99 replies to this topic

[gregsolidus]

Anyone remember how dark the nights were?Good times...

[Project_Mercy]

From a gameplay perspective, ChromeHounds was closer, but I think what people are referring to is the meta-game aspect. WoT is a lot closer than ChromeHounds, which was just buying a disk and an XBL gold account.

[Name48928]

Jonneh, on 22 June 2012 - 10:28 AM, said:

Except that you can buy premium mechs, pay for "premium account" which gives you 50% more XP/Cash and that you play purely through 12v12 matches for which you get XP based on damage done and tanks spotted. Sorry, mechs.

Seems the same to me so far? Not one speculation so far.

Except that the premium mechs MAY also be obtainable with c-bills. WoT premiums cannot be obtained without spending RL cash. That would be a very important distinction in their F2P business models.

However, if MWO has an equivalent of "gold ammo", then yeah, PGI's business model will fall into the "pay to win" side of the spectrum.

Things such as cash/XP multipliers are in most all F2P models. They're time accelerators. They don't directly add power or advantage to the player and don't really fall into the "pay to win" camp. They just allow players to progress faster. The important thing is that nNon-paying players can reach the same point as paying players, it just takes a little longer.

Uncertainty about where in the F2P spectrum MWO falls is one of the main reasons I've not purchased a Founder pack yet. I won't support businesses that follow the "pay to win" model.

Edited by MinionJoe, 22 June 2012 - 10:50 AM.

[Joanna Conners]

Jakebob, on 22 June 2012 - 10:20 AM, said:

aahh.. that explains it... it's a console game (which I interpret as a 'kiddie game').

Real games are played on PC's.

That'd be what I interpret as a "kiddie attitude".

[coRpSE]

Jonneh, on 22 June 2012 - 10:28 AM, said:

Except that you can buy premium mechs, pay for "premium account" which gives you 50% more XP/Cash and that you play purely through 12v12 matches for which you get XP based on damage done and tanks spotted. Sorry, mechs.

Seems the same to me so far? Not one speculation so far.

I agree with you on this, so far what I have gathered is that this is taking the same root that WoT has gone. I just hope they don't kill the game and the community aspect like WoT. Some of you may know me from WoT as the Clan new's Reporter for the New's letter that appears on the WoT forums. It used to be every week but now its a bi-weekly newsletter because WG decided to start getting rid of the community and have paid staff take over. Which thus far has done nothing. But thats a different thing all together.

But as for comparison, I don't see why people wouldn't use WoT for comparison because 1.)What Jonneh said, and 2.) Allot of people here play or have played WoT and are familiar with it. It will be used because the majority or people know the set up and how that works so it make for the perfect game for comparison. I am sure there may be some other games out their that might work, but using something that is more familiar to people is going to be the best root.

MinionJoe, on 22 June 2012 - 10:49 AM, said:

Except that the premium mechs MAY also be obtainable with c-bills. WoT premiums cannot be obtained without spending RL cash. That would be a very important distinction in their F2P business models.

However, if MWO has an equivalent of "gold ammo", then yeah, PGI's business model will fall into the "pay to win" side of the spectrum.

Things such as cash/XP multipliers are in most all F2P models. They're time accelerators. They don't directly add power or advantage to the player and don't really fall into the "pay to win" camp. They just allow players to progress faster. The important thing is that nNon-paying players can reach the same point as paying players, it just takes a little longer.

Uncertainty about where in the F2P spectrum MWO falls is one of the main reasons I've not purchased a Founder pack yet. I won't support businesses that follow the "pay to win" model.

The game is going to have differences, if there weren't differences as minor as that then this would be called World of Mechwarrior. Minor differences in the model will occur to best suit the game situation, like what I have gathered, WoWP will be a little different then WoT when it comes down to how they will handle everything, but its more about the similarities then the differences that this thread was based upon where he was asking to stop using the comparison.

Edited by coRpSE, 22 June 2012 - 11:00 AM.

[Valhakar]

Jakebob, on 22 June 2012 - 10:20 AM, said:

aahh.. that explains it... it's a console game (which I interpret as a 'kiddie game').

Real games are played on PC's.

Body point location damage, heat, infor warfare, squad based, and a mech lab with inifinite configurations. It was not a kiddie game. It was more BT than MechWarrior out at that time.

[Name48928]

coRpSE, on 22 June 2012 - 10:53 AM, said:

The game is going to have differences, if there weren't differences as minor as that then this would be called World of Mechwarrior. Minor differences in the model will occur to best suit the game situation, like what I have gathered, WoWP will be a little different then WoT when it comes down to how they will handle everything, but its more about the similarities then the differences that this thread was based upon where he was asking to stop using the comparison.

Well, yes, or course there will be differences. They're different games after all.

The question/concern is "what will be the similarities?" The information we have now indicates that PGI will not follow the "pay to win" business model. But until they open the store (or at least post pricing), we're not going to know for sure.

[raptorian]

I'll never forget the first time I saw "BOTH ARMIES FAIL" flash up.

The battle in question involved me having a knife fight in my RJ Sniper, with only one of my rifles left, then promptly hiding behind a hill till time was up as the rest of my squad was dead.

[Covet]

MinionJoe, on 22 June 2012 - 10:49 AM, said:

Except that the premium mechs MAY also be obtainable with c-bills. WoT premiums cannot be obtained without spending RL cash. That would be a very important distinction in their F2P business models.

I highly doubt premium mechs can be purchased with c-bills. There are 2 currencies in the game. c-bills will be used to buy regular mechs. You will need to spend RL money for premium mechs in MWO. FTP does not mean you get the whole game for free. With the amount of time and money they are putting into this game, they cannot recoup losses with paint jobs and the odd premium account.

I don't know if there will be 'gold ammo' in mwo, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was. The devs are using WoT as an inspiration of their business model. Why would anyone spend RL money on a premium mech when we could get it free? To save a couple hours? that won't cut it. Premium mechs are only 25% more c-bills earned. Once you grind up c-bills to get your first one, you can get your next one 25% faster. Seems counter productive for them making profits.

Free to play doesn't mean "Game for cheap players". It means you pay what meets your needs.

Dev's need to eat too.

[starview]

If you think MWO is going to be a different model than WOT your delusional. From what has been released and inferred it's pretty much the same game but with mech mechanics rather than tanks.

[Psyche]

Chromehounds had a single player component, was an Xbox game (that required Live! Gold membership) with a DLC shop. MWO and WoT are multiplayer exclusively, on the PC only with a Premium Item (Pay2Win) shop - neither of them even have an offline Demo.

For WoT thats pretty bad - normally a company would Want to show their product to perspective shoppers/downloaders...unless of course they can't hide the Pay2Win scam.

No clue why Piranha/PGI wouldn't with MW:O other than the same reason, its been pretty common across this industry (recently even more so than usual - probably hard economic times or maybe regulation has gotten too loose).

[Covet]

starview, on 22 June 2012 - 11:29 AM, said:

If you think MWO is going to be a different model than WOT your delusional. From what has been released and inferred it's pretty much the same game but with mech mechanics rather than tanks.

Just hoping there's no gold ammo.

[Tetatae Squawkins]

Looks a hell of a lot like WOT with mechs to me. That may be a bit oversimplified but I don't see whatever some of you are seeing.

[Reported for Inappropriate Name]

replace mechs with tanks, and you have world of tanks beta.

the pay model is quite similar as well.

this is why they are getting compared, as an Ex Wot player I'm hoping this provides not only a different experience, but a better experience overall in terms of community support and care for the game quality.

I know the point of a business is to make money for a provided service, and that to be considered "successful" in the stock market you must have exponential annual profit, but thinking like this when providing an entertainment media will only keep your customers so long as you have a monopoly. I'm warning you now piranha, if you love your game and nurture it, and if you find your customer base and make them happy, and stick to those principals instead of trying to appeal to "everybody"(see: corporate whores), then you will most definitely be able to secure a long term user base that is happy, and will provide you with enough money to live happily with your families while at the same time growing your ser you know what i'll just stop. I don't know a damn thing about business anyway. lol.

just, don't think you need to always make more money compared to last year, because eventually you'll start cutting your service and start ******* off your customers, which is why i've always said competitive rts players would make the best economists, if you know what I mean

Edited by Battlecruiser, 22 June 2012 - 11:59 AM.

[Urulf]

aRottenKomquat, on 22 June 2012 - 10:10 AM, said:

I think many of the WoT comparisons come from us WoT players who are not happy with the direction the game is taking and hoping MWO will fill the void left by WoT becoming a sucky game. That's how I look at it anyway.

totally agree there. Comparisons don't have to be a bad thing, if we are aiming for a better MWO game in the end.

[Fluffy Kitten]

the whiners will whine about everything.

make them play MMO pong, and they will still complain about something.
"pay to win cause his line is whiter"

whatever.


bottom line is as soon as this game goes live, there will be a pile of threads about this game being pay to win too.
the line in the sand is subjective, when you realize you cant be instantly the best player for free after your first game, you will cry pay to win.


i choose to ignore the post whenever i read it,
because it almost always translates to:
"someone is better than me, so they must have paid for it"


MWO will be a much more complex game than WoT. WoT is fairly linear in the battles, where MWO will have a much deeper dynamic to actual battles.
a deeper set of complexities will mean that it will be harder to master.
a harder game will separate the good players from the bad by a thicker margin.
it will also create more "you paid for your success so this is a pay to win game"

[Erev]

I am fairly certain it is WoT with mechs... maybe with a bit more customization. That said that model can be almost alright provided that there is no premium ammo and that any possible premium mechs and modules are balanced or only give indirect benefits (such as the c-bill increase). Admittedly what I would prefer to see in any RMT store would be new skins, sounds, and logos... and maybe the ability to rent out more mech slots on a monthly basis (two bucks per extra mech slot per month... encourage people to buy several and keep them with cheap pricing).

[alpha assault]

WOT is a game Mech devs can learn from don't introduce a game like this take your time with it and fix game breaking bugs before launch

Edited by alpha assault, 22 June 2012 - 12:05 PM.

[SparkSovereign]

If you've paid attention to some of the trailers or dev comments, they've said a few times that someone with more money than time can't "buy power". Regardless of how you acquire your mechs, they're still the same mechs, and they still mount the same guns. Premium Mechs are just re-skins of regular ones with a C-bill bonus, and premium account status just gives you more money/xp; absolutely nothing so far indicates at all that money does anything other than save you time. Which is perfect. As you can see from all the yellow, people will pay money anyway, so they don't need to resort to pay-to-win.

If you want an example of a similar model, League of Legends lets you buy xp-multipliers and skins, but when you arrive on the battlefield it's the same powers, the same items. That game is still going strong.

Edited by SparkSovereign, 22 June 2012 - 12:09 PM.

[SpecTRe X]

Jonneh, on 22 June 2012 - 10:21 AM, said:

why are people making all these butthurt threads about comparing MWO to its closest F2P model-mate?

Yes, this game is based on the WoT model. Who cares? What does that even mean to any of you, why are you all so crazy about it?

Jeez.

Because WoT has become a suckfest for anyone but the devs, pay to win massive unbalance, nerfs that make more problems than they solve etc etc. So people get mad when you compare a crap game to a game they hope will be the opposite