295 replies to this topic

[Amuro]

I hope they do this right ;(

[rollermint]

They already said they won't allow players to buy advantages over other players so until we see real proof that they are doing the contrary, why worry about that now and be bitter?

In any case, I know that they are aware that if they renege on their words, the consequences over it will be extremely dire, considering how niche the IP is. And I hope they take notes on how CCP tried to introduce P2Win model and got burnt by it pretty bad. Don't mess with your playerbase.

[Wieland Calhoun]

People are going to be suspicious because a lot of devs have promised "no tactical advantage" and turned right around and done the opposite when it came time to open up the wallets. With today's game industry, it is a good idea to be suspicious of the grand majority of devs.

Piranha seems pretty serious about making a good Mechwarrior experience, though. I'm pretty optimistic about their implementation of a F2P model.

[Hadet]

damocles, on 31 October 2011 - 01:05 PM, said:

also on DLC:
"Q. Will DLC be offered in the new MechWarrior® Online™ game?

A. Not in the way that you imagine it. Content will be pushed to you via the game patcher. Once a patch has been applied, new game content is immediately available to you. Larger patches could be considered expansion packs but again, it's pushed to you the player at no cost."


-A patcher that just pushes updates to you? Sounds like true PC gaming again.

edit:maybe would be more oldschool if you had to hunt down the patches yourself and install them but, woot!

Or better yet it could be mega old-school and not have patches and you have to wait until some other poor sap runs into the same bug you have and the two of you can dance about the the internet on 28K Modems trying to fix said problem yourselves. Those were the days.

[4bit]

thorn, on 31 October 2011 - 01:08 PM, said:

And you think thats fair? Someone who has money can spend however much they want and get whatever mech they want now through no effort, while I have to work for what I want?

It's a question of where you work. Either at a job, or at the game. There are people like my friend who say "I have to work a job 60 hours a week, I can't keep up with kids who have more free time"

It's all perspective, but as long as there is nothing that is 'for purchase only' or so out of reach of earning that it's effectively that, then yes, I think it's fair. And no, I don't think it's pay to win.

[uebersoldat]

Lots of 'sperg ITT...

Edited by uebersoldat, 01 November 2011 - 08:34 AM.

[Enki]

i gaurentee that capellan mech farmers will be available to subvert the honnor and provide cheap and large mechs to all the social generals out there

[Andary]

I gonna play battletech,f2p or p2p/

[Henric Pryde]

silentwolff, on 31 October 2011 - 01:34 PM, said:

What is it with all this negative BS? We just got a new MW game, try to keep the QQing to a minimum imo.

Agreed, well said.

However, I have found that most games that are F2P, but have a cash component, the ones who pay usually get an edge. I am hopeful that this wont be true, but I dont believe it wlll be. That being said, I will still play it, regardless.

[Sebastien Kane]

there is a lot of game that are F2P out there that have no difference between paying costumers and non-paying... except the speed of the levelling process... and rapidity of getting gear... league of legends, global agenda are both really nice F2P games that are really balanced and fun for both,,,

[AlanEsh]

TheRulesLawyer, on 01 November 2011 - 07:36 AM, said:

You have got to be kidding. Unless you *like* playing cannon fodder you have to pay to win in that game. Not to mention you can buy outright skill boosts, etc in their pay store that have direct effect on your stats, not just how fast you level. WOT is the most expensive game I've ever play in order to remain competitive.

Exactly. WoT is a horribly expensive example to base WoM on, and I sincerely hope they don't take even one page out of WoT's pricing model.
They also need to avoid the freakish spotting mechanics of WoT. If I am looking at an enemy mech 500m away with optics and he backs up a step (out of my "view range") and just vanishes like in WoT, i'm going to puke.
There are some good points to WoT, but there are MANY bad points that I pray to *** are avoided.

[Jambalaya Bob]

Pay to Win only happens with bad designers. MWO has pretty much been confirmed to not have P2W, and if you look at the majority of well-known, recent F2P ventures, they generally have not been P2W at all. I have full faith in the developers to not ***** it up, especially with the strides in F2P game design made over the last few years thanks to companies like Nexon and Perfect World.

[ipox]

capt-bishop (thread starter) is either a very effective forum troll or utterly illiterate. I can't decide which.

[Outlaw]

Honestly i don't see why people start to complain when a free to play game goes with the pay to win mind set, Is it wrong to get rewarded for your support of the franchise?

The problem i see is that people want free stuff and never take into consideration that these companies do put some significant investments into the game. A ton of money has already been spent on the licensing fees alone, so i for one have no problem shelling out cash for a monthly subscription to this game. Another thing to look at is the more money that players put into it, the more content that will be developed for the game, so quit whining because you have to pay for some things within the game and just pay for it.

[Cyprius]

I'm just happy that we've arrived at a legitimate Mechwarrior/Battletech IP MMO! I've been playing World of Tanks off and on since beta, and every time I want a mech. That and the fact that I couldn't get close to liking Perpetuum...

I'll pay some real cash for a chance to run a Warhammer around...or a hatchetman, or a jenner for Christ's sake...just given me Steiner!

[Catch]

outlaw, on 01 November 2011 - 09:17 AM, said:

Honestly i don't see why people start to complain when a free to play game goes with the pay to win mind set, Is it wrong to get rewarded for your support of the franchise?

The problem i see is that people want free stuff and never take into consideration that these companies do put some significant investments into the game. A ton of money has already been spent on the licensing fees alone, so i for one have no problem shelling out cash for a monthly subscription to this game. Another thing to look at is the more money that players put into it, the more content that will be developed for the game, so quit whining because you have to pay for some things within the game and just pay for it.

I'm sure the company prefers complaints instead of the alternative: people stop playing without saying why. Feedback from users is a key resource for building a service that people will want to use.

Pay to win creates ugly distortions in the competitive landscape and assaults core of what makes competition so satisfying. Losses become bitter and wins become hollow because the competitors start from inequal positions. There are plenty of proven successes that have found ways to monetize free to play games without upsetting that balance.

[Wieland Calhoun]

I don't want P2W and I have no problem paying for things. I've got a pretty nice job, but my job and the advantages I have in a video game are two things I want to be distinctly separate. Work and play.

If I win or lose, I want it to be determined by depth of skill and tactics, not by depth of wallet. If my merc company beats another, or loses to another, I want it to be because we beat them or were beaten in a fair fight, not because one company has more cash on hand outside of the game than the other.

Suffice to say, if there ends up being P2W, I won't feel comfortable shacking up with a group that shells out $50 a month for special ammo, etc. When you can pay for a win, it devalues strategy and skill, which is something I don't want happening in Mechwarrior, even if it's in my favor.

I have no problem supporting the franchise or the developer, I just don't think it should be rewarded with in-game advantages others don't have access to due to external factors.

[TheRulesLawyer]

outlaw, on 01 November 2011 - 09:17 AM, said:

Honestly i don't see why people start to complain when a free to play game goes with the pay to win mind set, Is it wrong to get rewarded for your support of the franchise?

The problem i see is that people want free stuff and never take into consideration that these companies do put some significant investments into the game. A ton of money has already been spent on the licensing fees alone, so i for one have no problem shelling out cash for a monthly subscription to this game. Another thing to look at is the more money that players put into it, the more content that will be developed for the game, so quit whining because you have to pay for some things within the game and just pay for it.

Nothing wrong with the devs making money. Profit isn't a swear word. People aren't really complaining about paying for the game. They are complaining about not having a level playing field. Life isn't fair, but games should be.

[Feircus Blacktooth]

Well, you won't have to worry about someone getting a MadCat. It's 3015, you got 35 more years till the clans pop. There are going to be some sad people when this fact finally settles in.

[Wolfclaw]

Ill gladly crush all "Pay to win" players with that "crappy scout mech". Remember, its the pilot that counts, not the mech.