56 replies to this topic

[Fox5859]

i thought mech assualt and mech warrior 4 mercs was pretty good just sayin

[Kaemon]

billyzero, on 10 March 2012 - 12:23 PM, said:

Have faith. World of Tanks is doing just fine and they aren't screwing over people with hidden micro-transaction fees. I honestly believe the devs care about this game and they aren't going to scuttle it by devising a payment system that doesn't make sense.

Now you're just trolling.

[John Clavell]

Who said they have even finished planning how monetisation of the product will work. Game is still pre-alpha, things can change or evolve prior to beta. They are not telling us because it's obviously not ready to be reviewed yet. We'll have to wait a few more months.

[nightsniper]

Kaemon, on 10 March 2012 - 01:04 PM, said:

Now you're just trolling.

WOT uses premium ammo that does cost real hard cash and that is the only way you can compete in Clan wars. Some of my unit members were dropping $50 a week on just premium rounds, this just to stay competitive. We burned out in 8 weeks on their model.

WOT stinks and does not listen to the players at all. I was with them from close beta on and the game has evolved into a pay for this pay for that. When they launched they had 5 million registered and at any hour they had 20,000 players on yesterday early PM EST they had 2800. That does not sound like a game on the upside to me. MWO mirrors the WOT model and they will be just a game of the week. Sorry for being so harsh but that is the reality. They may make the money with that model but will it cost them the Genre?

I still think the premium that increases exp and in game currency faster works You will pay cash for currency to purchase premium member ship hence the monthly fee then as many have said premium item shop that does not effect game play that works. Bag the premium ammo or the hot gun that shoots longer straighter and does more damage that is for me a game killer

[GuntherK]

nightsniper, on 10 March 2012 - 02:12 PM, said:

WOT uses premium ammo that does cost real hard cash and that is the only way you can compete in Clan wars. Some of my unit members were dropping $50 a week on just premium rounds, this just to stay competitive. We burned out in 8 weeks on their model.

WOT stinks and does not listen to the players at all. I was with them from close beta on and the game has evolved into a pay for this pay for that. When they launched they had 5 million registered and at any hour they had 20,000 players on yesterday early PM EST they had 2800. That does not sound like a game on the upside to me. MWO mirrors the WOT model and they will be just a game of the week. Sorry for being so harsh but that is the reality. They may make the money with that model but will it cost them the Genre?

I still think the premium that increases exp and in game currency faster works You will pay cash for currency to purchase premium member ship hence the monthly fee then as many have said premium item shop that does not effect game play that works. Bag the premium ammo or the hot gun that shoots longer straighter and does more damage that is for me a game killer

Well, i still have great fun in WoT.
But thats just me, i never spent a cent on premium ammo, and i couldnt care less about being competitive in clan wars. I play games for fun, not for going pro.

But i agree that WoT devs got greedy, when thay launched T59, a premium tier 8 medium tank that can fly and has better armour than a tier 8 heavy. Now they decide to remove it from the game shop, unfortunately there are millions of them around and show up in every match.

I believe they got greedy when they found out that some people were spending 50$ a week in premium ammo

Edited by GuntherK, 10 March 2012 - 02:24 PM.

[Zarkan]

Really? I have to hear about Type 59 whining here too?

Look WoT's model isn't perfect no one's is it's functional and certainly miles beyond *Most* Ftp MMO's. Regadless this discussion isn't about WoT, Tribes, LoL, or any other mmo it's about MWO and curretly there simply isn't enough evidence for any of us to make a call on how flawed or not their system is until they roll one out which probably won't be until second stage beta if they even release it before open release.

[Felicitatem Parco]

April shoud be "Capital Warfare Month"

[Kyuui]

Kyle Dragon Kurita, on 10 March 2012 - 12:03 AM, said:

Just do it like Star Trek Online. Make it free to play and sell goodies that you may or may not want to buy.

Please for the love of all that is Mech combat, DO NOT use STO, or its developer for any sort of guide, unless its a what not to do guide.
Their store, and what is in it, is no longer just fluff, its game imbalance effect is only getting worse. Yes is has some cosmetic stuff but more and more items are pure cash grab +1 items that imbalance the game

[Zarkan]

Kyuui, on 10 March 2012 - 09:28 PM, said:

Please for the love of all that is Mech combat, DO NOT use STO, or its developer for any sort of guide, unless its a what not to do guide.
Their store, and what is in it, is no longer just fluff, its game imbalance effect is only getting worse. Yes is has some cosmetic stuff but more and more items are pure cash grab +1 items that imbalance the game

Turbine has some nice implementation of a basis on how to allow Free players to earn premium currency. Though other than that I don't think they are over all the "best". Frankly I don't think any of them have it right I think WoT (atleast at first not doing the later argument) and LOL and even Turbine have started bits that really are good however and worth looking at.

[cyberFluke]

Prosperity Park, on 10 March 2012 - 09:06 PM, said:

April shoud be "Capital Warfare Month"

Quoted for truth.

I'm very curious what they've got in mind. Personally, I think they should look at City of Heroes' model. I know it transitioned from a sub model, well, they didn't, they.... You know what.. here goes.

I have never played a Free to Play game that didn't either outright suck, contain mostly grind or actually cost more than most subscription games. I am aware of a few possibles that may not, LoL etc, but I don't play moba games, so I have no experience with it. I've heard bad things about intentional bad early balance to encourage spending to help win, but can't validate or disprove this. WoT has apparently given over to the dark side and sold out competitive play to those willing to pay through the nose for it.

I am actually kinda hoping MWO could develop into an actual entertaining eSport, as frankly, watching some guy play SC2 or a Dota clone isn't my idea of fun. That is not very likely to happen if they don't get the money thing just right, I have hope, don't get me wrong, but I know what accountants and investors do to "products" that don't make the desired profit.

In my mind, EVE online, while a crappy game I wasted 2 years playing (my fault, unrealistic expectations; I wanted a space flight mmo, not spreadsheets in space), is a good example of how it can be done. Starting small, working up. Heck, the last year I played was for free, as you can buy Game time cards with *in-game currency* from other players, allowing them to effectively buy ingame currency from a player, with an item bought from the devs. So if you play enough, it's free, if you don't you can buy time.

As I was trying to say before all that got muddled in the way of my train of thought, City of Heroes' F2P model worked, in my mind, before they started adding new paid for "powersets" (tantamount to P2W, if there was any PvP worth a crap to be had). Kinda. I guess my conclusion is that I'd much rather be paying a fixed standard amount a month to play and have a totally level playing field than microtransactions that can give someone an advantage because they have a fatter wallet (even if only in speed of access of gear, first to have it, first to use the tactics/methods enabled, easy wins). I want there to be a good base for competition, not an online wallet measuring contest. (I've used that phrase before I think, apologies if I have, but it is apt).

Fluke

--EDIT Wow, didn't realise I'd just Wall Of Texted at you all, my apologies if it crit for massive damage, and my thanks if you actually read it all

Edited by cyberFluke, 10 March 2012 - 09:54 PM.

[Zarkan]

cyberFluke, on 10 March 2012 - 09:52 PM, said:

Quoted for truth.

I'm very curious what they've got in mind. Personally, I think they should look at City of Heroes' model. I know it transitioned from a sub model, well, they didn't, they.... You know what.. here goes.

I have never played a Free to Play game that didn't either outright suck, contain mostly grind or actually cost more than most subscription games. I am aware of a few possibles that may not, LoL etc, but I don't play moba games, so I have no experience with it. I've heard bad things about intentional bad early balance to encourage spending to help win, but can't validate or disprove this. WoT has apparently given over to the dark side and sold out competitive play to those willing to pay through the nose for it.

I am actually kinda hoping MWO could develop into an actual entertaining eSport, as frankly, watching some guy play SC2 or a Dota clone isn't my idea of fun. That is not very likely to happen if they don't get the money thing just right, I have hope, don't get me wrong, but I know what accountants and investors do to "products" that don't make the desired profit.

In my mind, EVE online, while a crappy game I wasted 2 years playing (my fault, unrealistic expectations; I wanted a space flight mmo, not spreadsheets in space), is a good example of how it can be done. Starting small, working up. Heck, the last year I played was for free, as you can buy Game time cards with *in-game currency* from other players, allowing them to effectively buy ingame currency from a player, with an item bought from the devs. So if you play enough, it's free, if you don't you can buy time.

As I was trying to say before all that got muddled in the way of my train of thought, City of Heroes' F2P model worked, in my mind, before they started adding new paid for "powersets" (tantamount to P2W, if there was any PvP worth a crap to be had). Kinda. I guess my conclusion is that I'd much rather be paying a fixed standard amount a month to play and have a totally level playing field than microtransactions that can give someone an advantage because they have a fatter wallet (even if only in speed of access of gear, first to have it, first to use the tactics/methods enabled, easy wins). I want there to be a good base for competition, not an online wallet measuring contest. (I've used that phrase before I think, apologies if I have, but it is apt).

Fluke

--EDIT Wow, didn't realise I'd just Wall Of Texted at you all, my apologies if it crit for massive damage, and my thanks if you actually read it all

Respectfully I have to disagree I don't belive it's impossible for a FtP game to offer the same level playing feild a purchased or pay to play game offers if the system is implemented in a proper balanced way. Now admittedly one major differnce in openion here is simply that I don't see xp or money boosting systems as pay to win. Even with that I think it's a big assumption to assume that most microtransactions are for items that directly effect game play.

[cyberFluke]

I'm not saying it's impossible, not by a long chalk, I just think that anything purchasable should be purely cosmetic. If it's not, it affects gameplay and skews the playing field, no matter how small an increment. I get that it'll happen, the degree to which it occurs however, will determine the game's long term success.

Fluke

[Lorcan Lladd]

That would have to be some exceptionally good lipstick, if they were trying to make a living out of it.
Nah, they're going to charge for some more stuff besides cosmetics; I don't think they're shameless enough to sell gold or premium ammunition and vehicles, though.

[Carebear]

Ive played some free to play games. I definitely start to see how this can be win/win for both devs and players. Time will tell how they do it here.

[Fabe]

If the game does truly turn out to be one where skill matter more then equipment like the devs have been saying then we have nothing to worry about. Someone could buy every mech in the game on day one from the cash shop but if they don't have the skills to use them then all they've done is given them self a nice selection of Mechs to die in.

Edited by Fabe, 10 March 2012 - 11:24 PM.

[Cifu]

billyzero, on 10 March 2012 - 12:23 PM, said:

Have faith. World of Tanks is doing just fine and they aren't screwing over people with hidden micro-transaction fees. I honestly believe the devs care about this game and they aren't going to scuttle it by devising a payment system that doesn't make sense.

I think no, WoT doing just wrong. It's actually SELL power.

Think about Type-59, which the most fearsome med in the game, until the french tanks come into the light. And because of the insane armour, it's fearsome even now.

Think about the GOLD AMMO, which put your hands a really neat extra punch. Imagine when someone just easly come to your way, believe your cannot harm to him. And you shoot through, because the extra penetration what the gold ammo present.

No. The WoT model only be good, if the premium tanks are balanced well (and suprisly in most time they actually balanced well, only a few example of wrong balance they make...), and if there is no Gold Ammo.

It's fair, to get 100% crew for gold. It's fair, to get more money and XP when you buy premium. It's fair, to convert XP to free XP for gold. It's fair to demount modules for gold. But again: it's not fair, to get overpowered tanks for gold, or extra power for your guns for gold...

[Elizander]

The issue with a long running F2P game is that it is easy to lose sight of how much you are 'requiring' your players to pay each week or each month as you keep updating the game. Payment is usually not the same as in-game leveling where you require more exp as more time goes by... you can't expect a player to pay more each month the longer he plays or the higher level he gets.

The basics is that the player's real life budget doesn't necessarily go up the higher level he gets in an F2P game. Pretty much it stays the same for most people. An example of silly pricing would be requiring $1.00 for a stack of Lv 1 potions and then requiring $10.00 for a stack of Lv 100 potions. Sure, the Lv 100 pots heal more, but relative to the player's level, they have the same value as the Lv 1 potions for a Lv 1. There's no reason to charge more for those.

F2P games compete for 2 things in general. First and most important is time. Your game must be worth the time to play and a lot of people must feel that it is worth dropping other things to spend a few hours a day or week logging in to play. After that would be value. Would it be worth more to me to buy a permanent $15 (example only) Awesome variant or should I just go watch a movie with my friends or go try out that new curry house instead? Which option would give me more entertainment and satisfaction for my money? There are a lot of other factors but that's generally how it goes. Of course this doesn't apply to hardcore fans and gamers who'd give an arm and a leg just to play even if you shaft them.

A common trap for declining games is that they focus on squeezing more money out of their dwindling player base (more cash out for less people) which in turn burns out players even more. I am not saying it will happen here, but in the examples given in threads like this, it's clear that it is very, very easy to forget the "F" in F2P once player numbers drop and investors start knocking on the doors for their monthly targets or when it's the end of the quarter or the end of the fiscal year (Blizzard Supa Resu Scroll anyone? While not F2P and laughs aside, it worked anyway. Text messages are flying all around offering to give or get a resu scroll or two where I'm at and my friends who quit want in on the deal).

Either way, they will have to keep an eye on the trends because part of this will be determined by players as well. If no one bought gold ammo in WoT, no one would be pressured to use them. Something seen as a perk or optional can become a competitive requirement in the minds of most players if a lot of other players decide to purchase it. Peer pressure? Maybe.