Meh

Devs should "do the blizzard" - make your mmo PPM with RMT on mostly the less pertinent (names, servers, races / genders, etc).  The real answer for the smaller companies is to get absorbed into a giant and hope for the best, because to compete in this market small transactions ain't gonna cut it .

Nontheless, I personally don't care if a game has it or not - as long as it doesnt effect my ability to reach & succeed in end game...Because in the end, every game will have RMT, whether the dev implements it or not :)

Originally posted by Lord_Ixigan

RMT's are use by companies that want the option open to them to milk their customers.

Just look at SOE. 'Nuff said.

And what is the problem of that?

If there are customers willing to be milk, more power to SOE. You can always vote with your wallet. It is a free world.

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by Lord_Ixigan

RMT's are use by companies that want the option open to them to milk their customers.

Just look at SOE. 'Nuff said.

 

And what is the problem of that?

If there are customers willing to be milk, more power to SOE. You can always vote with your wallet. It is a free world.

Because in the act of milking the milkable, they diminish the quality of game play for those that aren't willing. The entire game isn't available to those that refuse to participate in such a shady business practice. The intelligent players are forced to play an incomplete game. Development work and effort is put towards things that doesn't help the game, but helps the company.

These companies should try making more money by making better games instead of trying to make more money off of the same crappy games that usually aren't even worth their sub fee.

I'll chime-in and say I'm not a big fan of the MT modular. I also have played mmo's for 10+ years. Paying a sub fee imho is just easier and gives a level playing field.

I do understand the concept and where a use comes from MT. I just see it as too easy for people who have the resources to exploit it.

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by Lord_Ixigan

RMT's are use by companies that want the option open to them to milk their customers.

Just look at SOE. 'Nuff said.

 

And what is the problem of that?

If there are customers willing to be milk, more power to SOE. You can always vote with your wallet. It is a free world.

problem ...hm this might not be the right word for it :)

BUT "we" as customers are free to express our concerns of beeing pissed of by a plethora of low quality "games"  and  complete game failsures going microtransaction instead of going bancrupt right away.

giving the developers an easy bypass to get a bunch of unfinished crap for additional cash upon us customers is the wrong signal to all of them.

Originally posted by Whibbo

Originally posted by Munki

Originally posted by Whibbo

Many of us "veteran" gamers (those who played before they turned EverQuest into the WoW cartoon) have issues with it.

You don't speak for that audience. I played UO from the start and I can see the value of the microtransaction model, especially for some younger audiences and more casual markets.

 

Well I suppose a discussion of semantics would be in order then.  I've been playing P2P MMO's for about 10 years so I feel I am somewhat of a "veteran".  I have conversations often with those who have been playing about as long as me, and there's a general feeling among them.  So I am not a true "veteran"...?  What's the cutoff year?

Maybe I'm missing your point.

My point is I have a very similar gaming resume as yourself and I support micro-transactions have know many people who think its a good idea who would also be considered veterans as per your description.

So you're making the incorrect assumption that people who've been playing mmorpgs for a long time agree with you.
Thats all i was correcting :P

I don't think microtransactions suck. They have a place and function well to finance free-to-play mmos.

Personally, though, I think involving real-money in a game kills a lot of the fun factor for a variety of reasons - so those games will never appeal to me.

And when I pay a subscription for an mmo, part of what I get for my subscription is a game without microtransactions.

Really this debate isn't about RMTs themselves, rather, the fact that a lot of games that use the F2P (free-to-play with microtransactions) model are lower in quality to the gamers in certain target markets. And considering MMORPG started off supporting mostly Pay-to-Play games the most of the community is made up of those players, who also started out with pay-to-play as the norm.

What many of you are forgetting or ignoring others are saying is that not everyone can afford to pay higher subscription fees. Not everyone has an income that may be as high as yours and thusly are forced to go to games that do not charge a monthly subscription fee.

To those saying that most "veteran" players do not like RMTs, you need to stop. You cannot and do not have the authority to speak on the behalf of those who are in this community or others. I certainly didn't sign up to be on your list.

I like the arguement base for that games that choose a F2P they specifically lower the quality of games to force players to purchase the items. This actually may seem like a valid arguement, I give you that much, but having experienced first hand by living in Asia (China and Korea) where these games come out of, I can safely say that the games are not as high of quality because they are developed for Asia and not the west, they are published in the west in hopes of making a little more money. Most of these products are only translated loosely and never fundamentally changed to fit the market. This is due to high costs that would ensue if such a team would take on such vision. However, this does not mean that are are companies that will not concentrate on making games fits other markets better. Take Runes of Magic, for example. They actually changed a lot about the game to fit Europe and North America better and look how popular it became. I should know because I was in a team who were interested in licensing the product from Runewaker.

Another reason why these games are lower in quality is because of the turn-around rate of players in the markets that these games ARE intended for. Most games need to be developed fast and churned out fast to keep costs low and the fact that, unlike a lot of players in the western markets, these players sometimes do not spend years on the products. They play the game for a couple months, buy items and what not, then move on when newer games come out. On the other side, games for the west take a long time to develop and most developers need a large budget for creating a polished game.

Even then, this does not guarantee that the games will do well in the west. Look at DF, AoC, TR, and WAR, just to name a few. Those were/are Pay to Play games and aren't doing so well. The market is becoming saturated and not everyone can afford to sub to more than one or two MMOs if they have to pay a monthly fee of $15 USD or more. This is a main reason as to why even game developers/publishers such as Cryptic and EA are looking into developing games to fit a microtransaction/monthly payment hybrid.

I would like to point out that I am not against subscription game or Free to play games, before anyone can accuse me of being against either payment method.

Edit- polished was misspelled.

So in the end: everyone wants a piece of the online gold mine.

Making a game is secondary.

The most important thing is how to take the money and in whatever form.

And then everyone "wonders" why these last 3 years only duds were released.

No one is going to pay an extra 180 dollars per year to play games that are inferior to COD or GW's.

Now they try to sell you free to play duds with MTS.

Simple.

I don't think many people have a problem with the existence of RMT games as such. Given the number of countries games are played in, and the variety of people playing, financial models such as RMT are a necessity. As WebLinkz has pointed out - many people in developing countries simply cannot afford to play subscription based games. The same can be said for many children in the west.

However, many people are worried about how this will affect the subscription based games that have previously dominated the hobby in the west. The lines between the two models are starting to blur - witness the use of RMT in DDO, Everquest 2 and Champions Online. Since most businesses exist with the primary goal of making money, then we can expect more such blurred business models in the future.

And that scares a lot of people. People ask themselves questions such as:

- What if RMT was added to a game I know and love? Would I end up having to pay more to be able to compete, whilst essentially still getting the same experience?

- What if companies started seeing RMT or mixed models as the only profitable way to make MMOs? Would all new games be developed with this model? Would I be stuck playing ancient games whilst the rest of the gaming community moved on?

A lot of players like the current model. They don't have a problem with RMT existing, as long as subscription based games continue to operate and be developed. However, the essential question is - can both models co-exist? Or, once RMT and mixed models gain a certain amount of momentum, will they inevitably start to dominate due to corporate greed.

Originally posted by Munki

Originally posted by Whibbo

Originally posted by Munki

Originally posted by Whibbo

Many of us "veteran" gamers (those who played before they turned EverQuest into the WoW cartoon) have issues with it.

You don't speak for that audience. I played UO from the start and I can see the value of the microtransaction model, especially for some younger audiences and more casual markets.

 

Well I suppose a discussion of semantics would be in order then.  I've been playing P2P MMO's for about 10 years so I feel I am somewhat of a "veteran".  I have conversations often with those who have been playing about as long as me, and there's a general feeling among them.  So I am not a true "veteran"...?  What's the cutoff year?

Maybe I'm missing your point.

My point is I have a very similar gaming resume as yourself and I support micro-transactions have know many people who think its a good idea who would also be considered veterans as per your description.

So you're making the incorrect assumption that people who've been playing mmorpgs for a long time agree with you.
Thats all i was correcting :P

Ok.  I understand.

But, where is this game you speak of?  I am only basing my OP on the fact that it has no positive impact on gameplay as far as I have seen.  I certainly could be wrong...is there a game out there with a microtransaction model that has appeal for the more veteran crowd?

Originally posted by Whibbo 

Ok.  I understand.

But, where is this game you speak of?  I am only basing my OP on the fact that it has no positive impact on gameplay as far as I have seen.  I certainly could be wrong...is there a game out there with a microtransaction model that has appeal for the more veteran crowd?

You probably passed up my post, so let me reiterate for you.

Most games with Microtransactions as the main form of income were not designed for Veteran players in the west. Your arguement is null until there is a game that is specifically made using the MT model specifically targeting the western users.

Originally posted by weblinkz2002

Originally posted by Whibbo 

Ok.  I understand.

But, where is this game you speak of?  I am only basing my OP on the fact that it has no positive impact on gameplay as far as I have seen.  I certainly could be wrong...is there a game out there with a microtransaction model that has appeal for the more veteran crowd?

 

You probably passed up my post, so let me reiterate for you.

Most games with Microtransactions as the main form of income were not designed for Veteran players in the west. Your arguement is null until there is a game that is specifically made using the MT model specifically targeting the western users.

And never will be because the truth of the matter is the methods required to implement a cash shop actually reduce the playability of games. If I can afford every item in the cash shop the game would still suck simply because of the way it has to be implemented to be profitable. It's not even about the money it's about the way the game mechanics are warped. It's simply a bad way to make a game.

Originally posted by zymurgeist

 

And never will be because the truth of the matter is the methods required to implement a cash shop actually reduce the playability of games. If I can afford every item in the cash shop the game would still suck simply because of the way it has to be implemented to be profitable. It's not even about the money it's about the way the game mechanics are warped. It's simply a bad way to make a game.

Never say never. Haha. I do agree with you that games with microtransactions are forcing players to buy content that would be otherwise available in a game for free.

But this doesn't mean that there HAVE to be items in the shop that are game breaking. Such as vanity items. when you go to a mall you have to buy clothes, sometimes you can buy them in a set but you usually purchase each piece individually. Your clothes are merely for appearance and they don't give you and bonus strength in real life.

What I try to stress is that even though most F2P games are of lower quality or do not fit the western markets, it is the simple fact that if a game is free to download and to play, you don't have to spend a single dime on the game. Yes, there are players who buy their way to the top, but every game with a microtransaction model doesn't have to be that way. Not all shops have to allow players to buy elite weapons. This is a required balance for a more even level play.

I think the approach CoX is taking toward a Microtransaction system in the west is a good idea. If you want to look unique, why not pay a little extra cash to look unique. In fact, if they stopped charging a monthly fee, they could possibly increase their CCU and have a large ARPU by introducing more vanity items.

I think for now though, I am still happy with paying my monthly sub for LOTRO.

As the MTs stand I dont see the issue. Its mostly cosmetic items with a few stated items (which I susect are just cosmetic changes to exisiting in game items).

My expectation is that we will get a steady supply of costume stuff for free with atches and expansions BUT there will also be a side line of more exotic items available via the MTs.

By using MTs Cryptic are not forcing everyone to pay for the extras only those who want them have to ay for them, they are not giving them major powers or abilities beyond those readily available for free all it does is give them a new look.

Why on earth should I be FORCED to pay so that someone can have pink fluffy bunny feet when i'm pefectly happy with my character as he stands. MTs make it ossible to add urely cosmetic new content to the game for the benefit of those who want it without forcing everyone to pay for it.

Furthermore it also gives them the opportunity to grant cryptic points as awards for which you can then CHOOSE for yourself what you get and actually get something you want.

All in all if handled correctly it will be a really good boost (as long as its not to expensive) but if handled badly the repercussions will be severe. I recommend we reserve judgement on paper I think the idea has potential.

Remember lots of games do similar things all those "collector" editions which offer in game bonuses and cost three to four times more than the basic but offer cool in game STUFF. Or WOWS booster decks with their items most fluff but some with abiities hmmmm sounds familiar. Of course with the WoW stuff you need to buy a lot of decks to get that item you want ....

just my 2 cents

Gadareth

Originally posted by Whibbo

Ok so I keep reading these posts that say "so what's the big deal"  and "who cares, it's just s little bit of money".

That's not the point.

Many of us "veteran" gamers (those who played before they turned EverQuest into the WoW cartoon) have issues with it.  My main beef is that it detracts from the immersion quality that the earlier MMO's had.  You signed up for your monthly subscription and you forgot about it.  Not so with microtransactions.  You are making little purchases that cost you real money...and it gives the appearance that the developers are only interested in what makes the most money, and they'll do whatever gaming model does that for them, regardless of how bad the game plays.

And there's nothing wrong with making money, or trying to make more...but really, where in the world have the game developers gone that want to create a good game just for the sake of making a good game.  I mean, car manufacturers come out with luxury models, there are crap shoes and there are $100 leather shoes that are worth every penny. 

Microtransactions are like the cheap shoes but with a $100 price tag.

I wish some developers would get a clue and make a real game rather than all these cardboard cutouts, just for the sake of making a good game.  It seems the focus of EVERY game coming down the pike is like a politician reading the polls.  They change direction based on potential player's opinions and how they can make the most money right out of the gate.  It's a shame they will almost all nearly fade away and they haven't learned that the ones that have staying power are the ones that have better content over the long haul.

totally agree with you, but you have to see that games are now main stream entertainment, and like anything that was good and pure it got picked up by the corporate demons, and there minions the bean counters have there claws in them and will never let go, when they see it can make a lot of money there is nothing they will not do.

it's sad but our world is run by dirty money and only until we chose to get ride of this corrupting item there will never be anything not touched by the evil hand of greed

Originally posted by Whibbo

Ok so I keep reading these posts that say "so what's the big deal"  and "who cares, it's just s little bit of money".

That's not the point.

Many of us "veteran" gamers (those who played before they turned EverQuest into the WoW cartoon) have issues with it.  My main beef is that it detracts from the immersion quality that the earlier MMO's had.  You signed up for your monthly subscription and you forgot about it.  Not so with microtransactions.  You are making little purchases that cost you real money...and it gives the appearance that the developers are only interested in what makes the most money, and they'll do whatever gaming model does that for them, regardless of how bad the game plays.

And there's nothing wrong with making money, or trying to make more...but really, where in the world have the game developers gone that want to create a good game just for the sake of making a good game.  I mean, car manufacturers come out with luxury models, there are crap shoes and there are $100 leather shoes that are worth every penny. 

Microtransactions are like the cheap shoes but with a $100 price tag.

I wish some developers would get a clue and make a real game rather than all these cardboard cutouts, just for the sake of making a good game.  It seems the focus of EVERY game coming down the pike is like a politician reading the polls.  They change direction based on potential player's opinions and how they can make the most money right out of the gate.  It's a shame they will almost all nearly fade away and they haven't learned that the ones that have staying power are the ones that have better content over the long haul.

I do agree with some points and some i dont.

first question is what earlier games you referring too ?

Most people that have played the earlier games are either still playing them or got bored of them.. just like the newer ones

so the Immersion part isnt really there. All these Veterans are saying the older games were better or the story immersion is better but why are people complaining about newer games coming out? The answer is easy they want something new

People always thinks when we were younger things were better.

ex. the movies Transformers.

when the first movie came out people were stating that they dont look like the orginals and not enough tranformers in it. No kidding they dont look the same years are different 1984 (based off toys) 2007 (made for toys)when the second one came out people are like to much actions to not enough stories... Guys these movies are based off toys not story and if you watch the original cartoon there wasnt any real story line.

so in referring to the older games to new .. go back and play them and see the difference. New or Old it doesnt matter what ever you like.

Now to your comment on Car and Shoes
I have known people who say BMWs or higher luxury cars that suck. Hell i work in the automotive industry and i know first hand know how they could suck a low % of cars have braking problems or engine troubles but the rest is all good. I have bought a $100 leather shoes that just plain hurt my feet, and i have played MT MMOs that are fun to play.

Look at the last couple of years for P2P MMOs which ones sucked which ones are good.

Agree though MT quality isnt as high as P2P (on some games), but the point is they are still cheaper to play.

MT based games get small companies to release a game a low cost. Hell if i could make a game at low cost put MT in and give the game for free. (cause i dont have 200 million to make a crappy game...ex. War) .

Your right about being cardboard cutouts, Game companies need to pay more attention to the quality they are releasing. but that is most cause they want to make the 15/mth from everyone

i have to ask cause im not really sure name one game company that did try to make a game for a good game and not for money?

I'm thinking about creating a multi-part essay on the blogs here called "Death of a Dream" about the promise and failures of virtual worlds.

I'm not going into the whole of that piece, but I think the whole RMT thing is just one more bit of evidence to me that this genre is going back on what made it special in the first place.

The reason people flocked to MMOs is because it was a freer, more open society than the one we inhabit when we turn the game off.  And what we are discovering lately is that the real world is in fact much more free and open than online worlds today.

At least in the real world I can copy a shirt, design, or motiff that I like and want to own.  I'm allowed to create my own modes of expression that aren't pre-packaged and sold by the publishers.

But in MMOs with RMT, the publishers determine who can can express themselves in a particular way.  It isn't us anymore who make these decisions.  And the activities that we are allowed to do in the games are increasingly dictated by the publishers and are increasingly stratified: things like combat, where the outcome is determined by mathematics before the combat ever begins.  And also, things like RMT: which is a constant reminder of how powerless a person really is when the developers choose to withhold something.

And in this way, being a citizen in real-life starts to look much more "free" than being a citizen in the virtual world.  Instead of empowering players to create their own content, publishers have just empowered themselves to dish out content as they see fit...for a fee, of course.

Now someone is probably going to say at this point, "but they are a business, so of course they are going to seek the maximum profit they can."  I don't think anyone who argues against RMT is going to deny that...I mean, it's so painfully obvious what these publishers are doing, we don't need another explanation about why they are doing it.

But by making their motives so painfully obvious, they are inadvertently undermining the very appeal that made this genre so popular: that MMOs promise an experience where you can take charge of your own destiny better than you can in the world outside of computers.

In short, RMT is evidence of how disempowered we are in this genre.

Originally posted by Beatnik59

I'm thinking about creating a multi-part essay on the blogs here called "Death of a Dream" about the promise and failures of virtual worlds.

I'm not going into the whole of that piece, but I think the whole RMT thing is just one more bit of evidence to me that this genre is going back on what made it special in the first place.

The reason people flocked to MMOs is because it was a freer, more open society than the one we inhabit when we turn the game off.  And what we are discovering lately is that the real world is in fact much more free and open than online worlds today.

At least in the real world I can copy a shirt, design, or motiff that I like and want to own.  I'm allowed to create my own modes of expression that aren't pre-packaged and sold by the publishers.

But in MMOs with RMT, the publishers determine who can can express themselves in a particular way.  It isn't us anymore who make these decisions.  And the activities that we are allowed to do in the games are increasingly dictated by the publishers and are increasingly stratified: things like combat, where the outcome is determined by mathematics before the combat ever begins.  And also, things like RMT: which is a constant reminder of how powerless a person really is when the developers choose to withhold something.

And in this way, being a citizen in real-life starts to look much more "free" than being a citizen in the virtual world.  Instead of empowering players to create their own content, publishers have just empowered themselves to dish out content as they see fit...for a fee, of course.

Now someone is probably going to say at this point, "but they are a business, so of course they are going to seek the maximum profit they can."  I don't think anyone who argues against RMT is going to deny that...I mean, it's so painfully obvious what these publishers are doing, we don't need another explanation about why they are doing it.

But by making their motives so painfully obvious, they are inadvertently undermining the very appeal that made this genre so popular: that MMOs promise an experience where you can take charge of your own destiny better than you can in the world outside of computers.

In short, RMT is evidence of how disempowered we are in this genre.

You made some good points

but on the other hand

If you think that you are free to escape real life then you might want to change real life more then the games you play

When they say that you can choose your own destiny it is more of a marketing thing then anything.

I for one have never looked at a MMO to escape real life, it more on seeing how the MMOs are going and if the story is any good.

MT is just another way to make the experience different . good or bad it is there and it will stay for a long time.

lets face it MMOs are just another form of entertainment you never had a choice only the one to play it.

Originally posted by Whibbo

Originally posted by rr2real

 you kiddies that cry about microtransactions seem to forget video games cost more and more to create these days than they used to 

 

if i get a new innovative game because of microtransactions then i'll support it

i'm perfectly fine with champions online having microtransactions and a monthly fee 

 

Ok so what did making a game used to cost?  And what does it cost now?  You just pulled that out of your butt and have no idea.

Most everyone knows that games cost more to develop nowadays, I really don't understand how you could miss that fact - perhaps you had your head up your own butt.

Quote -  "Games are getting larger, which meant longer development time and larger staff costs."

Source - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8201332.stm

Date - 14 August 2009.

Excuse my insult, but you had no reason to insult rr2real, when he was simply repeating a well known fact in his post.

You people that know "everything" should know microtransactions is just one of many ways to charge more for their games without necessarily increasing the monthly fee price, I won't be adding F2Ps in here because they are not even worth talking about as they are all about item malls anyway.

- Large paid updates - expansions or campaigns (GW)
- Monthly Fee "exchanging" - PLEXes (EVE)
- Access "packs" - instead of making a damn item mall, you can just sell all access to all that crap via an "expansion", won't call it an expansion because it has no damn content, just virtual content you all say "oh, you don't need to buy them so who cares". 
 

But yeah, microtransactions are usually the most used method because it's damn easy and requires no imagination, you just need a customer with spare money that enjoys your game, and there you go, you have a cow to milk all they can for as long as they enjoy the game with virtual items or gameplay enhancements, doesn't matter if it's $10/mo or $1000/mo they will always have something for you. When the MT is a "mall", you can freely add stuff in there, virtual items are so easy to create compared to game content.

Originally posted by Whibbo

 

Ok so what did making a game used to cost?  And what does it cost now? 

During the late 80's a game could be made by ten people in about six months for under $100,000.

Around the mid 90's that jumped to 20 people working two years for just under $250,000.

Right now, a triple A title requires a team of over 100 people working five years with costs that exceed $25 million.

Any other questions?

Originally posted by Xasapis

Originally posted by rr2real

But that's exactly the catch. The core game was dumped down so you are either forced to grind or spend money on the RMT to avoid it. Do you understand that the grind was specifically introduced with the RMT transactions in mind? The grind in this case was intentional, so you would feel necessary to buy from the RMT.

That cuts both ways. The grind in most P2P MMOs is meant to keep you paying your subscription. At least with RMT you can pay a little to reduce the pain. The pricing model for MMORPGs is always the main focus and the game design is catered to specifically support the milking of customers for cash.

RMT.... Subscriptions... They're both sleazy if you ask me.

Originally posted by Whibbo

Originally posted by Munki

Originally posted by Whibbo

Originally posted by Munki

Originally posted by Whibbo

Ok.  I understand.

But, where is this game you speak of?  I am only basing my OP on the fact that it has no positive impact on gameplay as far as I have seen.  I certainly could be wrong...is there a game out there with a microtransaction model that has appeal for the more veteran crowd?

There always has been. Right from the beginning there's been people paying to level faster either through buying whole game accounts with characters attached, buying power-levelling or buying in-game currency to use to buy gear to make levelling faster (i'm assuming that's what people do with bought game currency?)

So, people in a hurry to reach max level have always used unofficial cash shops and that's maybe 25%(?) of the players who've been playing these games since early EQ/UO days. I'd imagine almost all of the people who buy in game gold will welcome the official cash shop model because they know, like everyone else, these games will never stick at just fluff items and will eventually sell stuff that makes levelling much faster. Being able to get that stuff from the official cash shop means they'll have less cvhance of getting ripped off.