309 replies to this topic

[Doomey]

League of Legends almost completely gets it's revenue from cosmetics and it seems to be doing just fine. I really hope they adopt their buisness model. Just replace champions with mechs and runes with your weapons and skins with paint jobs. For those of you who dont know, you can use currency you get from playing the game to buy champions or use real money to purchase them. you can only use the in game currency to purchase runes.

[KnowBuddy]

Never underestimate vanity, laziness, and the desire for social status symbols.

While I share the incredulity that many have that cosmetic items are a significant portion of sales for F2P games, I accept it as one of those inscrutable truths of the universe. I imagine it has something to do with the unbelievable power of the three drivers I listed above.

If I can get hours of enjoyment with minimal expense from a good, healthy new Mechwarrior game because it is funded by the sale of hot pink leopard paint jobs, I'm all for it.

[Valkyrie Vewas]

Also bad intentions please make a sig that dosent take up the whole screen... thanks....

[gregsolidus]

Thats his right as an American.

[Grax]

Absolutely unacceptable.


This "Pay-To-Win" market scheme ends up costing the average player MORE money on a monthly basis than a normal $15/month product. This shows the NORMAL "MMO" player that the Lead Developer him/herself does NOT believe Mechwarrior Online is of quality. You can put all the marketing "spins" on it that you may want. However, the fact remains that the community as a whole is tired of seeing good games destroyed by this P2W bullcrap.

IF you try to sell ANYTHING that is unobtainable in-game, or gives other players an advantage (ala: World of Tanks premium tanks, ammo, etc) this game will shut down faster than a **** in a nunnery. We, the BattleTech community, simply won't accept it.

I've been a true fan of BattleTech since I was 9 years old when I first got MechWarrior (yes, the VERY first one). This news of "Pay-To-Win" model GREATLY upsets me.


On a side note: What happened to the NEW Mechwarrior "reboot" being done recently that is considered "MechWarrior5"? Was it canceled, or is it still in production? I'd MUCH rather play a 32v32 online MechSim such as the MechWarrior reboot that a cash-shop exploiting MMO!

ps: why is fa-rt censored?

Edited by Grax, 01 November 2011 - 10:21 PM.

[Grond]

Not every game that is F2P is also Pay to Win (P2W). Yet there is no way a game can afford to support itself with just selling cosmetic items. Cosmetic stuff doesn't sell enough. So the items have to be usefull.

Many F2P MMO's out there offer items that make the game convenient rather than help you win. What I mean is that P2W items, by definition, make you a stronger and better player. In Mechwarrior, this would be Lost tech weapons and equipment while everyone else is using basic components, or perhaps ones that give you better stats. Items of convenience, however, are items that help you accomplish non combat things faster, like cheaper mechs and equipment, quicker leveling, cheaper travel, etc. You still end up with the same gear as everyone else, but not buying anything just takes longer. When the latter is combined with Cosmetic items (paint schemes, naming your techs, pet animals that ride in your cockpit, polkadotted parachutes for when you eject) it can pay for the game.

Another trick that F2P games use, is to make all the items TRADEABLE, or at least sellable in game. What this means is you will still have access to everything that the people who pay can get. They just need to buy it and sell it to you for in game credits. If you doubt anyone in their right mind would buy stuff with real cash just to sell it in game, check out the games at http://www.gpotato.com/?m=games . I have only played Rappelz, and it's not a bad game (good graphics and game mechanics), just practically no content, few comunity standards and pure grind. Lots of folks in these games buy stuff just to resell and become crazy rich in game. The ability to sell these items of convenience to others, combined with leveling things in game being a monsterous grind (usefull items for sale help you level faster, name pets, store more items, collect loot faster) generates much of their sales.

That being said, it would hugely lower the need for P2W items if they sold the game in stores and it was just free to play online using the servers. The money generated from the game sales would offset developement and the ingame sales would pay for keeping the servers running.

All that being said, I would still prefer a game I could pay for once or even a subscription only with free download since it is more convenient and less time is spent trying to figure out how to afford the next piece of gear before C-Bill farmers figure out how to artificially drive the prices up.

[Aidan]

Well look at F2P this way. We, the player base of MWO, are hiring the PGI studio to create content for us. As long as the content works well in the context of the game and we are having good competitive fun, why not contribute.

Sounds ok to me but I am eager to hear some more details which I am sure will be forthcoming.

[Grax]

Not to be rude Grond, but you're wrong. I've played nearly every single "F2P" MMO out there, and I can tell you that generally they ALL have some sort of exploitative gap DESIGNED into their games to pigeon hole you, eventually, into buying something.

The "FREE" aspect of the name needs to be completely removed, and should ONLY be referred to as "CashShop" or some other phrase. Putting the word "FREE" in there is just insulting to a player's intelligence.

Furthermore, I've been around the MMO, and gaming, market for a VERY long time, and all i've seen is constant abuse & degredation to games & their players from this new fad by publishers & developers alike. PayToWin is a digusting model, and it'll only be acceptable if it's considered an "Extended Free Trial" putting PAYING subscription players far above FREE players.

[Bad Intentions]

Max Liao, on 01 November 2011 - 10:03 PM, said:

The devs have to make money somehow, and they deserve to make money for a well made product; however, people like me never pay for fluff. I'll fight with stick 'Mechs that shoot Pong bolts if need be, but I will never pay for fluff - in any game.

I agree that any F2P game should not give a tactical advantage for those who pay - else it's no longer legitimately free to play. However, those games never earn a dime off of me. As a developer I would be in a conundrum over this.

I am in the camp that hopes there is a monthly fee (even if it's just a low cost monthly fee), else you'd better give me something worthwhile on which to spend my money.

Plain pixels = free

Glowy pixels = $1.00

I'll be sportin' the plain pixels every time.

Understand that I want to pay for this game - (if it's done well) - just give me something worthwhile to buy.

I respect that Max, and I agree to a large extent. However, (like you said) in a free to download, free to play game, the developers have to make money somewhere. I would rather drive a **** colored mech that shoots beige lasers than pay monthly for a cosmetics upgrade. I'm more than willing to pay, but I need substance rather than a paint job.

If that comes in the form of:
More mech bays.
A bigger drop ship,
More mission options or reduce the time it takes to upgrade a mech.
Or increase the number of items a player can have on the auction house at one time.
Temporary EXP/Loot boosters.

Then I'm all for it.

I don't think "special mechs" should be reserved for only those that pay.

[Ancient]

omega5-9er, on 01 November 2011 - 07:44 PM, said:

I've been saying it all over the forums today. World of Tanks is VERY successful right now, and although yes paying for a better ammunition type would not fit Mechwarrior, paying premium money for "Clantech weaponry" or some such that gives a little difference in the player but not an over edge could be acceptable in my opinion.
World of Tanks not just makes money on ammunition types and premium tanks, but the type of "subscription" that they offer. Pay for some gold, then take your gold and buy days/weeks/month of premium account. With the premium account you get fifty percent more XP and In-Game credits.
I could very well see this working for Mechwarrior. And if the Publisher could afford it, seeing a premium c-bills card for $20 at a pharmacy or Wal-Mart would be very nice.

barcode, on 01 November 2011 - 09:26 PM, said:

They could easily follow the WoT model and harm absolutely nobody. Progress through the tech/skill trees is improved by paying money, but you're put into matchmaking based on your tech/skill tree level(s).

I have to disagree with that.

WoT is a successful game, alright, but it is successful because it's the only plug in a genre black hole.
They have literary no competition. No similar game to which a player can migrate. That means no "***** you people, [insert game name here] offers me a better deal" which is otherwise a big factor in F2P game success.

Wot's economic model is fundamentally flawed. IF they had a good contender they'd have to abapt or close shop.

The flaw is rather subtle - non-paying customer can't afford to maintain high-tier tech.

Gradualy the cost of repairs cathes up with the player as he climbs the tech tree. This starts slowing you down untill eventually your highest tier tech stops giving you income and starts requiring aditional fundings for use. You can keep pushing past that point, but you'll have to alterate between you "target tech" and your "farming tech".

That'd be fine by itself, you pay less, so you grind more, BUT (and big one at that) while you are farming you'll be runnig into people who drive the tech you are farming to maintain. Those people will have advantage over you, and in the final calculation you'll be "dieing" a lot more than they do. In raw terms (please pardon the wording but there's no decent substitute here) you'll be owend most of the time by those who pay.

I haven't been around WoT for a long time, maybe upgrades to search engine alliviated some of those issues by pitting players against players on similar vehicles, but the point stands - there's a fine line between "free to play" and "free to be plankton" WoT crossed that line by droping "free" players into "poverty".

I don't have long history of playing LoL, but from what I know their model is about as good as F2P ever gets, so I'm keeping my hopes up and my ears to the ground (I hope they don't get steped on >_<).

[Bad Intentions]

Valkyrie Vewas, on 01 November 2011 - 10:19 PM, said:

Also bad intentions please make a sig that dosent take up the whole screen... thanks....

Don't lie, you love looking at my Atlas. I'll take it under advisement. =)

[selbie]

I for one would like to know more about the game's features, let alone their proposed business model, before coming to the conclusion that F2P is a bad direction to take. Is there an in-game economy/auction house? What are the details of progression for the mech classes? How are battles structured in terms of gameplay? How do you capture or defend territories? How can the player-run Mech Corps exert their influence? What is the server structure? Split by region? Sharded? Single server like EVE Online? Instanced multiplayer with a global lobby?

Space Captain Zor, on 01 November 2011 - 09:53 PM, said:

I smell a Thrustmaster/MechWarrior Online bundle...

Hell yes. I hope Microsoft produce a new SideWinder stick as good as the old FF2.

[rollermint]

Yes to Cosmetic/Vanity stuff.
Yes to additional Mech Slots/Player slots.
Yes to ability to form guilds or lead larger lances.
Yes to additional in-game monetary and XP rewards.

NO TO ANY TACTICAL ADVANTAGES.
NO TO SUPERIOR MECHS.
NO TO SUPERIOR WEAPONRY.
NO TO SUPERIOR AMMO.
NO TO SUPERIOR MECH COMPONENTS.

[gregsolidus]

Grax, on 01 November 2011 - 10:20 PM, said:

Absolutely unacceptable.


This "Pay-To-Win" market scheme ends up costing the average player MORE money on a monthly basis than a normal $15/month product. This shows the NORMAL "MMO" player that the Lead Developer him/herself does NOT believe Mechwarrior Online is of quality. You can put all the marketing "spins" on it that you may want. However, the fact remains that the community as a whole is tired of seeing good games destroyed by this P2W bullcrap.

IF you try to sell ANYTHING that is unobtainable in-game, or gives other players an advantage (ala: World of Tanks premium tanks, ammo, etc) this game will shut down faster than a **** in a nunnery. We, the BattleTech community, simply won't accept it.

I've been a true fan of BattleTech since I was 9 years old when I first got MechWarrior (yes, the VERY first one). This news of "Pay-To-Win" model GREATLY upsets me.


On a side note: What happened to the NEW Mechwarrior "reboot" being done recently that is considered "MechWarrior5"? Was it canceled, or is it still in production? I'd MUCH rather play a 32v32 online MechSim such as the MechWarrior reboot that a cash-shop exploiting MMO!

ps: why is fa-rt censored?

You are really new,go read the stickyed thread.

[CobraFive]

There was already a really long thread about this. Why not just post there?

Anyway, I have full faith they'll do a great job. They've already said they don't want it to be P2W... what else do you want to hear from them?

Once they announce pricing details, I'm sure people will overreact regardless.

[gregsolidus]

rollermint, on 01 November 2011 - 10:37 PM, said:

Yes to Cosmetic/Vanity stuff.
Yes to additional Mech Slots/Player slots.
Yes to ability to form guilds or lead larger lances.
Yes to additional in-game monetary and XP rewards.

NO TO ANY TACTICAL ADVANTAGES.
NO TO SUPERIOR MECHS.
NO TO SUPERIOR WEAPONRY.
NO TO SUPERIOR AMMO.
NO TO SUPERIOR MECH COMPONENTS.

Isn't the ability to level up and accrue wealth faster than a non paying player a tactical advantage?

[Grond]

Grax, on 01 November 2011 - 10:27 PM, said:

Not to be rude Grond, but you're wrong. I've played nearly every single "F2P" MMO out there, and I can tell you that generally they ALL have some sort of exploitative gap DESIGNED into their games to pigeon hole you, eventually, into buying something.

The "FREE" aspect of the name needs to be completely removed, and should ONLY be referred to as "CashShop" or some other phrase. Putting the word "FREE" in there is just insulting to a player's intelligence.

Furthermore, I've been around the MMO, and gaming, market for a VERY long time, and all i've seen is constant abuse & degredation to games & their players from this new fad by publishers & developers alike. PayToWin is a digusting model, and it'll only be acceptable if it's considered an "Extended Free Trial" putting PAYING subscription players far above FREE players.

If you read what I wrote, I was not advocating P2W. I would not play if it was P2W, no matter how much I like Battletech. I was simply saying how it is possible to do a F2P (Yes, its never really free, don't be a **** about it, and yes you are rude) without being P2W, yet selling only cosmetic items would never pay for the game.

An no one cares how long you have been around MMOs. The fact that you had to bring it up means I don't believe you anyway. 90% of the people here are old. We've all been around these games forever.

[rollermint]

gregsolidus, on 01 November 2011 - 10:40 PM, said:

Isn't the ability to level up and accrue wealth faster than a non paying player a tactical advantage?

It is but imho it is acceptable since its not a full restriction of features and doesn't impact the gameplay in any way as compared to allowing players to buy superior Mechs/Weapons/Ammo that would otherwise be fully off-limits to free players.

[Red Beard]

Brakkyn, on 01 November 2011 - 09:37 PM, said:

I am against any sort of payment of real-world money for any sort of in-game advantages. Cosmetic stuff, fine...buying levels, advanced weaponry, heavier chassis, real money for C-bills...no, adamantly no. Put your time into the game itself to get what you want out of it--work for it, in-game. Having a larger real-world paycheck should not bring you digital prestige.

Quote of the week.

[Doomey]

gregsolidus, on 01 November 2011 - 10:40 PM, said:

Isn't the ability to level up and accrue wealth faster than a non paying player a tactical advantage?

Depends on the advantages you get for leveling up and if you are fighting people in a certain level bracket or not. Hell, if I am fighting my way to the top and some dude who has no idea bought himself up to my level is on the enemy team thats just free XP to me. Sure it sucks if he's on my team but maybe we can help him out and pull through, if you lose the game just queue up for another geeze. I honestly think this is conversation is getting a little ahead of itself. other than very generic game-play mechanics (which sound very fun) we really know nothing about pricing or what is being priced. I think everyone really need to put down the pitchforks and torches and let the people make something first. Then we can take up our torches and actually have something to burn >

Edited by Doomey, 01 November 2011 - 10:55 PM.