rr2real is delusional.

Today's MMOs should be free. None of them offer anything that the rest of the gaming genres do not. You are basically paying server rent, and that's it. Shit should be free.

Originally posted by Interesting

rr2real is delusional.

No, he is just flame-baiting. Back on topic please.

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by JMoney95

 

Micro transactions to buy good gear would likely never happen in a good game.

Micro transactions to buy crap like a new dress doesn't change a thing and just upsets those on welfare that want a new dress.

 

Which is why there are no good micro-transaction games. There aren't any micro-transaction games that sell only crap like a new dress. They don't exist. The cake is a lie.

I'm sorry but you are completely wrong, they do exist, go take a look at CoX, all their MT are for costumes and new emotes, they even have one for wedding dresses. So I am sorry if I burst your bubble, but other games if not most of them have MT. Just quit crying about it and don't buy the game, you don't even know what they will sell in the store.

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.

Haloooo Mr Gen X. Many of us 'veterans' have been around since before UO, since before MUD's, since before PC's. Back in those days we played an old game called D&D. You'll probably think its awful because the whole game was MT based. You would need to buy individuall MT 'books', you would have to buy MT 'modules', and most of the fixins would cost more on top of that. You even had to roll you own dice (and maybe even roll a little something extra if ya know what I mean). Awful to even consider I know.

If you do respond. MAKE SURE YOU TALK LOUD. My hearing ain't what it used to be.

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 

The only thing that is more costly now is possibly graphics engines. Other than that, more programming languages are better documented than ever before, so programming games costs less. Unless of course the company chooses to purchase a third party programming interface also. However, we are talking about a software company creating software games right?

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.

Originally posted by Aganazer 

Haloooo Mr Gen X. Many of us 'veterans' have been around since before UO, since before MUD's, since before PC's. Back in those days we played an old game called D&D. You'll probably think its awful because the whole game was MT based. You would need to buy individuall MT 'books', you would have to buy MT 'modules', and most of the fixins would cost more on top of that. You even had to roll you own dice (and maybe even roll a little something extra if ya know what I mean). Awful to even consider I know.

If you do respond. MAKE SURE YOU TALK LOUD. My hearing ain't what it used to be.

Yes - I can see the  analogy. But if a group of players got fed up with the power cycle, they could just turn round and say "OK - main book only. Nothing from any of the expansions is allowed" - and lots of people were fine with that, since it saved them all a bunch of money, and everyone in the campaign was on a level playing field.

You simply can't do the same thing with an RMT game. Suppose you and your group of friends stop paying money - well a good part of the rest of the server will still be playing, so your entire group will find themselves at a big disadvantage...The point is that in a home paper and pencil game, the control is in the hands of the DM and the players. In an MMO, the control is with the game company, and that control is far more open to abuse.

Originally posted by Aganazer

 

Haloooo Mr Gen X. Many of us 'veterans' have been around since before UO, since before MUD's, since before PC's. Back in those days we played an old game called D&D. You'll probably think its awful because the whole game was MT based. You would need to buy individuall MT 'books', you would have to buy MT 'modules', and most of the fixins would cost more on top of that. You even had to roll you own dice (and maybe even roll a little something extra if ya know what I mean). Awful to even consider I know.

If you do respond. MAKE SURE YOU TALK LOUD. My hearing ain't what it used to be.

IS THIS LOUD ENOUGH? lol....

No, I loved D&D...I even have some old homemade modules as well.  Still have some old classic Battletech stuff too.  Those were the days.

My first digital RPG was Zork on the C64....

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.

 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.

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?