[Katamari / Mega Thread] Pay to Win

  • Baragoon

    Posts: 6105

    Posted:
    Posted:
    I'll just leave this here...
    Chris Roberts:
    [hide]

    "We generated $800,000 in February alone, which is crazy. We don't even have a campaign going, we're not even selling new ships or anything, and we don't have a game"


    Some how I think they will do alright without having to monetise everything to the n[SUP]th[/SUP] degree.

    Citizens [REDACTED]: 602_

  • Corran

    Posts: 402

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Wow this thread got skewed really quick. I myself don't mind having an in-game cash marketplace. Three things about it make me okay with it: One, it's capped. You can only spend a limited amount of $ for Credits per month. I would more or less expect this cap to be about $15 bucks per month. I am hazarding a guess at that figure as it's the average monthly rate for P2P monthly subscription games. Two, it's not an excessive conversion rate. From what I remember, it's going to be about $1/1,000c. Third, they've been completely up-front with this information since the beginning of the campaign.

    All facts and complaints aside, we've known about it from the beginning, and that it would offer credits and cosmetics only, like electroskins and decals. It was mentioned by CR that it may eventually support selling player-designed ships for cash once modding and mod submission methods are established, but that those ships would also be available in-universe too. No equipment, no exclusive ships, no God-Button for someone with a fat wallet.
    Rogue Squadron | WWW.SC-ROGUES.COM
  • soontm

    Posts: 1350

    Posted:
    Posted:
    CIG is a company and as a company, its goal is to earn money. There's no doubt about it. Anyone think them differently, you'll be disappointed. Besides, nothing is free. They need to make money to keep the boat floating.

    All the examples given so far are inevitably pay-to-win micro transactions, well maybe except EVE's PLEX. Simply put, the game forces you to pay for a premium account if you want to stand a chance in the game at all. This premium account includes things that are obtainable through cash shop only, which gives you the I-win button in many cases. Has there been any mentioning of premium contents in SC that are exclusive to the cash shop only? I don't recall. There hasn't even been any mentioning of item sales in the cash shop apart from in game credit. Until there's confirmation of premium content in SC that's exclusive for cash shops, you can't compare SC to the pay-to-win games.

    Is OP's concern valid? I'd think so, but certainly not to the degree of the OP's post. If an average Joe/Jane in SC plays 20 hours a week and earn 100,000 in game credit, give people who can only play 8 hours on the weekend the option to purchase 60,000 in game credit per week. I really don't see anything wrong with it. As with anything, moderation is the key.
    dragon_gif.gif
  • bdo7

    Posts: 3446

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    Fact 1 - without a subscription (and people don't like subscriptions, there is a reason that model is vanishing) dev house for an online game needs income from somewhere for maintenance, sustainment, and additional content
    Fact 2 - any MMO like game with something akin to an economy and has more than 10 players will end up with gold sellers *anyway* if there is not a game legal, official way of trading some real money for

    No other facts needed. At least this way the money goes to CIG and not a chinese gold farmer / account hacker and allows them to regulate things with monthly caps.

    Bursar, I wish you were a Moderator, so you could simply stamp this reply onto the end of each new thread and then lock it forever.

    It is really all that needs to be said. Especially your point #2 - if CIG doesn't sell the "gold," someone else will... and that means account hacking at nightmare levels.

    In fact, since CIG is limiting how much cash a player can LEGITIMATELY buy, I bet we'll see black-market cash traffic anyway. :(

    But anyway, it's a space dogfighting sim, not an MMORPG. I think people should stop basing their expectations on a completely different genre of game. I think the best way to describe SC's model (rather than "pay to this" or "pay to that") is "play to enjoy."

    I know I will be hitting the cash shop every time I need just a LITTLE more dosh to get that next shiny bit, and I'm okay with that. :) It will mean supporting the game.
    J3Y7129.png
    "the forums are a development resource, and drama worsens the signal to noise ratio." - Toast
  • StanleyCrube

    Posts: 11378

    Posted:
    Posted:
    In all this, let's not forget Chris is the one who strongly emphasized and promised players they would not end up having to pay fees to play.

    So in all the armchair prognostications let's stop arguing that isn't true and pushing for ways to come up with regular fees.

    For those who have implied that--promised or not--they accept fees have to be put in place and go on to imply "tiers of play" where "fee payers" get more game--it's arrogant and it's insulting to everyone else who pledged and took Chris at his word.

    You should too. We didn't all pledge for a game that would later be bought away by people competing with more money to have it after ALL of our pledges got it up and running.

    Ironically, that's why Chris didn't sell out to a company--so he could own it and let players equally and fully access it instead of having financiers dictate terms.

    Stan


  • Moruk

    Posts: 173

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    What CR is talking about is people who have jobs, kids, family, and don't have time to play 40 hours a week to earn credits, so players are allowed to use some real money per month to buy credits.

    I don't buy this argument. Now I really doubt there will be a mechanism to limit credit purchase for players who already invested their 40 hours per week. Essentially allowing them to spent their 40 hours and their money on top of that!

    IF
    Money = Time
    Money = Skill
    THEN
    Money + Time > Time
    Money + Skill > Skill
    Money + Time + Skill > Time + Skill

    We had this in so many other threads. In the end, they all got bombed by a lot of CIG fanboys, making any meaningful discussion impossible. We can close this thread right now to save time.

    ATTENTION: bombs incoming.
    ∀ x∊M, M⊇{SKILL, TIME}: MONEY + x > x.
  • Baragoon

    Posts: 6105

    Posted:
    Posted:
    A bomb dropped by the biggest bomber in the forum no less.

    Take it away Mr. Roberts:

    Citizens [REDACTED]: 602_

  • croberts68

    Developer

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Wow, there's a few things that get real gamer's blood boiling more than "micro-transactions" - perhaps "DRM", "EA" and "Pay2Win" but that's about it.

    It would be nice if everyone that was getting up in arms about the OP actually read the article that was referred to as I DON'T mention micro-transactions anywhere. The full article is here http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-04-22-chris-roberts-how-incredible-community-transforms-development. If you read my words I'm incredibly happy and excited about making the game, how the interaction with all of YOU is making the game better AND how grateful I am that everyone has been so generous in their contributions as its allowing us to make a game without compromises.

    My reference to World of Tanks was purely about how I felt the ability for people that don't have 40 hours a week to sink into a game have the opportunity to spend some money to keep up (an early post called this Pay2BeEqual) or drive a sexy tank they don't have 200 hours of game time to earn. I think WoT has some similarities to SC because they are both skill based games so having better equipment may help you but it will NOT guarantee victory - which is very important and similar to real life (I can have a better sports car than you but if you're a better driver you'll probably be able to beat me on a road course). And it is encouraging to me that they are doing well financially as it is a PC game in what I would have considered a niche category, which at first glance is how you could categorize Star Citizen. Its going to cost significant money to make Star Citizen and more money to continue to run it. I would love to see Star Citizen hit a 10 year anniversary like Eve, and knowing that another online PC game is doing well makes me feel confident that SC has the potential for longevity that I think everyone would like to see (which was the context for my comments in the article)

    For the record here are my simple rules for what I'm aiming for with Star Citizen (and personal play preference)

    1) NO grind - basic gameplay should be fun.

    2) NO subscription to play. Once you've bought the game you should be able to play and have fun without paying another penny. Maybe this is from all the MMOs I signed up for and then didn't have time to play yet still had to pay to keep my character (I think I paid over 2 years of subs for both WoW and SWG before I canceled, despite only playing them for the first month or so!)

    3) NO unfair advantage to people with either too much money or too much time. I think its disingenuous for people to claim that they should have a big advantage just because they can commit 40 hours a week in play time over someone that can only spend 4. Both types of player have purchased the game and are both entitled to have fun. If I make a game that only caters to people that have lots of time and nothing else I'm cutting out a huge part of the audience. The same goes if I build a game that just caters to people that have money to burn (The Asian P2W game style). Just because someone plays one way doesn't mean everyone should play that way. Some people will want to just spend a few hours dogfighting, some may want spend dozens of hours doing trade runs and building up a merchant empire. Others may just want to explore corners of the galaxy. A big audience supplies lots of players to make the universe more interesting. A big audience also spreads the costs of running the persistent universe (as it costs money for new content and servers), which in turn makes it cheaper for all.

    4) NO Pay2Win - You should never be able to buy anything with real money that you can't buy in with in game credits. Once fully live SC in-game items will only be purchasable with in-game credits. There will even be some items you can ONLY earn by playing / flying missions. All you will be able to spend money on that is gameplay related would be buying some in-game credits as you don't want or don't have enough time to earn the credits you need for your contemplated purchase. We'll cap purchase of in-game credits to avoid someone unbalancing the game / economy. Finally as I point out above skill will always play a factor - there will be no "magic spaceship of death" that will sweep all before it, so while you may have bought a more expensive spaceship / weapon a better pilot can still beat you (this is where people with lots of time get an advantage as they'll have spent a lot more time honing their combat skills!)

    From my perspective my above 4 rules and solutions are the best compromise that factors the need to make the game fun for people with lots of time or little time, while allowing the game the ability to cover its running costs based on player's actual engagement with the game. I am confident we can balance all this in a way that works and doesn't feel unfair to any one group. Contributing additional money beyond your initial ship package will be entirely optional and not required to have fun or progression (but if you do short cut once in a while, know that you're money is going to support the development of the game and on-going content!)

    I hope this allays some concerns. If not, I ask that you wait to you have a chance to actually play and see how everything will work and be balanced before making your mind up.

    -Chris
  • Lonestarr

    Posts: 5689

    Posted:
    Posted:
    What! You only played SWG for one month? What about JTL!(JK KINDA)

    The rest of CR's post is good lol.

    Nice restatement of facts.
    So I drink tang. That means technically, right this minute: I'm more of an astronaut than you are.
  • CorvinDallas

    Posts: 66

    Posted:
    Posted:
    World of Thanks is pay to win game, but I think comparsion was unforunate mistake. Propably Chris not play in this game, or play for short time.

    I think that argument about gamers with job, family and money versus gamers with time is unfortunate too. What about gamers with job, family and no money. Not everyone with job is rich.
    ^
    |
    [edit: wirtten before Chris post]

    Awesome post but I still think that Chris should be more careful with comparsion to other games in interviews.
  • Baragoon

    Posts: 6105

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]



    [CENTER]THIS IS HOW IT IS[/CENTER]

    -Chris

    *Bookmarked post for future quoting needs*

    Thank you for you input fearless leader. Bomb delivered with laser precision as always.

    Citizens [REDACTED]: 602_

  • SteelBurn

    Posts: 196

    Posted:
    Posted:
    I am fairly sure Chris Roberts mentioned allowing players to buy a certain amount of credits in game. This implies there will be an allowable maximum to be bought in a certain time frame.

    Ignore me. The man is up a few posts.
    Drake Cutlass Blue
    Origin JumpWorks 300i
    Aegis Dynamics Retaliator
  • soontm

    Posts: 1350

    Posted:
    Posted:
    FatJoeM:
    [hide]

    I don't buy this argument. Now I really doubt there will be a mechanism to limit credit purchase for players who already invested their 40 hours per week. Essentially allowing them to spent their 40 hours and their money on top of that!

    IF
    Money = Time
    Money = Skill
    THEN
    Money + Time > Time
    Money + Skill > Skill
    Money + Time + Skill > Time + Skill

    We had this in so many other threads. In the end, they all got bombed by a lot of CIG fanboys, making any meaningful discussion impossible. We can close this thread right now to save time.

    ATTENTION: bombs incoming.

    Well, you'll put the fanboi label on me now by replying to your post, aren't you? :P

    You're right that there'll be no stopping people who literally live in SC all day long to purchase in game credit at all. If someone has the means to do so and want to have an extra edge over other players, there's no stopping them, but what's wrong with "Money + Time + Skill > Time + Skill"? The result is very logical. You can not expect people who invest heavily in terms of time and money to be on the even ground with players who barely play. Besides, if someone spends 8+ hours per day playing games, I doubt he'll have much disposable income to spend in game.
    dragon_gif.gif
  • tonester

    Posts: 421

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Awesome, thanks for the post Chris. I was just digging up a heap of your quotes and interviews to post in here, but you've beaten me to it!

    I also think that players need to accept some of the responsibility for the "grind" in games... as in, players get so focused on "Item X", they must have it ASAP, and will go and figure out the most efficient way to get it; which is usually something repetitive. This is heavily capitalized on by the sub based MMO's, since itemization has the biggest effect on the power of your character.

    I think SC will be wildly different, I think it's about the Journey, not the Destination. I think the desire to play will be driven by the experience of playing the game, not getting an item. Sure, new ships are great and we all will relish the experience of buying a brand new, shiny interstellar beast, but I think the journey there will be about as far from "grind" as Earth is from Terra.
  • Cai

    Posts: 333

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    *snip wall of text*
    Contributing additional money beyond your initial ship package will be entirely optional and not required to have fun or progression (but if you do short cut once in a while, know that you're money is going to support the development of the game and on-going content!)

    -Chris

    \m/ Rock on, Chris.

    You make it easy to want to spend extra money on this game knowing that the investment is going back into the game. You'll have to forgive if some people are still skeptical of that, as some of the unnamed companies that are good at boiling gamers' blood seem to take financial goodwill and spend it on blow and hookers while their product continues to wallow in bugs and stagnation.

    Here's to one helluva a 10th Anniversary Party for SC, as I'm fairly confident we'll all be there for it :cool:
    bikqwj.png24qoms9.png
  • CCC_Dober

    Posts: 1567

    On Probation
    Posted:
    On Probation
    Posted:
    [hide]

    OP has a valid point and a right to feel the way he does. It seems alot of folks are simply just being naive or wishful rather then questioning things that are valid.

    Why does Chris Roberts get a auto pass? I have supported him with my Rear Admiral & a Pirate Add on pack not to mention skins. I am excited as any die hard fanboy in here is. Buying new pc gear and just preparing.

    BUT, I too question Mr. Roberts and hope things are on the up & up. Seems to me SC does ALOT of sitting around BRAINSTORMING more ways to charge for ANYTHING possible lately. I have NEVER ever heard of charging for a screen name? But his statements and utter mentioning of WoT to me was alarming. IMO, I have always considered WoT a good example of the pay2win type games to avoid like the plague. I could be very wrong on that but I have always felt WoT was that way and in NO WAY a real game that is fair and played straight up. So hearing the praise from Roberts on WoT is concerning...

    Exactly my sentiments. World of Tanks still exists in a vacuum of some sorts (lack of competition), whereas Star Citizen (when it is realeased) does not. The shameless monetizing scheme of WoT is bound to fail when there is competition around. So this obviously doesn't work for Star Citizen, no matter how you look at it. That also means Star Citizen holds neiter a de-facto monopoly nor does it have a huge fanbase numbering in the double digit millions. To reach such numbers you need a colossal marketing campaign, setting you back by a couple millions. Who is going to foot that bill? A publisher? Sony? Microsoft?

    If you have seen the absurd number of ads for World of Tanks popping up everywhere, you are just seeing the tip of the iceberg. This is not a cheap affair and it has a dircet impact on the general development progress of the game, which is disproportionately slow. Almost glacial I might say. And let's not talk about quality because key community members did and still do a better job with mods on average. If they don't receive a cease and desist or get banned outright for delivering superior solutions that WG can't monetize.

    In short: following the way of World of Tanks is the perfect way to alienate the core playerbase of Star Citizen and shoot yourself in the foot. It runs counter to the spirit of the stated campaign goals: no pay2win, no (de-facto) subscription - World of Tanks is all about that. Look no further than MWO and see how the World of Tanks monetization could work out for a game like Star Citizen. Marketing campaign: full speed ahead. Development progress: months behind schedule including radical changes and going back on promises. Such a (likely) scenario would not mix with plans and goals for Star Citizen where (content) updates are supposed to roll out on a bi-weekly basis.

    It's understandable that Chris admires the financial success of games like Minecraft, League of Legends and World of Tanks, but the ways they became successful were radically different. Especially because World of Tanks sticks out as the bad apple among these. The one with the worms in it and bird droppings on top of it. It's an ugly prospect for Star Citizen to be sure.
  • Whiplash-1

    Posts: 11426

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Dober, did you read CR's response on the previous page..?
    It's been fun, folks. See you around the verse.
  • CCC_Dober

    Posts: 1567

    On Probation
    Posted:
    On Probation
    Posted:
    Afterwards, but the points still stand. The way World of Tanks is designed and goes about monetization is questionable to put it lightly. Mentioning them works in terms of proving that the PC ain't dead. Mentioning them in terms of monetization is a massive turn-off. That is if you have experienced the game first hand and have been f'ked over at least once. It all goes hand in hand, monetization, communication and development and it's as bad as it gets. Worse than EvE IMO because those guys are straight up with their monthly fees. WoT tries to nickle and dime you for literally everything. Pay2win, pay2enjoy, pay2avoidfrustration ... you name it, they got it. This is not good for Star Citizen, nothing of it.

    P.S. What I'm trying to hint at is that Chris does not need to emulate other companies. His campaign is successful because he knows his stuff. He has shipped several full-blown AAA titles, whereas games like World of Tanks are hardly better than a Counterstrike mod. Star Citizen is going to deliver 2 games in one and has so much more to offer than any of those titles mentioned before.

    Chris can bank on that and doesn't need to deceive the players with monetization schemes that look fair on the outside, but rip you off eventually. Because he actually builds a game that is fun right out of the box. Hope that puts it a bit more into perspective. I didn't intend to come across as overly negative on this one. It's just that I'm seeing games mentioned that are clearly inferior to Star Citizen in many ways and that goes double for their marketing. Chris did and does a lot better than they ever did and I trust that he doesn't just terraform game development, but also marketing methods. In my opinion he is already doing it, quite successfully if I might add. Look at this very campaign as proof of concept.
  • Moruk

    Posts: 173

    Posted:
    Posted:
    PeterKane:
    [hide]

    I think that argument about gamers with job, family and money versus gamers with time is unfortunate too. What about gamers with job, family and no money. Not everyone with job is rich.

    This, and also the other way around! What about people who are rich, and have a lot of time nevertheless? There will be people on both ends of that spectrum.

    This is why I think the "pay2BeEqual" argumentation is invalid. There is no such thing, just pure old pay2win.
    [hide]

    Well, you'll put the fanboi label on me now by replying to your post, aren't you? :P

    You're right that there'll be no stopping people who literally live in SC all day long to purchase in game credit at all. If someone has the means to do so and want to have an extra edge over other players, there's no stopping them, but what's wrong with "Money + Time + Skill > Time + Skill"?

    Nothing is wrong with that equation. In fact, I will be the first to go all-in with money AND time (and hopefully skill) once the game is released. To be honest, most of the supporters here will do the same. Including you, wont you?

    I just feel that this does not deliver what was promised. For me this is equal to pay2win (I know CR has a different definition of that term). I don't accept a "pay2BeEqual" for above reasons.

    ∀ x∊{SKILL, TIME}: MONEY + x > x.
    ∀ x∊M, M⊇{SKILL, TIME}: MONEY + x > x.
  • Maleficus

    Posts: 423

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Like it or not morons server based multiplayer games cost money to maintain, LOTS OF FRACKING MONEY... You have 2 choices, neither of each anyone likes, either you pay a monthly subscription fee or the game uses micro transactions. Many games are doing both, however the trend seems to be leaning towards just micro transactions after having bought the game..

    You can bitch and moan all you want, you will still buy this game play it because it is the game you want to play.. Just like all the ***-wipes on the swtor forums crying about the game, the cartel market and yet they are still playing it...

    QQ bitches .. You are not going to stop it...
    m8s.gif
  • SteveE

    Posts: 143

    Posted:
    Posted:
    I just don't understand Pay2Win mentality. "Winning" is not the point of playing. Playing is the point of playing. It's like riding a motorbike in a marathon and then saying "Yeah! I beat you all! I'm the winner!" No you're not, you've totally missed the point of running a marathon - it's the training and the personal achievement. Winning is doing it yourself. I'm an old duffer but I remember playing PC games in the 80's and knowing that you can read "walk throughs" and "cheat codes" and getting frustrated when I got stuck. The sense of achievement when you beat a game vs the sense of complete pointlessness when you cheat is no comparison to me - cheating diminishes the fun.

    "WoT tries to nickle and dime you for literally everything. Pay2win, pay2enjoy, pay2avoidfrustration ... you name it, they got it." - I've played WoT since it first came out and I honestly don't see this.
    I laugh in the face of concerns
  • CCC_Dober

    Posts: 1567

    On Probation
    Posted:
    On Probation
    Posted:
    djuplift:
    [hide]

    Like it or not morons server based multiplayer games cost money to maintain, LOTS OF FRACKING MONEY... You have 2 choices, neither of each anyone likes, either you pay a monthly subscription fee or the game uses micro transactions. Many games are doing both, however the trend seems to be leaning towards just micro transactions after having bought the game..

    You can bitch and moan all you want, you will still buy this game play it because it is the game you want to play.. Just like all the ***-wipes on the swtor forums crying about the game, the cartel market and yet they are still playing it...

    QQ bitches .. You are not going to stop it...

    Wrong, there is a third method. There are expansions and (paid) content updates in the works. This is proven to work and advance the game as a whole. Maybe you were not around back in the days, but this is what Chris did very successfully with Wing Commander and Privateer.
  • Moruk

    Posts: 173

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    "WoT tries to nickle and dime you for literally everything. Pay2win, pay2enjoy, pay2avoidfrustration ... you name it, they got it." - I've played WoT since it first came out and I honestly don't see this.

    I'd like to know if you paid for WoT (microtransactions) or not?
    ∀ x∊M, M⊇{SKILL, TIME}: MONEY + x > x.
  • IMWeasel

    Posts: 15470

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Keep creating content I say. You see World of Tanks? Pwn the **** out of them. Even World of Tanks people should be told a valuable lesson. That lesson is Star Citizen.
    1159922.jpg

  • Maleficus

    Posts: 423

    Posted:
    Posted:
    CCC-Dober:
    [hide]

    Wrong, there is a third method. There are expansions and (paid) content updates in the works. This is proven to work and advance the game as a whole. Maybe you were not around back in the days, but this is what Chris did very successfully with Wing Commander and Privateer.

    My point is still valid Dober.. Like it or not, this **** will happen..
    m8s.gif
  • CCC_Dober

    Posts: 1567

    On Probation
    Posted:
    On Probation
    Posted:
    FatJoeM:
    [hide]

    I'd like to know if you paid for WoT (microtransactions) or not?

    What? So you know whether it's worth it to hack my account or not? Go ahead. I'm done giving a damn about that game LOL
  • CCC_Dober

    Posts: 1567

    On Probation
    Posted:
    On Probation
    Posted:
    djuplift:
    [hide]

    My point is still valid Dober.. Like it or not, this **** will happen..

    Point is, the cash shop and/or subscriptions are the only lifeline for the other games mentioned (the F2P stuff). The same is not true for Star Citizen. It plays in a whole different league, has an entry cost and can offer more than multiplayer, which is nothing to sneeze at.
  • Maleficus

    Posts: 423

    Posted:
    Posted:
    CCC-Dober:
    [hide]

    Point is, the cash shop and/or subscriptions are the only lifeline for the other games mentioned (the F2P stuff). The same is not true for Star Citizen. It plays in a whole different league, has an entry cost and can offer more than multiplayer, which is nothing to sneeze at.

    Again none of that changes the fact that it will cost money to maintain the game, the sales of the game itself will decline over time and people DO NOT wanna pay for subscriptions.. Even if they started out without micro transactions you would still end up there..
    m8s.gif
  • bdo7

    Posts: 3446

    Posted:
    Posted:
    I just don't understand how you passed up the opportunity to put "Tanks, but no Tanks!" in the subject line instead.

    I totally would have jumped on that.
    J3Y7129.png
    "the forums are a development resource, and drama worsens the signal to noise ratio." - Toast
  • SteveE

    Posts: 143

    Posted:
    Posted:
    FatJoeM:
    [hide]

    I'd like to know if you paid for WoT (microtransactions) or not?

    I've spent $10? since it was released. 1 single payment. Seeing as I've been playing for 2 and a half years I think that's damn good value.
    I laugh in the face of concerns
Sign In or Register to comment.