I would agree with you that debate is warranted, needed and good.  However, what we see a lot of on forums such as this is not debate.  It is simply a repetitious argument circle of "You don't agree with me, you are... stupid, a noob, lazy, a griefer, an asshat."  And a whole lot of arguments that contain simply, "You are wrong!!!!111!1!1!!!!!!111oneoneeleven"  That is not debate.  For debate to be had, you must have a discussion and telling someone that they are simply wrong when it comes to matters of opinion is not a discussion.

I would deffinately have to say "no way" to a higher priced subscription fee.  For several reasons, the main reason being... MMORPGs are very much so, an economy of scale.  What that (basically) means is, initially, when sub numbers are low, the cost of reimbursement for initial investment, the cost of daily ongoing costs to run the game and the cost of present and future development takes up a very large portion of the subscription payment.  However, once the sub numbers go up, the costs of running the game are spread out over more players, meaning that only a smaller portion of each subscription fee goes to "paying the bills".

Eventually, if they have done things right, they will get to a point where, like in the case of WoW, with so many subs, the cost of running the game barely makes up a fraction of a percent of the total subscription fee.  Meaning everything else is simply pure and total profit.  While I do not in any way, shape, or form, have a problem with the generation of profits, I do have a HUGE problem with games and developers like Blizzard, who feel the need to charge for game expansions, when they are making so much money per subscription fee already.

The reason why?  Simple, and it leads me to the second reason why I would not support a higher subscription fee.  Developers like CCP and their game, EVE Online, have shown me and the world that you can run a successful game, at a standard $15 a month fee, and never, ever, EVER charge "extra" for the expansions they put out, and yet still remain profitable and successful.  Nor do they use or support any frivilous Cash Shop or RMT services.  Yes, they do have the standard extra fees for character changes and stuff like that.  They also have the pay cash for time cards, thus selling them to other players for in-game money feature.  I would not classify either of those in the same realm as these other Cash Shop / Sub+ RMT scams the current developers are trying to get away with.

I've gone on long enough, just on the higher subscription fee thing.  I will have to get back later on the other two points asked.  I'm sure someone somewhere needs a break from my ramblings.

Originally posted by ForceQuit

We need a Wallstreet:  Online.  PvP would be absolutely ruthless and cutthroat.  As a derivatives trader, my hedge spell crits you for 275 million in losses.  Congrats, you are bankrupt!  The government wants to rez you with a bailout, y/n?

I LOLed.

Then I LOLed again.

+1

The term you are using, and thus defining is not a term that I would associate with a game itself.  The term "casual", or its defined polar opposite, "hardcore", are instead, to me, a definition of the player themself.  Even then, the terms can be used and categorized in many different ways.  Some examples of the categories follow.

Time Spent Playing

Defined solely by the attribute of amount of time spent playing a game during a specfic interval.  Again, these numbers themselves are arbitrary. It depends on who is defining the player, as to what the benchmark timeframe is.

Casual - Someone who spends less than 20 hours a week playing.

Hardcore - Someone who spends more than 20 hours a week playing.

Activity Level

Defined solely by the attribute of activity level of game sessions, regardless of length of time.

Casual - Someone who isn't regularly focused on any specific task or goal.  This player mainly just wanders around "looking for things to do".

Hardcore - Someone who has a regimented schedule planned out of the day's activities.  Again, regardless of length of time played.  This player knows where he is going, what he is going to do and knows what he is going to do long after he completes each task before him.  This is the type of player who will plan out his activities in an effort to maximize effectiveness, such as the best experience gain per hour played.

Dedication Level

Defined solely by the attribute of dedication to the game's available aspects.

Casual - Someone who doesn't care about going everywhere or seeing everything.  This player is not concerned with all the possible side quests or achievements.

Hardcore - This player is your professional "Badge Hunter".  He strives to take his character to every possible location.  He will attempt to complete every possible quest.  He will also try to aquire every possible badge/achievement the game may have.  This will also spill over into other things, like your "collectors".  People who will try to own one of all the game's available "pets" or other similar items.

Prefered Combat Type

Defined solely by the type of combat prefered when playing.

Casual -  Someone who does not partake in player versus player combat.  This player prefers to combat computer controlled characters instead of a fellow player.

Hardcore -  Someone who only plays a game for its player versus player combat.  This player will most likely find computer controlled character combat boring or without challenge.

As you can see, most will not agree with you by your very narrow definition.  In fact, some, like myself, do not agree that the terms casual and/or hardcore, can even apply to a game itself.  I do understand the point you are trying to make but alas, I must disagree with your assessment, even if I were to agree that such a moniker could apply to a game.

In my opinion, it is completely and totally based on the player, as to whether or not they are casual or hardcore.

Originally posted by donjuanamigo

again, fail on your part. coming to conclusions on something you dont know anything about. the devs said one thing and could totally change everything. this game has not even reached a finalized state and by coming to a conclusion based on a few tid bits of information to you means it is. like i said previously, this game is over a year away for release if not more. i dont play wow so i have no clue how their crafting is done.

I'm sorry, but it is you who are the one who has failed.  Your failure to speculate on and to  discuss the ideas and statements put out by the game developers has helped to lead us to the situation we are in now with the MMORPG genre.  Constantly I hear statements from folks like you that follow the line, or something similar to it, of, "Just wait and see what they do."  or my personal favorite, "They are the game developer, they know what they are doing.".  How many failed games, or rather, how many failed potential games have we had in the past because we as gamers sat by and said nothing, or did nothing, while the developers put out short one liners like, "Simple" and "Easily Accessable", or maybe "Innovative" and "Ground Breaking".

Too many people like you have taken the developers at their word and silenced other concerned gamers with your "You fail for speculating" rhetoric.  People like you have allowed developers free reign to drop whatever trash they want on the market, and then you buy it, because you'd rather have crap to play then nothing at all.  Thus perpetuating the cycle.  So again, you have failed.  You have failed for not questioning their ideas.  You have failed for not speculating on what they will do.  And you have failed for not getting out there and voicing your concerns to the developers.  Whether or not they listen to them is irrelevant.  You will at least know that you can proudly stand up and say, "Hey! I tried to tell them." or maybe "I tried to help make it a good game."  Or would that be too difficult for you?  Is it easier for you to just sit here and post "You fail!!" and "Stop speculating!!", then to actually stop and think for yourself, and try to make a concerted effort to improve gaming?

Originally posted by donjuanamigo

so essentially what just did in that entire ramble you call a post, is speculate. speculate on things you dont know anything about nor does anyone for that matter except the people making the game. bioware does that have to vomit out every single piece of information on the game right off the bat to please you or anyone. the game is over a year away and all information on it will be given out in due time. you heard a couple of rumours and just ran wild with them comparing an aspect of the game to WoW. that my mongo friend, is an epic fail.

I did not spout rumors or speculate on anything.  I quoted Bioware directly when they said the crafting system would be "Simple" and "Easily Accessable".  Not speculation, not rumors.  Posted and factual.  I compared their description of it to our most beloved example of "simple" and "easily accessable".  WoW's key trademarks.  Do you deny WoW is simple and easily accessable?  No, I don't think so.  Like I said, until they give out more information, what other conclusion can I possibly come to?

While I most certainly applaud your enthusiam, I am afraid that I do not share it. The main reason being that Bioware is but a few months shy of going to Beta testing stage and they have yet to discuss much about the game besides a small bit of its combat style and its epic storylines. Little else has been revealed, let alone discussed. Of the small information that has been released, I find little to be overly enthusiastic about. My biggest hang up? NPC controlled party "companions".

If you take the SW:tOR predecessors, KotOR, you will see games that are awesome for their stories, and good in their combat, but little else of them stands out. Will SW:tOR resemble KotOR heavily? One can only assume, and that is not something I like to do. I rely on the information given, but as we have seen, that's not much.

I worry about SW:tOR in many areas. First and foremost would be the areas of the game that have nothing to do with combat and story. Where are the other things that really help to make MMOs great? Where is the crafting at? Will it be there at all? They say yes, but I am extremely fearsome of it, because of the way they did describe their vision of it. What little they did talk about.

I'm not going to dig for it, but they said something along the lines of "simple" and "easily accessable". That really does scare me. I'm deeply afraid it is going to go the way of WoW crafting and be so overly simplified as to become down right stupid. If they do it like WoW, you will have a crafting system where you combine one piece of metal, a tube, a wooden stock, some other random item and after 5 seconds of crafting time, you have a brand new T-21 rifle. I'm sorry, but no thanks. Not to mention, after you make enough of the T-21's to get to the next level of crafting, you will NEVER make one again. Let's also not forget the fact that nearly every other rifle you can get from a loot drop will be significantly better than any crafted version you could make. Is that the way it will be? I most certainly hope not, but they have not given out any other information besides "simple" and "easily accessable" that could possibly lead me to a different conclusion.

In light of that possibility in the scheme of crafting, what does that mean for the economy? Are we again going to be relgated to an Auction House only system, like WoW's, where the only interaction between players will take place via a market screen in some random building in major cities? Again, I hope not. But unless they come out with some other information besides "simple" and "easily accessable", this will be another area that I have great concern for.

What about things not having anything to do with crafting, combat or story? I'd love to speculate on those, but there is nothing to speculate on. They have said the worlds will be "large and open". But to what extent? Will it be like WoW and SWG where the worlds are large and open? Or will they be like Guild Wars and Dungeons and Dragons Online, where once outside of a major city or town, you now exist in some instance made specifically for you and your avatar or your party.

Let's not even begin to talk about my fears for the "multiplayer" aspect of it. One phrase... "NPC companions" This phrase in and of itself causes me GREAT concern. I am by no means a stickler for forced grouping. Not no way, not no how. But I am one of those types of players that likes to see a slight need to rely on my fellow player. Of course this carries over into far more things than combat, like mainly the crafting and the economy. I don't mind if the game is soloable from start to end-game. I could care less. But when they make the game not soloable, then allow for NPC controlled companions, it kind of kills the whole MMO aspect to it, does it not? I mean seriously? What is the difference, in combat only, between an MMO that allows NPC controlled companions, and a game like, say, "Dungeon Siege"?

Okay, I think I have gone on long enough. I do hope I have not rained on anyone's parade too much. That MOST CERTAINLY was not my intent. I do sincerely hope that SW:tOR turns out to be a phenomenal game. If it does, I will MOST CERTAINLY be playing it. But again, I have not seen enough yet, or i've seen a little bit too much of stuff that gives me pause, to declare this game to be "the second coming". But as always... "Your mileage may vary."

Sincerely,

Me
 

WHile I most certainly applaud your enthusiam, I am afraid that I do not share it.  The main reason being that Bioware is but a few months shy of going to Beta testing stage and they have yet to discuss much about the game besides a small bit of its combat style and its epic storylines.  Little else has been revealed, let alone discussed.  Of the small information that has been released, I find little to be overly enthusiastic about.  My biggest hang up?  NPC controlled party "companions".

If you take the SW:tOR predecessors, KotOR, you will same games that are awesome for their stories, and good in their combat, but little else of them stands out.  Will SW:tOR resemble KotOR heavily?  One can only assume, and that is not something I like to do.  I rely on the information given, but as we have seen, that's not much.

I worry about SW:tOR in many areas.  First and foremost would be the areas of the game that have nothing to do with combat and story.  Where are the other things that really help to make MMOs great?  Where is the crafting at?  Will it be there at all?  They say yes, but I am extremely fearsome of it, because of the way they did describe their vision of it.  What little they did talk about.

I'm not going to dig for it, but they said something along the lines of "simple" and "easily accessable".  That really does scare me.  I'm deeply afraid it is going to go the way of WoW crafting and be so overly simplified as be become down right stupid.  If they do it like WoW, you will have a crafting system where you combine one piece of metal, a tube, a wooden stock, some other random item and after 5 seconds of crafting time, you have a brand new T-21 rifle.  I'm sorry, but no thanks.  Not to mention, after you make enough of the T-21's to get to the next level of crafting, you will NEVER make one again.  Let's also not forget the fact that nearly every other rifle you can get from a loot drop will be significantly better than any crafted version you could make.  Is that the way it will be?  I most certainly hope not, but they have not given out any other information besides "simple" and "easily accessable" that coupld possibly lead me to a different conclusion.

In light of that possibility in the sceme of crafting, what does that mean for the economy?  Are we again going to be relgated to an Auction House only system, like WoW's, where the only interaction between players will take place via a market screen in some random building in major cities?  Again, I hope not.  But unless they come out with some other information besides "simple" and "easily accessable", this will be another area that I have great concern for.

What about things not having anything to do with crafting, combat or story?  I'd love to speculate on those, but there is nothing to speculate on.  They have said the worlds will be "large and open".  But to what extent?  Will it be like WoW and SWG where the worlds are large and open?  Or will they be like Guild Wars and Dungeons and Dragons Online, where once outside of a major city or town, you now exist in some instance made specifically for you and your avatar or your party.

Let's not even begin to talk about my fears for the "multiplayer" aspect of it.  One phrase... "NPC companions"  This phrase in and of itself causes me GREAT concern.  I am by no means a stickler for forced grouping.  Not no way, not no how.  But I am one of those types of players that likes to see a slight need to rely on my fellow player.  Of course this carries over into far more things than combat, mainly crafting and the economy.  I don't mind if the game is soloable from start to end-game.  I could care less.  But when they make the game not soloable, then allow for NPC controlled companions, it kind of kills the whole MMO aspect to it.  Does it not?  I mean seriously?  What is the difference, in combat only, between an MMO that allows NPC controlled companions, and a game like, Dungeon Siege?

Okay, I think I have gone on long enough.  I do hope I have not rained on anyone's parade too much.  That MOST CERTAINLY was not my intent.  I do sincerely hope that SW:tOR turns out to be a phenominal game.  If it does, I will MOST CERTAINLY be playing it.  But again, I have not seen enough yet, or i've seen a little bit too much of stuff that gives me pause, to declare this game to be "the second coming".  But as always... "Your mileage may vary."

Sincerely,

Me

Originally posted by Toquio3

Something like that I think. But I still prefer the term 'magical pixie dust'. =P

2nd'ed

Because while they may all be on the same server, they are not all on the same "shard".  I don't know if that is the technical term for it, but that's basically what it is.  You have to think of each solar system or constellation as its own "shard", like it's very own server.  This is a very rudamentary and probably highly oversimplification of it, but basically, that's it.

EDIT: And no, not all 50,000 people can be in the same place at one time.  I think their current max per system is around 1500 ish.

I did not review the link you provided.  Sorry but my time is short today.  However, I fully understand what you are saying and have seen such vitriol infused responses when SWG is mentioned.  If you wnat to see worse, go over to the SW:tOR forums.  Any time SWG is mentioned and how you would like to see some elements of it placed in SW:tOR, oh my geez, the SWG haters ome out in force.  They will "remind you" of how much SWG sucked and how much they do not want to play SWG 2.  It was bad.  I was asking for a meaningful and in-depth crafting system, similar to SWG's, and man, did I get hate for that one.

There's one thread in particular.  It's in the Character Classes main section.

http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=107714

In that thread, I am BlazeIV.

I too miss, like the Dickens, SWG pre-NGE.  It was, and still is, in my very humble opinion, the best MMO game I have ever played.  Yes, there were things wrong with the game, but EVERY game has issues.  There isn't one game on the market today that does not have some.

I still to this day miss everything SWG:PreNGE had to offer.  And few, if any games, have even come remotely close to having the sheer number of activities and features that game has.  I will never forget the many houses I built from the ground up.  I personally crafted the house, all the furniture inside and any other non-craftable item I wanted, I went and got / farmed / bought.  What other game can you claim that?  There may be one, but I haven't played it.

My most favorite part of SWG, that I despise SoE for taking is without a doubt, the 32 profession system.  I loved the fact that I could be anything I wanted, even odd combinations you wouldn't expect.  When I got bored of being one profession, I could simply train my character into something else.  The ONLY thing I disliked about the system was that skills were completely forgotten once switched.  I would have much prefered to be able to switch back and forth from any profession(s) I previously trained.  No, i'm not saying I wanted to be all at once.  I simply wanted to be able to interchange them, once I trained them first.

Will SW:ToR give me anything close to what SWG:PreNGE had?  Not a chance in hell.  With eight locked classes, that kills the whole skill tree thing.  I don't forsee SW:ToR getting anywhere near the features that SWG:PreNGE had either.

It truly saddens me how much I miss SWG.  I have never had such a desire to play a game that I once played in the past.  But no, I will not return to it after SoE's behavior about the NGE.  I cannot and will not support a company that treats its paying customers so callously and negatively.

I am totally with you OP.  I, along with many others, will never be able to enjoy an MMO in the way we did SWG.  I also truly believe that my MMO enjoyment has been forever tarnished, even if ever so slightly, simply because I was able to play such a great game.  Now I am forever stuck to compare all future MMO games to it.  And sadly, I think none will ever be able to compete.

Originally posted by NotNiceDino

Expirience penalties are stupid. They where stupid in EQ, they are stupid now. Noone with a life would EVER want such a thing, because if you have a life, your time is worth something, and you only have so much recreational time, having several hours of it negated is not fun, or exciting, or challenging, it's just frustrating , designing a game with feature meant simply to frustrate is ridiculous.

I don't mind if it take a long time to get somewhere, or if it's very challenging, but let keep what I've accomplished. I always felt like my subscription fee was being stolen when I lost a level, and in the EQ days I didn't have a life (hence I put up with it, though I shouldn't have) I would never stick around for a game that does this in this day and age, as most people wouldn't, hence it isn't done anymore. Let me rephrase that: Like most thing you so called "Hardcore" players (who are everything but) whine about IF IT WAS A GOOD IDEA GAMES WOULD STILL BE DOING IT!!!!

That's what kills me. It's not like you morons ever preach about something new, that game developers are afraid to try... no your preaching about old, been there done that, got the tee shirt (literally) features that had their chance, didn't work out, and fell by the wayside.

Oh, and for my final flame bait: WoW is not easier just because leveling does not entail waiting 15 minutes for the runner to pull another bear into the camp for 1/20th a % of a level!

THIS ^^ 

Q.F.T.

Originally posted by LynxJSA

Originally posted by Maligar

EVE's sustainability stems from the fact that there is a region of the game, that for the most part, the average player is free from attack from other players.  Yes it is full loot, but to attack a player in high-sec means you WILL die also.  Yes, you do have a small handfull of asshats who do things like can-flipping and suicide gate camps.  But, being that there is a rather large safe zone, EVE remains financially viable.  Would it be anywhere near as viable or successful, if Empire (high-sec) space didn't exist?  It's not possible to say.  Just look at the statistics for EVE players and their spread.  If I remember correctly, greater than half of all EVE players NEVER leave high-sec.  And a large portion of the other half, only venture out into low/null-sec rarely.  It is but a small portion of the player base that lives, works and plays out in the area which could be called full-loot full-time.

 

So, you agree that PatchDay is correct, and such a game IS financially sustainable. Now, if you want to add conditionals to prove him wrong, that's another issue entirely, but the fact remains that all three of trophic's statements are incorrect.

I would say that without question, a full loot FFA PVP game is financially sustainable.  However, I am also saying that EVE's popularity stems largely from the fact that there is a place players can go, that for the most part, they are safe from it.  The question remains though... How popular would a game like EVE be if Empire space didn't exist?  Would it have anywhere near the amount of players?  I would argue, given by the player base statistics, no, not a chance in hell.

But yes, it is possible for a game like DF or any other such title with FFA PVP and full looting, to remain financial viable.  However, for how long is the question.  Do they have long-term viability?  Will they still be around in 5 - 10 years?  Maybe.  But the track record for it is not all that stellar.

Originally posted by Meridion

Full loot FFA PvP is not what drives people to hate this system.

That's funny because, that is the exact reason several people gave previously in this thread.  They don't like it, or hate it, because someone can take everything from them after killing them, even if they didn't want to engage in a PVP fight at that time.

Originally posted by zymurgeist

EVE isn't full loot. You can never take an enemy's ship and cargo intact. The game also has clones and insurance. It can be full loss if you're stupid but it's never been full loot.

Now you are just arguing semantics to be arguing.  Can you take whatever is left on the corpse when they die?  Yes.  You can fully loot anything that is left after destruction.  Full Loot.

Originally posted by PatchDay

Originally posted by trophic

Ultimately a full-loot PVP game is unworkable. It means that all gameplay is restricted to a small number of highly equipped players who can prevent all newcomers from progressing. Such a game is not financially sustainable.

 

What? Soooo you never heard of EVE Online then?

EVE's sustainability stems from the fact that there is a region of the game, that for the most part, the average player is free from attack from other players.  Yes it is full loot, but to attack a player in high-sec means you WILL die also.  Yes, you do have a small handfull of asshats who do things like can-flipping and suicide gate camps.  But, being that there is a rather large safe zone, EVE remains financially viable.  Would it be anywhere near as viable or successful, if Empire (high-sec) space didn't exist?  It's not possible to say.  Just look at the statistics for EVE players and their spread.  If I remember correctly, greater than half of all EVE players NEVER leave high-sec.  And a large portion of the other half, only venture out into low/null-sec rarely.  It is but a small portion of the player base that lives, works and plays out in the area which could be called full-loot full-time.

Originally posted by Sharne

 Both very good games. the setting of Fallen Earth (ie post apocalyptic) wasnt my type of thing, otherwise I would probably still be playing it. Eve is a very solid game, though the PVE isnt the best in the world. If I had to choose either, it would be Fallen Earth, simply for the reason that I dont like the fact that you can buy pretty much whatever you want in Eve for RL money.

Not exactly a valid arguement because the ability to buy your way up occurs in nearly EVERY game on the market.  P2P, F2P, it doesn't matter.  If it isn't the game developers providing you with the ability to do so, it is a third party selling uberness.

Originally posted by Agricola1

 

I paid to play DFO, not some watered down turd that caters to carebears that can't handle the fact they get outmanouvered by the enemy.

No, you paid to play a POS (turd) game that caters to the asshat bottom feeders of the gaming community, who can't handle the fact that they suck at real PVP and use tactics similar to the ones the OP is trying to get corrected.

In regards to the sheer amount of money Blizzard makes just off the subscriptions and their desire to milk players even more with stupid crap like this...