified for them to make maps cost, it just probably isnt the best way of doing it.

You do not have the right to anything.

But yes, I do agree with your base reason that no for paid maps, rather have the income somewhere that wont hurt the game, much like this idea probably would for reasons already mentioned many times here.

There is no 'entitlement'. If it's a free to play game you shouldn't have to pay for the meat of the game in general. It was their choice to go F2P so they make money off of the attachments, sidegrades, camos, customizations, etc. If they make you pay for the CONTS, you'll find a hell of a lot less population in the game because not everyone that will be playing will have a stuffed wallet like you. Paying for the main content in a F2P game is what turns people off. There are many other things they can charge for that don't affect the population in areas.

Coreldan · 2012-04-04, 02:32 PM

Originally Posted by Zulthus

There is no 'entitlement'. If it's a free to play game you shouldn't have to pay for the meat of the game in general. It was their choice to go F2P so they make money off of the attachments, sidegrades, camos, customizations, etc. If they make you pay for the CONTS, you'll find a hell of a lot less population in the game because not everyone that will be playing will have a stuffed wallet like you. Paying for the main content in a F2P game is what turns people off.

Which sorta leads me to an other thing...

It's weird how even sub-based games (WoW) or just retail-cost games (BF3) are justified to charge for maps, didnt they already "pay for the meat of the general game" once (or all the time in form of sub).

With the above noted, I still dont think it's even outrageous to charge for new content in an F2P game, but I still do agree with you that this will not work on Planetside cos as you said, it lowers and divides populations, and being Planetside it just needs the big pops in every area.

Also, I can guarantee my wallet isn't stuffed. I have 0 income at the moment as I'm studying

And I still don't say that this would be an OK thing to do for Planetside. I'm with you there, I just sorta found your original reasonings a bit weird.

Zulthus · 2012-04-04, 02:38 PM

Originally Posted by Coreldan

Which sorta leads me to an other thing...

It's weird how even sub-based games (WoW) or just retail-cost games (BF3) are justified to charge for maps, didnt they already "pay for the meat of the general game" once (or all the time in form of sub).

With the above noted, I still dont think it's even outrageous to charge for new content in an F2P game, but I still do agree with you that this will not work on Planetside cos as you said, it lowers and divides populations, and being Planetside it just needs the big pops in every area.

Those are two completely different things and are not comparable. BF3 is instance based and does not rely on population and persistence to keep people playing. And yes, as you said, it wouldn't work with Planetside because it is a persistent world. WOW expansions are complete overhauls adding MANY new things, and it is justified when you pay the price for those. (Classes, models, items, etc) Paying money for an expansion in Planetside would be justified when it includes weapons, vehicles, and other items. You should not be charged just for what cont you're playing the game on. It wouldn't work with the game.

Redshift · 2012-04-04, 02:41 PM

No it's a terrible idea.
We've seen it to some degree in PS1 with the caves being deserted/ lower pops than normal. Now imagine that with the majority of the players not having the content.

Skittles · 2012-04-04, 02:59 PM

I want to pay for it!!!!!!!!!

I want to pay for everything extra. I want to pay for

Extra maps
Side gadgets on my weapons
Helmets
Camo
Uniforms
Taunts
Mod to vehicles
VEHICLES period!!
Camo on vehicles
boots
sunglasses
gloves
TOWERS more money for towers!!
Flails--I want to be able to pay for flails!
Max units
Max camo
Max helmets
Max side arms
Max dance moves
Max rek kits!! OMG YES finally
Ammo dumps
Ammo period--make my ammo cost me .25 a pop
Med kits
Med reks
Blue Cross/Blue Shield
Nicotine patches
Nicotine gum
GUM!!
Bubblegum
Bubblious!! where you be?
Sundy guns
Sundy camo
Sundy underarmor
Underarmor uniforms..sschweet
Sundy ammo!!
All vehicle ammo!!!
Make it all cost like .42 so theres less vehicle spam!!
Spawning!! Why have we not thought of this yet?
Make spawning cost you money!
Dying! SHIIIIIIITTT someones gotta remove the body
that shit costs money. Charge us
We need to eat. We should be charged for MREs
Army travels on its stomach
Squads
Squadleaders
Outfits
Outfit leaders
Outfit chat!
Broadcast chat

But what we really should be charging for is all you jackasses wanting to be charged for every God damn little thing in this game. It seems theres some idea thrown out and somewhere in a thread someone wants to be charged for it, or suggests SOE does.

Are you dumbasses stockholders in SOE or some such shit? I dont get this whole, "I need to pay for everything" mentality by people. Unless you have stock in SOE I see no viable reason why people think its necessary to toss out random ideas on extra ways we can be charged for in-game shit. Heres a thought. Just let it breath a little bit next time you think you need to suggest another way SOE can siphon money out of us, and let THEIR account/idea team come up with some brilliant idea to suck money out of us, instead of other gamers who for all intents and purposes should be on other gamer's side.

NCLynx · 2012-04-04, 03:01 PM

All major content ever released in PS2 will be FREE (AFAIK). However the more major content they push out, the more sidegrades and custom skins/colors etc we will have access to and be able to purchase.

**Malorn** · 2012-04-04, 03:12 PM

See this video for reasons why paying for extra continents is bad.

http://extra-credits.net/episodes/microtransactions/

The whole video is good microtransaction information, but at 7:00 it talks about the problem this will cause specifically.

NCLynx · 2012-04-04, 03:37 PM

Originally Posted by Malorn

See this video for reasons why paying for extra continents is bad.

http://extra-credits.net/episodes/microtransactions/

The whole video is good microtransaction information, but at 7:00 it talks about the problem this will cause specifically.

Love that video.

headcrab13 · 2012-04-04, 03:46 PM

Originally Posted by Skittles

Are you dumbasses stockholders in SOE or some such shit? I dont get this whole, "I need to pay for everything" mentality by people.

Paying money for quality products? I know, it's fucking insane, right?

What are you, 11? Get off your ass, get a job and support the devs who wear themselves thin designing these amazing games.

Coreldan · 2012-04-04, 04:01 PM

Originally Posted by Redshift

No it's a terrible idea.
We've seen it to some degree in PS1 with the caves being deserted/ lower pops than normal. Now imagine that with the majority of the players not having the content.

The other, probably bigger reason for deserted cave was probably cos it was a horrible idea.

NCLynx · 2012-04-04, 04:06 PM

Originally Posted by headcrab13

Paying money for quality products? I know, it's fucking insane, right?

What are you, 11? Get off your ass, get a job and support the devs who wear themselves thin designing these amazing games.

While there's nothing wrong with supporting the developers and paying for quality products as everyone should, I've noticed people bringing up some strange un-needed things that we *could* pay for. Things that if we were to have to pay for we'd very likely see lowered population from it. Whether that population loss is for a few specific continents only and the original 3 are unaffected or a global population loss would be determined by what we had to pay for.

headcrab13 · 2012-04-04, 04:08 PM

Originally Posted by Coreldan

The other, probably bigger reason for deserted cave was probably cos it was a horrible idea.

Haha, that it was. That it was.

One point that could really change the whole argument is simply the price, I suppose. I'm assuming most people here figure the new continent(s) would cost as much as a normal expansion pack, or at least a typical $15 map pack.

If they did offer access to ALL the new continents for $5, for example, who could really turn that down?