If people want extra fluff because that is how they want to look they're going to pay for it on the broker or from the cash shop. By your argument everyone players charging for fluff on the broker are impacting game play too.
Yes, let them buy it on the broker. It's how game economy works. And yes, it affects the gameplay - someone crafts or loot the item, someone buys it from them on the broker or directly. That's called player economy, it impacts the game and it's healthy for a game. When you buy it in item shop, it's already a direct interference to a game.
So you're saying I'm now dependent on your game play for me to enjoy the game. Much of the coolest gear and fluff drop from raid areas. Let's say I don't have the option to raid. Now I am dependent on your game play and you get to set the price and availability to enhance your game play experience at my expense. I'm just there as a revenue generator to support your game play. No thanks.
The problem with your claim is that it is based on the conjecture of how you would like things to work. I still see people selling on the broker in WoW and EQ2 both of which have active cash shops. Contrast that to a game like LotRO, with no active cash shop, that may well have the most anemic economy and trade in any game I've played except maybe AoC. The current state of those games disproves your claim.
Wow.. now i see who you are. So you are saying WoW and EQ2 has better economy because it has item shops. Hmmm.. I've lost any reason to respond to your posts.
So you're saying I'm now dependent on your game play for me to enjoy the game. Much of the coolest gear and fluff drop from raid areas. Let's say I don't have the option to raid. Now I am dependent on your game play and you get to set the price and availability to enhance your game play experience at my expense. I'm just there as a revenue generator to support your game play. No thanks.
Once you start buying those end game rewards - you are no longer playing a game. Once you start buying from the cash shop - you are telling the devs to put more in it, at the expense of rewards for playing the game. You're no longer a player, you're a customer.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Im typing this post to end all posts on this topic once and for all (probably wont but I want to make this post sound epic).
Just because you subscribe, they dont all of a sudden owe it up to you to make sure you provide everything the way you want it 100% of the time. This isnt Burger King, you cant have it your way, you want that Celestial Steed, cough up the dough because that was their decision to be made, not yours. Now if it truly is ruining your experience, I implore all to leave the game (I highly doubt most will do this). If it is this serious, why not leave? You would normally stop going to the same restaurant if it starts charging too much or serving bad food and same goes with any other industry.
Ultimately, Blizzard (or any game company for that matter) owes you NOTHING, zilch nada and you should be happy enough these games are around in the first place and are providing great entertainment value. Again, YOU DO NOT OWN BLIZZARD OR ANY OTHER GAME COMPANY. If you think you could do better, open up your own. Not satisfied? Feeling robbed? Just leave, control what you can control and obviously if youre not happy, why are throwing extra dollars into it? If the industry isnt up to par, why are you still here? Many others are enjoying it without this senseless noise and its greedy and selfish of you to try and spoil it for them. When they truly cross the line, they will know in a severe backlash ala Allods Online, but obviously that hasn't happened with any other games truly.
The sense of entitlement is sickening and astounding and makes you really reflect on the type of society we live in today. The people against item shops call those companies greedy and selfish but isnt it also greedy and selfish of you to expect them to run everything the way YOU want to run them without a cent of ownership towards any of these companies. No your subscriptions are not an investment, you paid for a service and they provided so dont even try it. Quit sounding like a bunch of hypocrites by calling them greedy because you are no better trying to dictate companies that you dont even come close to owning. If you think you could do better, make your own and when you become successful, well see whether or not youll not put in a item shop then.
We're talking about P2P games, aren't you paying attention? YOU ARE ALREADY PAYING FOR THE GAME and that includes cosmetic aspects appropriate for the game.
And are you seriously arguing that making money any way possible is acceptable given the current examples in the news that easily disprove that thesis? If you want to argue cash shops are ok, then you're going to need a better argument than that.
Well, people are lining up to buy the mount so it must be acceptable to them. I don't see people boycotting WOW because of it.
May be it is not acceptable to YOU but the world does not evolve around you. If it is acceptable for the market, it is acceptable in the developer's eye.
Obviously not "any way possible" is acceptable. But obviously selling mounts is, based on the reaction of the market. Do you see outcry like those for the bank bailouts?
Plus, there is no guarantee that the sub covers everything made in the future. So obviously this is totally legal. For an entertianment item (even a virtual one), i don't see the big fuss. Don't like it. Don't buy it. Don't like the game with it. Don't play it. You have choices.
Plenty of things do go on and have gone on in the free areas of the market that aren't realized to be a problem for years.
RMT in a P2P damages gameplay on several levels. The main argument for it is "well, the game owners might be able to get away with it!" which isn't really a good argument and certainly doesn't touch on how it affects the game economy, value of in-game content, etc. We're not arguing legality here. We're arguing about what makes for a good and healthy game. This is about game design.
And there is no evidence to show that WOW is not healthy after the releases of RMT pets & mounts.
WOW certainly is NOT losing subs significantly since the release of the monk pet (that is the first). Many *are* enjoying those pets & mounts as I have seen in-game. What is so unhealthy about it?
Good game design is what make the game fun. There are many ways to collect pets/mount in WOW: quest, achievement, grinding rare drops ... i don't see why adding money would be a bad thing. Some like to quest. Some like to grind rare drops. Some like to pay for it .. so now they all have choices.
So you're saying I'm now dependent on your game play for me to enjoy the game. Much of the coolest gear and fluff drop from raid areas. Let's say I don't have the option to raid. Now I am dependent on your game play and you get to set the price and availability to enhance your game play experience at my expense. I'm just there as a revenue generator to support your game play. No thanks.
Once you start buying those end game rewards - you are no longer playing a game. Once you start buying from the cash shop - you are telling the devs to put more in it, at the expense of rewards for playing the game. You're no longer a player, you're a customer.
I'd add to this that having all cool stuff from raid areas isn't really good design either. There definitely should be content for many types of play and there's are a lot of possible end-game group play than just raiding. There's a very legitimate concern here about raiding, but this is an excellent example of how having a Cash Shop obscures the issue. Instead of focusing on in-game solutions to these problems, it encourages people to think in terms of the shop and hence the gameplay doesn't improve.
I think that the argument is deeply flawed. If you think about it it is limiting players from expressing themselves by denying those players the ability to have certain cosmetic pieces. Their character cannot look the way it is intended because they are not able or willing to spend the money. I think that taking away a customizable option is one of the worst things an MMO can do.
Well, having some cosmetic pieces from RARE drops is ALSO limiting players from expressing themselves. As long as those pieces are not given out right away, there is always some limit (on time you have to quest for it, or to grind for it).
I don't see why money cannot be one of those limit.
I am not wiling to spend the money"" is no difference than "I am not willing to spend the time".
We're talking about P2P games, aren't you paying attention? YOU ARE ALREADY PAYING FOR THE GAME and that includes cosmetic aspects appropriate for the game.
And are you seriously arguing that making money any way possible is acceptable given the current examples in the news that easily disprove that thesis? If you want to argue cash shops are ok, then you're going to need a better argument than that.
Well, people are lining up to buy the mount so it must be acceptable to them. I don't see people boycotting WOW because of it.
May be it is not acceptable to YOU but the world does not evolve around you. If it is acceptable for the market, it is acceptable in the developer's eye.
Obviously not "any way possible" is acceptable. But obviously selling mounts is, based on the reaction of the market. Do you see outcry like those for the bank bailouts?
Plus, there is no guarantee that the sub covers everything made in the future. So obviously this is totally legal. For an entertianment item (even a virtual one), i don't see the big fuss. Don't like it. Don't buy it. Don't like the game with it. Don't play it. You have choices.
Plenty of things do go on and have gone on in the free areas of the market that aren't realized to be a problem for years.
RMT in a P2P damages gameplay on several levels. The main argument for it is "well, the game owners might be able to get away with it!" which isn't really a good argument and certainly doesn't touch on how it affects the game economy, value of in-game content, etc. We're not arguing legality here. We're arguing about what makes for a good and healthy game. This is about game design.
And there is no evidence to show that WOW is not healthy after the releases of RMT pets & mounts.
WOW certainly is NOT losing subs significantly since the release of the monk pet (that is the first). Many *are* enjoying those pets & mounts as I have seen in-game. What is so unhealthy about it?
Good game design is what make the game fun. There are many ways to collect pets/mount in WOW: quest, achievement, grinding rare drops ... i don't see why adding money would be a bad thing. Some like to quest. Some like to grind rare drops. Some like to pay for it .. so now they all have choices.
There is also no more proof that it is healthy either, so mentioning one way or the other is irrelevant at this point, because we don't have the numbers. There are people who have left the game over it though, which in the least proves that it is a big enough of an issue for some peopel to break the game for them. Consequently others haven't left, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're okay with the RMT.
As per the monk pet, bad example. Many people accepted it because half of the proceeds went to charity, that was Blizzard's main selling point. So it essentially became "if you object to this then you object to charity" for a lot of people, that was the argument thrown around by people defending it at the time. In fact, what's really odd, is that there are players who think all of the new pets and mount have half of their proceeds going to charity, and are rather shocked when informed otherwise. As nice as it is that some money went to charity, it was still a rather sleazy way of pushing their RMT into acceptance.
As per your last point, the only difference is that paying for pets and mounts is the only choice that doesn't actually involve playing the game. That's the main problem.
And there is no evidence to show that WOW is not healthy after the releases of RMT pets & mounts.
WOW certainly is NOT losing subs significantly since the release of the monk pet (that is the first). Many *are* enjoying those pets & mounts as I have seen in-game. What is so unhealthy about it?
Good game design is what make the game fun. There are many ways to collect pets/mount in WOW: quest, achievement, grinding rare drops ... i don't see why adding money would be a bad thing. Some like to quest. Some like to grind rare drops. Some like to pay for it .. so now they all have choices.
I've pointed this out several times. WoW is in a unique position because it is kind of like a monopoly. There's no good AAA competition for WoW because all the AAA games released since WoW have had significant problems. LotRO is probably the best, and that has its own problems (I tried it and didn't enjoy the flow of combat...felt slow and awkward). In this position WoW can do things that normally wouldn't be ok.
And like many have said, paying for items isn't playing the game. When a game has to resort to pay items, then there's a Dev problem. Either the gameplay isn't enticing enough or the Devs have started to care less about making the game exciting and involving and gone for the ease of a cash shop. WoW having the best looking mount available for cash and especially only for cash is NOT a good thing for the game. Like many poor decisions though, you often won't see any initial problems with the scheme. Problems often crop up in the mid- to long-term. The cash shop will damage the game though, because the best looking mounts and other things will tend to go there because Blizzard will figure they can make a buck off it and if they don't put the best looking stuff there then people will *gasp* not buy it and go after in-game items. The incentive for the Devs gets completely screwed up by this.
I think in the long run we'll probably eventually see very different cash shops crop up. To support more real content in the game a cash shop could be used to support additional developers to make more quests/missions/engaging gameplay. A mini-expansion cash shop would make more sense and give proper value for the money. It would also cut costs for the developers since they wouldn't have to ship stuff in a box to the stores. (This would be in addition to free content updates provided by subs). That's a much better model for all concerned.
One last thing. If you prefer to pay cash rather than play the game then something is wrong with how the game is setup. Like I said in my previous post, a cash shop obscures this problem. Instead of focusing on where the game needs to be improved so you actually ENJOY playing it, you instead focus on spending money and avoiding gameplay. This means problems such as grind, over-emphasis of one kind of gameplay (like raiding), and the like won't get the attention they deserve. One can see this quite clearly in the reasoning people are using in this thread.
I'd add to this that having all cool stuff from raid areas isn't really good design either. There definitely should be content for many types of play and there's are a lot of possible end-game group play than just raiding. There's a very legitimate concern here about raiding, but this is an excellent example of how having a Cash Shop obscures the issue. Instead of focusing on in-game solutions to these problems, it encourages people to think in terms of the shop and hence the gameplay doesn't improve.
So now you want more end-game content than just raiding. Fair enough...but here's the kicker. That issue existed LONG before WOW had a cash shop. Really. People did express it.
So...no I don't see how the cash shop obscures the issue. It's just you bringing up a cash shop and muddling it with somethign else and hoping it sticks together.
Me? I'm fine with having some cool stuff come from raids. I'm fine with other cool stuff not coming from raids. All? Well, if you want to say "People have different ideas about what they want to do, and it's nice to give them choices about what to do" then..fine, go with that. But don't try bringing up this argument about how you can't get one thing in particular if you don't do something like buy it in the store and expect us not to see how it just doesn't work without tearing down a whole house of cards. There's lots of things you can't get if you don't choose to do it. Choices...sometimes you choose no.
I'd add to this that having all cool stuff from raid areas isn't really good design either. There definitely should be content for many types of play and there's are a lot of possible end-game group play than just raiding. There's a very legitimate concern here about raiding, but this is an excellent example of how having a Cash Shop obscures the issue. Instead of focusing on in-game solutions to these problems, it encourages people to think in terms of the shop and hence the gameplay doesn't improve.
So now you want more end-game content than just raiding. Fair enough...but here's the kicker. That issue existed LONG before WOW had a cash shop. Really. People did express it.
So...no I don't see how the cash shop obscures the issue. It's just you bringing up a cash shop and muddling it with somethign else and hoping it sticks together.
Me? I'm fine with having some cool stuff come from raids. I'm fine with other cool stuff not coming from raids. All? Well, if you want to say "People have different ideas about what they want to do, and it's nice to give them choices about what to do" then..fine, go with that. But don't try bringing up this argument about how you can't get one thing in particular if you don't do something like buy it in the store and expect us not to see how it just doesn't work without tearing down a whole house of cards. There's lots of things you can't get if you don't choose to do it. Choices...sometimes you choose no.
You really have not present ANY arguments in this thread how cash shops are good for the game. Saying that they make money doesn't mean it is good for gameplay.
And it doesn't obscure the issue because I AM BRINGING UP THE CASH SHOP? What's this thread about again? Oh yeah, cash shops. What sort of reasoning do we see getting tossed around left and right? Stuff like "I don't like raiding, so I'd rather buy stuff" which is the people supporting a cash shop not realizing how the problem is in the game.
Claiming my argument is a house of cards does not make it a house of cards. To do that you'd actually have to show logical fallacies. We're talking about gameplay, game quality, and how devs know things in the game need to be improved, and how they get proper incentive to improve them. Cash shops harm these things because they bypass all gameplay, they bypass gameplay feedback, and they provide an incentive to not improve gameplay because you can just put things in a shop and make money. You haven't refuted any of this. You have the 2-dimensional arguments here, not me.
As for the choice thing...well, not all choices are good. More choice isn't always good for a game. Part of game design is knowing what choices to provide to the gamer and what ones to avoid because they hurt the game.
Two keywords: "kind of like a monopoly" and "grind".
First, the easy issue. What exactly is the grind? Grind can be interpreted in so many different ways to the point that it just doesn't exist. If you don't enjoy killing monsters or other players then you're playing the wrong game. I don't see shooting people in the face, a "grind" in Team Fortress 2.
"Kind of like a monopoly" sounds more like Blizzard just knows how to do it better than most. No, you are free to move on and try other MMORPG's if Blizzard is really making you upset. I acknowledge its a time investment, but if you're not willin to leave like I said previous, than the issue isn't as large as people are making it seem.
Don't take a company like Blizzard as a bunch of simpletons that "aren't concerned about gameplay" when they are introducing absolute rehauls to a major part of the game on their next expansion. Don't cry about it being in an expansion because no one cried about expansions before.
EDIT: Who's to say game system changes are going to be limited to the expansions only as well?
There is also no more proof that it is healthy either, so mentioning one way or the other is irrelevant at this point, because we don't have the numbers. There are people who have left the game over it though, which in the least proves that it is a big enough of an issue for some peopel to break the game for them. Consequently others haven't left, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're okay with the RMT.
There are very few things one can do that are guaranteed to make everybody happy. No matter what you do, you're going to risk making somebody unhappy. That does not mean you do not do them. People are going to leave the game over the change to raids. People are going to leave the game because they change the classes in Cataclysm. People left because they added Blood Elves and Paladins to the Horde, people left because of adding Draenei and Shamans to the Alliance. So people leave the game...it happens for lots of reasons.
If people leave because they can't stand the thought of buying a mount...well, whatever. Other people can stand the thought and enjoy it quite a lot.
Why are the one people more valuable to you than others?
As per your last point, the only difference is that paying for pets and mounts is the only choice that doesn't actually involve playing the game. That's the main problem.
Not a problem for me, I don't consider the acquiring of pets and mounts to be especially meaningful in terms of playing the game, especially the ones you get from a vendor or even the AH.
Two keywords: "kind of like a monopoly" and "grind".
First, the easy issue. What exactly is the grind? Grind can be interpreted in so many different ways to the point that it just doesn't exist. If you don't enjoy killing monsters or other players then you're playing the wrong game. I don't see shooting people in the face, a "grind" in Team Fortress 2.
"Kind of like a monopoly" sounds more like Blizzard just knows how to do it better than most. No, you are free to move on and try other MMORPG's if Blizzard is really making you upset. I acknowledge its a time investment, but if you're not willin to leave like I said previous, than the issue isn't as large as people are making it seem.
Don't take a company like Blizzard as a bunch of simpletons that "aren't concerned about gameplay" when they are introducing absolute rehauls to a major part of the game on their next expansion. Don't cry about it being in an expansion because no one cried about expansions before.
Grind is a well-defined term. While there are elements of subjectivity, most players do agree on what grinding is (and by definition it isn't something enjoyable). WoW Heroics right now are a daily grind for instance. Repetitive and non-challenging tasks are not good for a game.
I have tried other MMOs (do you not read what I write?) The problem is I don't care for the indy stuff much because it doesn't have a full feature set. Blizzard has lucked out in that the AAA MMOs that have come out since WoW was released have had major problems. This has more to do with other companies being made of fail than Blizzard doing something special (not that WoW wasn't a great game for its time). It is also a situation that won't last. My point here is that in the current environment WoW isn't likely to suffer much for cash shop shenanigans, but that this will change in time (as soon as some good alternatives come out).
I didn't say Blizzard was unconcerned about gameplay. My point is much more subtle than that. A cash shop makes it harder to tell what gameplay matters and adds a discouragement to fix gameplay problems because you can make money by giving people a means to avoid the game. We do see this in WoW where the small group and full group experience is total crap, but they aren't doing anything about it even though the majority of their players still don't raid. Granted, part of this is the fact WoW doesn't have much real competition, but the cash shop is not a factor that helps.
Grind is a well-defined term. While there are elements of subjectivity, most players do agree on what grinding is (and by definition it isn't something enjoyable). WoW Heroics right now are a daily grind for instance. Repetitive and non-challenging tasks are not good for a game. I have tried other MMOs (do you not read what I write?) The problem is I don't care for the indy stuff much because it doesn't have a full feature set. Blizzard has lucked out in that the AAA MMOs that have come out since WoW was released have had major problems. This has more to do with other companies being made of fail than Blizzard doing something special (not that WoW wasn't a great game for its time). It is also a situation that won't last. My point here is that in the current environment WoW isn't likely to suffer much for cash shop shenanigans, but that this will change in time (as soon as some good alternatives come out). I didn't say Blizzard was unconcerned about gameplay. My point is much more subtle than that. A cash shop makes it harder to tell what gameplay matters and adds a discouragement to fix gameplay problems because you can make money by giving people a means to avoid the game. We do see this in WoW where the small group and full group experience is total crap, but they aren't doing anything about it even though the majority of their players still don't raid. Granted, part of this is the fact WoW doesn't have much real competition, but the cash shop is not a factor that helps.
Okay, the overall point was, you're basing much on assumption and misusing words. You call grind a "well-defined word", I would call it a misused/overused word. What exactly is a grind? Even you can only explain it fairly loosely. What's not challenging to you is not necessarily "not challenging" to others. Your opinion is not all encompassing of the whole population. Every game is "repititive, this is nothing new so I believe everything stems frmo "not being challenged" enough.
In the end, with a cash shop, whos to say their attention is being less focused with a total of 3 items available? I can probably hash up more evidence to the contrary in the number of patches and their upcoming expansions saying that their focus is in fact not their cash shop. What you say isn't evidence to the direction they're going to take.
Again, you're arguments are being based off your own opinion and assumptions and generalizing it to a much bigger thing, which is misapplied.
EDIT: I merely pointed out "kind of a monopoly" and other games to the fact that Blizzard does not have a monopoly over anything, you merely just have a preference above all other games, which is WoW and trying to force the direction that WoW should take into what YOU (and only you) believe is best.
As per your last point, the only difference is that paying for pets and mounts is the only choice that doesn't actually involve playing the game. That's the main problem.
Sure. But geting a pet from a loot card is not playing the game. Getting a pet from attending Blizz con is not playing the game. Getting a pet from the authenticator is not playing the game. So?
Plus, if you look at some of the CHEAP pets in the game, they are SO cheap that practically they are given away. So you really don't have to "play" much to get them.
You really have not present ANY arguments in this thread how cash shops are good for the game. Saying that they make money doesn't mean it is good for gameplay.
Probably because I don't think a cash shop and gameplay should be directly related. Why would I make an argument to endorse something like that if I don't beleive they should be mingled?
A cash shop is good for the players who can get something they enjoy with their money if they desire to do so. Players who can get things they enjoy...well, that's good in any game.
Gameplay shouldn't have anything to do with it.
Raiding as an issue? People have always complained that the best X came from raids. Or from PVP. Or from whatever.
Oh well. I can't expect any game to provide all things equally to all the desires of every player. Sorry, but I just can't. That's why I'm fine with, for example, somebody who says that items in the cash shop and acquired through in-game activity should be distinct. You want to say you did X in the game? Fair enough, you can have your special mount for it. Don't see why somebody else shouldn't get a different mount from buying it.
And like many have said, paying for items isn't playing the game. When a game has to resort to pay items, then there's a Dev problem. Either the gameplay isn't enticing enough or the Devs have started to care less about making the game exciting and involving and gone for the ease of a cash shop. WoW having the best looking mount available for cash and especially only for cash is NOT a good thing for the game. Like many poor decisions though, you often won't see any initial problems with the scheme. Problems often crop up in the mid- to long-term. The cash shop will damage the game though, because the best looking mounts and other things will tend to go there because Blizzard will figure they can make a buck off it and if they don't put the best looking stuff there then people will *gasp* not buy it and go after in-game items. The incentive for the Devs gets completely screwed up by this.
One last thing. If you prefer to pay cash rather than play the game then something is wrong with how the game is setup. Like I said in my previous post, a cash shop obscures this problem. Instead of focusing on where the game needs to be improved so you actually ENJOY playing it, you instead focus on spending money and avoiding gameplay. This means problems such as grind, over-emphasis of one kind of gameplay (like raiding), and the like won't get the attention they deserve. One can see this quite clearly in the reasoning people are using in this thread.
This notion of paying for items isn't playing the game is FLAWED. Sure, you are not playing the game to ACQUIRE the item, but you are playing the game for USING IT. There is utility (in econ lingual) or fun in riding a nice looking flying horse. In fact, that is WHY people shell out $25 for it. Flying around on it *is* PLAYING THE GAME.
Flying around in a cool mount is part of the enjoyment. Ditto for having a cool pet. That is why people collect pets. There are certainly other parts of the game that is being improved (and i don't see Blizz ignoring those) but it is a mistake to think pets & mounts are not one of the areas.
And this is blown way out of proportion. There are a total of ONE mount available for sale and do you know how many mounts there are in the game?
This notion of paying for items isn't playing the game is FLAWED. Sure, you are not playing the game to ACQUIRE the item, but you are playing the game for USING IT. There is utility (in econ lingual) or fun in riding a nice looking flying horse. In fact, that is WHY people shell out $25 for it. Flying around on it *is* PLAYING THE GAME.
I think that might be stretching the idea of "playing the game" a bit too far. At the least, I would make that concept distinct from one of "gameplay" so as to avoid needless confusion.
This notion of paying for items isn't playing the game is FLAWED. Sure, you are not playing the game to ACQUIRE the item, but you are playing the game for USING IT. There is utility (in econ lingual) or fun in riding a nice looking flying horse. In fact, that is WHY people shell out $25 for it. Flying around on it *is* PLAYING THE GAME.
I think that might be stretching the idea of "playing the game" a bit too far. At the least, I would make that concept distinct from one of "gameplay" so as to avoid needless confusion.
Now you are defining "gameplay" just to suit your arguments.
What is gameplay? It is what a player does in the game. How is travelling in a mount NOT gameplay to you? How is showing off a pet NOT gameplay to you?
Is socialization in a MMO gameplay? Is the discussion of in-game items gameplay?
And it is not confusion. USING an item is an integral part of the MMO experience. Otherwise, there is no need for fluff items.
This notion of paying for items isn't playing the game is FLAWED. Sure, you are not playing the game to ACQUIRE the item, but you are playing the game for USING IT. There is utility (in econ lingual) or fun in riding a nice looking flying horse. In fact, that is WHY people shell out $25 for it. Flying around on it *is* PLAYING THE GAME.
I think that might be stretching the idea of "playing the game" a bit too far. At the least, I would make that concept distinct from one of "gameplay" so as to avoid needless confusion.
Now you are defining "gameplay" just to suit your arguments.
No, I'm defining gameplay to suit my usage and understanding of the words of the word, which it seems that people have a different understanding of than others. That was actually the substance of my first post in this thread. Yeah, I'm sure if you read it, you'd have forgotten it by now.
Here it is though:
If you wish to object to the somewhat vague use of the term "gameplay" that's fair enough, would you prefer it with a qualifier, or would you just like folks to define it more explicitly? Really, that's all your position here is, quibbling over the meaning of words.
Sorry, but that's how I see it. I'm willing to work with folks as to what means what, but don't give me grief about it.
What is gameplay? It is what a player does in the game. How is travelling in a mount NOT gameplay to you? How is showing off a pet NOT gameplay to you?
Traveling in a mount is one thing. A particular mount is another. The one is gameplay. The other? May not. Maybe if the mounts have different characteristics, then it would be. But if it's just appearance, like say the Argent Tournament mounts? You can pick any one of the. But that's not affecting your gameplay. Not at all.
Same like showing off a pet is not gameplay. That's just...showing off a pet. Big whup.
Is socialization in a MMO gameplay? Is the discussion of in-game items gameplay?
Not necessarily. And that would be an example of socialization that probably isn't gameplay. It's like how discussion of a roleplaying story isn't actually roleplaying that story.
And it is not confusion. USING an item is an integral part of the MMO experience. Otherwise, there is no need for fluff items.
Um? Actually I do see it as confusion. Confusion arises when people mean different things from the same words. See, I can see from your usage of words that you are not using them like I am. It happens. I would certainly agree fluff items are part of an MMO experience. I would consider them to be vanity items that do not contribute to gameplay. They contribute to personal enjoyment, and do not matter as to gameplay. Many things that contribute to the MMO experience are not actually part of the gameplay itself. I suppose they may be part of the game, but they aren't gameplay to me.
I suppose we could come up with different, more precise and specific terms if you want. Then we'd at least be speaking the same language.
Would that be your preference? Do you have any suggestions?
Um? Actually I do see it as confusion. Confusion arises when people mean different things from the same words. See, I can see from your usage of words that you are not using them like I am. It happens. I would certainly agree fluff items are part of an MMO experience. I would consider them to be vanity items that do not contribute to gameplay. They contribute to personal enjoyment, and do not matter as to gameplay. Many things that contribute to the MMO experience are not actually part of the gameplay itself. I suppose they may be part of the game, but they aren't gameplay to me.
Ok, we will use your definitions. It is pointless to argue semantics.
In that case, i would then argue that why only focus on gameplay (as you defined it). The total MMO experience is MORE than that. If people are having fun running around in a new spiffy mount (which you cannot argue there are no such people) and that this kind of NON-GAMEPLAY activities have values for them, there is no reason why they should not pay money to get it.
So they skip gameplay and focus on another non-gameplay ENJOYABLE experience. I don't see why they should not do that. Not all gameplay elements are fun and enjoyable experiences.
So you're saying I'm now dependent on your game play for me to enjoy the game. Much of the coolest gear and fluff drop from raid areas. Let's say I don't have the option to raid. Now I am dependent on your game play and you get to set the price and availability to enhance your game play experience at my expense. I'm just there as a revenue generator to support your game play. No thanks.
Once you start buying those end game rewards - you are no longer playing a game. Once you start buying from the cash shop - you are telling the devs to put more in it, at the expense of rewards for playing the game. You're no longer a player, you're a customer.
This post hits the nail on the head. Why are you people wanting to pay 15/months to play dress up with your credit card? You can go online to amazon.com and do this if you really don't have time to actually play a game and get real merchandise for your money.
P2P is for players, RMT is for consumers, you can’t take that Celestial Steed (or whatever) with you. Once you leave the game it is gone. This is like going to a movie and buying a tie in t-shirt that you have to leave in the stalls before you go. But if they can con you into paying it is Kerching! time.
Comments
Wow.. now i see who you are. So you are saying WoW and EQ2 has better economy because it has item shops. Hmmm.. I've lost any reason to respond to your posts.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
You already are a customer.
Im typing this post to end all posts on this topic once and for all (probably wont but I want to make this post sound epic).
Just because you subscribe, they dont all of a sudden owe it up to you to make sure you provide everything the way you want it 100% of the time. This isnt Burger King, you cant have it your way, you want that Celestial Steed, cough up the dough because that was their decision to be made, not yours. Now if it truly is ruining your experience, I implore all to leave the game (I highly doubt most will do this). If it is this serious, why not leave? You would normally stop going to the same restaurant if it starts charging too much or serving bad food and same goes with any other industry.
Ultimately, Blizzard (or any game company for that matter) owes you NOTHING, zilch nada and you should be happy enough these games are around in the first place and are providing great entertainment value. Again, YOU DO NOT OWN BLIZZARD OR ANY OTHER GAME COMPANY. If you think you could do better, open up your own. Not satisfied? Feeling robbed? Just leave, control what you can control and obviously if youre not happy, why are throwing extra dollars into it? If the industry isnt up to par, why are you still here? Many others are enjoying it without this senseless noise and its greedy and selfish of you to try and spoil it for them. When they truly cross the line, they will know in a severe backlash ala Allods Online, but obviously that hasn't happened with any other games truly.
The sense of entitlement is sickening and astounding and makes you really reflect on the type of society we live in today. The people against item shops call those companies greedy and selfish but isnt it also greedy and selfish of you to expect them to run everything the way YOU want to run them without a cent of ownership towards any of these companies. No your subscriptions are not an investment, you paid for a service and they provided so dont even try it. Quit sounding like a bunch of hypocrites by calling them greedy because you are no better trying to dictate companies that you dont even come close to owning. If you think you could do better, make your own and when you become successful, well see whether or not youll not put in a item shop then.
And there is no evidence to show that WOW is not healthy after the releases of RMT pets & mounts.
WOW certainly is NOT losing subs significantly since the release of the monk pet (that is the first). Many *are* enjoying those pets & mounts as I have seen in-game. What is so unhealthy about it?
Good game design is what make the game fun. There are many ways to collect pets/mount in WOW: quest, achievement, grinding rare drops ... i don't see why adding money would be a bad thing. Some like to quest. Some like to grind rare drops. Some like to pay for it .. so now they all have choices.
I'd add to this that having all cool stuff from raid areas isn't really good design either. There definitely should be content for many types of play and there's are a lot of possible end-game group play than just raiding. There's a very legitimate concern here about raiding, but this is an excellent example of how having a Cash Shop obscures the issue. Instead of focusing on in-game solutions to these problems, it encourages people to think in terms of the shop and hence the gameplay doesn't improve.
Well, having some cosmetic pieces from RARE drops is ALSO limiting players from expressing themselves. As long as those pieces are not given out right away, there is always some limit (on time you have to quest for it, or to grind for it).
I don't see why money cannot be one of those limit.
I am not wiling to spend the money"" is no difference than "I am not willing to spend the time".
There is also no more proof that it is healthy either, so mentioning one way or the other is irrelevant at this point, because we don't have the numbers. There are people who have left the game over it though, which in the least proves that it is a big enough of an issue for some peopel to break the game for them. Consequently others haven't left, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're okay with the RMT.
As per the monk pet, bad example. Many people accepted it because half of the proceeds went to charity, that was Blizzard's main selling point. So it essentially became "if you object to this then you object to charity" for a lot of people, that was the argument thrown around by people defending it at the time. In fact, what's really odd, is that there are players who think all of the new pets and mount have half of their proceeds going to charity, and are rather shocked when informed otherwise. As nice as it is that some money went to charity, it was still a rather sleazy way of pushing their RMT into acceptance.
As per your last point, the only difference is that paying for pets and mounts is the only choice that doesn't actually involve playing the game. That's the main problem.
I've pointed this out several times. WoW is in a unique position because it is kind of like a monopoly. There's no good AAA competition for WoW because all the AAA games released since WoW have had significant problems. LotRO is probably the best, and that has its own problems (I tried it and didn't enjoy the flow of combat...felt slow and awkward). In this position WoW can do things that normally wouldn't be ok.
And like many have said, paying for items isn't playing the game. When a game has to resort to pay items, then there's a Dev problem. Either the gameplay isn't enticing enough or the Devs have started to care less about making the game exciting and involving and gone for the ease of a cash shop. WoW having the best looking mount available for cash and especially only for cash is NOT a good thing for the game. Like many poor decisions though, you often won't see any initial problems with the scheme. Problems often crop up in the mid- to long-term. The cash shop will damage the game though, because the best looking mounts and other things will tend to go there because Blizzard will figure they can make a buck off it and if they don't put the best looking stuff there then people will *gasp* not buy it and go after in-game items. The incentive for the Devs gets completely screwed up by this.
I think in the long run we'll probably eventually see very different cash shops crop up. To support more real content in the game a cash shop could be used to support additional developers to make more quests/missions/engaging gameplay. A mini-expansion cash shop would make more sense and give proper value for the money. It would also cut costs for the developers since they wouldn't have to ship stuff in a box to the stores. (This would be in addition to free content updates provided by subs). That's a much better model for all concerned.
One last thing. If you prefer to pay cash rather than play the game then something is wrong with how the game is setup. Like I said in my previous post, a cash shop obscures this problem. Instead of focusing on where the game needs to be improved so you actually ENJOY playing it, you instead focus on spending money and avoiding gameplay. This means problems such as grind, over-emphasis of one kind of gameplay (like raiding), and the like won't get the attention they deserve. One can see this quite clearly in the reasoning people are using in this thread.
So now you want more end-game content than just raiding. Fair enough...but here's the kicker. That issue existed LONG before WOW had a cash shop. Really. People did express it.
So...no I don't see how the cash shop obscures the issue. It's just you bringing up a cash shop and muddling it with somethign else and hoping it sticks together.
Me? I'm fine with having some cool stuff come from raids. I'm fine with other cool stuff not coming from raids. All? Well, if you want to say "People have different ideas about what they want to do, and it's nice to give them choices about what to do" then..fine, go with that. But don't try bringing up this argument about how you can't get one thing in particular if you don't do something like buy it in the store and expect us not to see how it just doesn't work without tearing down a whole house of cards. There's lots of things you can't get if you don't choose to do it. Choices...sometimes you choose no.
You really have not present ANY arguments in this thread how cash shops are good for the game. Saying that they make money doesn't mean it is good for gameplay.
And it doesn't obscure the issue because I AM BRINGING UP THE CASH SHOP? What's this thread about again? Oh yeah, cash shops. What sort of reasoning do we see getting tossed around left and right? Stuff like "I don't like raiding, so I'd rather buy stuff" which is the people supporting a cash shop not realizing how the problem is in the game.
Claiming my argument is a house of cards does not make it a house of cards. To do that you'd actually have to show logical fallacies. We're talking about gameplay, game quality, and how devs know things in the game need to be improved, and how they get proper incentive to improve them. Cash shops harm these things because they bypass all gameplay, they bypass gameplay feedback, and they provide an incentive to not improve gameplay because you can just put things in a shop and make money. You haven't refuted any of this. You have the 2-dimensional arguments here, not me.
As for the choice thing...well, not all choices are good. More choice isn't always good for a game. Part of game design is knowing what choices to provide to the gamer and what ones to avoid because they hurt the game.
Two keywords: "kind of like a monopoly" and "grind".
First, the easy issue. What exactly is the grind? Grind can be interpreted in so many different ways to the point that it just doesn't exist. If you don't enjoy killing monsters or other players then you're playing the wrong game. I don't see shooting people in the face, a "grind" in Team Fortress 2.
"Kind of like a monopoly" sounds more like Blizzard just knows how to do it better than most. No, you are free to move on and try other MMORPG's if Blizzard is really making you upset. I acknowledge its a time investment, but if you're not willin to leave like I said previous, than the issue isn't as large as people are making it seem.
Don't take a company like Blizzard as a bunch of simpletons that "aren't concerned about gameplay" when they are introducing absolute rehauls to a major part of the game on their next expansion. Don't cry about it being in an expansion because no one cried about expansions before.
EDIT: Who's to say game system changes are going to be limited to the expansions only as well?
There are very few things one can do that are guaranteed to make everybody happy. No matter what you do, you're going to risk making somebody unhappy. That does not mean you do not do them. People are going to leave the game over the change to raids. People are going to leave the game because they change the classes in Cataclysm. People left because they added Blood Elves and Paladins to the Horde, people left because of adding Draenei and Shamans to the Alliance. So people leave the game...it happens for lots of reasons.
If people leave because they can't stand the thought of buying a mount...well, whatever. Other people can stand the thought and enjoy it quite a lot.
Why are the one people more valuable to you than others?
Not a problem for me, I don't consider the acquiring of pets and mounts to be especially meaningful in terms of playing the game, especially the ones you get from a vendor or even the AH.
Grind is a well-defined term. While there are elements of subjectivity, most players do agree on what grinding is (and by definition it isn't something enjoyable). WoW Heroics right now are a daily grind for instance. Repetitive and non-challenging tasks are not good for a game.
I have tried other MMOs (do you not read what I write?) The problem is I don't care for the indy stuff much because it doesn't have a full feature set. Blizzard has lucked out in that the AAA MMOs that have come out since WoW was released have had major problems. This has more to do with other companies being made of fail than Blizzard doing something special (not that WoW wasn't a great game for its time). It is also a situation that won't last. My point here is that in the current environment WoW isn't likely to suffer much for cash shop shenanigans, but that this will change in time (as soon as some good alternatives come out).
I didn't say Blizzard was unconcerned about gameplay. My point is much more subtle than that. A cash shop makes it harder to tell what gameplay matters and adds a discouragement to fix gameplay problems because you can make money by giving people a means to avoid the game. We do see this in WoW where the small group and full group experience is total crap, but they aren't doing anything about it even though the majority of their players still don't raid. Granted, part of this is the fact WoW doesn't have much real competition, but the cash shop is not a factor that helps.
Okay, the overall point was, you're basing much on assumption and misusing words. You call grind a "well-defined word", I would call it a misused/overused word. What exactly is a grind? Even you can only explain it fairly loosely. What's not challenging to you is not necessarily "not challenging" to others. Your opinion is not all encompassing of the whole population. Every game is "repititive, this is nothing new so I believe everything stems frmo "not being challenged" enough.
In the end, with a cash shop, whos to say their attention is being less focused with a total of 3 items available? I can probably hash up more evidence to the contrary in the number of patches and their upcoming expansions saying that their focus is in fact not their cash shop. What you say isn't evidence to the direction they're going to take.
Again, you're arguments are being based off your own opinion and assumptions and generalizing it to a much bigger thing, which is misapplied.
EDIT: I merely pointed out "kind of a monopoly" and other games to the fact that Blizzard does not have a monopoly over anything, you merely just have a preference above all other games, which is WoW and trying to force the direction that WoW should take into what YOU (and only you) believe is best.
Sure. But geting a pet from a loot card is not playing the game. Getting a pet from attending Blizz con is not playing the game. Getting a pet from the authenticator is not playing the game. So?
Plus, if you look at some of the CHEAP pets in the game, they are SO cheap that practically they are given away. So you really don't have to "play" much to get them.
Probably because I don't think a cash shop and gameplay should be directly related. Why would I make an argument to endorse something like that if I don't beleive they should be mingled?
A cash shop is good for the players who can get something they enjoy with their money if they desire to do so. Players who can get things they enjoy...well, that's good in any game.
Gameplay shouldn't have anything to do with it.
Raiding as an issue? People have always complained that the best X came from raids. Or from PVP. Or from whatever.
Oh well. I can't expect any game to provide all things equally to all the desires of every player. Sorry, but I just can't. That's why I'm fine with, for example, somebody who says that items in the cash shop and acquired through in-game activity should be distinct. You want to say you did X in the game? Fair enough, you can have your special mount for it. Don't see why somebody else shouldn't get a different mount from buying it.
This notion of paying for items isn't playing the game is FLAWED. Sure, you are not playing the game to ACQUIRE the item, but you are playing the game for USING IT. There is utility (in econ lingual) or fun in riding a nice looking flying horse. In fact, that is WHY people shell out $25 for it. Flying around on it *is* PLAYING THE GAME.
Flying around in a cool mount is part of the enjoyment. Ditto for having a cool pet. That is why people collect pets. There are certainly other parts of the game that is being improved (and i don't see Blizz ignoring those) but it is a mistake to think pets & mounts are not one of the areas.
And this is blown way out of proportion. There are a total of ONE mount available for sale and do you know how many mounts there are in the game?
I think that might be stretching the idea of "playing the game" a bit too far. At the least, I would make that concept distinct from one of "gameplay" so as to avoid needless confusion.
Now you are defining "gameplay" just to suit your arguments.
What is gameplay? It is what a player does in the game. How is travelling in a mount NOT gameplay to you? How is showing off a pet NOT gameplay to you?
Is socialization in a MMO gameplay? Is the discussion of in-game items gameplay?
And it is not confusion. USING an item is an integral part of the MMO experience. Otherwise, there is no need for fluff items.
Um? Actually I do see it as confusion. Confusion arises when people mean different things from the same words. See, I can see from your usage of words that you are not using them like I am. It happens. I would certainly agree fluff items are part of an MMO experience. I would consider them to be vanity items that do not contribute to gameplay. They contribute to personal enjoyment, and do not matter as to gameplay. Many things that contribute to the MMO experience are not actually part of the gameplay itself. I suppose they may be part of the game, but they aren't gameplay to me.
Ok, we will use your definitions. It is pointless to argue semantics.
In that case, i would then argue that why only focus on gameplay (as you defined it). The total MMO experience is MORE than that. If people are having fun running around in a new spiffy mount (which you cannot argue there are no such people) and that this kind of NON-GAMEPLAY activities have values for them, there is no reason why they should not pay money to get it.
So they skip gameplay and focus on another non-gameplay ENJOYABLE experience. I don't see why they should not do that. Not all gameplay elements are fun and enjoyable experiences.
This post hits the nail on the head. Why are you people wanting to pay 15/months to play dress up with your credit card? You can go online to amazon.com and do this if you really don't have time to actually play a game and get real merchandise for your money.
P2P is for players, RMT is for consumers, you can’t take that Celestial Steed (or whatever) with you. Once you leave the game it is gone. This is like going to a movie and buying a tie in t-shirt that you have to leave in the stalls before you go. But if they can con you into paying it is Kerching! time.