GuntherK, on 02 June 2012 - 10:58 AM, said:
Earning xp and credits faster will make you get stuff faster. Not better.
I think you maybe mistaken and a bit too assumptive on that point, depending how you define better I guess.
We will all have to wait and see.
I would never be foolish to call it P2W, it's not close to that classification yet. I actually don't even believe the concept exists, except to describe things like gold rounds. The actual problem is P2A (Pay To Advantage), the question is how marked a degree the advantage over the free player is, to the extent it inconveniences a free player by disadvantage.
Nothing can make the player better per se, but having better gear quicker is an advantage. You say it won't be better, that is where I think you may be mistaken. It looks like all things will need to be unlocked by XP, those earning double will unlock more faster, along with having money to buy them outright. You don't think those unlockables will give people an advantage of some tangible sort, I do. I'm sure that there will be some tangible and beneficial differences on the battlefield, it's unavoidable. People will see, it's not all going to rainbows, that I doubt. Even the best F2P models can't avoid some of these things, question will be how wonky it gets. I saw the devs comments on these things, endeavoring to quell people's concerns. To think earning faster won't be tangibly better, just cuts across all logic to me, it sounds like too much kool-aid mixed with some Everclear, the words don't compute to me.
Quote
Someday people will understand that for a game to survive it has to make money, even if it is a f2p.
BTW, they need to make money, just like everyone else does too, I don't understand how they got excluded in the first place.
Some people want quality to be the determining factor on developers earning money, not the usual tricks of building gaps between convenience to the payer and inconvenience to the free, that many have to stay vocal on until the abuses stop. There's only a few F2P games, out of many many F2P games, that people say are not too bad. Is everyone the fool on that including mainstream press? I guess the gamers raising flags of caution don't want the developers to eat or make games, that must be it.
My reasoning to take a stand is simple, I want a game that is enjoyable beyond 4 months, which a bad F2P model will kill on a certain level, and I don't want the industry to continue down using manipulation techniques because kids are easy marks. Horribly misguided, I know.
Edited by MadBoris, 02 June 2012 - 02:04 PM.