56 replies to this topic

[Zythen]

I just don't get why there are so many references to the WoT in the way they do micro transactions when MWO is being modeled after league of legends in the way they do transactions, Yes one is closer in play style tank to mech vs LOL to mech but in LOL there is no pay for power... you can pay for characters vs waiting to earn them... which would be like buying a new mech vs paying for it with cbills, Or you can buy new skins would be be the exact same in buying a new skin, but you cannot pull out you credit card and poof make yourself more powerful.

[Redshift2k5]

They compare it to what they know. Because this is a simulator for very tank-like war machines, I suspect we have many more players from the WoT crowd than the LoL crowd.

[Joe Mallad]

I dont know why its compared to WOT at all when its nothing like WOT in any fashion.

[Black Sunder]

Zythen, on 27 May 2012 - 06:20 PM, said:

I just don't get why there are so many references to the WoT in the way they do micro transactions when MWO is being modeled after league of legends in the way they do transactions,

I'm sure you can find that dev quote somewhere right?

[merz]

the real point for comparison is the structure of WOT itself - the creation of grind through a structure of having to earn experience in each component of each mech, and each variation of each mech, and each module of each variation of each mech in small increments, supplimented by exponentially-increasing c-bill values, mirroring similar structure in world of tanks. Its not unlikely that mechs will further be locked down to factions, though they are not so exclusive in BT setting.

All of this will likely create incentive for average player to attempt and skip the tedium in raising their mech's performance, especially relative to that of other players, who may elect to pay and forego weeks of grind to get Elite upgrades for their mech, yet be matched with the players who haven't, consequently having their *** handed to them through no fault but lack of willingness or inability to pay their way in cash.

Another point is people assuming that the structure of unlocking progression mirrors WOT. For instance, a player in battletech would not have to unlock their awesome in order to get to pilot their marauder in order to get to pilot the atlas in order to get to pilot marauder II or anything linear like that. Individual mechs have variants, but they're not directly related (the way some tanks were in progression of their design..) ..Where some mechs are judged to be of this tier or that, and unlocking them progresses the player's selection to the next tier, balanced to be overwhelmingly superior as to make the preceding obsolete..

and so on and so forth. WOT presents players with unlocking sequencially-superior hardware that renders the previous tier obsolete. This pattern encourages grind and monetisation.. but that is also the precise point where balance in the sense it is present in the BT universe gets slaughtered on the altar of incentivising microtransactions.

let us pray it doesn't come to pass the way things do with money-starved russians seeking to cash in as quickly and shamelessly as humanly possible, even at the expense of the experience they offer their apparently-masochistic playerbase.

[Felicitatem Parco]

merz, on 27 May 2012 - 06:44 PM, said:

let us pray it doesn't come to pass the way things do with money-starved russians seeking to cash in as quickly and shamelessly as humanly possible, even at the expense of the experience they offer their apparently-masochistic playerbase.

Hey, Paul! Can you see Russia from up there above the Cinemas?

[corpse256]

I don't see how you can compare this game to any other game, this is no FPS this is no League of Legends this is no World of Tanks. THIS is MECHWARRIOR which is entirely diffrent than any of the games out there even the Armor Core series. can't compare it any game out on the market cause there is nothing close to this type of game. Its almost its own genre. This is not pay to win this is skill based game. If you read and watch the developer comments on this game it is not pay to win.

[Hyperius]

corpse256, on 27 May 2012 - 06:56 PM, said:

I don't see how you can compare this game to any other game, this is no FPS this is no League of Legends this is no World of Tanks. THIS is MECHWARRIOR which is entirely diffrent than any of the games out there even the Armor Core series. can't compare it any game out on the market cause there is nothing close to this type of game. Its almost its own genre. This is not pay to win this is skill based game. If you read and watch the developer comments on this game it is not pay to win.

As a whole you're probably right. But you can compare individual mechanics, such as the free to play model, to other games and the comparisons would often be perfectly viable. The only real way to determine the quality of something is to compare it to past experience, otherwise there is no point of reference and that's why we keep comparing Mechwarrior to F2P games that have come before. Not saying it's logical in every case but that's just how the human brain works when dealing with subjective topics.

[WalkingDeathBot]

There are quite a bit of similarities between the WoT model and the MWO model, to be fair though wargaming is doing well, making money, and it one of the better free to play games I've played. Yeah it has issues, but we don't need to talk about them here.

[khang]

corpse256, on 27 May 2012 - 06:56 PM, said:

I don't see how you can compare this game to any other game, this is no FPS this is no League of Legends this is no World of Tanks. THIS is MECHWARRIOR which is entirely diffrent than any of the games out there even the Armor Core series. can't compare it any game out on the market cause there is nothing close to this type of game. Its almost its own genre. This is not pay to win this is skill based game. If you read and watch the developer comments on this game it is not pay to win.

well they are not compareing on the game play of MW to LOL or WOT or any other game for that matter. They are just compareing how the micro transaction system works, is it like WOT where the fattest wallet wins or is it like like LOL where money realy lets you unlock your mechs faster and look cooler.

[Gunmage]

merz, on 27 May 2012 - 06:44 PM, said:

let us pray it doesn't come to pass the way things do with money-starved russians seeking to cash in as quickly and shamelessly as humanly possible, even at the expense of the experience they offer their apparently-masochistic playerbase.

I guess for a yankee the difference between Russia and Belarus is somewhat hard to understand, huh.

Also, neither LoL, nor WoT are not "pay-to-win" games (at least if you play WoT for fun, not for clan war).

Third, stop with the "our game is different and much, MUCH better". We know almost nothing about the pay model, and what we do know (existence of unique "premium" mechs, for example) resembles WoT very much.

corpse256, on 27 May 2012 - 06:56 PM, said:

can't compare it any game out on the market cause there is nothing close to this type of game.

Then any good game is a genre of its own. This game is a combination of FPS and simulator, everything else is background not affecting gameplay. You can't compare the detailed universe of Battletech and non-existent WoT universe, but you can compare them in the terms of gameplay, because they both are FPS/simulator, although WoT is more of an arcade simulator.

[khang]

Gunmage, on 27 May 2012 - 07:14 PM, said:

neither LoL, nor WoT are not "pay-to-win"

but in LOL you can't get an edge over your opponents for putting money in the game you can realy only buy champs faster and get skins for said champs

in WMO terms it would be like being able to buy that [place mech name here] you always wanted regardles if you have the c-bill for it and haveing the options to get a special paint job that no one else can get with out real money

Edited by khang, 27 May 2012 - 07:28 PM.

[goon]

Because generally speaking the games operate on a similar structure, in Meta and in gameplay. The main difference being that the player in MWO isn't railroaded up through the equipment and vehicle trees because of BTs inherent customization there really is no "best loadout" for a mech just ones that are "different" and since everything is using the same weapons it solves the power creep issues that is progressively getting worse in WoT.


And speaking from my perspective as a 2 year World of Tanks player, MWO is the game I, and a lot of my friends wish WoT was but isn't thanks to a lot of backwards and completely ridiculous design and balance choices by the developers who preach about a level of "historical accuracy" and then constantly fudge set in stone historical data so much that it's become a running gag, and because they delay content like it's going out of style, even minor things that you wouldn't expect would take long for a company of 600+ people to churn out, but somehow, they drag it out for months.

MWO doesn't seem to have these problems.

And premium rounds make WoT pay to win, I'm not sure how people are missing this or stubbornly refuse to accept it.

Edited by goon, 27 May 2012 - 07:36 PM.

[Jonneh]

WoT is a little bit pay2win with premium ammo.

MWO is definitely modelled after the WoT pay model. Premium account status for more money/xp. "Premium" (Hero?) Mechs.

I just hope they leave out the premium ammo.

I have little experience what the LoL pay model is, don't you pay to unlock Champs/Skins? I honestly can't imagine why that seems similar to MWO to some of you.

[Xendojo]

Redshift2k5, on 27 May 2012 - 06:26 PM, said:

They compare it to what they know. Because this is a simulator for very tank-like war machines, I suspect we have many more players from the WoT crowd than the LoL crowd.

I play both actually but i was a mechhead first. As i stated in another post, a level playing field regardless of what you spend is in my opinion one of the hallmarks of a successful F2P game, which is why i play LoL. And i don't really know why people insist that you have to spend cash to be competitive in WoT, its just not true. I helped my clan [THNK] defend land in clan wars tonight, and i have spent zero cash on that game. Sure you can buy gold ammo(and the majority in clan wars do), but your shots can still bounce(it breaks down to about 83 cents a shot, bummer if it bounces!)or you can miss. I have actually spent cash on LoL for skins. Not only is it super cool to have your champion look the way you like best, but it makes your opponents think twice if your champ is skinned.

Edited by Xendojo, 27 May 2012 - 07:51 PM.

[khang]

Jonneh, on 27 May 2012 - 07:34 PM, said:

WoT is a little bit pay2win with premium ammo.

MWO is definitely modelled after the WoT pay model. Premium account status for more money/xp. "Premium" (Hero?) Mechs.

I just hope they leave out the premium ammo.

I have little experience what the LoL pay model is, don't you pay to unlock Champs/Skins? I honestly can't imagine why that seems similar to MWO to some of you.

it's because rather than grind for the c-bills to buy a new mech you can simply buy it with real money like in LOL for champs, which does not impact the game balance that much

[Skylarr]

corpse256, on 27 May 2012 - 06:56 PM, said:

I don't see how you can compare this game to any other game, this is no FPS this is no League of Legends this is no World of Tanks. THIS is MECHWARRIOR which is entirely diffrent than any of the games out there even the Armor Core series. can't compare it any game out on the market cause there is nothing close to this type of game. Its almost its own genre. This is not pay to win this is skill based game. If you read and watch the developer comments on this game it is not pay to win.

Some of you are not getting merz's point. Yes this game is 30% Mechwarrior and 70% about the Mech fighting in a futuristic conflict. WoT 10% about the player and 90% about WWI & WWII tanks fighting fighting in hypothetical battles.

There is allot of similarities in how you get your fighting equipment ready for battle and into battle. There may even be allot of similarities in the fighting styles. I have not played in other PvP, Or is this considered First Shooter, games. Other than WoT.

So when someone makes a comparison. Think outside the box.

Edited by Skylarr, 27 May 2012 - 07:49 PM.

[UncleJimmema]

I feel it's going to be like TF2. You get the option to earn everything in the game without paying, but can pay to earn things faster. There's Items that can change up the role of a unit, but it doesn't necessarily give a distinct advantage over everyone else.

[merz]

Gunmage, on 27 May 2012 - 07:14 PM, said:

I guess for a yankee the difference between Russia and Belarus is somewhat hard to understand, huh.

а гадать - вот это делать надо очень осторожно..

Edited by merz, 27 May 2012 - 07:55 PM.

[PringlesPCant]

Just because you spend a lot of gold in WOT doesn't mean you are going to automatically win. The tanks are grouped by tier and the highest tank you can outright buy with gold is tier 8, out of 10. Player skill is a much greater determinant of victory than using gold ammo, and while using gold ammo in pub matches will give you an edge practically no one does it because its so expensive. All gold can do is just make the grinds easier.