27 replies to this topic

[Omega59er]

I simply don't think that many mechwarriors will stand for a Nexon-Like payment system. So please Piranha, do not give into the Nexon system.

In one of the latest Q&A I see this:
"My main role on MechWarrior® Online™ is the injection of the F2P development model into this well-defined franchise. My experience in the F2P market comes from in-depth research and discussions with a key group of people at Nexon. It was here that I realized the nuances between the Asian F2P consumer and the North American F2P consumer had different expectations. I wrote a ‘thesis’ (for lack of a better word) on how F2P works and what motivates a player to play these types of games." -Paul Inouye

Now, this kind of confuses me. I bolded the part that worries me and underlined the part that gives me hope.
I hope the Mechwarrior Online system can be described somewhat better soon, because as I said...... I just don't think the majority of Mechwarrior's will stand for a Nexon type payment system.
I take my experience of the Nexon system from Combat Arms mostly. It is somewhat little known that Combat Arms did not have a pay system, or the "Black Market" as it is called in-game, for a long time. The game was great and fair, without the "Buy this and you will be able to kill everything in your way with ease." As soon as the Black Market went into effect and settled in, (People realised it wasn't going to get better) many people left. It took Combat Arms a long time to build back it's playerbase, basically by saying the game had always been like that.
Please don't do anything related to this with Mechwarrior.
As a semi-reccomendation, World of Tanks has a decent system. So does Lord of the Rings Online, although it's a different kind of game entirely.

Thoughts please.

[Vulpesveritas]

Personally I like Combat Arms' Payment system. Mainly because of the way CA plays, It's how I buy perm guns since I don't play enough to get decent GP guns, but I keep going back to CA. lol

[djuice1701]

World of Tank's method is pretty good IMO, it's not really Pay 2 Win, as most of the things your actually use real $$ on doesn't give your an edge over people who play for free. Its more of a convenience, more in game credits and experience that reduces grind time, extra garage/barrack slots so you can have more tanks to play with, things that don't effect normal gameplay and therefore doesn't have an effect on game balance.

A free player can do all those things, but just takes more time, and more management due to slight restrictions.

[Paul Inouye]

It's the underlined part that you should be paying attention to.

[John Clavell]

omega5-9er, on 16 January 2012 - 09:41 PM, said:

I simply don't think that many mechwarriors will stand for a Nexon-Like payment system. So please Piranha, do not give into the Nexon system.

In one of the latest Q&A I see this:
"My main role on MechWarrior® Online™ is the injection of the F2P development model into this well-defined franchise. My experience in the F2P market comes from in-depth research and discussions with a key group of people at Nexon. It was here that I realized the nuances between the Asian F2P consumer and the North American F2P consumer had different expectations. I wrote a ‘thesis’ (for lack of a better word) on how F2P works and what motivates a player to play these types of games." -Paul Inouye

Now, this kind of confuses me. I bolded the part that worries me and underlined the part that gives me hope.
I hope the Mechwarrior Online system can be described somewhat better soon, because as I said...... I just don't think the majority of Mechwarrior's will stand for a Nexon type payment system.
I take my experience of the Nexon system from Combat Arms mostly. It is somewhat little known that Combat Arms did not have a pay system, or the "Black Market" as it is called in-game, for a long time. The game was great and fair, without the "Buy this and you will be able to kill everything in your way with ease." As soon as the Black Market went into effect and settled in, (People realised it wasn't going to get better) many people left. It took Combat Arms a long time to build back it's playerbase, basically by saying the game had always been like that.
Please don't do anything related to this with Mechwarrior.
As a semi-reccomendation, World of Tanks has a decent system. So does Lord of the Rings Online, although it's a different kind of game entirely.

Thoughts please.

First. No offence is intended here. However, I feel just reading out that one line and basing your assumptions on which is flawed. There is no context here. What we do know from this statement is Paul worked at Nexon, and produced a document discussing F2P models and mechanics, that's it. Without reading his documentation, Paul's work could of been the greatest, pro consumer thing since sliced bread. Or it could of laid the groundwork to line Nexons fat-cat bosses pockets with the last penny of their customers.

I don't think Paul was the man making the final calls on Nexon's pricing model. This is backed up by the fact Paul worked at Nexon for 8 months according to his Linkedin profile. Combat Arms came to market on July 11th 2008 in North America. Paul Left Nexon in May 2008. It's possible he had a role in the pricing model for that game but it seems dubious in my mind considering he was working in the company at a time that Combat Arms would of been very close to finishing up. Certainly past the major design stages and in the final run.

Let's try to keep an open mind about this until PGI actually says how their F2P model is going to work. Also let's please not linch Paul Inouye for crimes there is no evidence he committed or even was involved with.

[Shalmyan Moonsong]

If you feel you can keep the costs down to be F2P, and keep the game balanced and fair, why not dismiss the F2P model, and make the game P2P but at a lower cost them most current MMO's? Most P2P now a days are charging $15 a month, if you think you can run the game as a F2P, and hope players will buy advantages, which they may or may not.

Why not make the game fair for all, but charge less per month? How many people would pay $6 per month for this game? people might not be willing to spend 15-20 a month, but you give them a great product, ad free, with out having to spend money to gain an advantage. I would think that would be a model for an MMO that people are not looking at. Right now you have to be either Free to play, but need to spend money to get the full experince of a game, and if you don't you will basicly be kicked in the teeth by people who pay. The other options is to pay monthly, but most games are running 15-20 a month now. Have you considered a monthly payment model that is in the 5-7 dollar per month range?

A cheaper monthly would make it so you can get people in at much less of a cost then WOW or Star Wars, and make a gamed balanced to all players, how good of a mechwarrior you are would determine how well you did in the game, not how much money you spend. A 5 dollar a month fee would help pay saleries, pay for game servers, and control costs, and keep the game going, and also keep out the people who just want to play for free and not even do anything. Anyone who has played a Free to Play game knows, 50% of the people you meet are going to be gone in 3 week's time. They get bored, they are not investied, they see the new online shiney thing, and chase after it, before getting distracted by something else.

[HanaYuriko]

As Turbine first demonstrated with DnD Online, then later LotRO, they make MORE money with a F2P model than they did with subscription services. Then others followed suit even though this system was in place in Korea for years. The dreaded "Play to Win." But the more friendly "Extra Options" model seems to work fine without breaking the game mechanics or giving other players too much of an advantage over others.

As for the Nexon Model, it isn't a bad one at all. Their base sellers are visual. Buy an outfit for 30 days (Maple Story, Vindictus) or buy a premium character card to change your character appearance and rare clothing, or clothing dye to change its color (Mabinogi), or gold colored guns (Combat Arms). Then there are some more permanent sellers like the pets in Mabinogi (I have collected a dozen over the past few years from the fox to the thunder dragon). Then there are things like guild management. That costs about as much per month as a subscription to WoW and affords players a guild house (that must be maintained) guild stone, a little title to add to player names, guild robes, etc.

After Turbine started making money by going F2P, NCSoft did it with City of Heroes, Sony Online then followed with DCU. Both companies reported an increase in profits and sales over their subscription models. A lot of people are expecting BioWare to do the same thing to SWTOR after some time. World of Tanks shot out of the gate with a F2P model and it's business plan seems to work. Except for the current squabble over it's faulty Match Maker and the saturation of the Type 59 premium tank (Before the Type 59, it was the Lowe premium).

[Omigir]

Aww.. paul didnt troll this thred! I might just have to revoke my sig

*reads sig* nah... still to amusing.

Way to go though paul! *thumbs up!*

[Blackfire1]

I have to highly disagree with you. A Micro-transation system is by far one of the best things to happen to a F2P game. People deserve options. I'll tell you this. I'll be generous and pay for you to play this game. I plan to spend some money on the "cash shop" Not because it gives me an advantage, but because I agree to support this dev is anything they are doing. The fact I get stuff from helping out is a nice perk.

Now the point I'm interested is a "nexon" style system? You mean a Pay-2-win shop that sells items for x amount of time for real money? This is not how american(or canadian) companies run F2P. DDO, LOL, LOTRo, would fail on asian inspired super economies. I think you have very little to worry about.

In the end people enjoy choice. Unlike taxes, the federal government, and death a person likes to be able to choose what they eat for breakfast. (I have no idea where I was going with that statement, its 4:25am and I haven't been asleep yet.)
Give a player choice to spend their money on something they see a value and profit will follow.

I personally wouldn't mind an OPTIONAL $5/month subscription that give 24/7 perks.

Edited by Blackfire1, 17 January 2012 - 04:26 AM.

[Dlardrageth]

djuice1701, on 16 January 2012 - 10:04 PM, said:

World of Tank's method is pretty good IMO, it's not really Pay 2 Win, as most of the things your actually use real $$ on doesn't give your an edge over people who play for free. Its more of a convenience, more in game credits and experience that reduces grind time, extra garage/barrack slots so you can have more tanks to play with, things that don't effect normal gameplay and therefore doesn't have an effect on game balance.[...]

I beg to differ with the emboldened part of your post. It certainly is strongly leaning there. Special "gold" ammunition that clearly outperform the normally available one; soon to be implemented "gold" camouflage patterns that give a general camo bonus, special "gold" tanks that even on an utterly lost match make a solid profit, and on a victory almost ridiculous amounts of in-game currency. Those give all distinct in-game advantages, if that isn't "Pay2Win", I don't know what is.

Look at a game like LotrO in contrast where the benefits are mostly tieds to either leveling, fluff like character looks or extra content that you do not need in any way to play the game by itself. And even a system that allows you to earn a (limited) amount of "premium currency" within the game. I know what looks to me more balanced and customer-friendly... and where accordingly my money got spent on.

Edited by Dlardrageth, 17 January 2012 - 07:25 PM.

[Kaemon]

djuice1701, on 16 January 2012 - 10:04 PM, said:

World of Tank's method is pretty good IMO, it's not really Pay 2 Win...

I'd like to hear your definition of P2W, if you don't think WoT has gone down that road.

Can someone clarify the Nexon style pay system please?

Are you talking just buying time to play cards?

Or that it's a subscription model (which they've already said it's F2P) that differs from any of the ones we currently see?

Paul Inouye, on 17 January 2012 - 12:34 AM, said:

It's the underlined part that you should be paying attention to.

Paul, any possibility of posting your 'top secret' thesis on F2P somewhere? I'm always interested in how people in the industry view the current state of affairs (or current at the time).

Google searches on Pink Thunder F2P dissertation have strangely few results ;p

Edited by Kaemon, 17 January 2012 - 07:36 AM.

[Khushrenada]

Dlardrageth, on 17 January 2012 - 05:02 AM, said:

I beg to differ with the emboldened part of your post. It certainly is trongly leaning there. Special "gold" ammunition that clearly outperform the normally available one; soon to be implemented "gold" camouflage patterns that give a general camo bonus, special "gold" tanks that even on an utterly lost match make a solid profit, and on a victory almost ridiculous amounts of in-game currency. Those give all distinct in-game advantages, if that isn't "Pay2Win", I don't know what is.

Look at a game like LotrO in contrast where the benefits are mostly tieds to either leveling, fluff like character looks or extra content that you do not need in any way to play the game by itself. And even a system that allows you to earn a (limited) amount of "premium currency" within the game. I know what looks to me more balanced and customer-friendly... and where accordingly my money got spent on.

this

besides, i read somewhere that they wont have for example a special mech only available at an ingame shop, which i really like!!
the "only" on the other hand points into the direction, that they might sell mechs at an ingame shop, but you can also earn them lets say by saving enough c-bills in matches.
that would strongly point into the direction of a system like it is in LoL (league of legends).
they also already said, that they took inspiration from LoL (in what way, they didnt say).

i would actually like that a lot, since you cant buy anything in LoL that has a direct impact on the gameplay (gold shells in WoT, example for a terrible way to implement an ingame shop), you can buy chars (mechs) or skins, but you can also buy those chars by saving up ingame xp (most likely c-bills here).

i dont know anything about that nexus sort of ingame shop, but as i read paul`s statement, he is not going to copy that system, rather taking some ideas off of it, which mustn`t be bad by default.

Edited by Khushrenada, 17 January 2012 - 09:20 AM.

[Kaemon]

Khushrenada, on 17 January 2012 - 09:18 AM, said:

i dont know anything about that nexus sort of ingame shop, but as i read paul`s statement, he is not going to copy that system, rather taking some ideas off of it, which mustn`t be bad by default.

It seems to me all he was saying is that he came the the understanding there is quite a difference between the 2 markets, and that different models were needed for both.

That is why I asked for the original doc, so we can all be terrified and run amok on the boards, posting half baked theories that the game will require a pre-paid RSA token to login with.

[MaddMaxx]

If there is to be Token in the game, I want there to be some old fashion Columbian Gold be available for sale...

[Cattra Kell]

Oh boy here we go again with the same old argument. After playing Combat Arms (and investing a good chunk of money into it, est $350+) I will defend that it is not a Pay-To-Win game.

When I played CA in 08 there were no perm guns or black market and players still had to learn to use the guns they bought and guns, such as the G36, were always considered a high class weapon. After the black market came out I started buying permanent versions of guns, not for the fact they were “better” but rather because they would not cost me more money in the long run allowing me to save and try out new guns. Most of the time the permanent version of the weapon either had a new skin on it or was a little bit better but not by much, for example I love my SG556 its weak as hell BUT its accurate, it was a trade off of my own personal play style.

At this time I also joined the clan RDH = Rabid Dogs of Hell, which if any of you played CA may know was the sister of Heroes of Combat (HoC, who had a GM with them). Both of these clans ran the Combat Arms Community Blacklist, Legit Gaming League, and helped monitor and work with Nexon to remove hackers from the game. I also did one year of WoGL for Combat Arms under the RDH banner and I can assure you that the Free to Play guns were just as deadly (If not more deadly, see the G36) than any of my Perm paid guns.

In the end it all just came down to the amount of time getting to know how your gun will react in a situation, how the kick will be and the recoil and the spread of the weapon. The guns that you paid for could be good in one situation but then get outclassed in the next by a free to play person wielding the AK-74u. It all came down to who was using it and the situation.

With Paul on the dev team I have no fear or quarrel with the shop option for MWO and in fact I welcome that Paul will be (and I assume) working on that section of the game based on my past experience with Combat Arms and its F2P model (the problem was honestly with hackers in Combat Arms, not the guns). I cannot wait to mail my wallet to them.

[Masikai]

Having played World of Tank since launch i would have to take issue with people claiming that it is a P2W game,

For the most part gold round only have about 10-15% more penetration then non gold, which equates to a slight increase in damage if you hit your target. So it only takes you 4 rounds to kill your opponent rather than 5 big whoop.

[Kaemon]

Masikai, on 17 January 2012 - 11:28 AM, said:

Having played World of Tank since launch i would have to take issue with people claiming that it is a P2W game,

For the most part gold round only have about 10-15% more penetration then non gold, which equates to a slight increase in damage if you hit your target. So it only takes you 4 rounds to kill your opponent rather than 5 big whoop.

You know you just refuted your own argument right?
P2W means paying for an increased chance at winning (but PFAICAW is a terrible acronym)

And when the level 9 arty kills you with a near miss gold round, yeah it makes a difference.

Oh, don't forget the gold tanks and camo, items, etc....

It's PFAICAW, bigtime.

Edited by Kaemon, 17 January 2012 - 12:25 PM.

[Omigir]

the acronyms are killing me inside.. like lots of knife thrusts from my liver to my splean! T____________T

[Zervziel]

djuice1701, on 16 January 2012 - 10:04 PM, said:

World of Tank's method is pretty good IMO, it's not really Pay 2 Win, as most of the things your actually use real $$ on doesn't give your an edge over people who play for free. Its more of a convenience, more in game credits and experience that reduces grind time, extra garage/barrack slots so you can have more tanks to play with, things that don't effect normal gameplay and therefore doesn't have an effect on game balance.

A free player can do all those things, but just takes more time, and more management due to slight restrictions.

Um, paying for in-game money and experience is a pretty big advantage. Heck all the things you mentioned are pretty unbalanced. You're getting more exp and money than the regular player not to mention more tanks and can do so in less time. How is that fair?!

[Elizander]

Well I'm certainly going to be buying a few things so it doesn't really matter. I'll either get a rare and powerful mech, some cheesy power up, experience boosts, unlock stuff faster, that unseen battlemaster that everyone also has, some mech textures, a hula girl, or that sexy Russian girl voice pack for my mech (this WILL be available, right? RIGHT?!)