Originally posted by Sk1ppeR
Would you rather my little pony MMO? I know I wouldn't but I'm not a violent person, so yeah ... for people like you there is Hello Kitty Online. It's colorful enough :) 

Because, yeah, that's the real choice... Total war genocidal hyper violence, or My Little Pony or Hello Kitty. Nothing obviously exists in the middle.

Eli, I actually agree. It gets boring for me as well so I go out of my way to break it up.

This generation of X-Box will be the first one that I am skipping.

That presentation looked like it was sponsored by Sony.

Originally posted by Hatefull

Originally posted by amber-r

I see horrible, horrible tactics used in many mmos with their cash shops and I also see no laws in place to stop them.

 

You very often get a minority of players speaking out about tactics publishers and developers use in their cash shops but the majority of their players still buy them and still lose lots of money.  Why are mmo players just so stupid with their money to the point of spending hundreds and thousands of dollars on random chance cosmetics and such?  A good company selling cosmetics for a flat fee makes a fraction of what a bad company can make with low chance lotto boxes designed to make you pay hundreds of dollars.

 

Even boycotting the cash shop does nothing because so many others will do it will still be profitable, if players stopped rewarding the bad behaviour used in these cash shops they would stop doing it.

 

I don't see this kind of practice anywhere else, you don't see new DLC for skyrim with a % chance to get it if you buy it.  You don't see it anywhere else, why do mmo players put up with it so readily?

What are you talking about?  If it is in the cash shop, you buy it, its gets delivered, you use it.  The only, gamble I have ever seen is in a certain Shooter where you played a ball game

It is quite clear what he is talking about.

Originally posted by Mr_C

Originally posted by trancejeremy

If you mean, does it have the same combat system that it always had, yes, just like WoW, Rift, SWTOR, and a host of other MMORPGs.

Indeed, go play Rift. That combat system is even slower.

Eh, the induction time in LOTRO is so bad that I feel I could go have a shower between each time I hit a key to a skill.

One of THE best combat mechanics with super fast response time is definately World of Warcraft. The induction time feels like I am sending an order to a toon, which then does it, instead of that I feel like I am in DIRECT control of the toon.

Sluggish, slows syrup combat. I give it 1/10, which makes the whole game fail. A modern combat system and a good pvp system would attract alot of players. The game feel dead, and those that are around are snotty elitistic players which are far from helpful.

Really sounding like your only point now is to pick a fight.

You have had your answer.

Originally posted by NaughtyP

I am going to probably get flamed for this, but I take issue with games that still design their content delivery this way:

"While the outdoor game is, at least in beta, a very soloable experience, the dungeons require teammates working together."

There is something fundamentally wrong with designing a multiplayer game that is predominantly solo content and only promotes working together when you want to do a dungeon. This kind of content delivery is what I expect from a 2001 game, not a 2013 game.

Sorry. I get that a lot of people still want this, but to me it's... uninspired.

I would actually say the opposite and that the solo/ group design they have now is very 'now' and open world grouping is very 2001 (ish).

Not saying 'now' is better or anything, I don't believe it is personally with regards to these games, but FFXIV is doing what it needs to do to succeed with a broad modern audience. It's not uninspired, it's practical and necessary.

Would I have it another way? Sure, I would prefer loads more group orientated content, but I think this game is good enough for me to still really enjoy it.

Originally posted by Calerxes

Originally posted by Vesavius

Originally posted by Calerxes 

 

So how would the world economy work when everybody buys 1 car, 1 fridge, 1 kettle, 1 cooker, 1 toaster? and when I die I basically give that to my kids and then they give it to their kids and so on. It not that simple and where is your proof that we can make these everlasting product of super high quality for sensible prices? If you cannot see the difference in quality from a Toyota to a Ford then you really are not looking properly.

 

I sooo badly want to answer this and why it subscribes to a very flawed, though very ingrained, world view, but it would get me warned at least, so I won't.

Suffice to say I disagree in a very general sense.

 

Its a question and its not rhetorical and if your answer cannot be put in a civil way then its not really a valid answer is it?

You miss the point in what I am saying... I can indeed be very civil, but I have been temp banned from this site before for discussing ethics and politics in a very civil manner.

Answering you would cross both those lines. It's a shame, but there ya go.

Originally posted by Calerxes

 

So how would the world economy work when everybody buys 1 car, 1 fridge, 1 kettle, 1 cooker, 1 toaster? and when I die I basically give that to my kids and then they give it to their kids and so on. It not that simple and where is your proof that we can make these everlasting product of super high quality for sensible prices? If you cannot see the difference in quality from a Toyota to a Ford then you really are not looking properly.

I sooo badly want to answer this and why it subscribes to a very flawed, though very ingrained, world view, but it would get me warned at least, so I won't.

Suffice to say I disagree in a very general sense.

Originally posted by WhiteLantern

I don't even know where to begin with this one. Someone is actually trying to tie a form of entertainment to governmental archetypes.

 

Fascinating.

To be fair, how a game is funded directly influences what it's design aims are and how it is prepared to treat it's customers.

The things he touches on are broader philosophies than just being 'governmental archetypes'.

I think the OP brings up valid points. A lot of bad practice is brought about by having to keep publishers, VC investors, and shareholders paid. The more we can cut those guys out of the loop the better IMO.

Originally posted by Scot

Is there such a thing as a P2P MMO or a F2P one anymore? With the hybrid revenue models now in use the distinction is blurred.

Without sub games to make the Free bit of F2P stand out, how long before the free players find the net closing in on them?

Agreed Scot, all these converated Western 'F2P' games are actually hybrid models. It just makes marketing easier to use the word 'free' to hook people in.

'Free' is pure spin... they could as easily be described as 'sub games with extended trials and a cash shop' a lot of the time, but the marketing guys don't like talking about money up front. It scares folks off before they have reached the 'sweet spot' of commitment (addiction) that makes them more susceptible to spending.

I would be really interested to see how a lot of these converted titles look if the subs propping them up was removed...

Originally posted by RavingRabbid

Got the email on it this morning. Ill have to go back and revisit it once its F2P.

Can I ask, why did you leave before?

Originally posted by MikeJezZ

Originally posted by Robokapp

it's cheaper...but is it better ?

According to who? Misplaced reply is misplaced.

Irks me when people can only respond to any fair point in cliche internet speak.

Robo, I think if people found it boring and not 'worth' £2.50 a week to play then they will probably find it boring now.

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by Vesavius

Originally posted by witchhammer

It can be only P2W if there is a competition.

If there is no competition there can be no "win"

 Define 'competition'?

Do you count the guy that you are rolling for a loot drop against after running a dungeon, as an example, as competition?

Can you link to the MMO where you can buy a better loot roll?  If not, then that's irrelevant to his statement.

You are trying too hard to be clever.

I was simply exploring his definition of 'competition'. Once I understand where he is coming from I will carry on talking to him based on the answer he gives.

What you consider relevant or irrelevant means little to me in this case.

Originally posted by Eladi

PS:  Denambren - yes, best chat system ever used in a game.

/mood lustfull  /moan = <name> moans lustfully <txt> or <name> moans <txt> lustfully to <name>  

And this, in the green, is why RPing in general struggles in these games reputation wise...

I play tabletop RPGs, have done for decades, and even I stop at the thought of stepping into the 'lusting' cyber world of the MMO RPers.

Tabletop RPers seem to be a more resiliant breed in general though... less reliant on the more sordid side of things and not letting the fact that their lead minis can't sit in chairs ruin a game for them.

Originally posted by lizardbones

PUGs haven't been friendly for a very long time. They are apparently for speed runs. If you want social activity, you have to join guilds that don't really want you because you haven't done enough speed runs.

Made me chuckle :)

Originally posted by witchhammer

It can be only P2W if there is a competition.

If there is no competition there can be no "win"

Define 'competition'?

Do you count the guy that you are rolling for a loot drop against after running a dungeon, as an example, as competition?

Originally posted by Livnthedream

Originally posted by Vesavius
 I don't see what has you confused in all honesty. It seems simple to me... Yes, character development is a measure of how well you are doing in a MMORPG. You buy any part of that from a cash shop and you are, in my eyes, paying to 'win'.

You cannot see that MMORPGs are a series of micro 'wins'?

And, no, it's nothing like your example here at all.

Except they are not, atleast not on the game level. One can say "I am done" or that they "won a match" or "world first" but none of those are "winning" the game. The game does not end until they shut off the servers, and even then there is no winning or losing, merely the resolution of the conflict. Having the best gear in the game is not the end or even really the point of the game. Nor is being the most skilled, or completing the most content, or playing the game the longest.

I will repeat the part where I point out to you that a MMORPG is a series of micro 'wins' and leave it at that.

If you don't understand where I am coming from when I say that then... Well, nevermind.

Originally posted by SoMuchMass

Originally posted by Antiquated

Originally posted by Vesavius

If this is pointed at me

Note the "ourselves"--generally directed, not specific, comment. Turn down paranoia a couple notches.

Uh, you quoted him.  The "paranoia" is warranted.

Indeed. This is why I said to him, when he quoted me specifically, 'IF this was pointed at me'.

Seems some folks just like trying to insult others to get a reaction. ahh well, no matter.

Originally posted by Livnthedream

Originally posted by Vesavius

Absolutely agree.

I am confused now, care to clarify? One cannot be "winning" based entirely on only part of a metric. That is like declaring yourself a winner even though you did not even complete a race entirely because you participated in one degree or another.

I don't see what has you confused in all honesty. It seems simple to me... Yes, character development is a measure of how well you are doing in a MMORPG. You buy any part of that from a cash shop and you are, in my eyes, paying to 'win'.

You cannot see that MMORPGs are a series of micro 'wins'?

And, no, it's nothing like your example here at all.

Originally posted by Antiquated

Originally posted by Vesavius

Originally posted by Livnthedream

Originally posted by Vesavius 

Ahh, ok, I see.

Yeah, to me, the whole game would be 'pay to win'.

Because it allows character progression by cash.

Implying character progression is winning.

I am indeed saying that earning character progression is indeed a form of 'winning', especially in a PvE game.

And the outrage over someone 'winning' more 'easily' than ourselves...

"Moral indignation is jealousy with a halo."--H.G. Wells

If this is pointed at me, I haven't showed outrage or jealousy here. In fact, I said I turn a blind eye to it as long as I get to play the way I enjoy in a previous post.

Did you just want to make a general point an use your quote?