But let's no turn this into politics and religion...
The only problem I have with RMT these days is if it affects PvP. If someone can obtain an unfair advantage in PvP buy spending $$$, then I'm out of there where PvP is concerned. Thankfully, PvP is not something that's high on my priority list and I can tolerate it in a game like EVE because you can blow up the stuff he wasted his RL money on and big fancy expensive ship in EVE does not equal automatic win.
and this is why I don't really have any issues with the GW2 cash shop. Because right now, unlike other games, anyone who spends more money or more time aquiring high end items, can dominate pvp even if they suck.
Money nor time will give anyone an advantage in PvP. In WvW, the gap will be easily overcome once everyone reaches full level or skill points. Eventually someone will have that +40 ring of power vs that +25 power and +10 vitality. But luck and kharma determines that. Even so, that +5 extra stat for that uber item is based on a lvl 80 stat of 1500+ points total. Talk about the .0001% uber advantage.
Anet has dipped it toe into that realm of losing my trust though. What they do today, may not be what they do a year from today wit hthe CS. And frankly, after seeing the lootbag/mystic key crap, I don't trust them anymore.
I have the same problem in another game I'm playing. People were justifying bots are ok, because it's not fair cash shop people have advantage over them.
But again, how about for those that were poor and didn't use bots. Those that use bots have such advantage than those that don't use bots and don't use cash shop.
-Pirate the Bots? =P
A few comments here said "if you dont like, dont play"- I dont. I quit WOW over 'cosmetic' ca$h $hop mounts and such (I know one sub did not hurt them) I will not be playing GW2 because of a Ca$h $hop (again, not gunna make a dent) and I refuse to play a gam,e with a Ca$h $hop (Althoguh in a F2P- I think this i fine, I just wont play F2P)
I will continue to speak out (althoguhh it wont matter) Just as I did with DLC (Fanboys screamed that DLC was needed to give a game more life- Would never be used to hold content back).
A fair playing field is fair- Anything else is not.
PLUS there is creeping incrimentalism. The more this is accepted, the more they will push to earn greater profit... Its like the Lines at Cedar Point and "other" amusment parks now allow you to PAY MONEY to cut in line ahead of the poor folk (they need to make money too)- My family refuses to go there.
And guess what, its not the "rich" (as a rule) who pay for this shit. The rich didnt get rich by nort understanding the value of money... Its like Dave Ramsey says (financial Guru), most Millionares wont buy new cars for their primary transportation...
I refuse to be bled dry any longer- Which is why its so saddening to me to see what has happened to my hobby which I have beeen a part of since the late 1970's-
I may just be one person, but if ZENOUGH people refused to take this- It would stop. People wont so the gaming companies will keep pushing. In 10 years (mark my word) most of you defending this shit will be complaining about what has happened to YOUR HOBBY- And the next generation of gamers will not understand your objection to them being able to purchase 1 hit kill weapons in PVP.
EDIT: I lol at my own grammar. Typing fast,worn keyboard and no spellcheck = Garbled post
PLUS there is creeping incrimentalism. The more this is accepted, the more they will push to earn greater profit... Its like the Lines at Cedar Point and "other" amusment parks now allow you to PAY MONEY to cut in line ahead of the poor folk (they need to make money too)- My family refuses to go there.
And guess what, its not the "rich" (as a rule) who pay for this shit. The rich didnt get rich by nort understanding the value of money... Its like Dave Ramsey says (financial Guru), most Millionares wont buy new cars for their primary transportation...
I refuse to be bled dry any longer- Which is why its so saddening to me to see what has happened to my hobby which I have beeen a part of since the late 1970's-
I may just be one person, but if ZENOUGH people refused to take this- It would stop. People wont so the gaming companies will keep pushing. In 10 years (mark my word) most of you defending this shit will be complaining about what has happened to YOUR HOBBY- And the next generation of gamers will not understand your objection to them being able to purchase 1 hit kill weapons in PVP.
EDIT: I lol at my own grammar. Typing fast,worn keyboard and no spellcheck = Garbled post
Sounds like we are from the same time. It's sad isn't it to see what has become "acceptable". Imagine you were able to go back and tell yourself back in the 70's, "people pay 2 bucks for a bottle of water" or "people pay a monthly fee to watch TV".
Or better yet, "corporations can sell fake currency to gamble for an imaginary product and not go to jail for it". You would not only think the future was full of criminals, but that your were a comedian to boot.
So, since RMT is becoming bigger and bigger, and people justify it with "But it's better that the game company gets the money", is it then okay for the poor to bot while sleeping, so we can keep up with the gamers who have too much money irl?
Or should the rich just have more fun than the poor, in virtual worlds, like they do irl?
Make one legal and you might aswell do the other too, imo... Even out the playing field.
MMO's will become a very expensive hobby in the future, and I would still like to able to enjoy 'em, but I cannot, and will never be able to afford to be competitive in a game where power is bought with cash..
So if not this, then what is the solution for poor people in future MMO's?
This is a very fair question, and actually very appropriate given one of the most often voiced defenses for Cash Shops in MMOs. Time and again, people argue that Cash Shops are fair because they equal the playing field between those with more time and less money and those with more money and less time. People claim it's unfair that others who have more time to play can make more progress than they can. I personally consider that an extremely poor rationale, fueled a little too obviously by envy and self-entitlement. If something takes 10 hours of in-game time to complete, then it shouldn't really matter if it's 10 hours broken down into two 5 hour play sessions across two days out of a week, or into five 2 hour sessions across five days out of that same week. It's still the same in-game time requirement either way.
But of course, that's not how those arguing against it see it.
Coming back to the OP's question, it is a very valid question because if we're going to accept the notion that people with less time to play are somehow at an unfair advantage because others have more time, then it should be just as fair that those with less money to spend due to their real life circumstances are entitled to special treatment as well.
If fairness is truly the goal here, then what's good for the goose is good for the gander, is it not?
If Cash Shops exist to give those with less free time a way to spend money to speed up their progress, then it seems only fair that those with lower incomes or greater financial responsibilities be given lower prices on Cash Shop items to accomodate their particular circumstances. After all, why should those with less money to spend on cash shop items be penalized? It's not fair that others who have more money to spend at a time are able to buy more cash shop items, like xp potions that speed up their leveling, or a faster mount to make travel quicker, or more HP or MP pots to reduce their downtime. It creates an unfair gap between the haves and have-nots.
Now you might scoff and say "That's ridiculous". And I would agree. It is ridiculous. It's every bit as ridiculous as the idea that those with less free time to play should be entitled to a faster/easier ride to level the playing field against those with more time.
And what of those who have more money to spend and more time to play? They've got everyone beat and put both sides at an unfair advantage. What's to be done about that? We can't simply ignore that situation, can we? Not if fairness between all players is truly the goal.
If one wanted to really run with that, you could uncover a whole lot of seemingly unfair situations on either side. And who's to say one group of people is less deserving of such consideration than any other group?
It all gets rather messy, and stupid.
This is why the truly fair way to handle it is to go with a subscription model. This way, whether someone makes $300 a week or $3000, they still pay $15 a month and their real life income means absolutely nothing inside the game world, as it should be. A flat subscripton fee becomes an equalizer and a filter between their real life and their virtual one.
Similarly, whether someone has 5 hours a night to play or 2, they both still require the same overall amount of in-game time to achieve the same goals and experience the same content. That becomes an equalizer between the two and presents a truly level playing field between the two. How much or how little real-life time one has to play means nothing because they will both need to spend roughly the same amount of in-game time to achieve the same goals and experience the same content.
It would make the most sense and make things a whole lot less complicated if people could get over themselves, drop the victim routine and just accept that the game is what the game is, and their real life circumstances are left at the login screen, and have no bearings what-so-ever in the game world.
Of course, I realize that will never happen because so many people want to believe they're somehow that special snowflake with unique life circumstances that entitle them to special treatment, above all others.
It has limitations like I'm not able to trade to players, send mail, create auctions, or access the guild bank. In other words the currency I make is from quests and selling to NPCs.
Now what if there was a way for subscription based players to get access to these functions, but still let non subscribing players access the game but have these limitations. Would it work in regards to game mechanics? Disregard funding that it takes to keep the game running.
I just cannot see most MMO players subscribing to these games for much longer in the future. They are getting to bland, nothing new to the table, and will eventually be a thing of the past. There needs to be another medium for non subcribers to get back into the games to populate the worlds. Well at least some MMOs need players, others don't.
Cash shops, RMT, etc need to die already. Find a happy medium for people who are willing to subscribe, and for those that are not. But for the love of god lets get some players back into these empty worlds!
This can open up a whole can of worms for subscribers, but you have to understand the concept. There would have to be items that cost tremendous amounts of in game currency that no way a non subscriber could acquire, so that a subscriber can open a shop to make some coin from non subscribers to get the those items.
So, since RMT is becoming bigger and bigger, and people justify it with "But it's better that the game company gets the money", is it then okay for the poor to bot while sleeping, so we can keep up with the gamers who have too much money irl?
Or should the rich just have more fun than the poor, in virtual worlds, like they do irl?
Make one legal and you might aswell do the other too, imo... Even out the playing field.
MMO's will become a very expensive hobby in the future, and I would still like to able to enjoy 'em, but I cannot, and will never be able to afford to be competitive in a game where power is bought with cash..
So if not this, then what is the solution for poor people in future MMO's?
I'm sort of getting tired of having to say this over and over but, RMT is the same as it ever was. It was frowned apon and still is but the "rich" still did it and it hurt the poor. It's always been like this.
Too many people stubbornly and blindly equate monthly fees to a level playing field and it's never been so.
That is a HORRIBLE argument, because you're conflating illegal RMT by 3rd party companies with sanctioned RMT by game developers themselves. It has a demonstrable negative affect on the game (except for those doing the buying, of course). The two are not one in the same.
People who bought gold/characters/items/etc from 3rd party companies (which they still do, even in F2P MMOs with Cash Shops) do so despite and against the game's design and TOS. It's something people have always done outside the intentions and permission of the developers and the gameplay. This is why it's always been considered cheating.
Cash Shops in MMOs are sanctioned and provided by the developer. The game is designed around and in support of them. People are intended to spend money to buy items of whatever variety from the in-game Cash Shop.
Claiming that sanctioned Cash Shop RMT is the same as non-sanctioned 3rd party RMT in sub-based games is to grant legitimacy to the latter that is simply not and has never been there. And this is why your argument falls on its face. Because there is no legitimacy in 3rd party RMT and it has no place in the equation.
Let's not forget that even in Cash Shop MMOs, 3rd party RMT transactions are still prohibited and considered bannable, and yet still take place. I see as much RMT spam in F2P MMOs as I've ever seen in even the worst Sub-based ones. It is not, and should not be considered a valid part of the equation.
If you're going to compare one set up to the other, subs versus cash shops, then you have to do so on the basis and merits of each system by itself. And in that regard, yes, subscriptions do offer a level playing field because the subscription fee becomes the equalizer between players, regardless of their income. Similarly, the time investment required in-game to achieve a given goal or complete a given activity is comparable, regardless of how much real-life time the player has available. With subscription based games, how much time or money a player has has no relevance, because everyone pays the same fee, everyone has access to the same content and everyone has to deal with the same challenges, risks and time investments to engage in it.
The existence of 3rd party RMT has no bearing on that fundamental balance at all.
So, since RMT is becoming bigger and bigger, and people justify it with "But it's better that the game company gets the money", is it then okay for the poor to bot while sleeping, so we can keep up with the gamers who have too much money irl?
Or should the rich just have more fun than the poor, in virtual worlds, like they do irl?
Make one legal and you might aswell do the other too, imo... Even out the playing field.
MMO's will become a very expensive hobby in the future, and I would still like to able to enjoy 'em, but I cannot, and will never be able to afford to be competitive in a game where power is bought with cash..
So if not this, then what is the solution for poor people in future MMO's?
Even if I won the lottery I wouldn't dump a penny in these shops. I just don't get the appeal. Cosmetic yes, anything else? Why? And really it's got nothing to do with rich or poor. People keep blaming big companies for legalising this but really people have a choice. If they didn't play such games, or didn't buy from such shops then this would stop. And I don't really think it stops illegal gold farming/selling either. Again if people didn't buy that gold then people would not sell it. It's really not so difficult.
Cash shops, RMT, etc need to die already. Find a happy medium for people who are willing to subscribe, and for those that are not. But for the love of god lets get some players back into these empty worlds!
Runescape has a setup something like this. You can experience quite a bit of the game without paying, but certain features and areas are off-limits to you unless you do sub. I think it's a reasonable compromise, something like an extended trial.
I agree with you that Cash Shops really should go, or at least be balanced out with subscriptions. If more MMOs had the option of a subscription fee, or "gold membership" as they call it in EQ2's case, where you could get full access to the game with the option of disabling the cash shop altogether without being negatively affected by doing so, it would be fine. Let those who want to play free and buy their way around the restrictions do so. Let those who just want to pay their flat fee and avoid all that do so. Everyone's happy. Or should be.
Illegal RMT definitely should go. It would be a wonderful thing if it did. At this point, though, it's simply too huge a business and there are too many people giving them business to slow it down. Perhaps if developers cracked down more severely on it, banning the buyer as well as the seller, it could make a difference.
That's an interesting point OP but ultimately I don't think it matters if you're rich or poor in regards to how most people feel about the cash shop, I have money to spend but I never have and never will use it in cash shops. I want in-game achievements to be earned by time spent in-game and that's why I'm against all forms of RMT that affects gameplay.
I want to support games without a cash shop, I want it to be more profitable for a company to not have a cash shop, I'm willing to pay more for a game with no cash shop if I like their game. Ultimately it all comes down to money for the game developers, they do what they think will bring in the most cash. Only the players are to blame for this RMT trend since they are the ones spending money on it.
So, since RMT is becoming bigger and bigger, and people justify it with "But it's better that the game company gets the money", is it then okay for the poor to bot while sleeping, so we can keep up with the gamers who have too much money irl? Or should the rich just have more fun than the poor, in virtual worlds, like they do irl? Make one legal and you might aswell do the other too, imo... Even out the playing field. MMO's will become a very expensive hobby in the future, and I would still like to able to enjoy 'em, but I cannot, and will never be able to afford to be competitive in a game where power is bought with cash.. So if not this, then what is the solution for poor people in future MMO's?
This is a very fair question, and actually very appropriate given one of the most often voiced defenses for Cash Shops in MMOs. Time and again, people argue that Cash Shops are fair because they equal the playing field between those with more time and less money and those with more money and less time. People claim it's unfair that others who have more time to play can make more progress than they can. I personally consider that an extremely poor rationale, fueled a little too obviously by envy and self-entitlement. If something takes 10 hours of in-game time to complete, then it shouldn't really matter if it's 10 hours broken down into two 5 hour play sessions across two days out of a week, or into five 2 hour sessions across five days out of that same week. It's still the same in-game time requirement either way.
But of course, that's not how those arguing against it see it.
Coming back to the OP's question, it is a very valid question because if we're going to accept the notion that people with less time to play are somehow at an unfair advantage because others have more time, then it should be just as fair that those with less money to spend due to their real life circumstances are entitled to special treatment as well.
If fairness is truly the goal here, then what's good for the goose is good for the gander, is it not?
If Cash Shops exist to give those with less free time a way to spend money to speed up their progress, then it seems only fair that those with lower incomes or greater financial responsibilities be given lower prices on Cash Shop items to accomodate their particular circumstances. After all, why should those with less money to spend on cash shop items be penalized? It's not fair that others who have more money to spend at a time are able to buy more cash shop items, like xp potions that speed up their leveling, or a faster mount to make travel quicker, or more HP or MP pots to reduce their downtime. It creates an unfair gap between the haves and have-nots.
Now you might scoff and say "That's ridiculous". And I would agree. It is ridiculous. It's every bit as ridiculous as the idea that those with less free time to play should be entitled to a faster/easier ride to level the playing field against those with more time.
And what of those who have more money to spend and more time to play? They've got everyone beat and put both sides at an unfair advantage. What's to be done about that? We can't simply ignore that situation, can we? Not if fairness between all players is truly the goal.
If one wanted to really run with that, you could uncover a whole lot of seemingly unfair situations on either side. And who's to say one group of people is less deserving of such consideration than any other group?
It all gets rather messy, and stupid.
This is why the truly fair way to handle it is to go with a subscription model. This way, whether someone makes $300 a week or $3000, they still pay $15 a month and their real life income means absolutely nothing inside the game world, as it should be. A flat subscripton fee becomes an equalizer and a filter between their real life and their virtual one.
Similarly, whether someone has 5 hours a night to play or 2, they both still require the same overall amount of in-game time to achieve the same goals and experience the same content. That becomes an equalizer between the two and presents a truly level playing field between the two. How much or how little real-life time one has to play means nothing because they will both need to spend roughly the same amount of in-game time to achieve the same goals and experience the same content.
It would make the most sense and make things a whole lot less complicated if people could get over themselves, drop the victim routine and just accept that the game is what the game is, and their real life circumstances are left at the login screen, and have no bearings what-so-ever in the game world.
Of course, I realize that will never happen because so many people want to believe they're somehow that special snowflake with unique life circumstances that entitle them to special treatment, above all others.
So, since RMT is becoming bigger and bigger, and people justify it with "But it's better that the game company gets the money", is it then okay for the poor to bot while sleeping, so we can keep up with the gamers who have too much money irl?
Or should the rich just have more fun than the poor, in virtual worlds, like they do irl?
Make one legal and you might aswell do the other too, imo... Even out the playing field.
MMO's will become a very expensive hobby in the future, and I would still like to able to enjoy 'em, but I cannot, and will never be able to afford to be competitive in a game where power is bought with cash..
So if not this, then what is the solution for poor people in future MMO's?
This is a very fair question, and actually very appropriate given one of the most often voiced defenses for Cash Shops in MMOs. Time and again, people argue that Cash Shops are fair because they equal the playing field between those with more time and less money and those with more money and less time. People claim it's unfair that others who have more time to play can make more progress than they can. I personally consider that an extremely poor rationale, fueled a little too obviously by envy and self-entitlement. If something takes 10 hours of in-game time to complete, then it shouldn't really matter if it's 10 hours broken down into two 5 hour play sessions across two days out of a week, or into five 2 hour sessions across five days out of that same week. It's still the same in-game time requirement either way.
But of course, that's not how those arguing against it see it.
Coming back to the OP's question, it is a very valid question because if we're going to accept the notion that people with less time to play are somehow at an unfair advantage because others have more time, then it should be just as fair that those with less money to spend due to their real life circumstances are entitled to special treatment as well.
If fairness is truly the goal here, then what's good for the goose is good for the gander, is it not?
If Cash Shops exist to give those with less free time a way to spend money to speed up their progress, then it seems only fair that those with lower incomes or greater financial responsibilities be given lower prices on Cash Shop items to accomodate their particular circumstances. After all, why should those with less money to spend on cash shop items be penalized? It's not fair that others who have more money to spend at a time are able to buy more cash shop items, like xp potions that speed up their leveling, or a faster mount to make travel quicker, or more HP or MP pots to reduce their downtime. It creates an unfair gap between the haves and have-nots.
Now you might scoff and say "That's ridiculous". And I would agree. It is ridiculous. It's every bit as ridiculous as the idea that those with less free time to play should be entitled to a faster/easier ride to level the playing field against those with more time.
And what of those who have more money to spend and more time to play? They've got everyone beat and put both sides at an unfair advantage. What's to be done about that? We can't simply ignore that situation, can we? Not if fairness between all players is truly the goal.
If one wanted to really run with that, you could uncover a whole lot of seemingly unfair situations on either side. And who's to say one group of people is less deserving of such consideration than any other group?
It all gets rather messy, and stupid.
This is why the truly fair way to handle it is to go with a subscription model. This way, whether someone makes $300 a week or $3000, they still pay $15 a month and their real life income means absolutely nothing inside the game world, as it should be. A flat subscripton fee becomes an equalizer and a filter between their real life and their virtual one.
Similarly, whether someone has 5 hours a night to play or 2, they both still require the same overall amount of in-game time to achieve the same goals and experience the same content. That becomes an equalizer between the two and presents a truly level playing field between the two. How much or how little real-life time one has to play means nothing because they will both need to spend roughly the same amount of in-game time to achieve the same goals and experience the same content.
It would make the most sense and make things a whole lot less complicated if people could get over themselves, drop the victim routine and just accept that the game is what the game is, and their real life circumstances are left at the login screen, and have no bearings what-so-ever in the game world.
Of course, I realize that will never happen because so many people want to believe they're somehow that special snowflake with unique life circumstances that entitle them to special treatment, above all others.
Good Post, + 1
only the $15 sub fee eliminates those who couldnt afford anything from the cash shop, so they don't get to play now. So, back to the original problem.
The only true fair play is no cash shop and no sub fee. But we know that won't happen either.
The real issue is, the industry itself is now seeing the profit from these gold buyers. IGE racked in huge profits, and gold farmers made 3 billion total. The game industry wants that action. They could care less about the casual player with little income. The future is about exploiting irrational addictive behavior, and it will work. The rest, as far as the gaming industry, can go to hell.
EA stated it was going full speed into casual games. And here is what we are starting to see already.
So, since RMT is becoming bigger and bigger, and people justify it with "But it's better that the game company gets the money", is it then okay for the poor to bot while sleeping, so we can keep up with the gamers who have too much money irl?
Or should the rich just have more fun than the poor, in virtual worlds, like they do irl?
Make one legal and you might aswell do the other too, imo... Even out the playing field.
MMO's will become a very expensive hobby in the future, and I would still like to able to enjoy 'em, but I cannot, and will never be able to afford to be competitive in a game where power is bought with cash..
So if not this, then what is the solution for poor people in future MMO's?
I think the future of mmo's will be more along the lines of jobs. In the future i believe people will login to work online in games either assassinating enemies or farming resources. but it's probably too early to get into that.
I do agree however when it comes to certain games, no it's not an advantage at all.
I.E. buying potions that increase experience gains in a game with no end-game specific content where pvp and pve zones change your skills to match the level of the zone and where you learn your skills by using weapons and not by gaining levels, this type of game would never do anyone any good by trying to reach end game first.
I find it hard to believe that these MMO companies can't track gold farmers.
They have the ability and resources. Set up tracking to flag suspicious behavior.
I'll give Blizzard credit for one thing, they had a system in place that detected suspicious behavior when my account got hacked and they immediately locked my account before all the real damage was done.
To catch suspicious behavior within minutes? I will praise them for that. But at the same time, it leaves no excuses for gold farmers and botting.
I understand the plea for bots here, but Just what kind of game are we looking at here?
RMT both sanctioned and unsanctioned? Botting? Gold Farming? What are we trying to do here, bring back Pre-CU SWG?
So, since RMT is becoming bigger and bigger, and people justify it with "But it's better that the game company gets the money", is it then okay for the poor to bot while sleeping, so we can keep up with the gamers who have too much money irl?
Or should the rich just have more fun than the poor, in virtual worlds, like they do irl?
Make one legal and you might aswell do the other too, imo... Even out the playing field.
MMO's will become a very expensive hobby in the future, and I would still like to able to enjoy 'em, but I cannot, and will never be able to afford to be competitive in a game where power is bought with cash..
So if not this, then what is the solution for poor people in future MMO's?
The solution for poor people in future MMO is to get a job instead of playing games?
Stabilize your real life and worried more about your family that they does not get kick out of their own home.
What kind of fkup human are you if you are poor and you are more worried on games?
So, since RMT is becoming bigger and bigger, and people justify it with "But it's better that the game company gets the money", is it then okay for the poor to bot while sleeping, so we can keep up with the gamers who have too much money irl?
Or should the rich just have more fun than the poor, in virtual worlds, like they do irl?
Make one legal and you might aswell do the other too, imo... Even out the playing field.
MMO's will become a very expensive hobby in the future, and I would still like to able to enjoy 'em, but I cannot, and will never be able to afford to be competitive in a game where power is bought with cash..
So if not this, then what is the solution for poor people in future MMO's?
The solution for poor people in future MMO is to get a job instead of playing games?
Stabilize your real life and worried more about your family that they does not get kick out of their own home.
What kind of fkup human are you if you are poor and you are more worried on games?
Very good point. The same also goes for time. I don't buy the lack of time arguement either in regards to justifying RMT. I don't always have time to play games, when that happens I don't play games. I haven't always had money to spare to sub to games. There have been times when I have had no computer to play games. When these things happen you get on with life.
Not only in MMOs. There is something I spotted that falls like a glove at this topic.
Yesterday was posted on youtube the first proof of a direct input bot for Diablo 3, made by a chinese player from Guanzou.
What this means? It means that not only RMT, but also Real Money Auction House, RMAH end up causing the opposite effect.
A new first person shooter that released this month (open beta with active monetization is released enough for me), called Blacklight Retribution is not an MMO either, but it already has a subscription fee... a subscription fee of the trainer/aimbot from a private site. While the game itself offers a free to play model with RMT for power (wich can be acquired with in-game money through time, a lot of time, too much time that you might as well just spend the fucking 15 bucks already for that complete weapon instead of playing 200 15 minute matches over the course of a few weeks getting owned many times in the process by someone that bought it on the first day). Not to mention the AFK bots, or people multiboxing, using virtualizers in F2P games to play room based games with themselfs through friend invite methods to farm/grind/powerlevel.
There is no excuse for any kind of involvement of money in games content or experience. Its like trying to convince your girlfriend that your are going to put just a little... just cosmethics. The whole point now shifts from pay to win having acquired enough negative stigma and prejudice for games marketing/devs in interviews trying to run away from that label.
Now its time to create a label for games that attempt to justify the monetization that ruins the overall experience, balance, sense of achievement/ reward and progression through "TIME SKIPPERS". Basically, the argument that is trying to be pushed by the flanks is that the RMT only offers "AN ALTERNATIVE FOR THOSE WITH LESS TIME TO PLAY".
In the end, time is power. Time is progression. Progression and power are being sold. This is so obvious, yet most people need a big label shoved on their face so they understand ITS A BAD THING.
Its not about getting a job to pay for the win and advantages.
the whole point is the INTEGRITY OF WHAT A GAME IS. The moment money involvement affects that INTEGRITY, its no longer a game. It becomes less of a GAME. RMT dilutes, disolves the integrity of a game.
If your game is about power, or progression or time spent and you offer that on cash shop, then the integrity of the game got corrupted.
So, since RMT is becoming bigger and bigger, and people justify it with "But it's better that the game company gets the money", is it then okay for the poor to bot while sleeping, so we can keep up with the gamers who have too much money irl?
Or should the rich just have more fun than the poor, in virtual worlds, like they do irl?
Make one legal and you might aswell do the other too, imo... Even out the playing field.
MMO's will become a very expensive hobby in the future, and I would still like to able to enjoy 'em, but I cannot, and will never be able to afford to be competitive in a game where power is bought with cash..
So if not this, then what is the solution for poor people in future MMO's?
The solution for poor people in future MMO is to get a job instead of playing games?
Stabilize your real life and worried more about your family that they does not get kick out of their own home.
What kind of fkup human are you if you are poor and you are more worried on games?
Using an argument that basically boils down to "get a job" is a blanket statement that I consider ill-informed. Calling someone a fkup human doesn't really make it any better. For some people it truly is just a matter of getting a job. Not everybody is so fortunate though. Some people are unable to work or severely limited in what or how much they can do because of various disabilities. Sometimes there simply are no jobs to be had and if you're still lucky enough to get one, it might be so poorly paid that you have little to spare, both in terms of time and money. There's also the possibility that due to certain events, you may be in a position where you might have a well paid job but still end up being poor because you have to spend most of your hard earned money to recover from those events. In short, there are many reasons why you could be poor and some of them you have very little control over, so how can you be blamed - assuming you did your best? Also don't forget that poor is a very relative term. What you consider poor may not be what the OP or the next person considers poor. Heck, poor where I live is stinking rich compare to most of the world.
I'm a big ol' fluffy carewolf. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
So, since RMT is becoming bigger and bigger, and people justify it with "But it's better that the game company gets the money", is it then okay for the poor to bot while sleeping, so we can keep up with the gamers who have too much money irl?
Or should the rich just have more fun than the poor, in virtual worlds, like they do irl?
Make one legal and you might aswell do the other too, imo... Even out the playing field.
MMO's will become a very expensive hobby in the future, and I would still like to able to enjoy 'em, but I cannot, and will never be able to afford to be competitive in a game where power is bought with cash..
So if not this, then what is the solution for poor people in future MMO's?
The solution for poor people in future MMO is to get a job instead of playing games?
Stabilize your real life and worried more about your family that they does not get kick out of their own home.
What kind of fkup human are you if you are poor and you are more worried on games?
Using an argument that basically boils down to "get a job" is a blanket statement that I consider ill-informed. Calling someone a fkup human doesn't really make it any better. For some people it truly is just a matter of getting a job. Not everybody is so fortunate though. Some people are unable to work or severely limited in what or how much they can do because of various disabilities. Sometimes there simply are no jobs to be had and if you're still lucky enough to get one, it might be so poorly paid that you have little to spare, both in terms of time and money. There's also the possibility that due to certain events, you may be in a position where you might have a well paid job but still end up being poor because you have to spend most of your hard earned money to recover from those events. In short, there are many reasons why you could be poor and some of them you have very little control over, so how can you be blamed - assuming you did your best? Also don't forget that poor is a very relative term. What you consider poor may not be what the OP or the next person considers poor. Heck, poor where I live is stinking rich compare to most of the world.
I think the point he's trying to make is if you have moneyflow problems or any other problems, then not being able to spend money on a game to "keep" up is the least of your worries. Get the other things sorted first. Games are not life essential products.
So, since RMT is becoming bigger and bigger, and people justify it with "But it's better that the game company gets the money", is it then okay for the poor to bot while sleeping, so we can keep up with the gamers who have too much money irl? Or should the rich just have more fun than the poor, in virtual worlds, like they do irl? Make one legal and you might aswell do the other too, imo... Even out the playing field. MMO's will become a very expensive hobby in the future, and I would still like to able to enjoy 'em, but I cannot, and will never be able to afford to be competitive in a game where power is bought with cash.. So if not this, then what is the solution for poor people in future MMO's?
The solution for poor people in future MMO is to get a job instead of playing games?
Stabilize your real life and worried more about your family that they does not get kick out of their own home.
What kind of fkup human are you if you are poor and you are more worried on games?
Using an argument that basically boils down to "get a job" is a blanket statement that I consider ill-informed. Calling someone a fkup human doesn't really make it any better. For some people it truly is just a matter of getting a job. Not everybody is so fortunate though. Some people are unable to work or severely limited in what or how much they can do because of various disabilities. Sometimes there simply are no jobs to be had and if you're still lucky enough to get one, it might be so poorly paid that you have little to spare, both in terms of time and money. There's also the possibility that due to certain events, you may be in a position where you might have a well paid job but still end up being poor because you have to spend most of your hard earned money to recover from those events. In short, there are many reasons why you could be poor and some of them you have very little control over, so how can you be blamed - assuming you did your best? Also don't forget that poor is a very relative term. What you consider poor may not be what the OP or the next person considers poor. Heck, poor where I live is stinking rich compare to most of the world.
I think the point he's trying to make is if you have moneyflow problems or any other problems, then not being able to spend money on a game to "keep" up is the least of your worries. Get the other things sorted first. Games are not life essential products.
That kind of says that poor people shouldn't play a game and be able to win through their own honest efforts.
Lol, I m far from rich, I do ok, but I can afford 2 yearly subs 1 for Rift and 1 for EQ2 , and still don t mind a cs in GW2. Hell I ll probably dabble in the CS if I feel like I want something that doesn t effect gameplay at all.
Lol, I m far from rich, I do ok, but I can afford 2 yearly subs 1 for Rift and 1 for EQ2 , and still don t mind a cs in GW2. Hell I ll probably dabble in the CS if I feel like I want something that doesn t effect gameplay at all.
Lol, I m far from rich, I do ok, but I can afford 2 yearly subs 1 for Rift and 1 for EQ2 , and still don t mind a cs in GW2. Hell I ll probably dabble in the CS if I feel like I want something that doesn t effect gameplay at all.
I think it says that if your poor and your spending what little bit of money you have on a game then your a fkin idiot. There are thousands of things you should be doing with what little you do have and not one of them is a video game. Its no one elses fault your poor, nor is it anyone elses responsiblity so ensure your on even footing in a game you probably shouldnt be playing if you have no money anyways. Businesses are out to make money bottom line. You dont start a business to lose money or give shit away for free. They dont cater games to the poor or less fortunate because the assume most people would understand that if you have no money then you wont be playing anyways. And if you do decide to burn what little bit you have on a game instead of rent or food or whatever else you should have used it for then you again are a fkin idiot and deserve whatever you get.
The point is if you can afford the 15$ out of your budget for the sub you have as much chance as the millionaire to win, with P2W the millionaire can just outspend your budget and use his RL wealth to beat you at the game, it really isn't that difficult to understand.
I think it says that if your poor and your spending what little bit of money you have on a game then your a fkin idiot. There are thousands of things you should be doing with what little you do have and not one of them is a video game. Its no one elses fault your poor, nor is it anyone elses responsiblity so ensure your on even footing in a game you probably shouldnt be playing if you have no money anyways.
Businesses are out to make money bottom line. You dont start a business to lose money or give shit away for free. They dont cater games to the poor or less fortunate because the assume most people would understand that if you have no money then you wont be playing anyways. And if you do decide to burn what little bit you have on a game instead of rent or food or whatever else you should have used it for then you again are a fkin idiot and deserve whatever you get.
The point is if you can afford the 15$ out of your budget for the sub you have as much chance as the millionaire to win, with P2W the millionaire can just outspend your budget and use his RL wealth to beat you at the game, it really isn't that difficult to understand.
No its not difficult to understand at all, but nor is it the millionairs fault you dont have a million to spend on a game. And if you decide to play again with that kind of structure its your own damn fault if you cant keep up when you have no money. Bottom line is its no one elses fault you cant keep up in a p2w game but your own. Pick a different game with a better model that keeps you on even footing through out and there would be no problem. But bitching and whining about it is not going to solve anything, they arent gonna restructure the entire game because a few people cant afford to pay, when they have a bunch of people who can and they are making profit. If you hate business and hate people that make profit and hate people that can afford to play that type of game and spend loads of money to win, then play something else or keep quite.
I think it says that if your poor and your spending what little bit of money you have on a game then your a fkin idiot. There are thousands of things you should be doing with what little you do have and not one of them is a video game. Its no one elses fault your poor, nor is it anyone elses responsiblity so ensure your on even footing in a game you probably shouldnt be playing if you have no money anyways.
Businesses are out to make money bottom line. You dont start a business to lose money or give shit away for free. They dont cater games to the poor or less fortunate because the assume most people would understand that if you have no money then you wont be playing anyways. And if you do decide to burn what little bit you have on a game instead of rent or food or whatever else you should have used it for then you again are a fkin idiot and deserve whatever you get.
Poor people need something to keep their mind off things ever so often, an escape and hobby. As far as hobbies go, mmo's are one of the cheapest. I'm below the poverty line and i have no debt, what is it i should be doing with my money? I have enough each month to spend on a sub even two and hey i can buy a few games ever so often. This doesn't mean i can just go squander 100s of dollars a month to one-up mr low selfesteem.
People can't just work and work, they'll break down. Ever hear of the working poor? ya they're the backbone of the United States, ya kinda want it to keep working for ya.
there are lots of hobbys that dont require you to spend a dime. Its your own choice to spend money or save it. If you decide to play a game that is structured with a p2w model and your below the poverty line then dont expect me or anyone to feel sorry for you because your poor and you chose the wrong game.
As far as taking a break from work and breaking down, I have no idea where that comes from. I didnt say anything about poor people need to get to work and stay there. I simply said that if you choose to play games with what little you have and you cant keep up becuase you havent got money its not my fault or anyone elses.
To be honest i really dont give a fk whether or not you work or not or if you lose your home or not of if you can play a game or not. I work my ass off everyday and I dont have alot of money but i do have the common sense to know if i cant afford to play then i dont. If i cant afford to pay to win then i play something else, I dont come to the forums and bitch about it. I just pick a different game and move on.
Comments
and this is why I don't really have any issues with the GW2 cash shop. Because right now, unlike other games, anyone who spends more money or more time aquiring high end items, can dominate pvp even if they suck.
Money nor time will give anyone an advantage in PvP. In WvW, the gap will be easily overcome once everyone reaches full level or skill points. Eventually someone will have that +40 ring of power vs that +25 power and +10 vitality. But luck and kharma determines that. Even so, that +5 extra stat for that uber item is based on a lvl 80 stat of 1500+ points total.
Talk about the .0001% uber advantage.
Anet has dipped it toe into that realm of losing my trust though. What they do today, may not be what they do a year from today wit hthe CS. And frankly, after seeing the lootbag/mystic key crap, I don't trust them anymore.
-Pirate the Bots? =P
A few comments here said "if you dont like, dont play"- I dont. I quit WOW over 'cosmetic' ca$h $hop mounts and such (I know one sub did not hurt them) I will not be playing GW2 because of a Ca$h $hop (again, not gunna make a dent) and I refuse to play a gam,e with a Ca$h $hop (Althoguh in a F2P- I think this i fine, I just wont play F2P)
I will continue to speak out (althoguhh it wont matter) Just as I did with DLC (Fanboys screamed that DLC was needed to give a game more life- Would never be used to hold content back).
A fair playing field is fair- Anything else is not.
PLUS there is creeping incrimentalism. The more this is accepted, the more they will push to earn greater profit... Its like the Lines at Cedar Point and "other" amusment parks now allow you to PAY MONEY to cut in line ahead of the poor folk (they need to make money too)- My family refuses to go there.
And guess what, its not the "rich" (as a rule) who pay for this shit. The rich didnt get rich by nort understanding the value of money... Its like Dave Ramsey says (financial Guru), most Millionares wont buy new cars for their primary transportation...
I refuse to be bled dry any longer- Which is why its so saddening to me to see what has happened to my hobby which I have beeen a part of since the late 1970's-
I may just be one person, but if ZENOUGH people refused to take this- It would stop. People wont so the gaming companies will keep pushing. In 10 years (mark my word) most of you defending this shit will be complaining about what has happened to YOUR HOBBY- And the next generation of gamers will not understand your objection to them being able to purchase 1 hit kill weapons in PVP.
EDIT: I lol at my own grammar. Typing fast,worn keyboard and no spellcheck = Garbled post
Sounds like we are from the same time. It's sad isn't it to see what has become "acceptable". Imagine you were able to go back and tell yourself back in the 70's, "people pay 2 bucks for a bottle of water" or "people pay a monthly fee to watch TV".
Or better yet, "corporations can sell fake currency to gamble for an imaginary product and not go to jail for it". You would not only think the future was full of criminals, but that your were a comedian to boot.
This is a very fair question, and actually very appropriate given one of the most often voiced defenses for Cash Shops in MMOs. Time and again, people argue that Cash Shops are fair because they equal the playing field between those with more time and less money and those with more money and less time. People claim it's unfair that others who have more time to play can make more progress than they can. I personally consider that an extremely poor rationale, fueled a little too obviously by envy and self-entitlement. If something takes 10 hours of in-game time to complete, then it shouldn't really matter if it's 10 hours broken down into two 5 hour play sessions across two days out of a week, or into five 2 hour sessions across five days out of that same week. It's still the same in-game time requirement either way.
But of course, that's not how those arguing against it see it.
Coming back to the OP's question, it is a very valid question because if we're going to accept the notion that people with less time to play are somehow at an unfair advantage because others have more time, then it should be just as fair that those with less money to spend due to their real life circumstances are entitled to special treatment as well.
If fairness is truly the goal here, then what's good for the goose is good for the gander, is it not?
If Cash Shops exist to give those with less free time a way to spend money to speed up their progress, then it seems only fair that those with lower incomes or greater financial responsibilities be given lower prices on Cash Shop items to accomodate their particular circumstances. After all, why should those with less money to spend on cash shop items be penalized? It's not fair that others who have more money to spend at a time are able to buy more cash shop items, like xp potions that speed up their leveling, or a faster mount to make travel quicker, or more HP or MP pots to reduce their downtime. It creates an unfair gap between the haves and have-nots.
Now you might scoff and say "That's ridiculous". And I would agree. It is ridiculous. It's every bit as ridiculous as the idea that those with less free time to play should be entitled to a faster/easier ride to level the playing field against those with more time.
And what of those who have more money to spend and more time to play? They've got everyone beat and put both sides at an unfair advantage. What's to be done about that? We can't simply ignore that situation, can we? Not if fairness between all players is truly the goal.
If one wanted to really run with that, you could uncover a whole lot of seemingly unfair situations on either side. And who's to say one group of people is less deserving of such consideration than any other group?
It all gets rather messy, and stupid.
This is why the truly fair way to handle it is to go with a subscription model. This way, whether someone makes $300 a week or $3000, they still pay $15 a month and their real life income means absolutely nothing inside the game world, as it should be. A flat subscripton fee becomes an equalizer and a filter between their real life and their virtual one.
Similarly, whether someone has 5 hours a night to play or 2, they both still require the same overall amount of in-game time to achieve the same goals and experience the same content. That becomes an equalizer between the two and presents a truly level playing field between the two. How much or how little real-life time one has to play means nothing because they will both need to spend roughly the same amount of in-game time to achieve the same goals and experience the same content.
It would make the most sense and make things a whole lot less complicated if people could get over themselves, drop the victim routine and just accept that the game is what the game is, and their real life circumstances are left at the login screen, and have no bearings what-so-ever in the game world.
Of course, I realize that will never happen because so many people want to believe they're somehow that special snowflake with unique life circumstances that entitle them to special treatment, above all others.
I had an idea today while playing Rift Lite.
It has limitations like I'm not able to trade to players, send mail, create auctions, or access the guild bank. In other words the currency I make is from quests and selling to NPCs.
Now what if there was a way for subscription based players to get access to these functions, but still let non subscribing players access the game but have these limitations. Would it work in regards to game mechanics? Disregard funding that it takes to keep the game running.
I just cannot see most MMO players subscribing to these games for much longer in the future. They are getting to bland, nothing new to the table, and will eventually be a thing of the past. There needs to be another medium for non subcribers to get back into the games to populate the worlds. Well at least some MMOs need players, others don't.
Cash shops, RMT, etc need to die already. Find a happy medium for people who are willing to subscribe, and for those that are not. But for the love of god lets get some players back into these empty worlds!
This can open up a whole can of worms for subscribers, but you have to understand the concept. There would have to be items that cost tremendous amounts of in game currency that no way a non subscriber could acquire, so that a subscriber can open a shop to make some coin from non subscribers to get the those items.
That is a HORRIBLE argument, because you're conflating illegal RMT by 3rd party companies with sanctioned RMT by game developers themselves. It has a demonstrable negative affect on the game (except for those doing the buying, of course). The two are not one in the same.
People who bought gold/characters/items/etc from 3rd party companies (which they still do, even in F2P MMOs with Cash Shops) do so despite and against the game's design and TOS. It's something people have always done outside the intentions and permission of the developers and the gameplay. This is why it's always been considered cheating.
Cash Shops in MMOs are sanctioned and provided by the developer. The game is designed around and in support of them. People are intended to spend money to buy items of whatever variety from the in-game Cash Shop.
Claiming that sanctioned Cash Shop RMT is the same as non-sanctioned 3rd party RMT in sub-based games is to grant legitimacy to the latter that is simply not and has never been there. And this is why your argument falls on its face. Because there is no legitimacy in 3rd party RMT and it has no place in the equation.
Let's not forget that even in Cash Shop MMOs, 3rd party RMT transactions are still prohibited and considered bannable, and yet still take place. I see as much RMT spam in F2P MMOs as I've ever seen in even the worst Sub-based ones. It is not, and should not be considered a valid part of the equation.
If you're going to compare one set up to the other, subs versus cash shops, then you have to do so on the basis and merits of each system by itself. And in that regard, yes, subscriptions do offer a level playing field because the subscription fee becomes the equalizer between players, regardless of their income. Similarly, the time investment required in-game to achieve a given goal or complete a given activity is comparable, regardless of how much real-life time the player has available. With subscription based games, how much time or money a player has has no relevance, because everyone pays the same fee, everyone has access to the same content and everyone has to deal with the same challenges, risks and time investments to engage in it.
The existence of 3rd party RMT has no bearing on that fundamental balance at all.
Even if I won the lottery I wouldn't dump a penny in these shops. I just don't get the appeal. Cosmetic yes, anything else? Why? And really it's got nothing to do with rich or poor. People keep blaming big companies for legalising this but really people have a choice. If they didn't play such games, or didn't buy from such shops then this would stop. And I don't really think it stops illegal gold farming/selling either. Again if people didn't buy that gold then people would not sell it. It's really not so difficult.
the poster formerly known as melangel :P
That's an interesting point OP but ultimately I don't think it matters if you're rich or poor in regards to how most people feel about the cash shop, I have money to spend but I never have and never will use it in cash shops. I want in-game achievements to be earned by time spent in-game and that's why I'm against all forms of RMT that affects gameplay.
I want to support games without a cash shop, I want it to be more profitable for a company to not have a cash shop, I'm willing to pay more for a game with no cash shop if I like their game. Ultimately it all comes down to money for the game developers, they do what they think will bring in the most cash. Only the players are to blame for this RMT trend since they are the ones spending money on it.
This is a very fair question, and actually very appropriate given one of the most often voiced defenses for Cash Shops in MMOs. Time and again, people argue that Cash Shops are fair because they equal the playing field between those with more time and less money and those with more money and less time. People claim it's unfair that others who have more time to play can make more progress than they can. I personally consider that an extremely poor rationale, fueled a little too obviously by envy and self-entitlement. If something takes 10 hours of in-game time to complete, then it shouldn't really matter if it's 10 hours broken down into two 5 hour play sessions across two days out of a week, or into five 2 hour sessions across five days out of that same week. It's still the same in-game time requirement either way.
But of course, that's not how those arguing against it see it.
Coming back to the OP's question, it is a very valid question because if we're going to accept the notion that people with less time to play are somehow at an unfair advantage because others have more time, then it should be just as fair that those with less money to spend due to their real life circumstances are entitled to special treatment as well.
If fairness is truly the goal here, then what's good for the goose is good for the gander, is it not?
If Cash Shops exist to give those with less free time a way to spend money to speed up their progress, then it seems only fair that those with lower incomes or greater financial responsibilities be given lower prices on Cash Shop items to accomodate their particular circumstances. After all, why should those with less money to spend on cash shop items be penalized? It's not fair that others who have more money to spend at a time are able to buy more cash shop items, like xp potions that speed up their leveling, or a faster mount to make travel quicker, or more HP or MP pots to reduce their downtime. It creates an unfair gap between the haves and have-nots.
Now you might scoff and say "That's ridiculous". And I would agree. It is ridiculous. It's every bit as ridiculous as the idea that those with less free time to play should be entitled to a faster/easier ride to level the playing field against those with more time.
And what of those who have more money to spend and more time to play? They've got everyone beat and put both sides at an unfair advantage. What's to be done about that? We can't simply ignore that situation, can we? Not if fairness between all players is truly the goal.
If one wanted to really run with that, you could uncover a whole lot of seemingly unfair situations on either side. And who's to say one group of people is less deserving of such consideration than any other group?
It all gets rather messy, and stupid.
This is why the truly fair way to handle it is to go with a subscription model. This way, whether someone makes $300 a week or $3000, they still pay $15 a month and their real life income means absolutely nothing inside the game world, as it should be. A flat subscripton fee becomes an equalizer and a filter between their real life and their virtual one.
Similarly, whether someone has 5 hours a night to play or 2, they both still require the same overall amount of in-game time to achieve the same goals and experience the same content. That becomes an equalizer between the two and presents a truly level playing field between the two. How much or how little real-life time one has to play means nothing because they will both need to spend roughly the same amount of in-game time to achieve the same goals and experience the same content.
It would make the most sense and make things a whole lot less complicated if people could get over themselves, drop the victim routine and just accept that the game is what the game is, and their real life circumstances are left at the login screen, and have no bearings what-so-ever in the game world.
Of course, I realize that will never happen because so many people want to believe they're somehow that special snowflake with unique life circumstances that entitle them to special treatment, above all others.
Good Post, + 1only the $15 sub fee eliminates those who couldnt afford anything from the cash shop, so they don't get to play now. So, back to the original problem.
The only true fair play is no cash shop and no sub fee. But we know that won't happen either.
The real issue is, the industry itself is now seeing the profit from these gold buyers. IGE racked in huge profits, and gold farmers made 3 billion total. The game industry wants that action. They could care less about the casual player with little income. The future is about exploiting irrational addictive behavior, and it will work. The rest, as far as the gaming industry, can go to hell.
EA stated it was going full speed into casual games. And here is what we are starting to see already.
http://penny-arcade.com/report/editorial-article/flight-control-rocket-is-everything-bad-about-pay-to-win-schemes
I think the future of mmo's will be more along the lines of jobs. In the future i believe people will login to work online in games either assassinating enemies or farming resources. but it's probably too early to get into that.
I do agree however when it comes to certain games, no it's not an advantage at all.
I.E. buying potions that increase experience gains in a game with no end-game specific content where pvp and pve zones change your skills to match the level of the zone and where you learn your skills by using weapons and not by gaining levels, this type of game would never do anyone any good by trying to reach end game first.
I find it hard to believe that these MMO companies can't track gold farmers.
They have the ability and resources. Set up tracking to flag suspicious behavior.
I'll give Blizzard credit for one thing, they had a system in place that detected suspicious behavior when my account got hacked and they immediately locked my account before all the real damage was done.
To catch suspicious behavior within minutes? I will praise them for that.
But at the same time, it leaves no excuses for gold farmers and botting.
I understand the plea for bots here, but Just what kind of game are we looking at here?
RMT both sanctioned and unsanctioned? Botting? Gold Farming? What are we trying to do here, bring back Pre-CU SWG?
The solution for poor people in future MMO is to get a job instead of playing games?
Stabilize your real life and worried more about your family that they does not get kick out of their own home.
What kind of fkup human are you if you are poor and you are more worried on games?
Pardon my English as it is not my 1st language
Very good point. The same also goes for time. I don't buy the lack of time arguement either in regards to justifying RMT. I don't always have time to play games, when that happens I don't play games. I haven't always had money to spare to sub to games. There have been times when I have had no computer to play games. When these things happen you get on with life.
the poster formerly known as melangel :P
Not only in MMOs. There is something I spotted that falls like a glove at this topic.
Yesterday was posted on youtube the first proof of a direct input bot for Diablo 3, made by a chinese player from Guanzou.
What this means? It means that not only RMT, but also Real Money Auction House, RMAH end up causing the opposite effect.
A new first person shooter that released this month (open beta with active monetization is released enough for me), called Blacklight Retribution is not an MMO either, but it already has a subscription fee... a subscription fee of the trainer/aimbot from a private site. While the game itself offers a free to play model with RMT for power (wich can be acquired with in-game money through time, a lot of time, too much time that you might as well just spend the fucking 15 bucks already for that complete weapon instead of playing 200 15 minute matches over the course of a few weeks getting owned many times in the process by someone that bought it on the first day). Not to mention the AFK bots, or people multiboxing, using virtualizers in F2P games to play room based games with themselfs through friend invite methods to farm/grind/powerlevel.
There is no excuse for any kind of involvement of money in games content or experience. Its like trying to convince your girlfriend that your are going to put just a little... just cosmethics. The whole point now shifts from pay to win having acquired enough negative stigma and prejudice for games marketing/devs in interviews trying to run away from that label.
Now its time to create a label for games that attempt to justify the monetization that ruins the overall experience, balance, sense of achievement/ reward and progression through "TIME SKIPPERS". Basically, the argument that is trying to be pushed by the flanks is that the RMT only offers "AN ALTERNATIVE FOR THOSE WITH LESS TIME TO PLAY".
In the end, time is power. Time is progression. Progression and power are being sold. This is so obvious, yet most people need a big label shoved on their face so they understand ITS A BAD THING.
Its not about getting a job to pay for the win and advantages.
the whole point is the INTEGRITY OF WHAT A GAME IS. The moment money involvement affects that INTEGRITY, its no longer a game. It becomes less of a GAME. RMT dilutes, disolves the integrity of a game.
If your game is about power, or progression or time spent and you offer that on cash shop, then the integrity of the game got corrupted.
Using an argument that basically boils down to "get a job" is a blanket statement that I consider ill-informed. Calling someone a fkup human doesn't really make it any better. For some people it truly is just a matter of getting a job. Not everybody is so fortunate though. Some people are unable to work or severely limited in what or how much they can do because of various disabilities. Sometimes there simply are no jobs to be had and if you're still lucky enough to get one, it might be so poorly paid that you have little to spare, both in terms of time and money. There's also the possibility that due to certain events, you may be in a position where you might have a well paid job but still end up being poor because you have to spend most of your hard earned money to recover from those events. In short, there are many reasons why you could be poor and some of them you have very little control over, so how can you be blamed - assuming you did your best? Also don't forget that poor is a very relative term. What you consider poor may not be what the OP or the next person considers poor. Heck, poor where I live is stinking rich compare to most of the world.
I'm a big ol' fluffy carewolf. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
I think the point he's trying to make is if you have moneyflow problems or any other problems, then not being able to spend money on a game to "keep" up is the least of your worries. Get the other things sorted first. Games are not life essential products.
The solution for poor people in future MMO is to get a job instead of playing games?
Stabilize your real life and worried more about your family that they does not get kick out of their own home.
What kind of fkup human are you if you are poor and you are more worried on games?
Using an argument that basically boils down to "get a job" is a blanket statement that I consider ill-informed. Calling someone a fkup human doesn't really make it any better. For some people it truly is just a matter of getting a job. Not everybody is so fortunate though. Some people are unable to work or severely limited in what or how much they can do because of various disabilities. Sometimes there simply are no jobs to be had and if you're still lucky enough to get one, it might be so poorly paid that you have little to spare, both in terms of time and money. There's also the possibility that due to certain events, you may be in a position where you might have a well paid job but still end up being poor because you have to spend most of your hard earned money to recover from those events. In short, there are many reasons why you could be poor and some of them you have very little control over, so how can you be blamed - assuming you did your best? Also don't forget that poor is a very relative term. What you consider poor may not be what the OP or the next person considers poor. Heck, poor where I live is stinking rich compare to most of the world.
I think the point he's trying to make is if you have moneyflow problems or any other problems, then not being able to spend money on a game to "keep" up is the least of your worries. Get the other things sorted first. Games are not life essential products.
That kind of says that poor people shouldn't play a game and be able to win through their own honest efforts.Lol, I m far from rich, I do ok, but I can afford 2 yearly subs 1 for Rift and 1 for EQ2 , and still don t mind a cs in GW2. Hell I ll probably dabble in the CS if I feel like I want something that doesn t effect gameplay at all.
Good for you, we have a winner.Why thank you.
The point is if you can afford the 15$ out of your budget for the sub you have as much chance as the millionaire to win, with P2W the millionaire can just outspend your budget and use his RL wealth to beat you at the game, it really isn't that difficult to understand.No its not difficult to understand at all, but nor is it the millionairs fault you dont have a million to spend on a game. And if you decide to play again with that kind of structure its your own damn fault if you cant keep up when you have no money. Bottom line is its no one elses fault you cant keep up in a p2w game but your own. Pick a different game with a better model that keeps you on even footing through out and there would be no problem. But bitching and whining about it is not going to solve anything, they arent gonna restructure the entire game because a few people cant afford to pay, when they have a bunch of people who can and they are making profit. If you hate business and hate people that make profit and hate people that can afford to play that type of game and spend loads of money to win, then play something else or keep quite.
there are lots of hobbys that dont require you to spend a dime. Its your own choice to spend money or save it. If you decide to play a game that is structured with a p2w model and your below the poverty line then dont expect me or anyone to feel sorry for you because your poor and you chose the wrong game.
As far as taking a break from work and breaking down, I have no idea where that comes from. I didnt say anything about poor people need to get to work and stay there. I simply said that if you choose to play games with what little you have and you cant keep up becuase you havent got money its not my fault or anyone elses.
To be honest i really dont give a fk whether or not you work or not or if you lose your home or not of if you can play a game or not. I work my ass off everyday and I dont have alot of money but i do have the common sense to know if i cant afford to play then i dont. If i cant afford to pay to win then i play something else, I dont come to the forums and bitch about it. I just pick a different game and move on.