Fut, on 27 March 2014 - 11:08 AM, said:
My apologies if I'm coming off as judgmental. That was never my intention.
Also, I fully agree that fun is subjective - different strokes for different folk and all that jazz. So the issue really, is finding that delicate balance.
No worries, I just get a little aggravated with this topic so I may have just been overly sensitive to the wording.
Balance... Now there is a word that PGI seems to struggle with so perhaps we are all doomed to be miserable when it comes to this topic and sadly many others.
Fut, on 27 March 2014 - 11:08 AM, said:
The part that I get hung up on though, is that the game fully allows you to have your fun (ie. Collecting dem Mechs!), but you want to alter it because you're not having fun fast enough. So the proposed solution is to water the game down for everybody so that some people can fill their garage up faster.
It isn't a matter of not having fun fast enough, but rather I lose motivation to play at all. When I am in a game and I see a build or a mech that someone did something I hadn't thought of and I want to try it because it looks fun I then start to think hmm, I need to buy a mech bay with MC, and then I need another 12million c-bills which at my current rate of income will be roughly 100 games, and then I need... You know what screw it I'm just going to go do some laundry.
Fut, on 27 March 2014 - 11:08 AM, said:
Like I said before, I'm not against people collecting Mechs if that's what they enjoy doing. Have at it, collect them all.
If it feels like it's taking a bit too long, that's what MC purchases are for. There's no need to tweak the earnings.
I agree, but the problem becomes finding the balance that works. If the payout was only 1 C-bill per match a lot of people are going to think its taking too long, but the question becomes are they going to buy MC to skip the long grind or are they just going to leave. It needs to be a situation where I want to spend money not feel forced to.
Fut, on 27 March 2014 - 11:08 AM, said:
Although this might kill my argument, my main reasoning for this line of thought, is basically because Mechwarriors were never meant to be fat cats with fully stocked garages housing a full regiment of Mechs. To allow people to become so immensely wealthy, is breaking the immersion and feel of the game.
Lots of stuff breaks the immersion and feel of the game what's one more thing?
Fut, on 27 March 2014 - 11:08 AM, said:
Also, if there ever comes a time where R&R, logistics of C/FW travel are introduced, it won't even matter because most people will be insanely wealthy.
"Hmm.. Fully repair Atlas for 10mil CB?" Checks bank account - 1 Billion Cbills "Sure, do it."
Not sure why that matters. There are going to be people like that now even if nothing changes.
Fut, on 27 March 2014 - 11:08 AM, said:
Hate to compare to other games, but one of the things that makes EVE such an amazing game is the fact that they have a fully developed economy. Losing a ship actually means something in that game (means a lot depending on what ship you were in) because money isn't just handed out all loosey-goosey.
I liked EVE, but this isn't EVE. With EVE losing a ship did mean something, but earning isk to buy and replace ships wasn't done just by running lvl 4/5 missions. Your ability to earn in EVE was variable depending on how much effort you were willing to put into it, and the sky and beyond was the limit. However, here we don't have all the other options to earn and we are stuck making a living by what amounts to running lvl 2/3 missions in EVE.